a.

Congressional Assembly (ConAss) - by

THE PHILIPPINE a vote of ¾ of ALL its members (3/4
CONSTITUTION Senate and 3/4 HOR) (PHIL. CONST. art.
XVII, §2)
A. CONSTITUTION: DEFINITION, NATURE b. Constitutional Convention (ConCon)
AND CONCEPTS B. PARTS C. How called:
1. Congress may call a ConCon by a
AMENDMENTS AND REVISIONS
2/3 vote of all its members
2. By a majority vote of all its members,
Q: Differentiate Amendments from
Congress may submit to the
Revisions:
electorate the question of whether to
Amendment Revision call a ConCon or not
Change in the Constitution (PHIL. CONST. art. XVII, §3)
Purpose is to c. People’s Initiative Requirements:
Purpose is to 1. Petition must be signed be at least
improve specific
examine entirety 12% of ALL
parts
REGISTERED
Affects only the VOTERS.
Affects several
specific provision 2. Every legislative district represented
provisions
amended by at least 3% of the registered voters
therein.
Affects basic
Adds, reduces,
principles Limitations:
deletes WITHOUT
Affects 1. No amendment in this manner within
altering basic
substantial 5yrs from ratification of 1987
principle
entirety Constitution;
Ex: shift from 2. No amendment in this manner more
presidential to often than once every 5yrs thereafter.
Ex: extending the
parliamentary 3. Applies only to Amendments, NOT
term limit of
system; altering revisions. (PHIL. CONST. art. XVII,
members of House
the principle of §2)
of Representatives;
separation of
reduction of voting
powers or the II.RATIFICATION
age from 18 to 15
system of Proposed amendment becomes part of the
years
checksand- Constitution when ratified by a MAJORITY of
balances votes cast in a plebiscite held not earlier than 60
days nor later than 90days AFTER approval of the
Q: How to determine whether change is an proposal by Congress, or the Constitutional
Amendment or a Revision: Two-Part Test in Convention, or after certification by COMELEC of
Lambino v. COMELEC, GR No. 174153, Oct. 25, the sufficiency of the petition under Sec.2, Art.
2006: XVII. (PHIL. CONST. art. XVII, §4)
• First: Quantitative test – Whether the change
is so extensive as to change the “substance D. SELF-EXECUTING AND NON-SELF
entirety” by the number of provisions affected EXECUTING PROVISIONS E.
without considering the degree of change GENERAL PROVISIONS
• Second: Qualitative Test – Whether the
change will affect the nature of the basic Q: Are Constitutional provisions
governmental plan selfexecutory?
GR: Self-Executory – Complete in itself; operative
Q: Steps in the Amendatory Process: without the aid of supplementary or enabling
I. PROPOSAL legislation; supplies a sufficient rule by means of
which the right is grants may be enjoyed or
protected.

1
 seabed and the subsoil, and the superjacent
XPN: Those that only lay down general airspace, as well as all their resources,
principles such as Art. II; do not bestow rights; do belong to, and are subject to the sovereignty
not elevate privileges to the level of enforceable of the archipelagic State.
rights but merely specify guidelines for 3. Innocent passage of foreign vessels through
Legislative and Executive action. the waters of the archipelagic State shall be
allowed in accordance with its national
EXCEPTION TO EXCEPTION: legislation, having regard to the existing rules
• Article II Sec. 16 on the right to a of international law. Such passage shall be
balanced and healthful ecology is self- through sea lanes as may be designated for
executing (Oposa v. Factoran, G.R. No. the purpose by the archipelagic State.
101083, July 30, 1993). (Magallona citing Art. 49, UNCLOS III).
• Article II, Sec. 15 on the right to health Q: What is the extent of our maritime zones?
is also self-executing (Imbong v. Ochoa,
G.R. No. 204819, 2014).
• Right to full public disclosure of all the 12 nautical
Territorial Absolute
State’s transactions involving public miles from
Sea sovereignty
interest. (Province of North Cotabato v. baselines
GRP, G.R. No. 204819, 2014) Enforcement
of customs,
24 nautical fiscal,
GENERAL Contiguous
miles from immigration,
zone
CONSIDERATIONS baselines and
sanitation
A. NATIONAL TERRITORY laws
1. ARCHIPELAGIC DOCTRINE Exploitation
Exclusive 200 nautical
of living and
Economic miles from
Q: What is the archipelagic doctrine? non-living
Zone baselines
It is a doctrine of national territory articulated in the resources
second sentence of Sec.1, Art. I, which provides: Sovereign
“The waters around, between, and connecting the rights of
islands of the archipelago, regardless of their exploration
Submerged
breadth and dimensions, forms part of the internal and
Continental prolongation
waters of the exploitation
Shelf of the land
Philippines.” of living and
territory
non-living
It is based on the principle that an archipelago, resources of
which consists of a number of islands separated the seabed
by bodies of water, should be treated as one
integral unit. (Magallona v. Ermita, G.R. No. Q: What is the treatment of the Baselines Law
187167, 2011) (RA 9522) to the Kalayaan Group of Islands?
The Kalayaan Island Group (KIG), also known as
Q: What are the 3 basic principles of the Spratlys, as constituted under Presidential
archipelagic States? Decree No. 1596 and the Bajo de Masinloc, also
1. An archipelagic State may draw straight known as Scarborough Shoal were NOT included
baselines connecting the outermost points of in the islands enclosed by the Philippine
the outermost islands and drying reefs of the archipelagic baselines, and are
archipelago from which the extent of the instead treated as "regime of islands."
territorial sea of the archipelagic state is, or
may be determined. “Had Congress in RA 9522 enclosed the KIG and
2. The waters within the baselines, regardless of the Scarborough Shoal as part of the Philippine
their depth or distance from the coast, the archipelago, adverse legal effects would have

2
ensued. The Philippines would have committed a
breach of two provisions of UNCLOS III. First,
Article 47 (3) of UNCLOS III requires that ‘[t]he
drawing of such baselines shall not depart to any
appreciable extent from the general configuration
of the archipelago.’ Second, Article 47 (2) of
UNCLOS III requires that ‘the length of the
baselines shall not exceed 100 nautical miles,’
save for three per cent (3%) of the total number of
baselines which can reach up to 125 nautical
miles. (Magallona v. Executive Secretary, G.R No.
187167, July 16, 2011).
Q: What is the basis of the Philippine’s claim
to the KIG (also known as the Spratly Islands)
and Scarborough Shoal?
It is based on Art. 1 of the 1987 Constitution,
which states that the national territory includes “all
other territories over which the Philippines has
sovereignty or jurisdiction.”
Q: Is the use of the framework of Regime of
Islands in RA9522 to Determine the Maritime
Zones of the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal
inconsistent with the Philippines’ claim of
sovereignty over these areas?
No. Far from surrendering the Philippines’ claim
over the KIG and the Scarborough Shoal,
Congress’ decision to classify the KIG and the
Scarborough Shoal as “Regime of Islands” under
the Republic of the Philippines is consistent with
Art. 121 of UNCLOS III and manifests the
Philippine State’s responsible observance of its
pacta sunt servanda obligation under UNCLOS III.
Under this article, any “naturally formed area of
land, surrounded by water, which is above water
at high tide”, such as the KIG, qualifies under the
category of “regime of islands” whose lands
generate their own applicable maritime zones
(Magallona v.
Ermita, G.R. No. 187167, July 16, 2011).
Q: Does the Baselines Law abandon the
Philippines’ claim over Sabah under RA5446?
No. The definition of the baselines of the territorial
sea of the Phil. Archipelago … is without prejudice
to the delineation of the baselines of the territorial
sea around the territory of Sabah, situated in
North Borneo, over which the Philippines has
acquired dominion and sovereignty (Sec. 2 of
RA556). (Magallona v. Ermita, G.R. No. 187167,
July 16, 2011).
3
Q: What is the treatment of the Scarborough
Shoal following the South China
Sea
Arbitration?
As a high tide entity, Scarborough Shoal is entitled
to its own territorial sea of 12 nautical miles. The
waters surrounding Scarborough Shoal do not
form part of the exclusive economic zone of the
Philippines. (The South
China Sea Arbitration, 2013-19, July 12, 2016)
Q: Who has historical fishing rights in
Scarborough Shoal?
Fishermen of Philippines, China, and other
countries have long fished at Scarborough Shoal
and have traditional fishing rights within the area.
By preventing Philippine fishermen from
accessing the shoal, China violated its duty to
respect the traditional fishing rights of these
Filipino fishermen. (The South China Sea
Arbitration, 2013-19, July 12, 2016)
Q: Who has the exclusive right to construct
artificial islands or structures on low-tide
elevations (LTEs)?
A coastal state wherein an LTE is found within its
EEZ has the exclusive right to construct artificial
islands or structures on the said LTE. Only the
Philippines has the exclusive right to construct
artificial islands or structures in Ayungin Shoal –
an LTE within the Philippines EEZ. (In the Matter
of the South China Sea
Arbitration, PCA Case No. 2013-19, 2016)
Q: What are the elements of a “rock” under
Art. 121(3) of the UNCLOS?
“rock”
Includes both features that are
composed of solid rock and those
that are rock-like in nature.
“cannot”
This pertains to capacity or
capability and not to actual use.
Thus, the fact that a feature is
currently not inhabited or has no
economic life does not prove that
it is uninhabitable or cannot
sustain economic life.

“sustain” In connection with sustaining
human habitation, to “sustain”
means to provide that which is
necessary to keep humans alive
and healthy over a continuous
period of time, according to a
proper standard.
In connection with an economic
life, to “sustain” means to provide
that which is necessary not just to
commence, but also to continue,
an activity over a period of time in
a way that remains viable on an
ongoing
basis.
“human
The term habitation implies a non-
habitation” transient presence of persons
who have chosen to stay and
reside on the feature in a settled
manner. However, while no
precise number of persons is
specified in the Article, habitation
of a sole individual would not
typically fall within the ordinary
understanding of human
habitation.
“or”
A feature that is able to sustain
either human habitation or an
economic life of its own will be
entitled to an exclusive economic
zone and continental shelf.
“economic
A feature itself (or group of related
life of their
features) must have the ability to
own”
support an independent
economic life, without relying
predominantly on the infusion of
outside resources.
(In the Matter of the South China Sea
Arbitration, PCA Case No. 2013-19, 2016)
B. STATE IMMUNITY
Q: Does consent to be sued include consent
to be bound by the judgment or decision?
4
No. Consent to be sued does not include consent
to the execution of judgment against it. Such
execution will require another waiver because the
power of the court ends when judgment is
rendered, since government funds and properties
may not be seized under writs of execution or
garnishment, unless such disbursements are
covered by appropriation as required by law
(Republic v. Villasor, G.R. No. L30671, 1973).
Q: Is ATO covered by state immunity from
suit?
No. ATO does not enjoy sovereign immunity
because even if it is unincorporated, it is involved
in the management and operation of an airport
which is a proprietary function. While an
unincorporated agency is clothed with sovereign
immunity when performing governmental
function, the same privilege is not enjoyed by an
agency performing proprietary function (ATO v.
David, 2011).
(DEL CASTILLO) Q: Is an award of damages
against Department of Health (DOH) be
considered a suit against the state?
Yes. The DOH, being an “unincorporated agency
of the government” can validly invoke the defense
of immunity from suit because it performs
functions of governmental character. It is also
settled that if a complaint seeks to “impose a
charge or financial liability against the state,” the
defense of non-suability may be properly invoked.
(DOH v. Phil Pharmawealth,
G.R. No. 182358, 2013)
Q: When a private corporation entered into
exploration and development of natural
resources with the State, will it be covered by
state immunity?
No. It did not become an agent of the State by
virtue of a Service Contract which did not
constitute Shell to represent the State in dealing
with third persons. The contract merely gave rise
to a contractual commitment on the part of Shell
to undertake extraction and exploration but never
to represent the State in its dealings (Shell
Exploration Philippines v. Jalos, G.R. No.
179918, 2010).
C. GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND STATE
POLICIES
Q: What is “Soft Law”?
“Soft law” are non-binding norms, principles and
practices that influence state behavior such as
certain declarations and resolutions of the UN
General Assembly like the UN Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR) (Pharmaceutical and
Health Care Association of the Philippines v.
Duque III, G.R. No. 173034, 2007).
Q: Does “soft law” form part of the law of the
land by the doctrine of incorporation? It
depends. For an international rule to be
considered as customary law, it must be
established that such rule is being followed by
states because they consider it obligatory to
comply with such rules (opinio juris). Unless it can
be shown that this soft law has been enforced,
practiced and considered as binding by states,
soft law cannot be deemed to form part of the law
of the land. (Pharmaceutical and Health Care
Association of the Philippines v.
Duque III).
Q: Can the BIR impose additional
requirements for obtaining a refund that is
based on an international agreement? No. The
Constitution provides for adherence to the general
principles of international law as part of the law of
the land. Obligations under a treaty must be
complied with in good faith. The BIR must not
impose additional requirements that will negate
the availment of the reliefs paid for under
international agreement (Deutsche Bank v. CIR,
G.R. No. 188550, August 19, 2013).
Q: How is standing treated in actions for
violations of environmental laws? The
enactment of the Rules of Procedure for
Environmental Cases enabled litigants enforcing
environmental rights to file their cases as citizen
suits. It liberalized standing for all cases filed
enforcing environmental laws and collapses the
traditional rule on personal and direct interest,
based on the principle that humans are stewards
of nature. (Resident Marine Mammals v. Reyes,
G.R. No. 180771, 2015).
Q: Do animals have standing?
No. The need to give the Resident Marine
Mammals legal standing has been eliminated by
our Rules, which allow any Filipino citizen, as a
steward of nature, to bring a suit to enforce our
environmental laws. It is worth noting here that the
Stewards are joined as real parties in the Petition
5
and not just in representation of the named
cetacean species. The Stewards having shown in
their petition that there may be possible violations
of laws concerning the habitat of the Resident
Marine Mammals, are therefore declared to
possess the legal standing to file this petition.
(Resident Marine Mammals v.
Reyes, G.R. No. 180771, 2015).
Q: What are the requisites for a party to avail
of the writ of kalikasan?
1. There is an actual or threatened violation of
the constitutional right to a balanced and
healthful ecology;
2. The actual or threatened violation arises from
an unlawful act or omission of a public official
or employee, or private individual or entity;
and
3. The actual or threatened violation involves or
will lead to an environmental damage of such
magnitude as to prejudice the life, health or
property of inhabitants in two or more cities or
provinces (LNL Archipelago,
2016)
D. SEPARATION OF POWERS E.
CHECKS AND BALANCES F.
DELEGATION OF POWERS G. FORMS
OF GOVERNMENT
LEGISLATIVE
DEPARTMENT
A. WHO MAY EXERCISE LEGISLATIVE
POWER
1. CONGRESS
2. REGIONAL/LOCAL LEGISLATIVE POWER
3. PEOPLE’S INITIATIVE ON STATUTES
(a) Initiative and referendum
4. THE PRESIDENT UNDER A MARTIAL
LAW RULE OR IN A REVOLUTIONARY
GOVERNMENT
B. HOUSES OF CONGRESS
1. SENATE
2. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
(a) District representatives and questions of
reapportionment
Q: What is the rule on Apportionment of
Legislative Districts?
1. It must be based on uniform and progressive
ratio
2. Each city with at least 250,000 inhabitants
shall be entitled to at least 1 representative;
and
3. Each province, irrespective of number of
inhabitants, shall be entitled to at least 1
representative.
4. Each legislative district shall comprise, as far
as practicable, contiguous, compact, and
adjacent territory. No gerrymandering.
5. Reapportionment is done by Congress within
3 years following the return of every
census. (PHIL. CONST. art. VI, §5)
Q: Is Congress precluded from increasing its
membership in excess of 250 based on Sec.
5, Art. VI?
No, the Constitution does not preclude Congress
from increasing its membership by passing a law
other than a general apportionment law (Mariano
v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 118577,
1995).
Q: May Congress validly delegate to the
ARMM Regional Assembly the power to create
Legislative Districts? No, nothing in Sec. 20, Art.
X authorizes autonomous regions, expressly or
impliedly, to create or reapportion legislative
districts. This power is vested exclusively in
Congress. Accordingly, Sec. 19, Art. VI of R.A.
9054 granting the ARMM Regional Assembly the
power to create provinces and cities, is VOID for
being contrary to Sec. 5, Art. VI, and Sec. 20, Art.
X, as well as Sec.3 of the Ordinance appended to
the Constitution. (Sema v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 177597, 2008)
Q: Is the population requirement of 250,000 an
indispensable Constitutional requirement for
the creation of a new legislative district?
Distinction must be made
between the entitlement of a city to a
district on one hand, and the entitlement of a
province to a district on the other. While a
province is entitled to at least 1 representative
regardless of population, a city must initially meet
a minimum population of 250,000 in order to be
similarly entitled. (Aquino v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 189793, 2010)
6
Q: To be entitled to an additional district, does
a city have to increase its population by
another 250,000?
No, while Sec. 5(3), Art. VI requires a city to have
a minimum population of 250,000 to be entitled to
a representative, it does not have to increase its
population by another 250,000 to be entitled to an
additional district.
Q: In case of vacancy in the Senate or the
HOR, is it mandatory to fill up the vacancy?
No, Sec. 9 of Art VI provides, “In case of vacancy
in the Senate or in the House of Representatives,
a special election may be called to fill such
vacancy in the manner prescribed by law, but the
Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives thus elected shall serve only for
the unexpired term (See also Tolentino v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 187958,
2004).
(b) Party-list system (R.A. No. 7941)
Q: Can party lists that garnered less than 2 %
of the total votes casts occupy a seat in the
House?
Yes. The additional seats (those remaining after
allocation of the guaranteed seats to those with a
minimum of 2%), shall be distributed to the party-
list organizations including those that received
less than two percent of the total votes. (Atong
Paglaum v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
203766, 2013).
Q: How can a party-list join an electoral
contest?
It must undergo the process of (1) registration and
(2) accreditation. Registration bestows juridical
personality; Accreditation relates to the privileged
participation that our election law grant to qualified
registered parties. Registration precedes
accreditation (Magdalo v. COMELEC, G.R.
190793, 2012).
Q: Who may participate in
party-list elections?
a. Three different groups may participate in the
party-list system: (1) national parties or
organizations, (2) regional parties or
organizations, and (3) sectoral parties or
organization
b. National parties or organizations and regional
parties or organizations do not need to
organize along sectoral lines and do not need
to represent any “marginalized and
underrepresented” sector.
c. Political parties can participate in party-list
elections provided they register under the
party-list system and do not field candidates
in legislative district elections. A political
party, whether majority or not, that fields
candidates in legislative district elections can
participate in party-list elections only through
its sectoral wing that can separately register
under the party-list system. The sectoral wing
is by itself an independent sectoral party, and
is linked to a political party through a coalition.
d. Sectoral parties or organizations may either
be “marginalized and underrepresented” or
lacking in well-defined political
constituencies.” It is enough that their
principal advocacy pertains to the special
interest and concerns of their sector. The
sectors that are “marginalized and
underrepresented” include labor, peasant,
fisherfolk, urban poor, indigenous cultural
communities, handicapped, veterans, and
overseas workers. The sectors that lack “well-
defined political constituencies” include
professionals, the elderly, women, and the
youth.
e. A majority of the members of sectoral parties
or organizations that represent the
“marginalized and underrepresented” must
belong to the “marginalized and
underrepresented” sector they represent.
Similarly, a majority of the members of
sectoral parties or organizations that lack
“well-defined political constituencies” must
belong to the sector they represent. The
nominees of sectoral parties or organizations
that represent the “marginalized and
underrepresented,” or that represents those
who lack “well-defined political
constituencies,” either must belong to their
respective sectors, or must have a track
record of advocacy for their respective
sectors. The nominees of national and
regional parties or organizations must be
bona-fide members of such parties or
organizations.
7
f. National, regional, and sectoral parties or
organizations shall not be disqualified if some
of their nominees are disqualified, provided
that they have at least one nominee who
remains qualified (Atong Paglaum, supra).
Q: Are sectoral parties required to adduce
evidence showing their track record that they
have undertaken to further the cause of the
sector they represent?
No. It is sufficient that their ideals are geared
towards the cause of the sector they represent
(Abang-Lingkod v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
206952, 2013).
C. LEGISLATIVE PRIVILEGES,
INHIBITIONS AND
DISQUALIFICATIONS
Q: Is preventive suspension considered
“interruption” of a term under Sec. 8, Art. X
and Sec. 43(b) of R.A. 7160?
No, a preventive suspension cannot simply be
considered an interruption because the
suspended official’s continues to stay in office
although barred from exercising the functions and
prerogatives of the office within the suspension
period. The best indicator of the suspended
official’s continuity in office is the absence of a
permanent replacement and the lack of the
authority to appoint one since no vacancy exists
(Aldovino v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 184836, 2009).
Q: Can a Congressman be preventively
suspended by the Sandiganbayan for
violation of Anti-Graft Law notwithstanding
the exclusive power of Congress to discipline
its member?
Yes. The suspension contemplated in Article VI,
Section 16(3) of the Constitution is a punishment
that is imposed by the Senate or House of
Representatives upon an erring member. It is
distinct from the suspension under Section 13 of
the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, which is
not a penalty but a preventive measure. Since
Section 13 of the Anti-Graft and
Corruption Practices Act does not state that the
public officer must be suspended only in the office
where he is alleged to have committed the acts
which he has been charged, it applies to any office
which he may be holding. (Santiago v.
 Financial Cannot be They shall N/A
Interest financially not be
interested directly or Affirm/O
directly or indirectly, Resolu
indirectly in practice any
any contract, other
Impe
franchise, or profession,
special participate
privilege in any D. QUORUM AND VOTING MAJORITIES Discip
granted by business, or Memb
the be Electio
Government, financially
Q: What is the basis for determining the
or any interested existence of a quorum in the Senate? Offic
subdivision, in any The basis in determining the existence of a Declar
agency or contract Existenc
quorum in the Senate is the total number of
instrumentalit with, or in
y thereof, any Senators who are in the country and within the State o
including any franchise, coercive jurisdiction of the Senate. Those who are
GOCC or its or special out of the country, can not be contacted, or Overr
subsidiary. privilege
granted by incapacitated will not be included in the total Presid
(PHIL.
CONST. art. the number of the Senators for the purpose of Ve
VI, §14) Governmen counting majority or quorum. (Avelino v.
t or any
Quorum
subdivision,
Cuenco, G.R. No. L-2821, 1949). busin
agency, or
instrumenta Q: What are the voting majorities required in
lity thereof, Congress?
including Tax Exe
government Nature of Required Basis Confirma
-owned or
Proceeding Votes new
controlled
corporation Senate nominat
s or their
Presid
subsidiaries To Concur in a 2/3 of All Sec. 21, Art.
. (PHIL. Treaty VII Determ
CONST. art. that P
VII, §13) Conviction in 2/3 of All Sec. 3(6), Art.
Unab
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 128055, 2001) Impeachment XI
disch
pow
Q: Compare and contrast the disqualifications & dut
from holding incompatible offices in the To brea
Constitution: in presid
elect
Congress President's AFP
(Senate official in active
Revoca
& HOR) family service Proc.
Basis Sec. 13, Sec. 13, Sec. 5(4), Martial
Art. VI Art. VII Art. XVI Suspens
No other Gov’t, its Private Civilian Priv. of W
office or subdivision, corp. / position in
employ agency, gov’t; no government, Habe
ment in: instrumentalit practice of GOCCs, or Corp
y, GOCC profession; intrumentaliti Extens
no business es
Pro
interest or
transaction
O
w/ gov't. ML/Susp
During Term Tenure Tenure of Priv. o
To Con
Presid
E. DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS F. gran
ELECTORAL TRIBUNALS AND THE amne
COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENTS
3. NATURE The HRET may assume jurisdiction only after the
4. POWERS candidate is considered a member of the House of
Representatives. To be considered a member, there must
Q: When does the Electoral Tribunal’s jurisdiction be:
begin? 1. Valid proclamation;

8
 2. A proper oath; and Exceptions as to
Exceptions as to
3. Assumption of the functions of the office as a persons include:
persons include:
member of the House (Reyes v. “All heads of
(1) President
Comelec, G.R. No. 207264, 2013). departments of the
(2) Supreme
Executive Branch of
Court Justices
the government shall
Q: What is the minimum required number of elected (3) Members of
secure the consent
senators belonging to the same political party in order the AFP if prevented
of the President prior
by the President as the
for the party to qualify for a seat in the CA? to appearing before
Commander-In-Chief
A political party must have at least 2 elected senators for either House of
(Gudani v. Senga,
every seat in the CA. (Guingona v. Congress.”
2006)
Gonzales, G.R. No. 106971, 1993). (Section1, EO 464)
Exception as to information:
(1) Executive privilege which must be
Q: Is it mandatory to elect 12 senators and 12
invoked by the President himself or through the
members of the HOR to the CA? Executive Secretary by authority of the
No, the Constitution does not contemplate that the CA President (Senate v. Ermita, 2006)
must necessarily include 12 senators and 12 members of (2) Privileged information, e.g., national
the HOR. What it requires is that there be at least a defense, diplomatic, military secrets.
majority of the entire membership. (Guingona v. Gonzales, (3) Right against self-incrimination
supra). Discretionary Mandatory

Q: Is the rule on proportional representation in Sec.
18, Art. VI mandatory?
Yes, it is mandatory and does not leave any room for
discretion to the majority party in the House to disobey or
disregard the rule on proportional representation.
Otherwise, the party with the majority representation can
by sheer force of number impose its will on the hapless
minority. Sec. 18 is in effect, a check on the majority party.
(Guingona v. Gonzales, supra).
G. POWERS OF CONGRESS
1. LEGISLATIVE
Q: May Congress provide the criteria necessary for
the creation of a city, including the conversion of a
municipality into a city in another law?
No, the constitution requires the Congress to stipulate in
the Local Government Code all the criteria necessary for
such. Income is changed from 20 to 100 million and meets
either of the following: a) contiguous territory of 2000
square kilometers; b) population not less than 250,000.
(League of Cities of the Phil. et al. v. COMELEC, et al.,
G.R. No. 176951; G.R. No. 177499; G.R. No. 178056,
2011 and Local Government Code, Sec. 461).
(a) Legislative inquiries and oversight function
Q: Differentiate legislative inquiries under Sec. 21 and
22 of Art VI:
Inquiry in Aid of
Question Hour
Legislation
Sec. 22, Art. VI Sec. 21, Art. VI
Purpose is to elicit
Oversight Function information that may
be used for legislation
Q: Does the sub judice rule apply in inquiries in aid of
legislation?
No. The sub judice rule does not apply in inquiries in aid
of legislation. The Senate Rules of Procedure Governing
Inquiries in Aid of Legislation provide that the filing or
pendency of any prosecution of criminal or administrative
action should not stop or abate any inquiry to carry out a
legislative purpose. Hence, no individual can escape the
power of the Senate to investigate, even if he or she has
a pending administrative or criminal case. (Sabio v.
Gordon, G.R. No. 174340, 2006).
(b) Bicameral conference committee
Q: What is the scope of the Bicameral Conference
Committee’s powers?
The Bicameral Conference Committee may:
1. Adopt the Bill entirely; or
2. Amend; or
3. Revise; or
4. Reconcile the House Bill and the Senate
Bills;
5. Propose entirely new provisions not found in either the
House Bill or the Senate Bill.
(Amendments in the nature of a substitute)
LIMITATION:
So long as the amendment is germane to the subject of
the bills before the Committee.
(Tolentino v. Sec. of Finance, supra).
(c) Limitation on legislative power
i. Limitations on revenue, appropriations and tariff
measures
ii. Presidential veto and Congressional
override

9

Q: What are the limitations to Congress’ plenary
power of legislation?
1. Substantive – Limits the content of laws
a. Express limitations
• No ex post facto laws
• No bill of attainder
• Congress may not increase appropriations
recommended by the President for the
operation of government as specified in the
budget. (Sec. 25(1), Art.VI).
• No public money or property shall be
appropriated, applied, paid, or employed,
directly or indirectly for the use, benefit, or
support of any sect, church, denomination,
sectarian institution, or system of religious
teacher, or dignitary as such, EXCEPT when
such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is
assigned to the:
i. armed forces, or
ii. any penal institution, or
iii. government orphanage, or iv.
government leprosarium (Sec.
29(2), Art. VI).
• No law increasing the appellate jurisdiction of
the SC without its advice and concurrence.
(Sec. 30,
Art. VI).
• All revenues and assets of nonstock,
non-profit educational institutions
used actually, directly, and exclusively
for educational purposes shall be
exempt from taxes ad duties. (Sec. 4(3), Art.
XIV).
• No law granting a title of royalty or nobility
shall be passed. (Sec. 31,
Art. VI).
b. Implied
• Non-delegation of legislative powers:
delegate potestas non potest delegari.
• Prohibition against the passage
irrepealable laws
2. Procedural
a. One-title-one-subject (proscription against riders)
b. Three readings on separate days EXCEPT:
1. When the president certifies to its immediate
enactment to meet a public calamity or
emergency.
(Sec.26, Art. VI).
2. Calling for a special election during vacancy in
the offices of the President and Vice-President
(Sec.
10, Art VII).
2. NON-LEGISLATIVE
(a) Informing function
(b) Power of impeachment
10
(c) Other non-legislative powers
Q: What are the non-legislative functions of
Congress?
1. To act as national board of canvassers for President
and Vice President. (Art. VII, sec. 4).
2. To decide whether the President is temporarily
disabled in the event he reassumes his office after the
Cabinet, by a majority of vote of its members, declares
that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties
of his office. (Art. VII, sec. 11).
3. To concur in the grant of amnesty by the President.
(Art. VII, sec. 19).
4. To initiate (HOR) and, to try all cases of impeachment
(Senate), against the: a. President
b. Vice President
c. Members of the SC
d. Members of the Constitutional
Commissions
e. Ombudsman
For any of the following offenses:
i. culpable violation of the Constitution ii. treason
iii. bribery iv. graft and corruption
v. betrayal of public trust vi. other high
crimes
(Art. XI, Sec. 2-3).
5. To act as a constituent assembly for the revision or
amendment of the Constitution.
(Art. XVII).
Q: What does the pork-barrel system violate?
a. Violates the principle of separation of powers by
allowing legislators to wield postenactment authority
in the implementation or enforcement of the budget,
unrelated to congressional oversight, and assume
duties that properly belong to the sphere of budget
execution.
b. Constitutes an undue delegation of legislative power
insofar as it confers postenactment identification
authority to individual legislators. The power of
of appropriation is lodged in Congress as a body.
c. Violates the principle of checks and balances; as
legislators make intermediate appropriations only
after the GAA is passed and hence, outside of the law.
It necessarily means that the actual items of PDAF
appropriation would not have been written into the
General Appropriations Bill and thus effectuated
without veto consideration. This kind of lump-
sum/post-enactment legislative identification
budgeting system fosters the creation of a “budget
within a budget" which subverts the prescribed
procedure of presentment and consequently impairs
the President‘s power of item veto.
d. Violates the principle of local autonomy; with PDAF, a
Congressman can simply bypass the local
development council and initiate projects on his own,
 and even take sole credit for its execution. (Belgica v.
Ochoa, G.R. No. 208566, 2013).
Q: What are the requisites for the valid transfer of
appropriated funds under Sec 25(5)?
1. There is a law authorizing the President, Senate
President, Speaker, Chief Justice, and heads of the
Constitutional
Commissions;
2. The funds to be transferred are savings generated
from the appropriations for their respective offices;
and
3. The purpose of the transfer is to augment an item in
the general appropriations law for their respective
offices. (Araullo v. Aquino, G.R. No. 209287, 2014).
Q: What is covered by presidential immunity from
suit?
It extends to official acts of the president during tenure.
Unlawful acts of public officials are not acts of State and
the officer who acts illegally is not acting as such but
stands in the same footing as any other trespasser..
(Estrada v.
Desierto, G.R. No. 146710-15, 2001).
Q: May it be invoked by a Department Secretary?
No, even if the DECS Secretary is an alter ego of the
President, the President’s immunity from suit cannot be
invoked because the questioned acts are not the acts of
the President but merely those of a Department Secretary.
(Gloria v. CA, G.R. No. 119903, 2000).

Q: Considering the above requisites, what activities 2. PRESIDENTIAL PRIVILEGE

under the DAP are unconstitutional?
1. The withdrawal of unobligated allotments from the
implementing agencies and the declaration of the
withdrawn unobligated allotments and unreleased
appropriations as savings prior to the end of the fiscal
year and without complying with the statutory
definition of savings contained in the General
Appropriations Act;
2. Cross-border transfers of savings of the executive
department to offices outside the executive
department;
3. Funding of projects, activities, programs not covered
by appropriations in the General Appropriations Act
(Araullo v. Aquino, supra).
Q: When can the President exercise the power of
augmentation?
The President may, by law, be authorized to augment any
item in the General Appropriations Law, their respective
offices from savings in other items of their respective
appropriations
(PHIL. CONST. art. VI, §25; Sanchez v. COA).
Q: What are those covered by executive privilege?
1. Military, diplomatic and other national security
matters which in the interest of national security
should not be divulged (Almonte vs. Vasquez,
G.R. No. 95367, 1995; Chavez v. PCGG, G.R.
No. 130716, 1998).
2. Information between inter-government agencies
prior to the conclusion of treaties and executive
agreements (Chavez v. PCGG, G.R. No.
130716,
1998);
3. Discussion in close-door Cabinet meetings
(Chavez v. PCGG, G.R. No. 130716, 1998);
4. Matters affecting national security and public
order (Chavez v. Public Estates Authority, G.R.
No. 133250, 2002).
Q: What are the 2 types of executive privilege?
The presumptive presidential communications privilege
and the deliberative process privilege.
(Neri v. Senate, G.R. No. 180643, 2008).

Presidential Deliberative Process

Communications
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT Basis Separation of Common law
powers privilege
What Pertains to Includes
A. PRIVILEGES, INHIBITIONS AND
communications, advisory
DISQUALIFICATIONS documents or other opinions,
1. PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY materials that reflect recommendations and
decision-making deliberations
Q: When is the President immune from suit? and deliberations comprising part of a
• During tenure: for both official and unofficial acts; that should remain process by which
confidential. governmental
• After tenure: only for official acts Once out of office, It applies to decisions and policies
even before the end of the six-year term, immunity documents in their are
for non-official acts is lost (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. entirety, and covers formulated
No. 146710, 2001). final and post-
decisional materials
as well as

11
 predeliberative Privilege?
ones. Yes. Executive privilege cannot be used to conceal a
crime or a possible wrongdoing. Thus, the specific need
for evidence in a pending criminal trial outweighs the
President’s generalized interest in confidentiality (Neri v.
Ermita, supra, citing US v. Nixon).

Q: Does Executive Privilege violate the people’s right

to information? No. Sec. 7, Art. III provides that the right
is “subject to such limitations as may be provided by law”
such as Code of Conduct, revelation of secrets by an
officer under the RPC and corrupt practices of public
officers. These are in addition to the larger concept of
Cove Pre-deliberative, Deliberations; It applies executive privilege, which recognizes the public’s interest
rage final and post- to decision- in the confidentiality of certain information. (Neri v.
decisional matters making of executive Ermita, supra, citing US v. Nixon).
Negation of this officials
type of privilege is (and judiciary)
subject to more Q: Is there an exception to the prohibition on the
scrutiny. It applies President and his/her official family from holding any
to decision- other office or employment? Yes. If 4th degree relatives
making of the are already in office when a President assumes office, the
President. relatives are not thereby ousted from their positions. What
Requ 1. It must 1. Predecisional is prohibited is appointment or reappointment and not
isites involve a – it precedes, in uninterrupted continuance in office.
quintessential temporal
and non- sequence, the
delegable decision to which it B. POWERS
power of the relates. 1. EXECUTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE POWERS IN
President 2. Deliberative GENERAL
2. Operational – reflects the give and
proximity take of the Q: During the campaign, President Duterte, who was
3. Important consultative process then a candidate and later on became the elected
and compelling such that disclosure President, publicly announced that he would allow the
need to be kept would discourage burial of former President Marcos at the Libingan ng
confidential, not candid discussion
mga Bayani (LMNB). The Marcos Family entered into
merely based on within the agency
a 1992 agreement with the Government of the
general interest
Republic of the
Philippines that the remains be interred in Batac,
Q: What are the 3 Requisites for a valid claim of Ilocos Norte. Does this agreement bind President
Executive Privilege? Duterte?
1. The protected communication must relate to a No. The Presidential power of control over the Executive
quintessential and non-delegable Branch of Government is a selfexecuting provision of the
presidential power; Constitution and does not require statutory
Examples: commander-in-chief power, appointment implementation nor may its exercise be limited, much less
and removal power, the power to grant pardons and withdrawn, by the legislature. This is why President
reprieves, the soleauthority to receive ambassadors Duterte is not bound by the alleged 1992 Agreement to
and other public officers, the power to negotiate have the remains interred in Batac, Ilocos Norte. As the
treaties, etc. incumbent president he is free to amend, revoke or
2. It must be authored, solicited, and received by a close rescind political agreements entered into by his
advisor of the President or the President predecessors, and to determine policies which he
himself/herself. (Operational proximity test) considers, based on informed judgment and presumed
3. It may be overcome by a showing of adequate need, wisdom, will be most effective in carrying his mandate.
such that the information sought “likely contains (Ocampo v.
important evidence” and by unavailability of the Enriquez, G.R. No. 225973, 2016).
information elsewhere by an appropriate investigating
authority. (Neri v. Senate, G.R. No.180643,, 2008). 2. POWER OF APPOINTMENT

Q: Is there an exception to Executive (a) In general

12

Q: What are the Constitutional Limitations on the
President’s appointing power?
1. The president may not appoint his/her spouse and
relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the 4th civil
degree as members of the:
a. Constitutional Commissions
b. Ombudsman
c. Department Secretaries
d. Undersecretaries
e. Chairmen and heads of Bureaus and Offices
f. GOCCs (Sec. 13, Art. VII).
2. Appointments extended by an acting President shall
remain effective unless revoked by the elected
President within 90days from assumption of office.
(Sec. 14,
Art. VII).
3. 2 months immediately before the next presidential
elections and up to the end of his/her term, a
President or Acting President shall not make
appointments except temporary appointments to
executive positions when continued vacancies therein
will prejudice public service or endanger public safety.
(Sec. 15, Art. VII).
(b) Commission on Appointments
Q: What are the category/categories of officials whose
appointments need confirmation by the Commission
on Appointments?
The only officers whose appointments need confirmation
are:
a. Head of executive departments,
b. Ambassadors
c. Other public ministers,
d. Consuls
e. Officers of the AFP from rank of colonel or naval
captain
f. Other officials whose appointments are vested in
the President by the Constitution. The Congress
may not expand this list. (Sarmiento v. Mison G.R.
No. 79974, 1987).
Q: Differentiate Ad Interim from
Appointments in an acting capacity.
Ad Interim
• Considered a permanent appointment. (Pamantasan
ng Lungsod ng Maynila v. IAC, G.R. No. L-65439,
1985).
• May be terminated for any of 2 causes:
1. Disapproval of the appointment by the
CA;
2. Adjournment by Congress without the CA acting
on the appointment.
(Appointee-candidate is bypassed)
13
REMEDY OF THE PRESIDENT: Renew the Ad interim
appointment. (Matibag v. Benipayo, G.R.
No. 149036, Apr. 2, 2002).
Ad-interim Acting Capacity
Effective upon acceptance
Only during a recess of Anytime there is a
Congress vacancy
Submitted to the Not submitted
Commission of
Appointments
A way of temporarily
filling important offices
but, if abused, can be a
way of circumventing the
need for confirmation by
the Commission on
Appointments.
(Pimentel v. Ermita, G.R. No. 164978, 2005).
Temporary – not subject to confirmation by the CA. Such
confirmation, if given erroneously, will not make the
incumbent a permanent employee. (Valencia v. Peralta,
G.R. No. L-20864, August 23, 1963).
Q: Does the assumption of office on the basis of the
ad interim appointments issued by the President
amount to a temporary appointment which is
prohibited by § 1 (2), Art. IX-C?
No. An ad interim appointment is a permanent
appointment because it takes effect immediately and can
no longer be withdrawn by the
President once the appointee has qualified into office.
(Matibag v. Benipayo, G.R. No. 149036, 2002).
(c) Midnight appointments
Q: Does the ban on “midnight appointments” under
Sec. 15, Art VII apply to the judiciary? No, the
prohibition does not extend to appointments in the
Judiciary. Had the framers intended to extend the
prohibition to the appointment of Members of the
Supreme Court, they could have explicitly done so. The
prohibition is confined to appointments in the Executive
Department by the President or Acting President (De
Castro v. JBC, G.R. No. 191002, 2010). Neither does it
apply to local executive officials. (Quirog v. Aumentado,
G.R. 163443, 2008).
Q: May the succeeding President revoke
appointments to the Judiciary made by an Acting
President?
No, Sec. 14, Art. VII refers only to appointments in the
Executive Department. It has no application to
appointments in the Judiciary because temporary or acting
appointments can only undermine the judiciary due to their
being revocable at will. Prior to their mandatory retirement
or resignation, judges of the first or second level courts
and the Justices of the third level courts may only be
removed for cause, but the members of the Supreme
Court may be removed only by impeachment. (De Castro
v.
JBC, G.R. No. 191002, 2010).
(d) Power of removal
Q: Is RA 6770, insofar as it confers to the President
disciplinary authority over the Deputy Ombudsman,
valid?
No. The alter egos of the President and the officials of the
Executive Department are subject to the disciplinary
authority of the Ombudsman. The deputy Ombudsmen act
as agents of the Ombudsman in the performance of their
duties. Thus, subjecting the deputy Ombudsmen to the
power to discipline and removal by the President will
seriously place at risk the independence of the
Ombudsman. However, it is valid insofar as the Special
Prosecutor is concerned because he is not within the
Office of the Ombudsman (Gonzales III v. Office of the
President, G.R. No.
196231, 2012).
3. POWER OF CONTROL AND SUPERVISION
(a) Doctrine of qualified political agency
Q: What is the doctrine of qualified political agency?
The doctrine of qualified political agency declares that,
(save in matters on which the Constitution or the
circumstances require the President to act personally),
executive and administrative functions are exercised
through executive departments headed by cabinet
secretaries, whose acts are presumptively the acts of the
President unless disapproved by the latter.
There can be no question that the act of the secretary is
the act of the President, unless repudiated by the latter. In
this case, approval of the Amendments to the
Supplemental Toll Operation Agreement (ASTOA) by the
DOTC Secretary had the same effect as approval by the
President. The same would be true even without the
issuance of E.O. 497, in which the President specifically
delegated to the DOTC Secretary the authority to approve
contracts entered into by the Toll Regulatory Board.
(Hontiveros-Baraquel vs. Toll Regulatory Board, 2015).
(b) Executive departments and offices
Q: May the president appoint an individual as acting
Solicitor General and acting Secretary of Justice in a
concurrent capacity? No. The designation of Alberto
Agra as acting Secretary of Justice concurrently with his
position as Solicitor General is in violation of the
constitutional prohibition under Article VII, Section 13. It is
of no moment that the designation was in a temporary
capacity. The Constitution makes no reference to the
14
nature of the designation (Funa v. Agra, G.R. No. 191644,
February 19, 2013).
(c) Local government units
Q: What is the nature of the President’s power over
local governments?
The president’s power over local governments is only one
of general supervision, and not one of control. (Pimentel
v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 132988, July 19, 2000).
Q: May the President merge administrative regions?
Yes. To facilitate the exercise of power of general
supervision of local government, the president may merge
administrative regions and transfer the regional center to
Koronadal City from Cotabato City (Republic v. Bayao,
G.R. No.
179492, 2013).
4. MILITARY POWERS
Q: Distinguish the President’s authority to declare a
state of rebellion and the authority to proclaim a state
of national emergency. The authority to declare a state
of rebellion emanates from the President’s power as Chief
Executive. In Sanlakas, the President’s declaration of a
state of rebellion was deemed harmless and without legal
significance.
In declaring a state of national emergency, (PP1017), the
President did not only rely on Sec. 18, Art. VII but also on
Sec. 17, Art XII of the Constitution. Calling for the exercise
of awesome powers cannot be deemed harmless or
without legal significance. (David v.
Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396, 2006).
Q: Is a Presidential proclamation of a state of
emergency sufficient to allow the President to take
over any public utility?
No. Since it is an aspect of emergency powers in
accordance with § 23 (2), Art. VI of the Constitution, there
must be a law delegating such power to the President.
(David v.
Macagapal Arroyo, supra).
Q: What are the safeguards in the exercise of
Congress’ grant of authority to take over private
corporations and institutions under Sec. 17, Art. XII?
1. There must be war or a declared national emergency
2. Delegation is for a limited period only;
3. Delegation is subject to restrictions prescribed by
Congress;
4. Emergency powers are exercised to carry out a
declared national emergency.
Q: May the President issue “decrees” in a state of
rebellion?
No, PP1107 is unconstitutional insofar as it grants the President must act within 1. Time limit of 60
President the authority to promulgate “decrees” because permissible days
legislative power is peculiarly within the province of constitutional 2. Review and
Congress. (David v. boundaries or possible
in a revocation by
Macapagal-Arroyo, supra).
manner not constituting Congress
grave abuse of 3. Review and
Q: May the President enforce obedience to all laws discretion. But possible
through the military? generally, president has nullification by
No. The President cannot call the military to enforce or full discretion the SC
implement certain laws such as customs laws, those Actual use to which Subject to judicial
governing family and property relations, laws on President puts the review as to
obligations and contracts, etc. She can only order the armed forced not sufficiency for the
military, under PP1017, to enforce laws pertinent to its subject to judicial review factual basis of such
duty to suppress lawless violence. (David v. declaration.
Macapagal-Arroyo, supra). (Lagman v. Medialdea, G.R. No. 231658, July 4,
2017)
Q: Is the President required to dispense his
extraordinary powers (calling out, declaration of 5. PARDONING POWER
martial law, and suspension of the privilege of the writ
of habeas corpus) SEQUENTIALLY? (DEL CASTILLO) (a) Nature and limitations
No. The President has absolute discretion to choose
which of the extraordinary powers to exercise at a given Q: What are the limitations on the exercise of the
time, provided that the conditions for the valid exercise of President’s pardoning power?
each power exist. (Lagman v. Medialdea, G.R. No. 1. Cannot extend to cases of impeachment.
231658, Sec. 19, Art. VII).
July 4, 2017) 2. For violation of election laws, must have favorable
recommendation by the
Q: Is the recommendation of the defense secretary COMELEC. Sec. 5, Art. IX-C).
necessary for the declaration of martial law or 3. Granted only after conviction by final judgment. (Sec.
suspension of the writ of habeas corpus? (DEL 19, Art. VII).
CASTILLO) 4. Cannot extend to cases of legislative contempt, or civil
No. The power to choose, initially, which among these contempt.
extraordinary powers to wield in a given set of conditions 5. Does not absolve civil liability. (People v. Nacional,
is a judgment call on the part of G.R. No. 11294, Sep. 7, 1995).
the President. (Lagman v. Medialdea, 2017) 6. Does not restore public offices forfeited. (Monsanto v.
Factoran, G.R. No. 78239, February 9, 1989).
Q: Differentiate the extraordinary powers of the
President (DEL CASTILLO) (b) Forms of executive clemency
Calling out Suspending the
privilege of writ of Q: May the President grant executive clemency in
habeas corpus and
administrative cases? Yes, but only to administrative
declaration of
martial law cases in the Executive branch, not in the Judicial or
Most benign and Involve curtailment
Legislative branches of government. (Llamas v.
involves ordinary police and suppression of Orbos, G.R. No. 99031, Oct. 15, 1991).
action civil rights and
individual freedom Q: A trial judge was found liable by the SC for serious
President may invoke President may only misconduct and inefficiency, and meted a penalty of
whenever it becomes invoke when there is suspension from office for 6 months. The judge
necessary to prevent or actual invasion, thereafter filed a petition for executive clemency with
suppress rebellion, and public
the Office of the President. The Executive Secretary
lawless safety requires it
issued a resolution granting the executive clemency.
violence, invasion, or Is it valid?
rebellion.
No. The power of executive clemency cannot be
delegated for it was not signed by the President himself
but by the Executive Secretary. Also, it cannot extend to
administrative cases in the Judiciary because it will violate

15
the principle of separation of powers and impair the power of the Monetary Board and subject to such limitations as
of the SC under §6 Art. VIII. may be prescribed by law. (Sec. 20, Art. VII).

6. DIPLOMATIC POWERS Q: What is an “item” under an appropriations bill?

An item in an appropriation bill is a specific appropriation
Q: Distinguish treaties from of money, not some general provision of law, which
executive agreements. happens to be put into an appropriation bill. An item of
Executive appropriation must be an item characterized by singular
Treaty Agreement correspondence, which is an allocation of a specified
singular amount for a specified singular purpose known as
Involve political Involve details
a "line-item." (Belgica v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 208566, 2013).
issues, nat'l. carrying out nat'l.
policy policy
Q: May an appropriation be validly apportioned into
Int'l. agreements of More or less
component percentage or values?
a permanent temporary in
kind character Yes, provided that each percentage or value must be
allocated for its own corresponding purpose for such
Does not require
component to be considered a proper line-item. (Belgica
Requires senate senate
v. Ochoa, supra).
concurrence concurrence
(Bayan Muna v. Romulo, G.R. No. 159618, 2011). 7. POWERS RELATIVE TO
APPROPRIATION MEASURES
Q: The President alone without the concurrence of the 8. DELEGATED POWERS
Senate abrogated a treaty. Assume that the other 9. VETO POWERS
country party to the treaty is agreeable to the
abrogation provided it complies with the Philippine
Q: Distinguish between the 2 kinds of presidential
Constitution. If a case involving the validity of the veto.
treaty abrogation is brought to the SC, how should it
1. General veto power - veto the entire bill; If you
be resolved?
veto a provision in an ordinary bill – considered as
It should dismiss the case. The jurisdiction of the SC (other
if you vetoed the whole thing.
lower courts) over a treaty is only with respect to questions
2. Item/line veto– veto separate items, not the entire
of its constitutionality of validity. It does not pertain to the
bill. Only in an appropriation, revenue or tariff bill.
termination/abrogation of a treaty. (Gonzales v.
(Sec. 27, Art. VI).
Hechanova, G.R. No. L-21897, 1963).
Q: What is the Doctrine of inappropriate provisions?
Q: When may the President opt to enter into an
• A provision that is constitutionally inappropriate for an
executive agreement?
appropriation bill may be singled out for veto even if it
Executive agreements are concluded (1) to adjust the
is not an appropriation or revenue item (refers to
details of a treaty, e.g., EDCA as to VFA; (2) pursuant to
riders).
or upon confirmation by an act of the Legislature; or (3) in
• Included are:
the exercise of the President's independent powers under
1) unconstitutional provisions and
the Constitution.
2) provisions which are intended to amend other
laws. (Philconsa vs. Enriquez, G.R. No.
Q: May the President enter into an executive
113105, 1994)
agreement on foreign military bases, troops or
facilities?
10. RESIDUAL POWERS
Yes, but only if the executive agreement (a) is not the
11. EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
instrument that allows the presence of foreign military
12. EMERGENCY POWERS
bases, troops or facilities; or (b) merely aims to implement
an existing law or treaty. (Saguisag v. Exec. Sec., G.R.
No. C. RULES OF SUCCESSION
212426, 2016)
Start of Term as of Noon June 30 (Art. VII, Sec. 7):
President VP Both
Q: What are the restrictions prescribed by the
Fails to VP acts as N/A Senate P.
Constitution in the power of the President to contract
Qualify P or Speaker
or guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the State? acts as P.
The power of the President to contract or guarantee loans
on behalf of the State is subject to the prior concurrence

16
 Not Chosen VP acts as N/A Senate P. of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus? (DEL
P or Speaker CASTILLO)
acts as P.
It is limited to a determination of the sufficiency of the
Death; P. VP is P. After June Senate P.
Disability 30, Sec. 9 or Speaker factual basis of such declaration or suspension. (Lagman
can apply. acts as P. v. Medialdea, G.R. No.
231658, July 4, 2017)
During or Mid-Term (Sec. 8):
Death; P. Disabled; Removal, Death; P. Q: Differentiate the judicial power to review the
Resignation Disabled; sufficiency of the factual basis for the declaration of
Resignation martial law and the suspension of the privilege of writ
Pres. VP Both Acting Pres.
(SP/SH)
of habeas corpus from the congressional power to
VP is Pres. will Senate P. By law
revoke such declaration and suspension.
P. nominate VP or Speaker (DEL CASTILLO)
from Congress acts as P.
(Sec. 9). Judicial Power to Congressional
review Power to revoke
Court can only refer to Congress may take
information available to into consideration:
the President prior to or• Data available to
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT at the time of the
declaration
the President
prior to or at the
time of the
A. CONCEPTS Court is not allowed to declaration and
1. JUDICIAL POWER undertake an • Events
independent supervening the
Q: Can the court exercise judicial power when there is investigation beyond declaration
the pleadings
no applicable law?
Does not look into the Can probe further and
• No. In a number of cases decided, the Supreme Court
absolute correctness of deeper, can delve into
ruled that the exercise of judicial power when there is accuracy of facts
the factual basis
no applicable law is not authorized. presented before it
• The court has no authority to entertain an action for Passive power Automatic
judicial declaration of citizenship because there was Initiated by filing of a May be activated by
no law authorizing such proceeding (Tan v. Republic, petition “in an Congress itself at any
G.R. No. L14159, April 18, 1960). appropriate time after the
• An award of honors to a student by a board of proceeding” by a proclamation or
teachers may not be reversed by a court where the citizen suspension was made
awards are governed by no applicable law (Santiago (Lagman v. Medialdea, G.R. No. 231658, July 4,
Jr. v. Bautista, G.R. No. L-25024, March 30, 1970). 2017)
• Courts cannot reverse the award of a board of judges
in an oratorical contest (Felipe v. 2. JUDICIAL REVIEW
Leuterio, G.R. No. L-4606, May 30, 1952).
Q: What are the requisites for judicial review?
Q: What is the nature of the Supreme Court’s (1) There must be a judicial case ripe for adjudication;
jurisdiction to determine the sufficiency of the factual (2) Raised by the proper party – party must have locus
basis for the declaration of martial law and the standi
suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas (3) Raised at the earliest opportunity
corpus by the President? (DEL CASTILLO) (4) Decision on the constitutional question must be
It is sui generis and granted by Sec. 18, Art. VII of the determinative of the case itself; it is the lis mota.
Constitution which provides that in case of invasion or
rebellion, when public safety requires it, the President Q: Can inferior courts exercise judicial review?
may, for a period not exceeding 60 days suspend the Yes. Since the power of judicial review flows from judicial
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the power and since inferior courts are possessed of judicial
Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. It does power, it may fairly be inferred that the power of judicial
not stem from Sec. 1 or 5 of Art. VIII. (Lagman v. review is not an exclusive power of the Supreme Court.
Medialdea, G.R. No. 231658, July 4, 2017) (Bernas, Commentary, 2009 ed.).

Q: What is the scope of the Supreme Court’s power to Q: Does the CTA have the power to issue writs of
review the declaration of Martial Law or suspension certiorari?
17
Yes. Section 1, Article VIII vests judicial power in the
Supreme Court and in lower courts established by laws.
Judicial power includes the determination whether there
has been grave abuse of discretion on the part of the
government. The CTA has the judicial power to determine
whether the RTC gravely abused its discretion in issuing
an interlocutory order in cases falling within its exclusive
appellate jurisdiction (City of Manila v. Grecia-Cuerdo,
G.R. No. 175723, 2014).
(a) Operative fact doctrine
Q: What is the “operative fact doctrine”? When the
assailed legislature act or executive act is found by the
judiciary to be contrary to the Constitution, it is null and
void. However, the actual existence of a statute prior to
such determination is an operative fact and may have
consequences which cannot be erased by a new judicial
declaration. Thus, for a period of time such statute, treaty,
executive order or ordinance was in “actual existence.” It
is considered as an operative fact. (CIR v. San Roque
Power Corporation, G.R. No. 187485, 2013).
Q: When is the operative fact doctrine not applicable?
• Operative fact doctrine cannot be invoked if it will
constitute an unjust enrichment. In the case of
Planters v. Fertiphil, the tax on fertilizers had already
been collected and applied to a private corporation’s
needs. This was by virtue of the law imposing the tax.
If the operative fact doctrine would be applied in this
case it would sanction the enrichment of the Planters
Product at the expense of the Fertiphil. (Planters
Products, Inc. v. FertiPhil Corporation, G.R. No.
166006, 2008).
• It should also not be applied if it will be iniquitous and
would send a wrong signal that an act may be justified
when based on an unconstitutional provision. Simply
put, it will not be applied if it will result to injustice.
(Phil. Coconut v. Republic, G.R. Nos
177857-58, 2012). 
 be of no practical value. As a rule, courts decline
Q: Can an administrative practice be the basis for
applying the operative fact doctrine?
No. The doctrine of operative fact states that a judicial
declaration of invalidity may not necessarily obliterate all
the effects of a void act prior to the declaration. For the
operative fact doctrine to apply, there must be a law or an
executive issuance invalidated by the court. Its effect,
when relied upon by the public in good faith, may have to
be recognized as valid. (CIR v. San Roque Power
Corporation, G.R. No.
187485, 2013).
Q: How was the operative fact doctrine applied to the
DAP?
18
1. The term “executive act” is broad enough to include
any and all acts of the Executive, including those that
are quasi legislative and quasi-judicial in nature. It is
not confined to statutes and rules and regulations
issued by the executive department or those which
are quasi-legislative in nature. Thus, it applies to the
DAP (which was a mere program of the DBM).
• The DAP itself, as a policy, transcended a merely
administrative practice especially after the
Executive, through the DBM, implemented it by
issuing various memoranda and circulars.
2. This doctrine, in the interest of justice and equity, can
be applied liberally and in a broad sense to
encompass said decisions of the executive branch.
• The DAP resulted to public infrastructure. Not to
apply the doctrine of operative fact to the DAP
could literally cause the physical undoing of such
worthy results by destruction, and would result in
most undesirable wastefulness.
3. However, the OFD applies only to the programs,
activities, and projects that can no longer be undone,
and whose beneficiaries relied in good faith on the
validity of the DAP, but cannot apply to the authors,
proponents and implementors of the DAP, unless
there are concrete findings of good faith in their favor
by the proper tribunals determining their criminal, civil,
administrative and other liabilities.
• Note however that the presumption of good faith
was not removed; there must first be a factual
determination of the guilt of the authors.
Complainants has burden of proof; presumption
of GF still stands. (Araullo v. Aquino III, G.R.
No. 209287, 2014).
(b) Moot questions
Q: What is a “moot and academic case”? It is one that
ceases to present a justiciable controversy by virtue of
supervening events, so that a declaration thereon would
jurisdiction over such case or dismiss it on ground of
mootness (Gunsi, Sr. v.
Commissioners, The COMELEC, 2009).
Q: What are the exceptions to the rule that the Courts
will not entertain “moot” questions?
1. A grave violation of the Constitution
2. The exceptional character of the situation and
paramount public interest is involved
3. A need to formulate controlling principles to guide the
bench, the bar and the public; and
4. The fact that the case is capable of repetition yet
evading review. (David v.
Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396, 2006).
(c) Political question doctrine
Q: What is a “political question”? It is a question, the
resolution of which has been vested by the Constitution
exclusively:
1. In the people, in the exercise of their sovereign
capacity, or
2. In which full discretionary authority has been
delegated to a co-equal branch of the
Government. (Tanada v. Cuenco, G.R. No. L-
10520, 1957).
Q: Is the judiciary precluded from reviewing “political
questions”?
No, the 2nd clause of Sec. 1, Art. VIII (the power to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of
discretion) effectively limits the “political question” are
which, heretofore, was forbidden territory for the courts.
The Courts may now determine whether there has been
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of
government. (Francisco v.
House of Rep, G.R. No. 160261, 2003).
Q: Is the determination of what constitutes “betrayal
of public trust” or “other high crimes” a political
question?
Yes. A determination of what constitutes an impeachable
offense is a purely political question, which the
Constitution has left to the sound discretion of the
legislature. (Gutierrez v. The HOR Committee on Justice,
et al., G.R. No.
193459, 2011).
Q: Examples of political
questions in jurisprudence.
1. Interpretation of the meaning of “disorderly behavior”
and the legislature’s power to suspend a member
(there is no procedure for the imposition of the penalty
of suspension nor did the 1935 Constitution define
what “disorderly behavior is). The matter is left to the
discretion of the legislature (Osmeña, Jr. v. Pendatun,
G.R. 17144, 1960).
2. Whether the court could intervene in a case where the
House of Representatives was said to have
disregarded its own rule. The court was held to have
been without authority to intervene (Arroyo v. De
Venecia, G.R. No. 127255, August 14, 1997).
3. Recognition of diplomatic immunity (International
Catholic Migration Commission v. Hon. Calleja, G.R.
No.
85750, 1990).
Q: Examples of cases in jurisprudence where there
was held to be no political question involved.
1. Apportionment of representative districts (because
there are constitutional rules governing
apportionment) (Avelino v. Cuenco, G.R. No. L-2821,
March 4, 1949).
19
2. Suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus is not a political question because the
Constitution sets limits to executive discretion on the
matter (Montenegro v. Castañeda, G.R. No. L4221,
August 30, 1952).
3. Manner of forming the Commission on Appointments
(Guingona v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 106971, October
20, 1992).
4. Constitutionality of Pork Barrel system (Belgica v.
Ochoa G.R. No. 208566, November 19, 2013)
B. SAFEGUARDS OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
C. JUDICIAL RESTRAINT
Q: What is the doctrine of judicial restraint? This
doctrine is well intertwined with the doctrine of separation
of powers. The courts should defer to the decisions made
by the legislature and executive branches and should not
thwart the implementation of these acts unless they are
clearly unconstitutional. (Francisco v. House of Rep., G.R.
No. 160261, 2003).
D. APPOINTMENTS TO THE JUDICIARY
Q: Can the President appoint a temporary member of
the Supreme Court?
No. There can be no doubt that the Chief Justice and
Associate Justices required by the Constitution to
compose the Supreme Court are regular members of the
Court. A temporary member would be a misnomer,
implying a position not contemplated by the Constitution.
Thus, a law which authorizes the President to designate
any judge of the lower court or cadastral judge to act as
member of the Supreme Court is void. (Vargas v.
Rilloraza, G.R. No. L-1612, 1948).
1. JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL
Q: What happens if the President is not satisfied with
the list submitted by the JBC? He may ask for another
list. But once the appointment is issued by the President
and accepted by the nominee, it needs no further
confirmation.
Q: Can both a senator and congressman sit in the JBC
as representatives of Congress? No. There is only one
representative of congress entitled to one vote in the JBC.
Congress chooses whether the JBC representative shall
come from the Senate or the House or Representatives.
(Chavez v. JBC, G.R. No.
202242, 2013).
Q: Is the JBC required to hold hearings on the
qualifications of nominees?
No. The process by which an on objection is made based
on Sec 2, Rule 10 of JBC-009 is not judicial, quasi-judicial,
or fact finding because it does not aim to determine guilt
or innocence akin to a criminal or administrative offense.
Rather, it is to ascertain the fitness of an applicant vis-a-
vis the requirements for the position. Even if proceedings
before the JBC are sui generis, due process still applies
(Jardaleza v. Chief Justice Sereno G.R. No. 213281, Aug
19, 2014)
Q: The JBC sorted Sandiganbayan Associate Justice
nominees in 6 clusters. The President appointed 2
nominees belonging in one cluster. The other
nominees argued that the President could only
choose 1 nominee from each of the separate six
shortlists or clusters provided by the JBC. Is the
clustering of nominees by JBC unconstitutional?
Yes. It is unconstitutional. The JBC, in sorting the qualified
nominees into six (6) clusters, one for every vacancy,
could influence the appointment process beyond its
constitutional mandate of recommending qualified
nominees to the President. Clustering impinges upon the
President’s power of appointment, as well as restricts the
chances for appointment of the qualified nominees.
(Aguinaldo v. Aquino, G.R.
No. 224302, 2017).
E. SUPREME COURT
1. EN BANC AND DIVISION CASES
Q: What cases must be decided by the SC en banc?
(LIT)
1. All cases involving constitutionality of a: Code:
1. Law
2. International or executive agreement
3. Treaty
2. All cases involving the constitutionality, application or
operation of: (POPORI)
1. Presidential decrees
2. Orders
3. Proclamations
4. Ordinances
5. Other regulations
6. Instructions
3. All cases required to be heard en banc under the
Rules of Court
4. Appeals from Sandiganbayan and from the
Constitutional Commissions
5. Cases heard by a division where required majority of
3 was not obtained
6. Cases where SC modifies or reverses a doctrine or
principle of law laid down by the SC en banc or by a
division
7. Administrative cases to discipline or dismiss judges of
lower courts
8. Election contests for President and VicePresident
(i.e., the Presidential Electoral Tribunal). (Sec. 4, Art.
VIII).
20
NOTE: Other cases outside the enumeration are heard in
Division and decided or resolved with the concurrence of
a majority of the members who actually took part in the
deliberations on the issues and voted thereon, but in no
case without the concurrence of at least 3 such members.
(Sec. 4, Art. VIII).
Q: Is a law fixing the passing grade in the Bar
examinations at 70%, with no grade lower than 40% in
any subject is constitutional?
No. Such law entails amendment of the Rules of Court
promulgated by the Supreme Court. The Constitution has
taken away the power of Congress to alter the Rules of
Court. The law will violate the principle of separation of
powers.
(In Re: Cunanan, 94 Phil. 534, 1954).
What are the requisites for a 3rd party to file a case?
1. The litigant must have suffered an injury-infact, thus
giving him or her a "sufficiently concrete interest" in
the outcome of the issue in dispute;
2. The litigant must have a close relation to the third
party; and
3. There must exist some hindrance to the third party's
ability to protect his or her own interests. (White Light
v. City of Manila, G.R.
No. 122846, 2009).
CONSTITUTIONAL
COMMISSIONS
A. CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS TO
ENSURE INDEPENDENCE OF
COMMISSIONS
Q: What are the institutional safeguards to guarantee
the independence of the
Constitutional Commissions?
1. They are constitutionally created, may not be
abolished by statute.
2. Each is expressly described
as
“independent”
3. Each is conferred certain powers and functions by the
Constitution which cannot be reduced by statute.
4. The Chairmen and members cannot be removed,
except by impeachment.
5. The chairmen and the members are given a fairly long
term of office of 7 years.
6. The Chairmen and members may not be reappointed
or appointed in an acting capacity.
7. The salaries of the Chairmen and members are
relatively high and may not be decreased during
continuance in office.
8. The Commissions enjoy fiscal autonomy
 (Sec. 5, Art. IX-A).
9. Each Commission en banc may promulgate its own
procedural rules, provided they do not diminish,
increase or modify substantive rights (Sec. 6, Art. IX-
A)
10. The Chairmen and members are subject to certain
disqualifications calculated to strengthen their
integrity.
The Commissions may appoint their own officials and
employees in accordance with Civil Service Law.
(Nachura, Reviewer in Political Law, p. 325).
Q: What are the inhibitions/
disqualifications?
1. Shall not, during tenure, hold any other office or
employment
2. Shall not engage in the practice of any profession
3. Shall not engage in the active management or control
of any business which in any way may be affected by
the functions of his office
4. Shall not be financially interested, directly or indirectly
in any contract with, or in any franchise or privilege
granted by the Government or any of its subdivisions,
agencies or instrumentalities, including GOCCs or
their subsidiaries. (Sec.2, Art.
IX).
Q: In case of conflict between a rule of procedure
promulgated by a Commission and a Rule of Court,
which prevails? It depends upon the venue. The rule of
the commission shall prevail if the proceeding is before a
commission. But if before a court, the Rules of Court
prevail. (Aruelo Jr. v. CA, G.R.
No. 107852, 1993).
Q: What is the “rotational scheme of appointments”
and what are the 2 conditions for its workability?
The first appointees shall serve terms of 7, 5 and 3 years,
respectively. After the first commissioners are appointed,
the rotational scheme is intended to prevent the possibility
of one President appointing all the Commissioners. (Funa
v. The Chairman, G.R. No. 192791,
2012).
The 2 conditions for its workability are:
1. The terms of the First Chairman and
Commissioners should start on a common date,
irrespective of variation of dates of their
appointments and qualifications; and
2. Any vacancy due to the death, resignation or
disability before the expiration of the term should
be filled only for the unexpired balance of the
term. (Funa v. The Chairman, G.R. No.
192791, 2012).
Q: What constitutional offices does the rotational
scheme of appointments apply?
21
1. Civil Service Commission
2. Commission on Elections
3. Commission on Audit
4. Judicial and Bar Council (Funa v. The Chairman, G.R.
No. 192791, 2012).
B. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF EACH
COMMISSION
A. The Civil Service Commission
Q: What is the covered by the Civil Service
Commission? (BIGAS)
1. Branches
2. Instrumentalities
3. GOCCs with original charters
4. Agencies of the government
5. Subdivisions
NOTE:
1. “With Original Charter” means that the GOCC was
created by special law or by Congress
2. If incorporated under the Corporation Code, it
does not fall within the Civil Service and is not
subject to the CSC jurisdiction
3. If previously government-controlled, but is later
privatized, it ceases to fall under CSC
4. Jurisdiction is determined as of the time of filing
the complaint. (PNOC v. NLRC, G.R. No. 79182,
1991).
Q: May the CSC disallow an appointment to a position
authorized by law but not included in the Index of
Occupational Service? No. Although the CSC rules limit
appointments to positions within the Index of Occupational
Service, nevertheless, it is also bound to implement the
laws it is tasked to enforce. RA 8494 exempted the Trade
and Investment Corporation from conforming to the
position classification, thus, the appointment made even
not within the index is still valid (Trade and Investment v.
CSC, G.R.No.182249, 2013).
Q: May the CSC terminate the employment of a civil
servant?
No, the CSC is not a co-manager or surrogate
administrator of government offices and agencies. Its
functions and authority are limited to approving or
reviewing appointments to determine their compliance
with requirements of the Civil Service Law. On its own, the
Commission does not have the power to terminate
employment or drop members from the rolls. (UP and
Torres v. CSC, G.R. No. 132860, Apr. 3, 2001 citing
Chang v. CSC, G.R.
No. 86791, 1990).
Q: What is the concept of security of tenure in the Civil
Service Law?
“No officer or employee of the civil service shall be
removed or suspended except for cause provided by law.”
(Section 2(3), Article IX-B).
Q: What are the classes of non-competitive positions?
1. Policy determining
Where the officer lays down principal or
fundamental guidelines or rules or formulates a
method of action for government or any of its
subdivisions.
E.g. department head. (Nachura) 2. Primarily
confidential A position is considered primarily confidential
if the nature of the office requires close intimacy between
the appointee and appointing authority which insures
freedom of intercourse without embarrassment or freedom
from misgiving of betrayal of personal trust on confidential
matters of state.
3. Highly technical
It means something beyond the ordinary
requirements of the profession. Hence, its
determination is always a question of fact. (CSC
v. Javier, G.R. No. 173264, 2008).
Q: Are individuals occupying noncompetitive position
covered by the guarantee of security of tenure?
They are covered by the guarantee of security of tenure
but the termination of their official relation can be justified
on the ground of loss of confidence because in that case
their cessation from office involves no removal but the
expiration of the term of office. (Tanjay v. Quinit, G.R. No.
160502, April 27, 2007).
Q: What is “partisan political campaign”? The phrase
involves any form of solicitation of the elector’s vote in
favor of a specific candidate. But this does not prevent the
expression of views on current political problems or
issues, or mention of the names of candidates for public
office whom the public officer supports. (Gonzales v.
Comelec, G.R. No. L-27833, 1969).
Q: Who are exempt from the prohibition on engaging
in electioneering and partisan political campaign?
Exempt from this provision are members of the Cabinet
and public officers and employees holding political offices.
(Santos v. Yatco, G.R.
No. L-16133, 1959).
Q: Section 7, Article IX-B states that “No elective
official shall be eligible for appointment or
designation in any capacity to any public office or
position during his tenure”, is this rule absolute?
What are the exceptions, if any?
It is not absolute. The Vice President may be appointed
member of the Cabinet and a member of Congress is
designated to sit in the Judicial and Bar Council. The
22
Senate President is also the ex-officio chairman of the
Commission on Appointments.
Q: The Civil Service Commission took back up files in
the computer of an employee to determine if he was
acting as counsel for employees with cases before
the commission. Is this valid?
No. To determine whether an employee has a reasonable
expectation of privacy, the following factors should be
considered: (1) The
Employee’s relationship to the item seized; (2) Whether
the item was in the immediate control of the employee; (3)
Whether the employee took actions to maintain his privacy
in the item.
The Supreme Court declared that the employee did not
have a reasonable expectation of privacy over the
computer files in view of the following facts: (1) The
employee’s computer was issued by the government, and
could be used only for government business, (2) There
was a memo policy restricting use of the computer
expressly stating that the use of password does not imply
privacy, and (3) She allowed other people to access the
computer; and (4) There is reasonable ground for
suspecting the computer files will produce evidence of the
misconduct of the employee. (Pollo v. Constantino-David,
G.R.
No. 181881, 2011)
B. The Commission on Elections
Q: What are the powers and functions of the
COMELEC?
1. Enforce and administer all laws and regulations
relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite,
initiative, referendum, and recall. (Sec. 2(1), Art. IX).
E.g. COMELEC can enjoin construction of public
works within 45 days of an election.
The COMELEC can take cognizance of any question
on the conduct of plebiscite such as to correct or
check what the Board of Canvassers erroneously or
fraudulently did during the canvassing, verify or
ascertain the results of the plebiscite either through
pre-proclamation case or through revision of ballots.
(Buac v. Comelec, G.R. No. 155855, 2004).
The power of the COMELEC to ascertain the results
of the plebiscite is implicit in the power to enforce all
laws relative to the conduct of plebiscite. (Buac v.
Comelec, G.R. No. 155855, 2004).
COMELEC can take jurisdiction over cases involving
party identity and leadership or controversy as to
leadership in the party. Such jurisdiction is sourced
from the general power of the Commission to
 administer laws and rules involving the conduct of
election.
2. Exercise
a. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests
relating to the elections, returns, and
qualifications of all elective regional, provincial
and city officials.
• Election contests in the Sangguniang Kabataan
(SK) are under the original jurisdiction of the
MTC, and its appellate jurisdiction over the
decisions of the MTC is under the COMELEC.
(Fernandez v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 176296, 2008)
b. Appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving:
i. Elective municipal officials decided by
trial courts of general jurisdiction
ii. Elective barangay officials decided by
trial courts of limited jurisdiction. (Article
IX-C, Sec. 2 (2)).
c. Decisions, final orders, or rulings of the
COMELEC contests involving elective municipal
and barangay offices shall be final, executory,
and not appealable.
(Art. IX-C, Sec. 2(2)).
EXCEPTION:
May be appealed to the SC EN BANC on
questions of law.
When the decision is brought on a special civil
action for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus
under Rule 65 for grave abuse of discretion under
Article IX-A Section 7.
d. Contempt powers
i. COMELEC can exercise this power only in
relation to its adjudicatory or quasi-judicial
functions. It cannot exercise this in
connection with its purely executive or
ministerial functions.
• If it is a pre-proclamation controversy, the
COMELEC exercises quasi-judicial or
administrative powers. (Sandoval v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 133842, 2000).
• Its jurisdiction over ‘contests’ (after
proclamation) is in exercise of its judicial
functions. (Article IX-C, Sec. 2(2)).
e. Issue writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.
3. Decide, except those involving the right to vote, all
questions affecting elections, including determination
of the number and location of polling places,
appointment of election officials and inspectors, and
registration of voters. (Art. IX-C, Sec. 2(3)). NOTE:
23
These petitions are cognizable by the Regular Courts
(MTC).
4. Deputize, with the concurrence of the President, law
enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of the
Government, including the Armed Forces of the
Philippines, for the exclusive purpose of ensuring free,
orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections. .
(Art. IX-C, Sec.2 (4)).
NOTE:
1. This power is not limited to the election period.
2. Applies to both criminal and administrative cases.
(Ejercito v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 212398, 2004).
5. Register political parties, organizations, or coalitions,
accredit citizens’ arms of the Commission on
Elections. (Art. IX-C, Sec.2(5)).
NOTE:
1. Political parties, etc. must present their platform
or program of government.
2. There should be sufficient publication.
3. Groups that cannot be registered:
i. Religious denominations/ sects
ii. Those that seek to achieve their goals
through violence or unlawful means
iii. Those that refuse to uphold and adhere to the
Constitution
iv. Those supported by any foreign government
e.g., receipt of financial
contributions related to elections
6. File, upon a verified complaint, or on its own initiative,
petitions in court for inclusion or exclusion of voters;
investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute cases
of violations of election laws, including acts or
omissions constituting elections frauds, offenses and
malpractices. (Art. IX-C, Sec.2(6)).
NOTE:
1. COMELEC has EXCLUSIVE
JURISDICTION to investigate and prosecute
cases for violations of election laws.
2. COMELEC can deputize prosecutors for this
purpose. The actions of the prosecutors are the
actions of the COMELEC.
3. COMELEC can conduct preliminary investigation
on election cases falling
within its jurisdiction
7. Recommend to the Congress effective measures to
minimize election spending, including limitation of
places where propaganda materials shall be posted,
and to prevent and penalize all forms of election
frauds, offenses, malpractices, and nuisance
candidacies. (Art. IX-C Sec.2(7)).
8. Recommend to the President the removal of any
officer or employee it has deputized, or the imposition
of any other disciplinary action, for violation or
disregard of, or disobedience to its directive, order, or
decision. (Art. IX-C Sec.2(8)).
9. Submit to the President and the Congress a
comprehensive report on the conduct of each
election, plebiscite, initiative,
referendum, or recall. (Art. IX-C Sec.2(9)).
Q: What is the vote requirement for a valid COMELEC
en Banc resolution?
A majority of the votes, or 4 votes. If the six members are
evenly divided, the Commission on Elections should
rehear the case (Sevilla v.
COMELEC, G.R. 203833, 2013).
Q: What political parties and organizations may not be
registered?
1. Religious denominations/ sects
2. Those that seek to achieve their goals through
violence or unlawful means
3. Those that refuse to uphold and adhere to the
Constitution
4. Those supported by any foreign government e.g.,
receipt of financial contributions related to
elections (Art.
IX-C Sec.2(5)).
Q: Powers not given to COMELEC.
1. Decide questions involving the right to vote (placed
under jurisdiction of courts) (Art. IX-
C Sec. 2(3); Sec. 33, R.A. No. 8189);
2. Transfer municipalities from one congressional district
to another for the purpose of preserving
proportionality. (Montejo v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
118702,
1995).
Q: Can the COMELEC disqualify candidates who
cannot wage a nationwide campaign and are not
nominated by a political party as candidates in
elections?
Yes. The equal access to opportunities for public office
under Article II is not self-executory. It neither bestows a
right nor elevates the privilege to the level of an
enforceable right. Such privilege may be subjected to
limitations. (Chavez v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161872, April
13, 2004)
C. The Commission on Audit
Q: What are the powers and duties of the COA?
1. Examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to:
1. Revenue and receipts of funds or property
24
2. Expenditures and uses of funds or property
owned or held in trust by, or pertain to:
I. The Government
II. Any of its subdivisions, agencies or
instrumentalities III. GOCCs with original
charters. (Art. IX-D, Sec. 2(1)).
• COA is endowed with enough latitude to determine,
prevent and disallow irregular, unnecessary,
excessive, extravagant or unconscionable
expenditures of government funds. In resolving
cases brought before it on appeal, respondent
COA is not required to limit its review only to the
grounds relied upon by a government agency’s
auditor with respect to disallowing certain
disbursements of public funds. In consonance
with its general audit power, respondent COA is
not merely legally permitted, but is also duty-
bound to make its own assessment of the merits
of the disallowed disbursement and not simply
restrict itself to reviewing the validity of the ground
relied upon by the auditor of the government
agency concerned. To hold otherwise would
render COA’s vital constitutional power unduly
limited and thereby useless and ineffective. (Yap
v. Commission on Audit, G.R.
No.158562, 2010).
2. Conduct post-audit with respect to the following:
a. Constitutional bodies, commissions, and offices
granted fiscal autonomy
b. Autonomous state colleges and
universities
c. GOCCs and their subsidiaries incorporated under
the Corporation
Code
d. Non-governmental entities receiving subsidy or
equity, directly or indirectly, from or through the
government, which are required by law the
granting institution to submit to such audit. (Art.
IX-D, Sec.2(1)).
Q: Classify the functions of the COA.
1. Examine and audit all of government revenues
2. Examine and audit all forms of government
expenditures
3. Settle government accounts
4. Promulgate accounting and auditing rules including
those for the prevention and disallowance of irregular,
unnecessary, excessive, extravagant or
unconscionable expenditures.
5. Decide administrative cases involving expenditures of
public funds
Q: A was a career ambassador when he accepted an
ad interim appointment as Cabinet member. The
COA bypassed his ad interim appointment, however,
and he was not reappointed. Can he re-assume his
position as a career ambassador? No. His ad interim
appointment as a Cabinet member was a permanent
appointment. He abandoned his position as Ambassador
when he accepted his appointment as Cabinet Member
because as Cabinet Member, he could not hold any other
office during his tenure.
C. PROHIBITED OFFICES AND INTERESTS D.
JURISDICTION OF EACH CONSTITUTIONAL
COMMISSION
Q: Does the COMELEC have jurisdiction over intra-
party disputes?
The COMELEC’s jurisdiction over intra-party disputes is
limited. It does not have blanket authority to resolve any
and all controversies involving political parties. Political
parties are generally free to conduct their activities
without interference from the state. The COMELEC may
intervene in disputes internal to a party only when
necessary to the discharge of its constitutional functions.
The COMELEC’s jurisdiction over intra-party leadership
disputes has already been settled by the Court. The
Court ruled in Kalaw v. COMELEC that the COMELEC’s
powers and functions under Section 2, Article IX-C of the
Constitution, include the ascertainment of the identity of
the political party and its legitimate officers responsible
for its acts. The Court also declared that the COMELEC’s
power to register political parties necessarily involved the
determination of the persons who must act on its behalf.
Thus, the COMELEC may resolve an intra-party
leadership dispute, in a proper case brought before it, as
an incident of its power to register political parties.
(Matias v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 188920, 2010).
Q: Is the election of Sangguniang Kabataan (SK)
members within the jurisdiction of the COMELEC?
No, the conduct of election, and contests involving the
election of SK officials do not fall within the jurisdiction of
COMELEC. Thus, it was within the authority of the DILG
Secretary to exempt a local government unit from holding
SK elections. (Alunan v. Mirasol, G.R. No. 122250 &
122258, July 21, 1997).
However, it should be noted that before proclamation,
cases concerning eligibility of SK officers and members
are cognizable by the Election Officer which is under the
DILG. But after the election and proclamation, the same
cases become quo warranto cases cognizable by MTCs,
MCTCs, and MeTCs. (Marquez, v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 127318, 1999).
Q: Does the COA have jurisdiction over the Local
Water Utilities Administration? Yes. A water district is a
GOCC with a special charter. Under Section 2,
Subdivision D, Article IX of the 1987 Constitution, it is the
mandate of the COA to audit all government agencies,
including GOCCs with original charters. (Barbo v. COA
G.R. No. 157542, 2008)
25
If COA finds the internal control system of audited
agencies inadequate, COA may adopt measures,
including temporary or special pre- audit, as necessary to
correct deficiencies.
(Art. IX-D, Sec.1(1)).
Keep the general accounts of the government, preserving
vouchers and other supporting papers pertaining thereto.
(Art.IXD, Sec. 2(1)).
Exclusive authority to define the scope of
COA’s audit and examination and to establish the
techniques and methods required.
(Art.IX-D, Sec. 2(2)).
Promulgate accounting and auditing rules and regulations:
1. Including those for the prevention or disallowance
of irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant,
or unconscionable expenditures of government
funds and properties.
2. Failure to comply with these rules can be a ground
for disapproving the payment of a proposed
expenditure. (Caltex v. COA, G.R. No. 92585,
1992).
Q: Do the Boy Scouts of the Philippines
(BSP) fall under the COA’s audit jurisdiction? Yes.
The Supreme Court held that not all corporations, which
are not government owned or controlled, are ipso facto
private corporations as there exists another distinct class
of corporations or chartered institutions which are
otherwise known as “public corporations.” These
corporations are treated by law as agencies or
instrumentalities of the government which are not subject
to the tests of ownership or control and economic viability
but to a different criteria relating to their public
purposes/interests or constitutional policies and
objectives and their administrative relationship to the
government or any of its departments or offices.
As presently constituted, the BSP is a public corporation
created by law for a public purpose, attached to the
Department of Education Culture and Sports pursuant to
its Charter and the Administrative Code of 1987.
It is not a private corporation which is required to be
owned or controlled by the government and be
economically viable to justify its existence under a special
law. The economic viability test would only apply if the
corporation is engaged in some economic activity or
business function for the government, which is not the
case for BSP. Therefore, being a public corporation, the
funds of the BSP fall under the jurisdiction of the
Commission on Audit. (Boy Scouts of the Philippines v.
COA, G.R. No.
177131, 2011)

Q; Is the Manila Economic and Cultural Office subject
to audit by the COA?
Yes, it is subject to the audit by COA for the consular fees
and verification fees it collects because these are
government funds. MECO is sui generis. It was
established when the Philippines severed diplomatic
relations with Taiwan upon recognition of China. None of
its members are government officials. It is neither a
GOCC nor an instrumentality. Its functions are of a kind
that would otherwise be performed by the diplomatic and
consular offices of the
Philippines.
Although MECO is neither a GOCC nor a government
instrumentality and despite its nongovernmental
character, MECO handles government funds in the form
of the "verification fees" it collects on behalf of the DOLE
and the "consular fees" it collects under Section 2(6) of
EO No. 15, s. 2001. Hence, under existing laws, the
accounts of the MECO pertaining to its collection of such
"verification fees" and "consular fees" should be audited
by the COA.
(Funa v. MECO, G.R. No. 193462, 2014).
Q: Are water districts within the coverage of the COA?
Yes. A water district is a GOCC with a special charter
since it is created pursuant to a special law. Thus, COA
has the authority to investigate whether directors, officials
or employees of GOCCs receiving allowances and
bonuses are entitled to such benefits under applicable
laws. (Zamboanga Water District v. COA, G.R. No.
213472, 2016).
Q: Can COA disallow TESDA from paying a healthcare
allowance to their employees? Yes. TESDA is a
government instrumentality, and thus, under the coverage
of COA. COA is generally accorded complete discretion in
the exercise of its constitutional duty and responsibility to
examine and audit expenditures of public funds. Only in
instances when COA acts without or in excess of
jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction shall the Court interfere.
(TESDA v. COA, G.R. No. 196418, Feb 10,
2015).
E. REVIEW OF FINAL ORDERS, RESOLUTIONS
AND DECISIONS
What cases decided by COMELEC are subject to
judicial review?
Decisions or determinations by COMELEC in the exercise
of its administrative (not quasijudicial) power may be
questioned in an ordinary civil action before the trial court.
(Filipinas Engineering & Machine Shop v. Ferrer, G.R. No.
L-31455, 1985).
26
If the COMELEC, in deciding a case, is exercising quasi-
judicial functions, the remedy is to go to the Supreme
Court via Rule 65 (Rule 64, Rules of Court).
Q: Who has jurisdiction to determine the presence of
“probable cause” in election cases?
The finding of probable cause and the prosecution of
election offenses rest in the COMELEC’s sound
discretion. (Baytan v.
COMELEC G.R. No. 153945, Feb 4, 2003).
The Chief State Prosecutor, who may have been
designated by the COMELEC to prosecute a criminal
action, merely derives his authority from the COMELEC. It
is beyond his power to oppose the appeal made by
COMELEC. (Comelec v.
Silva, G.R. No. 129417, 1998).
Q: How is judicial review of COMELEC decisions
invoked?
A petition for certiorari via Rule 65 of the ROC is filed with
the SC within 30days from receipt of a copy of a final order,
ruling, or decision of the Commission en banc. (Aratuc v.
Comelec, G.R.
No. L-49705-09, 1979).
BILL OF RIGHTS
A. FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE
Q: What are the inherent or fundamental powers of the
State?
1. Police Power
2. Power of eminent domain
3. Taxation
These belong to the very essence
of government, without which no government can exist; a
constitution does not grant such powers to government; a
constitution can only define and delimit them and allocate
their exercise among various government agencies.
Q: Who may exercise police power? It is vested in the
Legislature and may be delegated, within limits, to local
governments. (Philippine Association of Service Exporters
v.Drilon,).
Q: Who may exercise the power of taxation? It is
vested in the Legislature, and is delegated to:
1. Local legislative bodies, (Sec. 5, Art. X).
a SECTION 5. Each local government unit
shall have the power to create its own
sources of revenues and to levy taxes, fees,
and charges subject to such guidelines and
limitations as the Congress may provide,
 consistent with the basic policy of local Benefits No direct and Market value of Receives
autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges Received immediate property taken equivalent of the
by benefit, only tax in form of
shall accrue exclusively to the local Person what may protection and
governments. Affected arise from benefits from
2. To a limited extent, the President when granted tariff maintenance government
of a healthy
powers. (Sec. 28(2), Art. VI). economic
a (2) The Congress may, by law, authorize standard of
the President to fix within specified limits, society
and subject to such limitations and Amount What is Market value of Generally no
sufficient to property taken limit; subject to
restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates,
cover cost of due process
import and export quotas, tonnage and license and
wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts other
within the framework of the national necessary
development program of the Government. expenses

Q: Who may exercise the power of eminent domain? Q. What are the requirements for the validity of local
It is vested in the Legislature and, may be delegated to ordinance? (COD-PUT)
the: 1. Must not contravene with the Constitution and any
1. President other statute
2. Administrative bodies 2. Must not be unfair or Oppressive
3. Local government units 3. Must not be partial or Discriminatory
4. Private enterprises performing public services (City 4. Must be general and consistent with Public policy
of Manila v. Chinese Community of Manila, G.R. No. 5. Must not be Unreasonable
L-14355, 1919). 6. Must not prohibit, but may regulate Trade (City of
Manila v. Laguio, G.R. No. 118127, 2005).
Q. What are the differences among the three powers
of the State? B. PRIVATE ACTS AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS

Police Eminent Taxation Q: Are private acts subject to the protection of the Bill
Domain of Rights?
Power No, by definition, the Bill of Rights is a set of prescriptions
Authority Government May be granted Gov’t or its setting forth the fundamental civil and political rights of the
or its political to public service political
subdivisions companies or subdivisions
individual, and imposing limitations on the powers of the
public utilities government as a means of securing the enjoyment of
those rights. (Nachura).

Purpose Regulation Property is Property is If the violation is by private individuals, the remedy is found
for promotion “taken” public taken for the in the Civil Code, or if proper, in the Revised Penal Code.
of general use or benefit support of Gov’t (Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the
welfare and –
Philippines,
the public compensable
good – not 2009 ed.)
compensable
Persons Community An entity or Community or Q: Who are protected by Due Process?
affected or class of Individual class of entities 1. All natural persons
entities or or individuals
individuals
2. Artificial persons – only insofar as their property is
concerned. (Smith Bell & Co. v.
Effect No transfer of Transfer of the Becomes part of Natividad, G.R. No. 15574, 1919).
title, at most right to property public funds
there is a whether it be
restraint on ownership or to Q: Is Constitutional Due Process different from
the injurious a lesser right Statutory Due Process? Yes. The Due Process Clause
use of the
in Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution embodies a
property
system of rights based on moral principles so deeply
imbedded in the traditions and feelings of our people as to
be deemed fundamental to a civilized society as
conceived by our entire history. It is a constitutional
restraint on the legislative as well as on the executive and
judicial powers of the government provided by the Bill of
27
Rights. On the other hand, Statutory due process is a
procedure created by law, which upholds the constitutional
right of a person to due process.
C. DUE PROCESS – THE RIGHTS TO LIFE,
LIBERTY & PROPERTY
1. RELATIVITY OF DUE PROCESS
Q: Is the right to a preliminary investigation a
Constitutional right?
No, it is merely a statutory right. It is required before the
filing of a complaint or information for an offense where the
penalty prescribed by law is at least 4 years, 2 months and
1 day, without regard to the fine. (Serapio v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148468, Jan. 28, 2003).
2. PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTANTIVE DUE
PROCESS
3. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY DUE
PROCESS
4. HEIRARCHY OF RIGHTS
Q: Is there a hierarchy of rights in Article III? Yes. While
the Bill of Rights also protects property rights, the primacy
of human rights over property rights is recognized.
Property and property rights can be lost thru prescription;
but human rights are imprescriptible. The superiority of
these freedoms over property rights is underscored by the
fact that a mere reasonable or rational relation between
the means employed by the law and its object or purpose
— that the law is neither arbitrary nor discriminatory nor
oppressive — would suffice to validate a law which
restricts or impairs property rights. (Philippine Blooming
Mills Employment Organization v. Philippine Blooming
Mills Co., G.R. No. L-31195, June 5, 1973).
Q: What are the requisites of a valid exercise of police
power in connection with substantive due process?
1. The interest of the public generally, as distinguished
from those of a particular class, require such
interference.
2. That the means are reasonably necessary for the
accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly
oppressive upon individual. (U.S. v. Toribio, G.R. No.
L-5060, 1910).
5. JUDICIAL STANDARDS OF REVIEW
Q: What are the elements of due process in judicial
proceedings? (Ju3NO)
1. An impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial
power to hear and determine the matter before it.
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person
or subject matter.
28
3. Judgment must be rendered upon a lawful hearing.
4. The defendant must be given notice and an
opportunity to be heard.
Q: What are the elements of due process in
administrative proceedings? (HIP DESK)
1. The right to a hearing, which includes the right to
present one’s case and submit evidence in support
thereof.
2. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on
its or his own independent consideration of the law
and facts of the controversy, and not simply accept
the views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision.
3. The decision must be based on the evidence
presented at the hearing or at least contained in the
record and disclosed to the parties affected.
4. The decision must have something to support itself.
5. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented.
6. Evidence supporting the conclusion must be
substantial.
7. The board or body should, in all controversial
questions, render its decision in such a manner that
the parties to the proceeding can know the various
issues involved and the reasons for the decision
rendered
Q: What are the instances when hearings are not
necessary?
1. When administrative agencies are exercising their
quasi-legislative functions
2. When administrative agencies are exercising their
quasi-judicial functions if temporary pending hearing.
3. Abatement of nuisance per se
4. Granting by courts of provisional remedies
5. Cases of preventive suspension
6. Removal of temporary employees in the government
7. Issuance of warrants of distraint and/or levy by the
BIR Commissioner.
8. Cancellation of the passport of a person charged with
a crime.
9. Suspension of a bank’s operations by the Monetary
Board upon a prima facie finding of liquidity problems
in such bank.
Q: What are the minimum standards of due process in
student disciplinary cases? (IA-
IAC)
1. The students must be informed in writing of the nature
and the cause of any accusation against them
2. They shall have the right to answer the charges
against them, with the assistance of counsel, if
desired
3. They shall be informed of the evidence against them
4. They shall have the right to adduce evidence in their
own behalf
5. The evidence must be duly considered by the
investigating committee or official designated by the
school authorities to hear and decide the case.
Q: Is the Philippine Military Academy (PMA) bound by
the due process standards in student disciplinary
cases?
Yes. The PMA is not immune from the strictures of due
process. The statement that “a cadet can be compelled to
surrender some civil rights and liberties in order for the
Code and System to be implemented” simply pertains to
what cadets have to sacrifice in order to prove that they
are men or women of integrity and honor, such as the right
to entertain vices and the right to freely choose what they
want to say or do. In the context of disciplinary
investigation, it does not contemplate a surrender of the
right to due process but, at most, refers to the cadets’
rights to privacy and to remain silent. (First Class Cadet
Aldrin Jeff P. Cudia of the PMA v. The Superintendent of
the PMA, G.R. No. 211362,
February 24, 2015.)
Q. What are the requirements of due process in
deportation proceedings? (SP-CP)
1. Charges against alien must Specify the acts or
omissions complained of
2. Preliminary investigation – to determine whether there
is sufficient cause to charge respondent with
deportation
3. Follow rules of Criminal procedure
4. Private prosecutors should NOT be allowed to
intervene.
Q: Does media coverage in criminal cases violate the
right of the accused to a fair trial? Not necessarily. The
right of an accused to a fair trial is not incompatible to a
free press, that pervasive publicity is not per se prejudicial
to the right of an accused to a fair trial, and that there must
be allegation and proof of the impaired capacity of a judge
to render a bias-free decision. The Court partially granted
pro hac vice petitioners’ prayer for a live broadcast of the
trial court proceedings, subject to strict guidelines. (In Re:
Petition For Radio And TV Coverage Of The Multiple
Murder Case Against Zaldy Ampatuan Et Al., A.M. No. 10-
11-5-SC,
2011.)
6. VOID FOR VAGUENESS DOCTRINE
Q: What is the Void for Vagueness doctrine? A law is
vague when it lacks comprehensible standards such that
men of common intelligence must necessarily guess as to
its meaning and differ as to its application. It should be
distinguished from those couched in imprecise language
which can be saved by proper construction. (Romualdez
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152259, 2004).
29
Q: Does the RH Law suffer void for vagueness due to
the insufficiency of definition of some terms?
No. A statute or act suffers from the defect of vagueness
when it lacks comprehensible standards that men of
common intelligence must necessarily guess its meaning
and differ as to its application. It is repugnant to the
Constitution in two respects: (1) it violates due process for
failure to accord persons, especially the parties targeted
by it, fair notice of the conduct to avoid; and (2) it leaves
law enforcers unbridled discretion in carrying out its
provisions and becomes an arbitrary flexing of the
Government muscle. Moreover, in determining whether
the words used in a statute are vague, words must not only
be taken in accordance with their plain meaning alone, but
also in relation to other parts of the statute. It is a rule that
every part of the statute must be interpreted with reference
to the context, that is, every part of it must be construed
together with the other parts and kept subservient to the
general intent of the whole enactment.
As correctly noted by the OSG, in determining the
definition of "private health care service provider,"
reference must be made to Section 4(n) of the RH Law
which defines a "public health service provider," (Imbong
v. Ochoa, G.R.
204819, April 2014).
Q: Is “aiding or abetting” in the commission of any
offense or “attempting” to commit any offense
punished in the Cybercrime Prevention overbroad?
Yes. A user can post a statement, a photo or a video on
Facebook. If the post is made available to the public,
anyone can react by clicking “Like.” “Comment” enables
him to post on line his feelings or views. “Share” make it
visible to his friends. Except for the original author of the
assailed statement, the rest are knee-jerk sentiments of
readers who may thing littler or haphazardly of their
response to the posting.
Unless the law takes to account the unique circumstances
and culture of cyberspace, such a law will create a chilling
effect on those who express themselves through
cyberspace. Thus, Section 5, which punishes “aiding or
abetting” libel on cyberspace is void. (Disini v. Secretary
of Justice, G.R. No. 203335 February 18, 2014.)
D. EQUAL PROTECTION
1. CONCEPT
2. REQUISITES FOR VALID
CLASSIFICATION
1. It must be based on
substantial distinctions;
2. It must be germane to the purpose of the law;
3. It must not be limited to existing conditions only;
and
4. It must apply equally to all members of the class
(PAGCOR v. BIR, G.R. No.
172087, 2011).

3. STANDARDS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
Q: What is the doctrine of Relative
Unconstitutionality?
A statute valid at one time may become void at another
time because of altered circumstances. Thus, if a statute
in its practical operation becomes arbitrary or confiscatory,
its validity, even though affirmed by a former adjudication,
is open to inquiry and investigation in the light of changed
conditions. (Central Bank Employees Association, Inc. v.
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, G.R. No. 148208, Dec. 15,
2004).
Q: Distinguish between strict judicial scrutiny,
intermediate scrutiny and rational basis scrutiny, the
three test for the reasonableness of classification.
1. Rational basis - challenged classification needs
only be shown to be rationally related to serving a
legitimate state interest.
2. Intermediate - challenged classification serves an
important state interest and that the classification
is at least substantially related to serving that
interest.
3. Strict - classification is necessary to achieve a
compelling state interest and that it is the least
restrictive means to protect such interest. (White
Light Corporation v. City of Manila, G.R. No.
122846, 2009).
Q: Is there a substantial distinction between elective
and appointive officials?
Yes. The former occupy their office by virtue of the
mandate of the electorate. They are elected to an office
for a definite term and may be removed therefrom
only upon stringent conditions. On the other hand,
appointive officials hold their office by virtue of their
designation thereto by an appointing authority. Some
appointive officials hold their office in a permanent
capacity and are entitled to security of tenure while
others serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority.
(Eleazar P. Quinto and Gerino A. Tolentino, Jr., vs.
COMELEC, G.R.
No. 189698, February 22, 2010).
Q: Does Section 6 of the Cybercrime Prevention Act,
punishing by one degree higher crimes
committed through the internet, violate
equal protection?
No. There is substantial distinction between crimes
committed through the use of information technology and
similar crimes using other means. In every cybercrime,
the offender often evades identification and is able to
reach more victims or cause more harm. (Disini vs.
Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 203335, February 18,
2014).
30
Q: Does the RH Law violate the right to equal
protection of the law such that
it discriminates against the poor as it makes them
the primary target of the government program that
promotes contraceptive use rather than promoting
reproductive health among the poor?
No. To provide that the poor are to be given priority in the
government's reproductive health care program is not a
violation of the equal protection clause. In fact, it is
pursuant to Section 11, Article XIII of the Constitution
which recognizes the distinct necessity to address the
needs of the underprivileged by providing that they be
given priority in addressing the health development of the
people. Section 7 of the RH Law prioritizes poor and
marginalized couples who are suffering from fertility issues
and desire to have children. Thus, there is no merit to the
contention that the RH Law only seeks to target the poor
to reduce their number. (Imbong v.
Ochoa, G.R. 204819, April 2014).
E. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
1. CONCEPT
2. WARRANT REQUIREMENT
Q: What are the requisites for searches and seizures
with a valid warrant?
CODE: JPEPO
1. The existence of probable cause is determined
personally by the JUDGE.
2. It must be issued upon a finding of PROBABLE
CAUSE.
3. The judge must EXAMINE UNDER OATH the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce.
4. The warrant must PARTICULARLY DESCRIBE the
place to be searched and person or things to be
seized.
5. It must be in connection with ONE
SPECIFIC offense. (Art. III, Sec.2)
Q: Must the judge personally examine the
complainant and the witnesses?
No. The judge is not required to examine personally. He is
only required to determine probable cause personally. He
may satisfy himself by fiscal reports, if not, he may require
submission of affidavit of witnesses. (Soliven v.
Makasiar, G.R. No. 82585, 1988).
Q. What is the requirement for a John Doe warrant to
be valid?
It must contain a descriptio personae (description of the
person) such as to enable the officer to identify the
accused. (People v.
Veloso, G.R. No. L-23051, 1925).
3. WARRANTLESS SEARCHES
 • The existence of • When the person to
Q: When can there be warrantless searches? probable cause is be arrested has
determined COMMITTED, is
personally by the actually
1. Waiver of right
JUDGE. COMMITTING, or is
2. Incidental to a lawful arrest • It must be issued ABOUT TO
3. Plain view doctrine upon PROBABLE COMMIT an offense
4. During exigent and emergency situations CAUSE. in the PRESENCE of
5. Moving vehicle • The judge must the arresting officer.
6. Stop and frisk rule EXAMINE UNDER • When an offense has
7. Seizure of goods concealed to avoid customs duties OATH the in fact just been
8. Airport searches complainant and the committed and the
witnesses he may arresting officer has
9. Checkpoints
produce. probable cause to
10. Warrantless search by a private individual
• The warrant believe based on
must PERSONAL
Q: Can the right against unreasonable search and PARTICULARLY KNOWLEDGE of
seizure be invoked against acts of a private DESCRIBE the facts and
individual? person to be circumstances
No. The protection against unreasonable searches and arrested. indicating that the
• It must be in person to be
seizures cannot be extended to acts committed by private
connection with ONE arrested has
individuals so as to bring it within the ambit of alleged committed it.
unlawful intrusion by the government. (People v. Marti, SPECIFIC offense.
• When the person to
G.R. No.81561, January 18, 1991). be arrested is a
PRISONER who has
Q: What are the requisites of the plain view doctrine? escaped.
REQUISITES: (VIAJ)
1. There was a prior valid intrusion
2. The evidence was inadvertently discovered 3. Q: What is the rule on the issuance of warrants of
The evidence is immediately apparent arrest or search warrants? GENERAL RULE: Only a
4. Plain view is justified seizure without further search. judge may validly issue a warrant of arrest or a search
(Miclat v. People, G.R. No. 176077, 2011). warrant, upon fulfillment of Constitutional requirements.
(Salazar v. Achacoso, G.R. No. 81510, 1990).
Q: What is the exclusionary rule?
Any evidence obtained in violation of the proscription EXCEPTION: Orders of arrest may be issued by
against warrantless searches and seizure shall be Administrative Authorities, but only for the purpose of
inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. However, carrying out a final finding of a violation of law. (Morano v.
in the absence of governmental interference, the Vivo, G.R. No. L22196, 1967). E.g.
protection against unreasonable search and seizure • Order or deportation (Domingo v. Sheer, G.R. No.
cannot be extended to acts committed by private 154745, 2004)
individuals. (People v. Marti, supra.) • Order of Contempt (Cruz v. Gingoyon,
G.R. No. 170404, 2011)
4. WARRANTLESS ARRESTS
Q: Are search warrants, which allowed the seizure of
Q: Differentiate arrests with warrants from over 100 items from offices suspected of conducting
warrantless arrests. illegal toll bypass operations, general warrants?
No, they are not general warrants if it is established that
the items to be searched are connected to the crime
Arrest with Warrant Warrantless Arrests involved.
A search warrant fulfills the requirement of particularity in
the description of the things to be seized when the things
described are limited to those that bear a direct relation to
the offense for which the warrant is being issued.
(Worldwide Web Corporation v. People, G.R. 161106, Jan
13, 2014).

Q: May the right to question the irregularity of a

warrantless arrest be subject to waiver or estoppel?

31
Yes. An accused is already estopped from assailing any
irregularity of his arrest if he fails to raise this issue or to
move for the quashal of the information against him on this
ground before arraignment. Thus, any objection involving
a warrant of arrest or the procedure by which the court
acquired jurisdiction of the person of the accused must be
made BEFORE he enters his plea; otherwise, the
objection is deemed waived. (People v. Velasco, G.R. No.
190318, November 26, 2013).
5. ADMINISTRATIVE ARRESTS
6. DRUG, ALCOHOL AND BLOOD TESTS
Q: May mandatory drug tests be validly conducted in
schools and private offices?
Yes. The drug test prescribed under Sec. 36(c), (d), and
(f) of RA 9165 for secondary and tertiary level students
and public and private employees, while mandatory, is a
random and suspicion-less arrangement. The objective is
to stamp out illegal drug and safeguard in the process "the
well being of [the] citizenry, particularly the youth, from the
harmful effects of dangerous drugs." This statutory
purpose, per the policy - declaration portion of the law, can
be achieved via the pursuit by the state of "an intensive
and unrelenting campaign against the trafficking and use
of dangerous drugs x x x through an integrated system of
planning, implementation and enforcement of anti - drug
abuse policies, programs and projects." The primary
legislative intent is not criminal prosecution, as those
found positive for illegal drug use as a result of this random
testing are not necessarily treated as criminals. They may
even be exempt from criminal liability should the illegal
drug user consent to undergo rehabilitation. (SJS v. DDB
and PDEA, GR No: 157870, Nov. 3, 2008).
Q: May persons arrested for crimes be the subject of
mandatory drug tests?
There is no valid justification for mandatory drug testing
for persons accused of crimes. In the case of students, the
constitutional viability of the mandatory, random, and
suspicion-less drug testing for students emanates
primarily from the waiver by the students of their right to
privacy when they seek entry to the school, and from their
voluntarily submitting their persons to the parental
authority of school authorities. In the case of private and
public employees, the constitutional soundness of the
mandatory, random, and suspicion-less drug testing
proceeds from the reasonableness of the drug test policy
and requirement.
The situation is entirely different in the case of persons
charged before the public prosecutor's office with criminal
offenses punishable with six (6) years and one (1) day
imprisonment.
The operative concepts in the mandatory drug testing are
"randomness" and "suspicion-less." In the case of persons
32
charged with a crime before the prosecutor's office, a
mandatory drug testing can never be random or suspicion-
less. They are not randomly picked; neither are they
beyond suspicion. When persons suspected of committing
a crime are charged, they are singled out and are
impleaded against their will. The persons thus charged, by
the bare fact of being haled before the prosecutor's office
and peaceably submitting themselves to drug testing, if
that be the case, do not necessarily consent to the
procedure, let alone waive their right to privacy.
To impose mandatory drug testing on the accused is a
blatant attempt to harness a medical test as a tool for
criminal prosecution, contrary to the stated objectives of
RA 9165. Drug testing in this case would violate a persons'
right to privacy guaranteed under Sec. 2, Art. III of the
Constitution. Worse still, the accused persons are
veritably forced to incriminate themselves. (SJS v. DDB
and PDEA, supra).
F. PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATIONS AND
CORRESPONDENCE
1. PRIVATE AND PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
2. INTRUSION, WHEN ALLOWED
Q: What are “Zones of Privacy”?
Zones of privacy are recognized and protected in our laws.
Within these zones, any form of intrusion is impermissible
unless excused by law and in accordance with customary
legal process. The meticulous regard we accord to these
zones arises not only from our conviction that the right to
privacy is a “constitutional right” and “the right most valued
by civilized men,” but also from our adherence to the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights which mandates
that, “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference
with his privacy” and “everyone has the right to the
protection of the law against such interference or attacks.”
Thus, the two constitutional guarantees create these
zones of privacy: (a) the right against unreasonable
searches and seizures, which is the basis of the right to be
let alone, and (b) the right to privacy of communication and
correspondence. In assessing the challenge that the State
has impermissibly intruded into these zones of privacy, a
court must determine whether a person has exhibited a
reasonable expectation of privacy and, if so, whether that
expectation has been violated by unreasonable
government intrusion. (Disini v. Sec. of Justice,
G.R. No. 203335, Feb. 11, 2014)
3. WRIT OF HABEAS DATA
Q: What is the Writ of Habeas Data?
A remedy available to any person whose right to
privacy in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened
by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or
employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in
the gathering, collecting or storing of data or information
regarding the person, family, home and correspondence
of the aggrieved party. (Sec. 1,
A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC)
Q: Is there an expectation of privacy in an Online
Social Network activity? Before one can have an
expectation of privacy in his or her Online Social Network
activity, it is first necessary that said user manifest the
intention to keep certain posts private. In the cyber world,
utilization of privacy tools is the manifestation of the user’s
invocation of his or her right to informational privacy.
Considering that the default setting for Facebook posts is
“Public,” it can be surmised that the photographs in
question were viewable to everyone on Facebook, absent
any proof that petitioners’ children positively limited the
disclosure of the photograph. If such were the case, they
cannot invoke the protection attached to the right to
informational privacy.
That the photos are viewable by “friends only” does not
necessarily bolster the petitioners’ contention. In this
regard, the cyber community is agreed that the digital
images under this setting still remain to be outside the
confines of the zones of privacy in view of the following:
(1) Facebook “allows the world to be more open and
connected by giving its users the tools to interact and
share in any conceivable way”; (2) A good number of
Facebook users “befriend” other users who are total
strangers; (3) The sheer number of “Friends” one user
has, usually by the hundreds; and (4) A user’s Facebook
friend can “share” the former’s post, or “tag” others who
are not Facebook friends with the former, despite its being
visible only to his or her own Facebook friends. Setting a
post’s or profile detail’s privacy to “Friends” is no
assurance that it can no longer be viewed by another user
who is not Facebook friends with the source of the content.
(Vivares v. St. Theresa’s College, G.R.
No. 202666, September 29, 2014).
G. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
1. CONCEPT AND SCOPE
Q: What are the 2 aspects of Freedom of Expression?
1. Prior restraint - Official government restrictions on the
press or other forms of expression in advance of actual
publication or dissemination are constitutionally
impermissible. (Chavez v. Gonzales, G.R.
No. 168338, 2008).
2. Subsequent punishment - The guarantee of freedom of
expression also means a limitation on the power of the
State to impose subsequent punishment, after
publication. (Soriano v. Laguardia, G.R. 164785, 2009,
Dissenting opinion J. Carpio).
Q: What are the exceptions to freedom from prior
restraint? 1. When the nation is at war
33
2. Obscene publications
3. Security of community life may be protected against
incitements to violence or overthrow of orderly
government. (Near v. Minnesota 283 U.S. 697, 1931).
2. CONTENT-BASED AND CONTENT-
NEUTRAL REGULATIONS
Q: Distinguish content-neutral from contentbased
regulations.
Content-based restriction is based on the subject matter
of the utterance or speech and thus treated as more
suspect than contentneutral laws because of judicial
concern with discrimination in the regulation of expression.
Content-neutral regulation is merely concerned with the
incidents of the speech, or one that merely controls the
time, place or manner, and under well-defined standard.
Content-neutral regulations of speech or of conduct that
may amount to speech are subject to lesser but still
heightened scrutiny. (Newsounds Broadcasting Network
v. Dy, G.R.
Nos. 170270 & 179411, April 2, 2009).
(a) Tests
Q: What is an example of content-based and content-
neutral regulations?
Clear and Present Danger Test (Contentbased
regulations) Speech may be curtailed if the words used
are used in such circumstances and are of such nature as
to create a clear and present danger that they will bring
about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to
prevent. (Chavez v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 168338,
February 15, 2008)
Intermediate Scrutiny Test (Content-neutral regulations)
Content-neutral government regulation is sufficiently
justified if:
1. it is within the constitutional power of the
Government
2. it furthers an important or substantial
governmental interest
3. governmental interest is unrelated to the
suppression of free expression
4. the incident restriction on alleged freedom of
speech & expression is no greater than is
essential to the furtherance of that interest.
(Chavez v.
Gonzales, supra.)
(b) Applications
Q: The COMELEC ordered to immediately remove a
6x10ft tarpaulin displaying the names of electoral
candidates who did and did not vote for the adoption
of the RH Law under the headings “Team Buhay” and
“Team Patay”. Was the order of COMELEC violated
the exercise of the petitioners’ right of freedom of
speech?
Yes. The Court found that there is no compelling and
substantial state interest endangered by the posting of the
tarpaulin as to justify curtailment of the right of freedom of
expression. There is no reason for the State to minimize
the right of noncandidate petitioners to post the tarpaulin
in their private property. (Archdiocese of Bacolod v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 205728, 2015)
Q: COMELEC ordered a prohibition on exhibiting
election propaganda on “mobile” places like cars.
Was the COMELEC’s prohibition valid?
No. The Court held that the prohibition unduly infringes on
the right to free speech and expression. It ruled that there
was no public interest substantial enough to warrant the
kind of restriction involved in this case. There was also no
showing that the prohibition served any substantial
government interest. (Adiong v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 103956, 1992)
3. FACIAL CHALLENGES AND THE OVERBREADTH
DOCTRINE
Q: When is Facial Invalidation proper?
A facial challenge is allowed against vague or overbroad
statutes because of possible "chilling effect" upon
protected speech. The theory is that "[w]hen statutes
regulate or proscribe speech and no readily apparent
construction suggests itself as a vehicle for rehabilitating
the statutes in a single prosecution, the transcendent
value to all society of constitutionally protected expression
is deemed to justify allowing attacks on overly broad
statutes with no requirement that the person making the
attack demonstrate that his own conduct could not be
regulated by a statute drawn with narrow specificity." This
rationale does not apply to penal statutes. (Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, Nov. 19, 2001).
Q: What is the Over-Breadth doctrine? The doctrine
provides that a government purpose may not be achieved
by means that sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby
invade the area of protected freedoms. (Griswold v.
Connecticut, 381 US 479, 1965 citing NAACP v. Alabama,
377 U.S. 288 (1964)).
Q. Are void for vagueness and over-breadth doctrine
applicable to criminal statue? No. It only applies to
those involving free speech. Criminal statue generally
have in terrorem effect resulting from the very existence,
and, if facial challenge is allowed for this reason alone, the
State may be prevented from enacting laws against
socially harmful conduct. (Southern Hemishpere
Engagement Network, Inc v. Anti-terrorism Council, GR
No. 178552, 2010).
34
Q. What is the hierarchy of civil liberties? The freedom
of expression and the right of peaceful assembly are
superior to property rights. (Phil. Blooming Mills Emp. Org.
v. Phil. Blooming Mills Co., G.R. No. L-31195, June 5,
1973).
4. TESTS
Q: What are the tests for valid governmental
interference?
1. Clear And Present Danger Rule – words are used in
such circumstance and of such nature as to create a
clear and present danger that will bring about
substantive evil that the State has the right to prevent.
(Focus on content + context) (Schenck v. US, 249
U.S. 47, 1919)
2. Dangerous Tendency Rule – words uttered create a
dangerous tendency of an evil which State has the
right to prevent. (Focus on content) (Cabansag v.
Fernandez, et al.,
GR No. L-8974, 1957)
3. Balancing of Interests Test – when particular conduct
is regulated in interest of public order and the
regulation results in an indirect, conditional, partial
abridgement of speech, the duty of the courts is to
determine which of the 2 conflicting interests
demands the greater protection under the particular
circumstances presented. (American
Communications Assn. v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382,
1950).
Q: What is the test for obscenity? (Miller Doctrine)
1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary
community standards, would find the work, taken as a
whole, appeals to the prurient interest.
2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in patently
offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by
the applicable state law.
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious
literary, artistic, political or scientific value. (Miller v.
California, 413 U.S. 15, 1973).
Q: Does Section 19 of the Cybercrime Prevention Act
on Restricting or Blocking Access to Computer 
Data
violate Freedom of Speech?
Yes. The content of the computer data can also constitute
speech. In such a case, Section 19 operates as a
restriction on the freedom of expression over cyberspace.
Certainly not all forms of speech are protected. Legislature
may, within constitutional bounds, declare certain kinds of
expression as illegal. But for an executive officer to seize
content alleged to be unprotected without any judicial
warrant, it is not enough for him to be of the opinion that
such content violates some law, for to do so would make
him judge, jury, and executioner all rolled into one. Not
only does Section 19 preclude any judicial intervention,
but it also disregards jurisprudential guidelines
established to determine the validity of restrictions on authorities to show that there has been a denial of the
speech. (Disini v. Sec. of Justice, G.R. No. 203335, Feb. application, in which case the rally may be peacefully
11, 2014; See case for other provisions relating to freedom dispersed following the procedure of maximum tolerance
of speech, which were upheld by the court). prescribed by the law. (Bayan, Karapatan, Kilusang
Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP) v. Ermita, GR No. 169838,
Q: Define core speech. 2006).
“Core speech” is speech that communicates political,
social, or religious ideas. It is given greater protection than Q: What is a Heckler’s veto?
commercial speech that does no more than propose a It involves situations in which the government attempts to
commercial transaction. e.g. advertisements. ban protected speech because it might provoke a violent
response. The mere possibility of a violent reaction to
Q: What is Symbolic Speech? protected speech is simply not a constitutional basis on
When “speech” and “non-speech” elements are combined which to restrict the right to speak. (Roe v. Crawford, No.
in the same course of conduct, a sufficiently important 06-3108, 2008). However, when a speaker passes the
government interest in regulating the non-speech element bounds of argument or persuasion and undertakes
can justify incidental limitations on free speech. A incitement to riot, the police are not powerless to prevent
governmental regulation is sufficiently justified if: a breach of the peace. (Feiner v. New York, 340 US 315,
1. It is within the Constitutional power of the 1951).
government;
2. It furthers an important or substantial H. FREEDOM OF RELIGION
governmental interest unrelated to the
suppression of free expression; and 1. NON-ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE
3. If the incidental restriction on alleged freedom is (a) Concept and basis
no greater than is essential (b) Acts permitted and not permitted by the clause
to that interest (U.S. v. O’Brien)
Q: Differentiate non-establishment of religion from
Q: What is the doctrine of fair comment? freedom of religion.
Fair commentaries on matters of public interest are
privileged and constitute a valid defense in an action for Non-Establishment Free Exercise of
libel or slander. Clause Religion
Does not depend upon While the non-
The doctrine of fair comment means that while in general, any showing of direct establishment clause is
every discreditable imputation publicly made is deemed governmental absolute, the moment
false, because every man is presumed innocent until his compulsion. such belief flows over
guilt is judicially proved, and every false imputation is into action, it becomes
deemed malicious, nevertheless, when the discreditable subject to gov’t
imputation is directed against a public person in his public
regulation.
capacity, it is not necessarily actionable; unless it be a
Violated by the In order to show a
false allegation of fact or a comment based on a false
enactment of laws violation of this clause,
supposition.
which establish an the person affected
OFFICIAL RELIGION must show the
If the comment is an expression of opinion, based on facts, COERCIVE effect of
then it is immaterial that the opinion happens to be whether those laws
operate directly to the legislation as it
mistaken as long as it might reasonably be inferred from
coerce non-observing operates against him in
the facts.
individuals or not. the practice of his
(Borjal v. CA, GR No. 126466, 1999).
religion.
Q: If the petitioners cannot present a permit during a
(c) Tests
rally due to inaction of the mayors on the applications
within a reasonable time, can they be dispersed
validly? Q: Standard to determine compliance with the non-
establishment clause:
No. After two days from submission of the application with
the local mayor and the corresponding inaction of the said Secular legislative purpose
mayor, the rallyists may conduct their rally in accordance 1. The primary effect neither advances nor inhibits
with their application without the need to show a permit religion
from the mayor, the grant of the permit being then 2. No excessive entanglement between religion and
presumed under the law, and it will be the burden of the state. (Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 1971).

35
2. FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE
Q. What are the two aspects of free exercise of
religion?
1. Freedom to believe – absolute and cannot be
regulated
2. Freedom to act – translation of belief to external acts,
it can be regulated and subject to police power.
(Employment
Division v. Smith)
Q: What is the “Conscientious Objector Test”?
A person who for moral or religious reasons is opposed to
participating in any war, and who may be excused from
military conscription but remains subject to service in civil
work for the nation’s health, safety or interest. (Black’s law
dictionary, 9th ed.)
Q: Does State-sponsored procurement of
contraceptives violate the guarantee of religious
freedom since contraceptives contravene their
religious beliefs?
No. It is not within the province of the Court to determine
whether the use of contraceptives or one's participation in
the support of modem reproductive health measures is
moral from a religious standpoint or whether the same is
right or wrong according to one's dogma or belief. For the
Court has declared that matters dealing with "faith,
practice, doctrine, form of worship, ecclesiastical law,
custom and rule of a church are unquestionably
ecclesiastical matters which are outside the province of
the civil courts." The jurisdiction of the Court extends only
to public and secular morality. Whatever pronouncement
the Court makes in the case at bench should be
understood only in this realm where it has authority. Stated
otherwise, while the Court stands without authority to rule
on ecclesiastical matters, as vanguard of the Constitution,
it does have authority to determine whether the RH Law
contravenes the guarantee of religious freedom.
While the Constitution prohibits abortion, laws were
enacted allowing the use of contraceptives. To some
medical practitioners, however, the whole idea of using
contraceptives is an anathema. Consistent with the
principle of benevolent neutrality, their beliefs should be
respected.
In the same breath that the establishment clause restricts
what the government can do with religion, it also limits
what religious sects can or cannot do with the government.
They can neither cause the government to adopt their
particular doctrines as policy for everyone, nor can they
not cause the government to restrict other groups. To do
so, in simple terms, would cause the State to adhere to a
particular religion and, thus, establishing a state religion.
(Imbong v. Ochoa, G.R. 204819, April 2014).
36
Q: Does RH Law violates the guarantee of religious
freedom by compelling medical health practitioners,
hospitals, and health care providers, under pain of
penalty, to refer patients to other institutions despite
their conscientious objections?
Yes. The Court is of the view that the obligation to refer
imposed by the RH Law violates the religious belief and
conviction of a conscientious objector. Once the medical
practitioner, against his will, refers a patient seeking
information on modem reproductive health products,
services, procedures and methods, his conscience is
immediately burdened as he has been compelled to
perform an act against his beliefs. As Commissioner
Bernas has written, "at the basis of the free exercise
clause is the respect for the inviolability of the human
conscience.
(Imbong v. Ochoa, G.R. 204819, April 2014).
Q: Can Catholic Masses be held in Halls of Justice?
Yes. The holding of Catholic masses at the basement of
the QC Hall of Justice is not a case of establishment, but
merely accommodation.
1. There is no law, ordinance or circular issued by
any duly constitutive authorities expressly
mandating that judiciary employees attend the
Catholic masses at the basement.
2. When judiciary employees attend the masses to
profess their faith, it is at their own initiative,
without any coercion from the judges or
administrative officers.
3. No government funds are being spent because
the lightings and air conditioning continue to be
operational even if there are no religious rituals
there.
4. The basement has neither been converted into a
Roman Catholic chapel nor has it been
permanently appropriated for the exclusive use of
its faithful.
5. The allowance of the masses has not prejudiced
other religions (Re: Letter of Tony Valenciano,
A.M. 10-4-19-SC,
2017)
Q: Can religious images be displayed in government
offices?
No. In no case shall a particular part of a public building
be a permanent place for worship for the benefit of any
and all religious groups. There shall also be no permanent
display of religious icons in all halls of justice in the
country. In case of religious rituals, religious icons and
images may be displayed but their presentation is limited
only during the celebration of such activities. After any
religious affair, the icons and images shall be hidden or
concealed from public view. (Re: Letter of Tony The state of the country at that time was characterized by or a
Valenciano, A.M. 10-419-SC, 2017) political and economic instability. This was sufficient an
justification for the President to restrict the return of the adm
3. TESTS Marcoses to the Philippines. (Marcos v. Manglapus, G.R. age
No. 88211, October 27, 1989). c. A
Q: What is the “compelling state interest” test? per
The state has the burden of justifying any possible Q: Is the right to return to one’s country protected mo
incursion into the exercise of religion. The process under the UDHR or the ICCPR? No. The Universal upo
Declaration of Humans Rights and the International by
involves three steps:
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights treat the right to Dep
1. The courts should look into the sincerity of the
freedom of movement and abode within the territory of a ituti
religious belief without inquiring into the truth of the
state, the right to leave a country, and the right to enter com
belief
one's country as separate and distinct rights. Jus
2. The state has to establish that its purposes are Pre
legitimate and compelling Hou
3. The state used the least intrusive means possible. The Declaration speaks of the "right to freedom of
or
(Estrada v. Escritor, A.M. No. P02-1651, August 4, movement and residence within the borders of each
adv
2003). state". It would therefore be inappropriate to construe the
the
limitations to the right to return to one's country in the
or
I. LIBERTY OF ABODE AND FREEDOM OF same context as those pertaining to the liberty of abode
age
and the right to travel. (Marcos v.
MOVEMENT inst
Manglapus, supra.)
or
1. LIMITATIONS of
2. RIGHT TO TRAVEL sec
(a) Watch-list and hold departure orders safe
Q: Is the right to return to one’s country contemplated
in the Constitutional right to travel? hea
Q: Distinguish the grounds for which Hold Departure
No. The right to return to one's country is not among the
Orders versus Watch-list Orders may be issued.
rights specifically guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, which
treats only of the liberty of abode and the right to travel.
It is within the residual powers of the President to restrict
or prevent such return. The test used was “arbitrariness”.

Hold Departure Watch List Order

Orders
The Secretary of The Secretary of
Justice may issue an Justice may issue a
HDO, under any of WLO, under any of
the following the following
instances: instances:
a. Against the a. Against the
accused, accused,
regardless of regardless of
nationality, in nationality, in
criminal cases criminal
falling within the cases
jurisdiction of pending
courts below the trial before
RTCs. the
b. Against the alien b. Regional
whose presence Trial
is required as Court.
defendant/respon Against the
dent/witness in a respondent,
civil or labor case regardless of
pending litigation, nationality, in
criminal cases
pending
preliminary
37
(Department Circular No. 41 – 2010).

J. RIGHT TO INFORMATION

Q: What are the twin rights guaranteed in

Article III, Sec. 7?
1. Right to information on matters of public
concern
2. Right of access to official records and
documents

Q: What are the exceptions to the right to

information? (BENT DISC) 1. Banking
transactions
2. Executive sessions
3. National security matters
4. Trade secrets
5. Diplomatic correspondence
6. Intelligence information

38
7. Supreme court deliberations
8. Closed door cabinet meetings
K. RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION
Q: Is the ability to strike essential in the
right to association?
No. To grant employees of the public sector
the right to strike, there must be a clear and
direct legislative authority therefor. In the
absence of any express legislation allowing
government employees to strike, recognizing
their right to do so, or regulating the exercise
of the right, employees in the public service
may not engage in strikes, walkouts and
temporary work stoppages like workers in the
private sector. (Bangalisan vs. CA, G.R. No.
124678, July 31, 1997).
Q: May employees in the public service
engage in strikes?
No. It is relevant to state at this point that the
settled rule in this jurisdiction is that
employees in the public service may not
engage in strikes, mass leaves, walkouts, and
other forms of mass action that will lead in the
temporary stoppage or disruption of public
service. Social Security System Employees
Association (SSEA) vs. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 85279, July 28, 1989).
L. EMINENT DOMAIN
1. CONCEPT
Q: What is eminent domain?
The right of the sovereign power to
appropriate, not only the public, but even the
private property of all citizens within the
territorial sovereignty, to public purposes.
This power is exercised by the national
government but may be delegated to local
governments and public utilities. (Barangay
Sindalan vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
150640, March 22, 2007).
Q: What are the essential requisites
before an LGU can exercise the power of
eminent domain?
1. An ORDINANCE is enacted by the local
legislative council authorizing the local chief
executive, in behalf of the LGU, to exercise the
39
power of eminent domain or pursue expropriation
proceedings over a particular private property.
2. The power of eminent domain is exercised for
PUBLIC USE, PURPOSE or welfare, or for the
benefit of the poor and the landless.
3. There is payment of
JUST
COMPENSATION, as required under Section 9,
Article III of the Constitution, and other pertinent
laws.
4. A valid and definite OFFER has been previously
made to the owner of the property sought to be
expropriated, but said offer was not accepted.
(Spouses Yusay vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
156684, April 6, 2011).
Q: What are the elements of “taking” private
property? (BEAPP)
1. Utilization of the property must be in such a way
as to oust the owner and deprive him of the
beneficial enjoyment of his property.
2. The expropriator enters the property
3. Entry is made under warrant or color of legal
authority
4. Property is devoted to public use
5. The entrance must be permanent (Republic vs.
Vda. de Castellvi, G.R. No. L-20620, August 15,
1974).
Q: What are matters may be reviewed by the
courts insofar as expropriation is concerned?
1. The ADEQUACY of the compensation
2. The NECESSITY of the taking
3. The “PUBLIC USE” character of the taking.
(Municipality of Meycauayan v. IAC, G.R.
No. 72126, January 29, 1988)
Q: What are the requisites for authorizing
immediate entry?
LGUS NATIONAL
GOVERNMENT
On the part of Thus, pursuant to General Rule: The value must be that as of
LGUs, Section 2 of Rule 67 of the time of the FILING OF THE COMPLAINT
expropriation is the 1997 Revised for expropriation.
also governed by Rules of Civil
Sec. 19, LGC. Procedure, Exceptions:
1. When the filing of the case comes LATER
(1) the filing of (1) the filing of a than the time of taking and meanwhile the
a complaint for complaint for value of the property has INCREASED
expropriation expropriation sufficient because of the use to which the
sufficient in form in form and substance; expropriator has put it, the value is that of
and and the time of the earlier TAKING.
substance; and 2. Where this Court fixed the value of the
(2) the making of property as of the date it was taken and
(2) the a deposit equivalent to not the date of the commencement of the
deposit of the the assessed value expropriation proceedings. (NPC v.
amount equivalent of the property Lucman Ibrahim, G.R. No. 168732, June
to 15 percent of subject to 29, 2007).
the fair market expropriation. Upon
value of the Exception To The Exception: If the value
property to be INCREASED INDEPENDENTLY of what the
expropriated compliance with the expropriator did, then the value is that of the
based on its requirements the FILING of the case. (NPC v. Lucman Ibrahim,
current tax issuance of the writ G.R. No. 168732, June 29, 2007).
declaration. (Iloilo of possession
v. becomes “ministerial. Q: Which court has the jurisdiction over
Legaspi, G.R. No. (Biglangawa v. petitions for the determination of just
154614, November Bacalla, G.R. Nos. compensation?
25, 2004). 139927 and R.A. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive
139936, November Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 specifically provides
22, that the Special Agrarian Courts (which are the RTCs)
2000) shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction over all
petitions for the determination of just compensation to
2. EXPANSIVE CONCEPT OF “PUBLIC landowners, and the prosecution of all criminal
USE” offenses under said Act. The DAR cannot be granted
3. JUST COMPENSATION jurisdiction over cases of eminent domain. The
(a) Determination valuation of property in eminent domain is essentially
(b) Effect of delay a judicial function which cannot be vested in
administrative agencies. (Land Bank of the
Q: What is just compensation? A sum Philippines v. Spouses Umandap, G.R. No. 166298,
equivalent to the market value of his property, November 17,
paid within a reasonable period. 2010).

Market Value is generally defined as the fair
value of the property as between one who
desires to purchase but is not forced to buy,
and one who desires to sell but is not
compelled to part with his property. (Republic
v. Rural Bank of Kabacan, G.R. No. 185214,
January 25, 2012).
Q: What should be the basis of the value
of just compensation?
4. ABANDONMENT OF INTENDED USE AND
RIGHT OF REPURCHASE
Q: What happens if there is abandonment of
intended use?
If the property ceases to be used for a public purpose,
the property reverts to the owner in fee simple. (ATO
vs. Gopuco, Jr. G.R. No. 158563, June 30, 2005).
M. CONTRACT CLAUSE

40
Q: When is there an impairment of a contract? • After a person • During a police
1. If it changes the terms and conditions of a legal has been taken line-up
contract either as to the time or mode of into
performance custody; EXCEPTIONS:
2. If it imposes new conditions or dispenses with • When a person 1. Once admissions
those expressed is deprived of or confessions
3. If it authorizes for its satisfaction something his freedom of are sought to be
different from that provided in its terms. action in any elicited from the
(PAGCOR vs. BIR, G.R. No. 172087, March 15, significant way; suspect;
2011). • When a person 2. During
is merely administrative
Q: Does a change in available procedural “invited” for investigations;
remedies impair contracts? questioning 3. Confessions
No. A mere change in procedural remedies which (R.A. No. made by an
does not change the substance of the contract, and 7438); accused at the
which still leaves an efficacious remedy for • The time he
enforcement does not impair the obligation of investigation is voluntarily
contracts. being surrendered to
conducted by the police or
Q: Is there a limitation to the non-impairment the gov’t with outside the
clause, Sec. 10, Art. III? respect to a context of a
Yes. The non-impairment clause of the criminal formal
Constitution must yield to the loftier purposes offense (police, investigation;
targeted by the Government. Time and again, this DOJ, NBI); 4. Statements made
Court has said that contracts affecting public interest to a private
contain an implied reservation of the police power as person.
a postulate of the existing legal order. This power can
be activated at anytime to change the provisions of P. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
the contract, or even abrogate it entirely, for the
promotion or protection of the general welfare. Such Q: What are the constitutional rights of the
an act will not militate against the impairment clause, accused? (PITCHES MACA)
which is subject to and limited by the paramount 1. PRESUMPTION of innocence
police power. (Chavez v. Comelec, G.R. No. 2. Right to be INFORMED of nature and cause
162777, August 31, 2004). of accusation against him
3. Right to TESTIFY as a witness in his own
N. LEGAL ASSISTANCE AND FREE behalf
ACCESS TO COURTS 4. Right to COMPULSORY process to secure
attendance of witnesses and production of
O. RIGHTS OF SUSPECTS evidence
5. Right to be HEARD by himself and counsel
Q: When are the Miranda Rights available? 6. Right to be EXEMPT from being compelled
When Available: When Not to be a witness against himself
Available: 7. Right to SPEEDY, impartial and public trial
8. Right to MEET witness face to face
9. Trial in ABSENTIA - mandated only after
arraignment and absence
unjustified
10. CRIMINAL due process:
a. Accused to be heard in court of
competent jurisdiction
b. Accused proceeded against under
orderly processes of law

41
 c.Accused given notice and 3. If convicted by the trial court, bail is only
opportunity to be heard discretionary pending appeal. (Section
d. Judgment rendered was within 5 of Rule 114 of the Rules on Criminal
authority of a constitutional law Procedure).
11. To APPEAL in all cases allowed and in the
manner prescribed by law (Sec. 14, Art. III, Q: Can a bail be granted in extradition
PHIL. CONST.) proceedings?
If bail can be granted in deportation cases,
Q: What are the rights of an accused under there is no justification why it should not also
investigation? be allowed in extradition cases. After all, both
1. Right to be informed of his: are administrative proceedings where the
a. Right to remain silent and innocence or guilt of the person detained is
b. To have competent and independent not in issue. (Government of Hong Kong v.
counsel preferably of his own choice Olalia Jr., G.R.
2. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, No. 153675, April 19, 2007).
he must be provided with one.
Q: When can bail be granted to a
NOTE: These rights cannot be waived except in prospective extradite?
writing and in the presence of counsel. (Sec. 12,
Art. III, PHIL. CONST.) 1. Upon a clear and convincing showing that
he/she will not be a flight risk or a danger
Q: Does the right to be assisted by counsel to the community.
extend to administrative proceedings? There is 2. That there exist special, humanitarian,
nothing in the 1987 Constitution stating that a party in compelling circumstances. (Government
a non-litigation proceeding is entitled to be of the United States vs. Purganan, G.R.
represented by counsel. A party in an administrative No.
inquiry may or may not be assisted by counsel, 148571, September 24, 2002)
irrespective of the nature of the charges and of the
respondent's capacity to represent himself. Hence, Q. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
the administrative body is under no duty to provide
the person with counsel. (First Class Cadet Aldrin Jeff Q: What are the limitations to the writ of
P. Cudia of the PMA v. The Superintendent of PMA, habeas corpus?
G.R.
No. 211362, February 24, 2015). EXTENDS TO DOES NOT EXTEND
TO
Q: Do all persons have the right to bail? All cases of illegal Questions of
confinement or conditions of
GENERAL RULE: All persons actually detention by which confinement; but only
detained shall, before conviction be entitled to any person is to the fact and
bail. deprived of his liberty, duration of
or by which the rightful confinement.
custody of any person
EXCEPTIONS: is withheld from the
1. Persons charged with offenses person entitled to it.
punishable by RECLUSION
PERPETUA, LIFE IMPRISONMENT It’s essential is to
inquire into all manner
and DEATH, when of involuntary restraint It is not a means for
EVIDENCE of guilt is STRONG and to relieve a the redress of
(Section 3 of Rule 114 of the Rules on person from it if such grievances or to seek
Criminal Procedure). restraint is illegal. injunctive relief or
2. Persons who are members of the AFP damages. (In re: Major
Aquino, G.R. 174994,
facing a court martial. (Comendador vs.
August 31, 2007).
De Villa, G.R. No. 93177, August 2,
1991).

42
R. WRITS OF AMPARO, HABEAS DATA,
AND KALIKASAN
Q: What is the writ of amparo?
It is a remedy available to any person whose right to
life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with
violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public
official or employee, or of a private individual or entity.
There must be a showing that their right to life, liberty
and security is violated or threatened with an unlawful
act or omission. Absent any considerable nexus
between the acts complained of and its effect on
respondents’ right to life, liberty and security, the
Court will not delve on the propriety of petitioners’
entry into the property. (P/Supt. Felixberto Castillo, et.
al. vs. Dr. Amanda T. Cruz, et. al., G.R. No.
182165, November 25, 2009).
Q: Does the writ of amparo cover threats to
property?
No. To be entitled to a writ of amparo, petitioners
must prove that their rights to life, liberty and security
are being violated or threatened by an unlawful act or
omission. An allegation that barangay tanods raided
their farm to look for marijuana and that they
anticipated the possibility of harassment cases, false
accusation and violence is not sufficient bases for a
grant of the privilege of the writ. The intrusion into
their farm was merely a violation of property rights.
(Pador v. Arcayan, G.R. No.
183460, March 12, 2013).
S. SELF-INCRIMINATION CLAUSE
Q: When is the right against selfincrimination
available?
It is available noy only in criminal prosecutions, but
also in all other government proceedings, including
civil actions and administrative or legislative
investigations. It may be claimed not only by the
accused, but also by a witness to whom an
incriminating question is addressed. It also applies to
proceedings which are criminal in nature, such a
revocation of medical license.
(Pascual v. Board of Medical Examiners)
Accused Witness
Taking the CAN be CAN be
Witness compelled compelled
Stand
43
Taking the
Witness
CAN be CAN’T be
Stand in
compelled compelled
Criminal
Proceedings
Answering
CAN’T be CAN’T be
Incriminating
compelled compelled
questions
Q: What is the scope of the right against
selfincrimination?
It applies only against testimonial compulsion
and production of documents, papers and
chattels in court except when books of
account are to be examined in exercise of
power of taxation/police power. It does not
cover acts which are purely mechanical such
as body check up, forcing morphine out of
mouth, and the like. But it covers acts which
involve the intelligence such as asking
someone to write. (Dela Cruz vs. People,
G.R. No. 200748, July 23, 2014).
Q: May the right against self-incrimination
be invoked by a person undergoing a
normal audit examination?
No. The rights against self-incrimination and
to counsel guaranteed under the Constitution
are applied only during the custodial
interrogation of a suspect. A person
undergoing a normal audit examination is not
under custodial investigation and, hence, the
audit examiner may not be considered the law
enforcement officer contemplated by the rule.
(Mariera De Castro v. People of the
Philippines, G.R. No. 171672, February 2,
2015).
T. INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE AND
POLITICAL PRISONERS U.
EXCESSIVE FINES AND CRUEL
AND INHUMAN PUNISHMENTS V.
NON-IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBTS
W. DOUBLE JEOPARDY
Q: What are the two kinds of jeopardy?
1. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy
for the same offense. In this kind, jeopardy
attaches upon either conviction or acquittal
or dismissal without the express consent
of the accused.
 2. If an act is punished both by a law and an
ordinance, conviction or acquittal under
either shall constitute a bar to another
prosecution for the same act. In this kind,
jeopardy attaches only upon conviction or
acquittal.
(Sec. 21, Art. III, PHIL. CONST.)
Q: What are the requisites for double jeopardy?
1. 1st jeopardy must have attached prior to the
second
2. The 1st jeopardy must have terminated
3. The 2nd jeopardy must be for the same offenses
as that in the 1st.
Q: How does jeopardy attach? (CICAP)
1. A person is charged
2. Under a complaint or information sufficient in form
and substance to sustain a conviction
3. Before a court of competent jurisdiction
4. After the person is arraigned
5. Such person enters a valid plea.
Q: Does the dismissal of an action, made at the
instance of an accused, constitute double
jeopardy?
No, except:
1. When the ground for dismissal is insufficiency of
evidence;
2. When the proceedings violate the right of the
accused to a speedy trial. (Caes v. IAC, G.R.
Nos. 74989-90, November 6, 1989).
Q: What is the doctrine of supervening event?
Under the doctrine of supervening event, the accused
may be prosecuted for another offense if a
subsequent development changes the character of
the first indictment under which he may have already
been charged or convicted.
(Abrigo v. Flores, G.R. No. 160786, 2013).
X. EX POST FACTO LAWS AND BILLS OF
ATTAINDER
Q: What is an ex-post facto law?
1. Makes an action done before the passing of the
law, and which was innocent when done,
criminal, and punishes such action.
2. Aggravates the crime or makes it greater than
when it was committed.
3. Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than that which the law annexed to
the crime when it was committed.
44
4. Alters the legal rules of evidence and receives
less testimony than the law required at the time
of the commission of the offense in order to
convict the accused.
5. Assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies but
in effect imposes a penalty or deprivation of a
right, which when done was lawful.
6. Deprives a person accused of a crime of some
lawful protection to which he has become entitled
such as the protection of a former conviction or
acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty.
(Republic v. Eugenio, G.R. No. 174629, February
14, 2008).
Q: What are the elements of a bill of
attainder? 1. There must be a law
2. The law imposes a penal burden
3. On a named individual or
easily ascertainable members of a
group
4. The penal burden is imposed directly by
the law without judicial trial. (People v.
Ferrer, G.R. Nos. L-32613-14, 1972).
CITIZENSHIP
A. WHO ARE FILIPINO CITIZENS
Q: Who are Filipino citizens?
1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines
at the time of the adoption of this
Constitution;
2. Those whose fathers or mothers are
citizens of the Philippines;
3. Those born before January 17, 1973, of
Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine
citizenship upon reaching the age of
majority; and
4. Those who are naturalized in accordance
with law. (Art. IV, Sec.1, PHIL. CONST.).
B. MODES OF ACQUIRING
CITIZENSHIP
Q: What are the modes of acquiring
citizenship?
1. Direct Act of Congress
2. Naturalization
3. Repatriation
 Under RA 9225, by taking an oath of Citizenship is Citizenship conferred
allegiance required of former natural-born acquired by an alien on:
citizens who may have lost their Philippine through: i. Wife of
citizenship by reason of their acquisition of the 1. Judicial naturalized
citizenship of a foreign country. naturalization husband
under CA 473 ii. Minor children of
C. NATURALIZATION AND 2. Administrative naturalize person
DENATURALIZATION naturalization iii. Alien woman upon
under RA 9139 marriage to
Q: What are the grounds for denaturalization: a national
1. Naturalization certificate obtained fraudulently Legislative
or illegally naturalization in the Nachura, p.238.
2. If within 5 years, he returns to his native country form of a law enacted
or to some foreign country and establishes by Congress,
residence there bestowing Philippine
Provided: A one-year stay in the native country citizenship to an alien.
or two-year stay in a foreign country shall be
prima facie evidence of intent to take up D. DUAL CITIZENSHIP AND DUAL
residence in the same. ALLEGIANCE
3. Petition was made on an invalid declaration of
intention Q: Differentiate between Dual Citizenship
4. Minor children failed to graduate through the and Dual Allegiance
fault of the parents either by neglecting to
support them or by transferring them to another Dual Citizenship Dual Allegiance
school. Arises when, as a result Refers to the situation in
5. Allowed himself to be used as a dummy of concurrent application which a person
6. Conviction of perjury and rape (In Re: Guy of the different laws of simultaneously owes, by
v. Guy, G.R. No. L-41399, July 20, 1982) two or more states, a some positive voluntary
person is act, loyalty to two or
simultaneously more states
Ground affects the Ground was considered a national by
intrinsic validity of personal to the those other states;
the proceedings denaturalized Involuntary Voluntary
Filipino (Mercado v. Manzano, G.R. No. 135083,
The denaturalization Wife and children shall 1999).
shall divest the wife and retain their
children of their Philippine citizenship. E. LOSS AND RE-ACQUISITION OF
derivative
PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP
naturalization.
Q: How is citizenship lost?
Q: Differentiate the modes of Naturalization
1. Cancellation of certificates of
Direct Naturalization Derivative naturalization (In Re: Guy v. Guy,
Naturalization G.R. No. L-41399, July 20, 1982)
2. Naturalization in a foreign country
XPN: Take oath under §3, RA 9225.
3. Being a deserter of the armed forces
of one’s country
4. Serving in the armed forces of an
enemy country
5. when there is express renunciation of
Filipino citizenship
6. Seeking public office in a foreign
country. (Sec. 5, RA 9225)

45

Q: Person A is a natural-born Filipino
Citizen. He was later naturalized as a
citizen of the United States, thereby
losing his Filipino citizenship. Later, he
applied for repatriation under RA 9225
and took the Oath of
Allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines. But Person A continued
using his foreign passport after
renouncing his foreign citizenship. What
is the effect on his Filipino citizenship?
The use of foreign passport after renouncing
one’s foreign citizenship is a positive and
voluntary act of representation as to one’s
nationality and citizenship; it does not divest
Filipino citizenship regained by repatriation
but it recants the Oath of Renunciation
required to qualify one to run for an elective
position. (Maquiling v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
195649, 2013).
F. NATURAL-BORN CITIZENS AND
PUBLIC OFFICE
Q: Is a foundling considered a Filipino Citizen?
Yes. While the Constitution is silent about foundlings,
the deliberations show that the framers intended
foundlings to be covered by the enumeration of
Filipino Citizens in the Constitution. The textual
omission was not because there was any objection to
the notion that persons of "unknown parentage" are
not citizens but only because their number was not
enough to merit specific mention. Furthermore, under
international law, foundlings are citizens of the
country where they were found. The common thread
of the UDHR, UNCRC and
ICCPR is to obligate the Philippines to grant
nationality from birth and ensure that no child is
stateless. (Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, GR.
No. 221697, May 8, 2016).
LAW ON PUBLIC
OFFICERS
A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Q: What is public office?
The right, authority, and duty created and conferred
by law, by which for a given period, either fixed by law
or enduring at the pleasure of the appointing power,
46
an individual is invested with some portion of the
sovereign functions of the government, to be
exercised by him for the benefit of the public.
(Fernandez v. Ledesma, G.R. No. L-18878, 1963).
Q: What are the elements of public office?
The elements are: (LSCIP)
1. Created by law or by authority of law;
2. Possess a delegation of portion of sovereign
powers of government, for
benefit of the public;
3. Powers conferred and duties imposed
defined by Constitution, legislature, or by its
authority;
4. Duties performed independently and only
controlled by law unless placed under
general control of superior office or body;
5. Permanent or continuous. (State Ex Rel.
Barney v. Hawkins, 257 P. 411 (Mont.
1927).
Q: Is public office a property right? No, public
office is not a property right, but a protected right. It
cannot be taken from the incumbent without due
process. It also protected by the right of security of
tenure, which is guaranteed by the Constitution.
(Segovia v.
Noel, G.R. No. L-23226, 1925)
Q: How is public office created?
Public office is created:
1) By the constitution; (e.g. Office of the
President)
2) By valid statutory enactments; (e.g.
Office of the Insurance
Commissioner)
3) By authority of law. (e.g. the Davide
Commission) (Serana v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162059,
2008; Buklod ng Kawaning EIIB v.
Zamora, G.R. No. 142801-802,
2001).
B. MODES OF ACQUIRING TITLE TO
PUBLIC OFFICE
Q: How is title to public office acquired?
It is acquired through the following: (ADE)
1. APPOINTMENT - The act of
designation by the executive officer, board, or
body to whom that power has been
delegated, of the individual who is to exercise
the powers and functions of a given office. It
 is to be distinguished from the selection or
designation by a popular vote.
2. DESIGNATION - The mere
imposition of new or additional duties upon an
officer to be performed by him in a special
manner. It presupposes that the officer is
already in the service by virtue of an earlier
appointment, performing other functions.
Thus, there is no new appointment and the
designation does not entitle the officer
designated to additional benefits or the right
to claim the salary attached to the position.
3. ELECTION - The act of selecting or
choosing a person by popular vote to occupy
the office. (Borromeo v. Mariano, G.R. No. L-
16808, 1921; Conde v. National Tobacco
Corp., G.R. No. L11985, 1921).
Q: Is acceptance of an
appointment required?
GR: As a general rule, acceptance of
appointment is not necessary for the
completion or validity of appointment.
(Marbury v. Madison,
5 US 137, 1830)
XPN: However, it is necessary to possession
of office, and to enable appointee to the
enjoyment and responsibility of an office.
(Magana v.
Auditor-General, GR No. L-12180, 1960)
Q; How is acceptance made? Acceptance may be
express when it is done verbally or in writing.
Acceptance is implied when, without formal
acceptance, the appointee enters upon the exercise
of the duties and functions of an office.
Q: Who are the officers to be appointed by the
president? (E-MA2C-JC2AR-NL2)
1. Heads of executive departments
2. Ambassadors
3. Other public ministers and consuls 4.
Officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel
or naval captain
5. Other officers whose appointments are vested in
him in the Constitution
a. Regular members of the Judicial and
Bar Council
b. The Chairman and Commissioners of the
Civil Service Commission
47
c. The Chairman and Commissioners of the
COMELEC
d. The Chairman and Commissioners of the
Commission on Audit
e. Members of the Regional
Consultative Commission 6. Officers
whose appointments are not
otherwise provided for by law
7. Officers whom the president may be
authorized by law to appoint
8. Officers lower in rank whose appointments
the Congress, by law, vested in the President (Art.
X, Sec.18).
C. MODES AND KINDS OF
APPOINTMENT
Q: Differentiate between ad-interim
appointments and temporary appointments. Ad
interim appointments are made while
Congress is NOT in session or during its recess,
whether such recess is voluntary (before
adjournment) or compulsory (when Congress
adjourns). The appointment shall cease to be
effective upon rejection by the COA, or if not acted
upon, at the adjournment of the next session of
Congress, whether regular or special.
(Art. VI, Sec. 19).
Temporary or acting appontments are those which
last until a permanent appointment is issued. The
Commission on Appointments cannot confirm their
appointments because confirmation presupposes a
valid nomination or ad-interim appointment. Thus,
the appointee has no personality to bring a quo
warranto proceeding because he is not entitled to
office. (Valencia v. Peralta, G.R. No. L-20864, 1963;
Rules of Court, Rule 66, Sec. 6).
Q: Is acquisition of civil service eligibility
during tenure of a temporary appointee
necessarily translate to permanent
appointment?
No. A new appointment which is permanent is
necessary. (Province of Camarines Sur v. CA,
G.R. No. 104639, 1995)
Q: A was a career ambassador when he
accepted an ad-interim appointment as
cabinet member. However, the
Commission on Appointments by-passed
his ad-interim appointment, and he was
 not re-appointed. Can he re-assume his
position as career ambassador?
The career ambassador cannot re-assume
his position. His ad-interim appointment as
cabinet member was a permanent
appointment.
(Summers v. Ozaeta, G.R. No. L-1534, 1948)
He abandoned his position as ambassador
when he accepted his appointment as cabinet
member because as cabinet member, he
could not hold any other office during his
tenure. (Art.
VIII, Sec. 13).
D. ELIGIBILITY AND
QUALIFICATION
REQUIREMENTS
Q: What are qualifications?
Qualifications can be understood in two ways:
1. It may refer to endowments, qualities, or
attributes which make an individual
eligible for public office. In which case,
the individual must possess these
qualities at the time of appointment or
election and continuously for as long as
the official relationship continues;
or
2. It may refer to the act of entering into the
performance of the functions of a public
office. (Nachura Law Notes on Law on
Public Officers).
Q: What are qualifications in the sense of
the act of entering into the performance of
the functions of a public office?
It means that failure of an officer to perform an act
required by law can affect the officer’s title to the
given office.
Prolonged failure or refusal to take the office could
result in forfeiture of office. (Masadao Jr. v. Glorioso,
A.M. No. P-26-1207, 1997).
An oath of office taken before a person who has no
authority to administer oath is no oath at all.
Once proclaimed and duly sworn in office, a public
officer is entitled to assume office and to exercise the
functions thereof. The pendency of an election
48
protest is not sufficient basis to enjoin him from
assuming office. (Mendoza v.
Laxina, Jr. G.R. No. 146875, 2003).
Q: Who are required to give an official bond
before qualifying for a public office? Only
accountable public officers or those who are
entrusted with the collection and custody of public
money, and public ministerial officers whose actions
may affect the rights and interests of individuals. (F.
Mechem, A Treatise on the Law of Public Offices and
Officers, 165, 1980).
Q: What is the liability of an officer who
misrepresented his or her qualification, e.g.
educational attainment and eligibility for
government service?
The employee is guilty of plain and simple dishonesty
as it refers to the act of intentionally making a false
statement on any material fact in securing one’s
appointment. (Momongan v.
Sumayo, A.M. No. P-10-2767, 2011)
Q: What is required of all public officers and
employees based on the Constitution?
All public officers and employees shall take an oath
or affirmation to uphold and defend the Constitution.
(PHIL. CONST., art. IX-B, § 4)
E. DISABILITIES AND INHIBITIONS OF
PUBLIC OFFICERS
Q: What are the general disqualifications of
public officers?
1. No candidate who lost in an election shall, within
one year after such election, be appointed to any
office in Government. (PHIL. CONST. art. IX-B,
§VI)
2. No elective official shall be eligible for
appointment or designation in any capacity
to any public office or position during his
tenure. (PHIL. CONST., art. IX-B, § 7(1))
3. Unless otherwise provided by law or by the
primary functions of his position, no appointive
official shall hold any other position in
Government. (PHIL. CONST., art. IX-B, § 7(2))
Q: What are the special disqualifications
of public officers?
1. The President, Vice-President, the
Members of the Cabinet, and their
deputies or assistants shall not, unless
 otherwise provided in the Constitution,
hold any other office or employment
during their tenure. (PHIL. CONST. art. VIII,
§13)
2. No Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives may hold any other
office or employment in the Government,
or any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof, including
government-owned or controlled
corporations or their subsidiaries, during
his term, without forfeiting his seat.
Neither shall he be appointed to any
office which may have been created or
the emoluments thereof increase during
the term for which he was elected. (PHIL.
CONST. art. VI, § 13)
3. The Members of the Supreme Court and
of other courts established by law shall
not be designated to any agency
performing quasijudicial or administrative
functions. (PHIL. CONST. art. VIII, § 12)
4. No Member of a Constitutional
Commission shall, during his tenure, hold
any other office or employment. (PHIL.
CONST. art. IX-A, § 2) The same
disqualification applies to the
Ombudsman and his deputies. (PHIL.
CONST. art. XI, § 8)
5. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall
not be qualified to run for any office in the
election immediately succeeding their
cessation from office. (PHIL. CONST. art.
XI, § 11)
6. Members of Constitutional Commissions,
the Ombudsman and his deputies must
not have been Candidates for any
elective position in the elections
immediately preceding their appointment.
(PHIL. CONST.
art. IX-B, IX-C, IX-D, §. 1; art. XI, § 8)
7. Members of the Constitutional
Commissions, the Ombudsman and his
deputies are appointed to a term of seven
(7) years, without reappointment. (PHIL.
CONST. art. IX-B, § 1(2); art. IX-C, § 1(2);
Art. IX-D, §. 1(2); art. IX, §11)
8. The spouse and relatives by
consanguinity or affinity within the fourth
civil degree of the President shall not
during his tenure be appointed as
Members of the Constitutional
49
Commissions, or the Office of the
Ombudsman, or as Secretaries,
Undersecretaries, chairmen or heads of bureaus
or offices, including governmentowned or
controlled corporations (PHIL.
CONST. art. VII, § 13, Art. VII)
F. POWERS AND DUTIES OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS
Q: Distinguish between dishonesty and
negligence.
Dishonesty begins when an individual intentionally
makes a false statement in any material fact, or
practicing or attempting to practice any deception or
fraud in order to secure his examination, registration,
appointment or promotion. It should be emphasized
only when the accumulated wealth becomes
manifestly disproportionate to the employee’s income
or other sources of income and his failure to properly
account or explain his other sources of income does
he become susceptible to dishonesty. (Ombudsman
v.
Nieto, G.R. No. 185685, 2011).
In the case of public officials, there is negligence
when there is a breach of duty or failure to perform
the obligation, and there is gross negligence when a
breach of duty is flagrant and palpable. Failing to
comply with his duty to provide a detailed list of his
assets and business interests in his SALN and for
relying on the family bookkeeper/accountant to fill out
his SALN and in signing the same without checking
or verifying the entries is negligence.
(Presidential Anti-Graft Commission v. Pleyto,
G.R. No. 176058, 2011)
Q: What are the rules on nepotism?
1. The Constitution prohibits the president from
appointing his close relatives (within the 4th
civil degree by consanguinity or affinity to the
president or his spouse) to high positions in
government during his tenure. No relative of
the President, within the 4th civil degree, shall
be appointed to/as:
a. A Constitutional Commission
b. The Office of the Ombudsman
c. Secretary of a Department
d. Undersecretary of a Department
e. Chairman or Head of Bureaus of
Offices
f. Any GOCC
g. Any GOCC subsidiary
2. Under the Civil Service Decree, all
appointments in the national, provincial, city,
and municipal governments or in any branch
or instrumentality, including GOCCs, made in
favor of the appointing or recommending
authority, or of the chief of the bureau of the
office, or of persons exercising immediate
supervision over him, are prohibited. As used
in the Civil Service Law, the term “relative”
and members of the family referred to those
within the 3rd degree of consanguinity or
affinity. (Presidential Decree No. 807, Sec.
49).
Q: The rule on nepotism does not apply to
designations made in favor of a relative of
the authority making a designation. True
or False.
False. A designation accomplishes the same
purpose as appointment. (Laurel v. Civil
Service Commission, G.R. No. 71562, 1991);
2010 Bar Exam Question.
Q: What are the exceptions to the rule on
nepotism? (CTAP)
1. Persons employed in confidential capacity
2. Teachers
3. Physicians
4. Members of AFP (Executive Order No,
292, § 59).
Q: The Mayor of San Jose City appointed
his wife, Amelia, as City Treasurer from
among tree (3) employees of the city
considered for the said position. Prior to
said promotion, Amelia had been an
Assistant City Treasurer for ten (10) years,
that is, even before she married the City
Mayor. Should the Civil
Service Commission approve the
promotional appointment of Amelia? Why
or why not?
The Civil Service Commission should not
approve the promotional appointment of
Amelia. Sec. 59(1), Chapter 7, Title I,
Subsection A, Book V of the Administrative
Code prohibits all appointments in the cities
of a relative of the appointing authority within
the third degree of consanguinity or affinity.
The prohibition applies to all appointments,
whether original or promotional. (Debulgado
v. CSC, G.R. No.
111471, 1994).
50
Q: What is the rule regarding errors in the
Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth
(SALN)?
Section 10 of R.A. 6713 provides that when the head
of office finds the SALN of a subordinate incomplete
or not in the proper form, such head of office must call
the subordinate’s attention to such omission and give
him the chance to rectify the same. However, there
is no right to notice regarding errors in his SALN and
to be told to correct the same. The notice and
correction referred to in Section 10 are intended
merely to ensure that SALNs are “submitted on time,
are complete, and are in proper form.” These refer to
formal defects in the SALN and do not include
charges for falsification of the assets and for declaring
a false net worth because these are substantive, not
formal defects. (Carabeo v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 190580-81, 2011).
Q: Who are required to file SALN? (VAPOSC3)
1. President
2. Vice-President
3. Members of the Cabinet
4. Members of Congress
5. Justices of the Supreme Court
6. Members of Constitutional Commissions
7. Other constitutional offices
8. Officers of the Armed Forces with general or flag
rank
A public officer or employee shall submit a declaration
under oath of his assets, liabilities and net worth
within 30 days after the assumption of office, as often
as required under the law, i.e., on or before April 30
of every year thereafter, and within 30 days after
separation from service. (Republic Act No. 6713, Sec.
8
(A)).
Q: What happens when an employee makes a
misdeclaration in his or her SALN?
Mere misdeclaration in SALN does not automatically
amount to dishonesty. Only when the accumulated
wealth becomes manifestly disproportionate to the
employee’s income or other sources of income and
the public officer/employee fails to properly account
or explain his or her other sources of income, does he
become liable to dishonesty. (Ombudsman v.
Racho, G.R. No. 185685, 2011)
G. RIGHTS OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
Q: What are the rights of public officers?
1. Right to Office, just and legal claim to
exercise powers and responsibilities of
public office.
2. Right to Wages
3. Right to Preference in Promotion, subject
to the discretion of the appointing
authority
4. Right to Vacation and Lick leave
5. Right to Maternity Leave 6. Right to
Retirement Pay 7. Other rights:
a. Right to reimbursement for
expenses incurred in due
performance of duty (does not
include transportation allowance
for those using government
vehicles)
b. Right to be indemnified against
liabilities they may incur in bona
fide discharge of duties
c. Right to longevity pay
Q: What is the hold-over principle?
It is the principle which provides that even
though a public officer’s term has expired or
his services terminated, he should continue
holding his office until his successor is
appointed or chosen and had qualified.
(Topacio Nueno v.
Angeles, 76 Phil. 12, 1946).
H. LIABILITIES OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS
1. Preventive suspension and
back salaries
Q: What is preventive suspension?
Preventive suspension is merely a preventive
measure, a preliminary step in an
administrative investigation. The purpose of
the suspension order is to prevent the
accused from using his position and the
powers and prerogatives of his office to
influence potential witnesses or tamper with
records which may be vital in the prosecution
of the case against him. If after such
investigation, the charge is established and
the person investigated is found guilty of acts
warranting his suspension or removal, then,
as a penalty, he is suspended, removed or
dismissed. (Villasenor v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R.
51
No. 180700, 2008)
Q: What are the kinds of preventive
suspension (PS)?
1. Preventive Suspension pending
investigation;
2. Preventive Suspension pending appeal.
Q: What is preventive suspension pending
investigation?
Such suspension is not a penalty. It is a measure
intended to enable the disciplining authority to
investigate charges against respondent by preventing
the latter from intimidating or in any way influencing
witnesses against him. If the investigation is not
finished and a decision is not rendered within that
period, the suspension will be lifted and the
respondent will automatically be reinstated. If after
investigation, respondent is found innocent of the
charges and is exonerated, he should be reinstated.
(CSC v. Alfonso, G.R. No. 179452,
2009)
Q: What is preventive suspension pending
appeal?
This is part of the penalty. no back salaries shall be
due for the period of preventive suspension pending
investigation but only for the period of preventive
suspension pending appeal, in the event the
employee is exonerated. (Gloria v. CA,
G.R. No. 131012, 1999)
Q: May the Ombudsman place a public officer
under preventive suspension? Yes. There is no
dispute as to the power of the Ombudsman to place
a public officer charged with an administrative offense
under preventive suspension. That power is clearly
confined under Section 24 of R.A. No. 6770.
The law sets forth 2 conditions that must be satisfied
to justify the issuance of an order of preventive
suspension pending an investigation: 1. The
evidence of guilt is strong; and
2. Either of the following circumstances coexists
with the first requirement:
a. The charge involves dishonesty,
oppression or grave misconduct or
neglect in the performance of duty;
b. The charge would warrant
removal from the service; or
c. The respondent's continued stay in
office may prejudice the case filed
 against him. (Ombudsman v.
Valeroso, G.R.
No. 167828, 2007)
Q: Is prior notice and hearing required before an
officer may be placed under preventive
suspension?
No. Settled is the rule that prior notice and
hearing are not required in the issuance of a
preventive suspension order. (Carabeo v. CA,
G.R. Nos. 178000 and 178003, 2009)
2. Illegal dismissal, reinstatement and
back salaries
Q: What are ultra vires acts?
These are acts which are clearly beyond the
scope of one's authority. They are null and
void and cannot be given any effect. The
doctrine of estoppel cannot operate to give
effect to an act which is otherwise null and
void or ultra vires. (Acebedo Optical Company
v. CA, G.R. No.
100152, 2000)
Q: What is demotion? (DEL CASTILLO)
There is demotion when an employee is
appointed to a position resulting in diminution
of duties, responsibilities, status or rank,
which may or may not involve a reduction in
salary. Where an employee is appointed to a
position with the same duties and
responsibilities but with rank and salary
higher than those enjoyed in his previous
position, there is no demotion and the
appointment is valid. (Bautista v. Civil Service
Commission, G.R. No. 185215, 2010).
Q: When is demotion not proper?
Demotion to a lower rate of compensation is
also equivalent to removal if no cause is
shown for it when it is not part of any
disciplinary action.
(Floreza v. Ongpin, G.R. No. 81356, 1990).
Q: Is proof of damage required for one to
be administratively liable?
No. Proof of damage or actual injury is not
required for administrative liability to attach to
a public officer. It is enough that the act was
contrary to the established norms of conduct
for government service. However, an
employee of GSIS who altered IP addresses
52
without authority, not in the performance of
his duties, will not be guilty of grave
misconduct but conduct prejudicial to the best
interest of service. To constitute misconduct,
the act or acts must have a direct relation to
and be connected with the performance of
official duties. (GSIS v. Mayordomo, G.R. No.
191218,
2011)
Q: What is reinstatement?
It is the restoration to a state or condition from
which one had been removed or separated.
One who is reinstated assumes the position
he had occupied prior to the dismissal and is,
as an ordinary rule, entitled only to the last
salary in that position. (Judy Philippines, Inc.
v. NLRC,
G.R. No. 111934, 1998; People v. Macalino,
G.R. No. 79387, 1989).
Q: When is a public officer entitled to
reinstatement and back salaries? Two conditions
before an employee may be entitled to back salaries.
1. The employee must be found innocent of the
charges; and
2. His suspension must be unjustified or the official
was innocent. Laws provide for preventive
suspension for a fixed period. Thus, a
suspension beyond the fixed period is unjustified
and must be compensated.
(CSC v. Cruz, G.R. No. 187858, 2011)
Q: When is a public officer not entitled to
reinstatement and back salaries?
A public officer is not entitled to reinstatement and
back salaries, when removal or suspension is lawful.
The denial of salary to an employee during the period
of his suspension, if he should later be found guilty, is
proper because he had given ground for his
suspension. It does not impair his constitutional
rights because the Constitution itself allows
suspension for cause as provided by law, and the law
provides that an employee may be suspended
pending an investigation or by way of penalty.
(Bangalisan v. CA, G.R. No. 124678, 1997)
Q: If the public officer is entitled to back salaries,
how much should this be?
When an official or employee was illegally dismissed
and his reinstatement is ordered, for all legal
purposes he is considered as not having left his office
and, therefore, is entitled to all rights and privileges
that accrue to him by virtue of the office. (DOTC v.
Cruz, G.R. No. 178256, 2008) However, an illegally
terminated civil service employee is entitled to back
salaries limited only to a maximum period of five
years.
(Galang v. Land Bank, G.R. No. 175276, 2011)
Q: Where should the claim for back salaries be
filed?
The claim for recovery of back salaries involves
settlement of accounts or claims against the
government and should therefore be filed with the
Commission on Audit.
Q: Mario, a Bureau of Customs examiner,
was administratively charged with grave
misconduct and preventively suspended
pending investigation. The head of office
found him guilty as charged and ordered
his dismissal. The decision against him
was executed pending appeal. The CSC
subsequently found him guilty and after
considering a number of mitigating
circumstances, reduced his penalty to
only one-month suspension. Is Mario
entitled to back salaries?
No, he is still guilty of grave misconduct, only
the penalty was reduced.
Q: X, an administrative officer in the
Department of Justice, was charged with
grave misconduct and preventively
suspended for 90 days pending
investigation. Based on the evidence, the
Secretary of Justice found X guilty as
charged and dismissed him from the
service. Pending appeal, X's dismissal
was executed. Subsequently, the Civil
Service Commission (CSC) reversed the
Secretary’s decision and the reversal
became final and executory. What is the
effect of X's exoneration? Because of his
exoneration, X is entitled to reinstatement and
back salaries during his suspension pending
appeal.
I. IMMUNITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
Q: Are public officers immune from suit?
Yes. A public officer is not liable for injuries
sustained by another due to official acts done
within the scope of his authority. (REVISED
PENAL CODE, art. 11 (5)).
53
Q: Are there exceptions to a public
officer’s immunity from suit?
Yes. A public officer is not immune when
liability does not devolve ultimately to the
State, such as:
1. A petition to require official to do his duty
2. A petition to restrain him from doing an
act
3. To recover taxes from him
4. Those where the officer impleaded may
by himself alone comply with the decision
of the court
5. Where the government itself has violated
its own laws
Also, where a public officer has committed an
ultra vires act, or where there is a showing of
bad faith, malice or gross negligence, the
officer can be held personally accountable
even if such acts are claimed to have been
performed in connection with official duties.
(Wylie v. Rarang, G.R. No. 74135, 1992)
Where the public officer is sued in his
personal capacity, state immunity will not
apply. (Lansang v. CA, G.R. No. 102667,
2000)
Q: Executive Secretary Chua issued an order
prohibiting the holding of rallies along Mendiola
because it hampers the traffic flow to
Malacanang. A group of militants questioned the
order for being unconstitutional and filed a case
against Secretary Chua to restrain him from
enforcing the order. Secretary Chua raised state
immunity from suit claiming that the state cannot
be sued without its consent. Is the claim correct?
No, public officers may be sued to restrain them from
enforcing an act claimed to be unconstitutional.
Q: If a public officer has already resigned, should
the administrative complaint filed against her be
dismissed?
Cessation from office by virtue of her intervening
resignation did not warrant the dismissal of the
administrative complaint against her, for the act
complained of had been committed when she was still
in the service. (Concerned Citizen v.
Catena, A.M. OCA IPI No. 02-1321-P, 2013)
J. DE FACTO OFFICERS
Q: What is a de facto officer?
A de facto officer is one who derives his appointment
from one having colorable authority to appoint, if the
office is an appointive office, and whose appointment
is valid on its face. He may also be one who is in
possession of an office, and is discharging its duties
under color of authority, by which is meant authority
derived from an appointment, however irregular or
informal, so that the incumbent is not a mere
volunteer. (Funa v. Agra, G.R. No. 191644, 2013).
Q: What are the effects of the acts of de facto
officers?
The acts of the de facto officer, insofar as they affect
the public, are valid, binding and with full legal effect.
The doctrine is intended not for the protection of the
public officer, but for the protection of the public and
individuals who get involved in the official acts of
persons discharging duties of a public office. (Funa v.
Agra, G.R. No. 191644, 2013)
Q: Are de facto officers entitled to
salaries? The rightful incumbent of a public
officer may recover from an officer de facto
the salary received by the latter during the
time of his wrongful tenure, even though he
entered into the office in good faith and under
color of title. (General Manager v. Monserate,
G.R. No.
129616, 2002)
However, where there is no de jure public
officer, the officer de facto, who in good faith
has had possession of the office and has
discharged the duties pertaining thereto, is
legally entitled to the emoluments of the
office, and may, in an appropriate action,
recover the salary, fees and other
compensation attached to the office. (Civil
Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, G.R.
No.
83896, 1991).
Q: A person who occupies an office that is
defectively created is a de facto officer.
True or False.
False. For him to be a de facto officer, the
office must be validly created. (Tuanda v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 110544, 1995)
Q: Van sought to disqualify Manresa as
congresswoman of the third district of
Manila on the ground that the latter is a
green card holder. By the time the case
54
was decided against Manresa, she had
already served her full term as
congresswoman. What was Manresa's
status during her incumbency as
congresswoman?
She was a de facto officer since she was
elected and she served, and her
disqualification only came later. (Sampayan
v. Daza, G.R. No.
103903, 1992).
K. TERMINATION OF OFFICIAL
RELATION
Q: What are the causes for termination of
official relations? (TAD PAIR CAIRR)
1. NATURAL CAUSES:
a. Expiration of the term or tenure of office
unless authorized to hold over, his/her
rights and duties ipso facto cease;
b. Reaching the age limit (retirement) – 65
years for public officers and employees;
c. Death or permanent disability.
2. ACTS OR NEGLECT OF OFFICER:
a. Prescription of Right to Office – quo warranto is
the proper remedy against a public officer or
employee for his/her ouster from office, which
should be commenced within one year after the
cause of such ouster; otherwise the action shall
be barred;
b. Abandonment of Office – Abandonment of an
office is the voluntary relinquishment of an office
by the holder, with the intention of terminating his
possession and control thereof. There are,
therefore, two essential elements of
abandonment: first, an intention to abandon and
second, an overt or “external” act by which the
intention is carried into effect.
Generally speaking, a person holding a public
office may abandon such office by nonuser or
acquiescence. Non-user refers to a neglect to
use a right or privilege or to exercise an office.
However, nonperformance of the duties of an
office does not constitute abandonment where
such nonperformance results from temporary
disability or from involuntary failure to perform.
Abandonment may also result from an
acquiescence by the officer in his wrongful
removal or discharge, for instance, after a
summary removal, an unreasonable delay by an
 officer illegally removed in taking steps to
vindicate his rights may constitute an
abandonment of the office. (Canonizado v.
Aguirre, G.R. No.
133132, 2001)
c. Acceptance of an incompatible office – It is a well
settled rule that he who, while occupying one
office, accepts another incompatible with the first,
ipso facto vacates the first office and his title is
thereby terminated without any other act or
proceeding. Public policy considerations dictate
against allowing the same individual to perform
inconsistent and incompatible duties. The
incompatibility contemplated is not the mere
physical impossibility of one person’s performing
the duties of the two offices due to a lack of time
or the inability to be in two places at the same
moment, but that which proceeds from the nature
and relations of the two positions to each other
as to give rise to contrariety and antagonism
should one person attempt to faithfully and
impartially discharge the duties of one toward the
incumbent of the other. (Canonizado v. Aguirre,
G.R. No. 133132,
2001)
d. Resignation – formal renunciation or
relinquishment of office. To constitute a complete
and operative act of resignation, the officer or
employee must show a clear intention to
relinquish or surrender his position accompanied
by the act of relinquishment. Resignation implies
an expression of the incumbent in some form,
express or implied, of the intention to surrender,
renounce and relinquish the office, and its
acceptance by competent and lawful authority.
Verily, a "courtesy resignation" cannot properly
be interpreted as resignation in the legal sense
for it is not necessarily a reflection of a public
official's intention to surrender his position.
Rather, it manifests his submission to the will of
the political authority and the appointing power.
(Ortiz v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 78957, 1988)
3. ACTS OF THE GOVERNMENT OR
PEOPLE:
a. Conviction of a crime – termination
results when the penalties of perpetual or
temporary absolute disqualification or
penalties of perpetual or temporary
special disqualification are imposed upon
conviction by final judgment in a trial court
55
b. Abolition of office
c. Impeachment – way of removing the
President, Vice President, Members of
the Supreme Court and the Constitutional
Commissions and the Ombudsman
d. Removal – ouster of the incumbent
before the expiration of his/her term
e. Recall – refers to the election itself by
means of which voters decide whether
they should retain their local official or
elect replacement. The ground for recall
is “loss of confidence.”
Q: What is the relationship between
administrative liability and criminal
liability? It is a fundamental principle in the
law on public officers that administrative
liability is separate from and independent of
criminal liability. A simple act or omission can
give rise to criminal, civil or administrative
liability, each independently of the others.
This is known as the “threefold liability rule.”
Thus, absolution from a criminal charge is not
a bar to an administrative prosecution, and
vice versa. The dismissal of the administrative
cases against the petitioners will not
necessarily result in the dismissal of the
criminal complaints filed against them.
(Regidor, Jr. vs. People, G.R. No.
166086-92, 2009)
Q: Anton was the duly elected Mayor of Tunawi in
the local elections of 2004. He got 51% of all the
votes cast. Fourteen months later, Victoria, who
also ran for mayor, filed with the Local Election
Registrar, a petition for recall against Anton. The
COMELEC approved the petition and set a date
for its signing by other qualified voters in order
to garner at least 25% of the total number of
registered voters or total number of those who
actually voted during the local election in 2005,
whichever is lower. Anton attacked the
COMELEC resolution for being invalid. Do you
agree with Anton?
Yes, the petition should be initiated by at least 25% of
the total number of registered voters of
Tunawi. (See, Republic Act 7160, Sec. 70)
L. THE CIVIL SERVICE
1. Scope
Q: What is the scope of the Civil Service? It
embraces all branches, subdivisions,
instrumentalities and agencies of the government,
including government-owned or controlled
corporations with original charter. (Art.
IX-B, Sec. 2(1)).
Q: What are the classes of service in the Civil
Service?
1. Career Service
2. Non-Career Service
Q: What is career service?
It is characterized by:
1. Entrance based on merit and fitness to be
determined by competitive examinations or
based on highly
technical qualifications
2. Opportunity for advancement to higher
career positions
3. Security of tenure (P.D. No. 807, Art. 4, Sec.
5).
It is composed of the following levels of positions:
• 1st level: clerical, trades, crafts and
custodial service positions involving
nonprofessional/sub-professional in a
nonsupervisory or supervisory capacity
requiring less than 4 yrs of collegiate
studies
• 2nd level: professional, technical and
scientific positions in a Generally, no, but, it may be revoked/recalled
nonsupervisory/supervisory capacity
requiring at least 4 years of college work
up to division chief level
• 3rd level: career executive service
positions. (P.D No. 807, Art. 4, Sec. 7).
Q: What is non-career service?
It is characterized by:
1. Entrance on bases other than those of the
usual test of merit and fitness
2. Tenure which is limited to
• Period specified by law
• Coterminous with that of
appointing authority
• Subject to appointing authority’s
pleasure
• Limited to the duration of a
particular project (P.D. No 807,
Art. 4, Sec. 6).
56
3. They, however, enjoy constitutional
guarantee that they cannot be removed,
except for cause and after due hearing.
(P.D. No 807, Sec. 36).
2. Appointments to the civil service
Q: What are the causes for protesting an
appointment?
1. Appointee not qualified
2. Appointee is not the next-in-rank
3. In the case of appointment by transfer,
reinstatement, or by original appointment,
that the protestant is not satisfied with the
written special reason(s) given by the
appointing authority. (P.D. No. 807, Art. 8,
Sec. 19(6)).
Q: What does “for cause” mean?
It means for reasons which the law and sound
public policy recognized as sufficient warrant
for approval; that is, legal cause, and not
merely causes which appointing power, in the
exercise of discretion, may deem sufficient.
The cause must relate to and affect the
administration of the office, and must be
restricted to something substantial in nature.
(Eduardo de los Santos v.
Gil Mallare, G. R. No. L-3881, 1950).
Q: May the CSC revoke an appointment?
by the CSC on the following grounds:
1. Non-compliance w/ the procedures/criteria
provided in the agency’s merit promotional plan
2. Failure to pass through the agency’s
selection/promotion board
3. Violation of the existing collective agreement
between management and employees relative to
promotion
4. Violation of other existing civil service law, rules
& regulations
3. Personnel actions
Q: What are personnel actions?
These are any action denoting movement or progress
of personnel in the civil service. (Omnibus
Implementing Rules of E.O. No. 292, Rule V, § 1,
cited in City Mayor Debulgado v.
CSC, G.R. No. 111471, 1994)
Q: Who may inquire into the validity of creation of power. (Corona v. Senate of the Philippines
positions? sitting as an Impeachment Court, G.R. No.
It is the CSC which is empowered to look into the 200242, 2012)
validity of creation of positions and appointments of
personnel appointed by the Mayor which Q: Who may be impeached? (VP-SOC)
appointments were confirmed by the CSC. There 1. President
being a valid appointment confirmed by CSC and the 2. Vice President
concerned personnel having rendered services, 3. Supreme Court Justices
payment of their salaries is proper and legal. 4. Constitutional Commission members
(Tolentino vs. Atty. 5. Ombudsman
Roy Loyola, G.R. No. 153809, 2011)
Q: What are the grounds for
Q: What are the valid personnel actions? impeachment?
1. Extending temporary appointment, but, must not (GOT BBC)
amount to removal. 1. Graft and corruption
2. Transfer or re-assignment, which shall not 2. Other high crimes
involve a reduction in rank, status, and salary, 3. Treason
without break in service. 4. Betrayal of public trust
3. Detail, which must be made in the interest of 5. Bribery
public service, absent showing of manifest 6. Culpable violation of the Constitution
abuse or improper motive or purpose
This is an exclusive list. Congress cannot add
Q: What are the personnel actions amounting to to the list of impeachable offenses. (Bernas
removal? Primer, page 444).
1. Shortening term
2. Control does not extend to removal Q: How is impeachment done?
3. Demotion Impeachment is carried out in the following
4. Denial of optional retirement and refusal to manner:
reinstate 1. Filing of verified complaint. Can be filed by:
a. Any member of the
Q: Can personnel be House of
temporarily transferred? Representatives
Yes. But, while a temporary transfer or assignment of b. Any citizen upon a resolution or
personnel is permissible even without the employee’s endorsement by any Member of the
prior consent, it cannot be done when the transfer is House
a preliminary step toward his removal, or is a scheme c. By at least 1/3 of all the Members of
to lure him away from his permanent position, or the House of Representatives
designed to indirectly terminate his service, or force
his resignation. Such a transfer would in effect Note: If the verified complaint or
circumvent the provision which safeguards the tenure resolution of impeachment was filed
of office of those who are in the Civil Service. (Hon. by at least 1/3 of all the Members of
Gloria v. CA, G.R. No. 119903, the House, it shall constitute the
2000) Articles of Impeachment. Trial in the
Senate shall proceed.
M. ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS 2. Inclusion of complaint in the order of business
within 10 session days
Q: What is Impeachment? 3. Referral to proper Committee within 3 session
Impeachment refers to the power of Congress days thereafter
to remove a public official for serious crimes 4. Submission of committee report to the House
or misconduct as provided in the Constitution. together with corresponding resolution
It is a mechanism designed to check abuse of

57
5. The report should be submitted within 60 days
from referral, after hearing, and by a majority vote
of all its members.
6. Calendaring of resolution for consideration by the
House
7. Should be done within 10 session days from
receipt thereof
8. Vote of at least 1/3 of all the members of the
House necessary to:
a. Affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles
of Impeachment of the Committee or
b. To override its contrary resolution
9. The 1-year period shall be counted from the time
of the filing of the first impeachment complaint.
Impeachment proceedings pertain to the
proceedings in the House of Representative which
commences from the initiation of the complaint, to
the referral to proper committees, to submission of
the report to the House, subsequent deliberation,
and ends with the transmittal of the Article of
Impeachment to the Senate. An impeachment
case pertains to a trial in the Senate which
commences at the time the Articles of
Impeachment are transmitted to the Upper House.
(Art XI, Sec. 3, PHIL.
CONST.).
Q: Who has the power to try and decide
impeachment cases?
Senate has the sole power to try and decide all cases
of impeachment.
Q: Who has the power to initiate impeachment
complaints?
The House of Representatives has the exclusive
power to initiate impeachment cases. However, this
power has limitations, which include the manner of
filing, required vote to impeach, and the one-year bar
on the impeachment of one and the same official.
(Gutierrez v. House
Committee on Justice, G.R. No. 193459, 2011)
Q: Who determines sufficiency of form and
substance of an impeachment complaint?
The determination of sufficiency of form and
substance of an impeachment complaint is an
exponent of the express constitutional grant
of rule-making powers of the House of
Representatives. In the discharge of that
power and in the exercise of its discretion, the
House has formulated determinable
standards as to the form and substance of an
impeachment complaint. Questions on what
58
constitutes as an impeachable offense are
considered to be purely political questions
and thus left to the sound determination of the
legislature. (Gutierrez v. House Committee on
Justice, G.R.
No. 193459, 2011)
Q: Can the SC inquire into the conduct of
impeachment proceedings?
The SC found it well-within its power to
determine whether Congress committed a
violation of the Constitution or gravely abused
its discretion in the exercise of its functions
and prerogatives that could translate as lack
or excess of jurisdiction in taking cognizance
of two impeachment complaints that are
inquisitorial in function, akin to a preliminary
investigation. (Gutierrez v. House Committee
on Justice, G.R.
No. 193459, 2011)
Q: What are the effects of impeachment?
(LDR)
1. Removal from office of the official
concerned
2. Disqualification to hold any office
3. Officer still liable to prosecution, trial,
and punishment if the impeachable
offense committed also constitutes a
felony or crime.
Q: Upon endorsement from the Senate
where it was first mistakenly filed, the
House of Representatives Committee on
Justice found the verified complaint for
impeachment against the President
sufficient in form but insufficient in
substance. Within the same year, another
impeachment suit was filed against the
President who questioned the same for
being violative of the Constitution. Is the
President correct?
Yes, no impeachment proceeding can be filed
against the President more than once within a
year. (Rules of Procedure in Impeachment
Proceedings, Rule 5, Sec. 14).
Q: What is the scope of the authority of the
Ombudsman?
The Office of the Ombudsman shall have disciplinary
authority over all elective and appointive officials of
the Government and its subdivisions,
instrumentalities and agencies, including Members of
the Cabinet, local government, government-owned or Practices Act
controlled corporations and their subsidiaries, except b. R.A. 1379 (Forfeiture of Ill-
over officials who may be removed only by Gotten
impeachment or over Members of Congress, and the Wealth Act)
Judiciary. (R.A. 6770, Sec. 21) c. Chap.2, Sec. 2, Title VII, Book
II, RPC
Q: Where does one appeal decisions of the 2. Where one or more of the accused
Ombudsman? are officials, whether in a permanent, acting
It depends. or interim capacity, at the time of the
1. Administrative disciplinary cases commission of the offense:
a. GR: Rule 43, CA (Fabian v. Desierto, a. Officials of the executive branch
G.R. No. 129742, 16 occupying the positions of
September 16, 1998) regional director and higher,
b. XPN: (i) Absolved or otherwise classified as Grade 27
(ii) Convicted but penalty imposed is and higher, of the Compensation
public censure or reprimand, and
suspension of not more than one Position Classification Act of
month, or fine equivalent to one-month 1989 (R.A. No. 6758),
salary. (Dagan v. Ombudsman, G.R. b. Members of Congress and
No. 184083, November 19, 2013) 2. officials thereof classified as
Criminal cases – Rule 65, SC (Tirol v. Grade ’27’ and higher under the
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. Compensation and
135913, November 4, 1999) Position Classification Act of
3. Consolidated administrative and criminal 1989;
cases - Rule 43, CA OR Rule 65, SC. c. Members of the judiciary without
(Cortes v. Ombudsman, G.R. prejudice to the provisions of the
No. 187896-97, June 10, 2013) Constitution;
d. Chairmen and members of the
Q: When may the Office of the Special Prosecutor Constitutional Commissions,
file an information against a public officer for without prejudice to the
graft? provisions of the
The Office of the Special Prosecutor may file an Constitution; and
information against a public officer for graft only when e. All other national and local
authorized by the Ombudsman. (Uy v. officials classified as Grade ’27’
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 105965-70, 2001). and higher under the
Compensation and
Q: What is the jurisdiction of Position Classification Act of
the Sandiganbayan? 1989.
It is Sandiganbayan which has jurisdiction over 3. Other offenses or felonies whether
appeals from criminal cases where the accused is a simple or complexed with other crimes
government employee. Pursuant to RA 8249, the committed by the public officials and
Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive appellate employees mentioned in subsection a. of this
jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or orders section in relation to their office.
of regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their 4. Civil and criminal cases filed
own original jurisdiction or of their appellate pursuant to and in connection with Executive
jurisdiction as herein provided. (Filomena v. Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A, issued in 1986.
People, G.R. No. 188630, 2011) (R.A. No. 10660, Sec.
2)
The Sandiganbayan shall exercise exclusive
original jurisdiction in all cases involving: Q: Who has control over cases falling
1. Violations of within the jurisdiction of the
a. R.A. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Sandiganbayan? While it is the Ombudsman
Corrupt who has the full discretion to determine

59
 whether or not a criminal case should be filed
in the Sandiganbayan, once the case has
been filed with said court, it is the
Sandiganbayan, and no longer the
Ombudsman, which has full control of the
case so much so that the Information may not
be dismissed without the approval of said
court. In this case, the Sandiganbayan,
ordered the Special Prosecutor to conduct a
reinvestigation and subsequently granted his
motion to withdraw the informations, after
finding no probable cause against the latter
on reinvestigation. The Sandiganbayan thus
gave its approval to the withdrawal of the
informations and ordered the dismissal of the
cases. Since no appeal was taken by the
Special Prosecutor from the order of
dismissal within the reglementary period, the
same had become final and executory. (City
Government of Tuguegarao v. Ting, G.R.
Nos.
192435-36, 2011)
Q: Who shall act as prosecutor in cases before
the Sandiganbayan?
In all cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from
the Sandiganbayan to the Supreme Court, the Office
of the Ombudsman, through its special prosecutor,
shall represent the People of the Philippines, except
in cases filed pursuant to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2,
14 and 14-A. A private complainant in a criminal case
before the Sandiganbayan is allowed to appeal only
the civil aspect of the criminal case after its dismissal
by said court. (City Government of Tuguegarao v.
Ting, G.R. Nos. 192435-36,
2011)
Q: When may ill-gotten wealth be
sequestered?
Sec. 26, Art. 18 of the Constitution states that an
order of sequestration may only issue upon a showing
of a prima facie case that the properties are ill-gotten
wealth under Executive Orders 1 and 2. When a court
nullifies an order of sequestration for having been
issued without a prima facie case, the Court does not
substitute its judgment for that of the PCGG but
simply applies the law. (Republic of the Philippines v.
Sandiganbayan and Imelda Marcos, G.R. No.
155832, 2010)
Q: Does the PCGG have the power to grant
immunity to witnesses?
60
Yes. The scope of immunity that the PCGG may offer
to witnesses may vary. It has discretion to grant
appropriate levels of criminal immunity depending on
the situation of the witness and his relative
importance to the prosecution of illgotten wealth
cases. The immunity from criminal or civil
prosecution covers immunity from giving evidence in
a case before a court of law, because in reality the
guarantee given to a witness against being compelled
to testify constitutes a grant of immunity from civil or
criminal prosecution. (Disini v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 180564, 2010)
N. TERM LIMITS
Q: How does the holdover principle affect
term?
The concept of holdover when applied to a
public officer implies that the office has a fixed
term and the incumbent is holding onto the
succeeding term. It is usually provided by law
that officers elected or appointed for a fixed
term shall remain in office not only for that
term but until their successors have been
elected and qualified. Where this provision is
found, the office does not become vacant
upon the expiration of the term if there is no
successor elected and qualified to assume it,
but the present incumbent will carry over until
his successor is elected and qualified, even
though it be beyond the term fixed by law.
(Lecaros v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 130872), 1999)
Q: Does voluntary renunciation interrupt a
public officer’s term?
No. Voluntary renunciation, while involving
loss of office and the total incapacity to render
service, is disallowed by the Constitution as
an effective interruption of a term. It is
therefore not allowed as a mode of
circumventing the threeterm limit rule.
Preventive suspension, by its nature, does
not involve an effective interruption of a term
and should therefore not be a reason to avoid
the three-term limitation. (Aldovino v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 184836, 2009)
Q: Alfredo was elected municipal mayor
for three consecutive terms. During his
third term, the municipality became a city.
Alfredo ran for city mayor during the next
immediately succeeding election. Voltaire
 sought his disqualification citing the
threeterm limit for elective officials. Will
Voltaire's action prosper?
Yes, the three-term limit uniformly applies to
the office of mayor, whether for city or
municipality.
(Abundo v. Comelec, G.R. No 201716, 2013).
Q: Adela served as Mayor of Kasim for 2
consecutive terms. On her third term,
COMELEC ousted her in an election
protest that Gudi, her opponent, filed
against her. Two years later, Gudi faced
recall proceedings and Adela ran in the
recall election against him. Adela won and
served as Mayor for Gudi's remaining
term. Can Adela run again for Mayor in the
next succeeding election without violating
the 3term limit?
Yes, her ouster from office in her third term
interrupted the continuity of her service as mayor.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES B.
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
1. DEFINITION
2. MANNER OF CREATION
3. KINDS
C. POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENCIES
Q: What are the powers of administrative
agencies?
The powers of administrative agencies are:
1. DISCRETIONARY - The power or right conferred
upon them by law to act officially under certain
circumstances, according to the dictates of their
own judgment and conscience, and not
controlled by the judgment or conscience of
others.
2. MINISTERIAL - Nothing is left to discretion; a
simple, definite duty arising under conditions
admitted or proved to exist, and imposed by law;
a duty performed in response to what has been
imposed by law under conditions specified by law
not being dependent upon the officer’s judgment
or discretion.
61
Q: Is Philippine National Red Cross a public
agency?
The structure of the Philippine National Red Cross is
sui generis being neither strictly private nor public in
nature. (Liban v. Gordon, G.R. No.
175352, 2011)
1. QUASI-LEGISLATIVE (RULE-MAKING) POWER
Q: Distinguish between legislative and
quasilegislative powers.
Legislative power involves the discretion to determine
what the law shall be. This cannot be delegated.
Quasi-legislative power only involves the discretion to
determine how the law shall be enforced. This can be
delegated. (US v. Ang Tang Ho, G.R. No. 17122,
1922).
Quasi-legislative power only involves the
discretion to determine how the law shall be
enforced. This can be delegated. (Smart v.
NTC, G.R. No. 151908, 2003).
(a) Kinds of administrative rules and
regulations
Q: What are the kinds of administrative
rules and regulations? (SIC PIP)
1. SUPPLEMENTARY - Those which
only supply details, also known as detailed
legislation.
2. INTERPRETATIVE - Those that do
no more than to interpret a statute. These are
given weight and respect but are not
conclusive to the courts.
3. CONTINGENT - Those which
determine when a statute will go into effect.
Power to ascertain the happening of such
facts may be delegated to administrative
agencies.
4. PROCEDURAL - Those which
describe the method by which the agency will
carry out its appointed functions
5. INTERNAL - Those issued by a
superior administrative or executive officer to
his subordinates for the proper and efficient
administration of law.
6. PENAL - Those that carry out penal
or criminal sanctions for violation of the same.
(b) Requisites for validity
 Q: What are the tests for valid delegation
of quasi-legislative power?
The tests of delegation are:
1. COMPLETENESS test - The statute
must be complete in all its terms and
conditions when it leaves the legislature
such that when it reaches the delegate,
the only thing he will have to do is to
enforce it. (Association of Phil. Coconut
Desiccators v. Phil. Coconut Authority,
G.R. No. 110526, 1998).
2. SUFFICIENT STANDARD test - The
statute fixes a standard, mapping out the
boundaries of the agency’s authority to
which it must conform. The law must offer
a sufficient standard to specify the limits
of the delegate’s authority, announce the
legislative policy and specify the
conditions under which it is to be
implemented. (Abakada v. Purisima, G.R.
No. 166715, 2008).
2. QUASI-JUDICIAL (ADJUDICATORY)
POWER
(a) Administrative due process
Q: What is administrative due process? The
essence of due process in administrative
proceedings is the opportunity to explain one's side
or seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling
complained of. As long as the parties are given the
opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered,
the demands of due process are sufficiently met.
What is offensive to due process is the denial of the
opportunity to be heard. (Flores v. Montemayor,
G.R. No. 170146, 2011) A respondent in an
administrative case is not entitled to be informed of
the preliminary findings and recommendations; he is
entitled only to a reasonable opportunity to be heard,
and to the administrative decision based on
substantial evidence. (Valasquez v. CA, G.R.
No. 150732, 2004)
Q: What are the rights of persons in
administrative proceedings.? (HIP DESK)
1. The RIGHT TO A HEARING, which includes the
right to present one’s case and submit evidence
in support thereof.
2. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act
on its or his own INDEPENDENT
CONSIDERATION of the law and facts of the
62
controversy, and not simply accept the views of a
subordinate in arriving at a decision.
3. The decision must be based on the EVIDENCE
PRESENTED at the hearing or at least contained
in the record and disclosed to the parties
affected.
4. The DECISION must have something to support
itself.
5. The tribunal must CONSIDER
THE
EVIDENCE presented.
6. Evidence supporting the conclusion must be
SUBSTANTIAL.
7. The board or body should, in all controversial
questions, render its decision in such a manner
that the parties to the proceeding can KNOW the
various ISSUES involved and the REASONS for
the decision rendered.
(Ang Tibay v. CIR, G.R. No. L-46496, 1940)
(b) Administrative appeal and review
(c) Administrative res judicata
Q: Give an example of the application of
administrative res judicata.
The principle of res judicata is applicable in
labor relations proceedings which are “non-
litigious and summary in nature without
regard to legal technicalities obtaining in
courts of law.” (Rules and Regulations
Implementing the Labor Code, Sec. 5, Rule
XIII, Book V) That in which the statute makes
or attempts to make a court a part of the
administrative scheme by providing in terms
or effect that the court, on review of the action
of an administrative agency.
Q: When is res judicata not applicable?
It is not applicable in:
1. Citizenship cases (Zita Ngo Burca v.
Republic, G.R. No. 122226, 1998 &
United Pepsi Cola v. Laguesma, G.R. No.
L-24252,
1973)
2. When WCC Referee awards the
employee less than what the law provides
(BF Goodrich v. WCC, G.R. No. L-42319,
1978)
3. FACT FINDING, INVESTIGATIVE,
LICENSING AND RATE-FIXING
POWERS
 Q: What are the requisites for penal laws
to be valid? (PFPO)
1. The law which authorizes the
promulgation of rules and regulations
must itself provide for the imposition
of a penalty for their violation;
2. The law must fix or define such
penalty;
3. The violation for which the rules and
regulations impose a penalty must be
punishable under the law itself; and
4. The rules and regulations must be
published in the Official Gazette or
newspaper of general circulation and
archived at the UP Law Center.
Q: Must all rules and regulations be filed
with the UP Law Center?
No. Not all rules and regulations adopted by
every government agency are to be filed with
the UP Law Center. Only those of general or
of permanent character are to be filed.
Internal rules which are meant to regulate the
personnel of the GSIS are not subject to this
rule. (Board of
Trustees v. Velasco, G.R. No. 17046, 2011)
Q: What is investigatory power?
Investigatory power is the power to inspect,
secure, or require the disclosure of
information by means of accounts, records,
reports, statements and testimony of
witnesses. This power is implied and not
inherent in administrative agencies. (Sec of
Justice v.
Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, 2000).
D. JUDICIAL RECOURSE AND REVIEW
1. DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY
ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION
2. DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
3. DOCTRINE OF FINALITY OF
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
Q: What is the doctrine of primary administrative
jurisdiction?
1. Courts cannot determine a controversy, which
requires the expertise, specialized skills and
knowledge of the proper administrative bodies
because technical matters of intricate questions
of fact are involved.
63
2. Relief must first be obtained in an administrative
proceeding before a remedy will be supplied by
the court, even if the matter is within the
jurisdiction of a court. (Republic of the Philippines
v. Martinez, G.R. No. 158253, 2007).
Q: When is the doctrine of primary administrative
jurisdiction not applicable?
1. Congress does not intend that the issues be left
solely to the administrative agency for initial
determination;
2. When issues involve questions of law; and
3. When courts and administrative agencies have
concurrent jurisdiction. (Republic of the
Philippines v. Martinez, G.R. No. 158253, 2007).
Q: What is the doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies?
It is the general rule that an administrative decision
must first be appealed to the administrative superiors
up to the highest level before it may be elevated to a
court of justice for review. It is a condition precedent
that must be complied with. (Sps. Sadang v. CA, G.R.
No.
140138, 2006).
Q: When is the doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies not applicable? (DARNN
JP LICD DRIED LPS Quo)
1. If it should appear that an
IRREPARABLE DAMAGE will be
suffered by a party unless resort to the
court is immediately made.
2. When the respondent is the ALTER
EGO of the President
3. When no administrative REVIEW is
provided as a condition precedent for
court action
4. Where insistence on its observance
would result in the NULLIFICATION of
the claim asserted
5. When there was NO DECISION
rendered
6. When there are special circumstances
demanding immediate JUDICIAL
INTERVENTION
7. When the administrative remedy is
PERMISSIVE or concurrent
8. When the question raised is
ESSENTIALLY AND PURELY LEGAL
9. When strong PUBLIC
INTEREST is involved
 10. Where the issue raised is
the
CONSTITUTIONALITY of the statute,
rule or regulation
11. Where it is a civil action for DAMAGES
12. Where the officer acted in
utter DISREGARD OF DUE
PROCESS
13. When there is NO OTHER plain, speedy,
adequate REMEDY
14. When act complained of is PATENTLY
ILLEGAL
15. When the administrative body or the
person invoking the doctrine is in
ESTOPPEL
16. When there is long-continued and
UNREASONABLE DELAY
17. When the subject of controversy is
PRIVATE LAND
18. When the controversy involves
POSSESSORY ACTION involving
public
lands
19. When the claim involved is SMALL so
that to require exhaustion would be
oppressive and unreasonable
20. In QUO WARRANTO proceedings
Q: Jax Liner applied for a public utility bus
service from Bacolod to Dumaguete from
the Land Transportation Franchising and
Regulatory Board (LTFRB). BB Express
opposed. LTFRB ruled in favor of Jax. BB
appealed to the Secretary of the
Department of Transportation and
Communication (DOTC), who reversed the
LTFRB decision. Jax appealed to the
Office of the President which reinstated
the LTFRB’s ruling. BB Express went to
the Court of Appeals on certiorari
questioning the decision of the Office of
the President on the ground that Office of
the President has no jurisdiction over the
case in the absence of any law providing
an appeal from DOTC to the Office of the
President. Will the petition prosper? No,
the action of the DOTC Secretary bears only
the implied approval of the President who is
not precluded from reviewing the decision of
the former. (Land Car Inc. v. Bachelor
Express, G.R.
No. 154377, 2003).
Q: What is the doctrine of finality of
administrative action?
It provides that courts are reluctant to interfere with
actions of an administrative agency prior to its
completion or finality. Absent a final order or
decision, power has not been fully and finally
exercised, and there can usually be no irreparable
harm. (Mendiola v. CSC, G.R. No.
100671, 1993).
Q: When is the doctrine of finality of
administrative action not applicable? (SPA DIVE)
1. To grant relief to preserve STATUS QUO pending
further action by the administrative agency;
2. Essential to the PROTECTION OF RIGHTS
asserted;
3. When ALLOWED by law;
4. When the order is NOT REVIEWABLE and the
complainant will suffer great and obvious
DAMAGE if the order is carried out;
5. An INTERLOCUTORY ORDER affecting the
merits of a controversy;
6. An administrative officers acts in VIOLATION of
constitution and other laws and
7. To an order made in EXCESS of power, contrary
to specific prohibitions in the statute.
Q: What is the doctrine of ripeness for review?
The same as that of exhaustion of administrative
remedies, except that it applies to the rule making and
to administrative action which is embodied neither in
rules or regulations nor in adjudication or final order.
Q: How should the court view administrative
findings?
Factual findings made by quasi-judicial bodies and
administrative agencies when supported by
substantial evidence are accorded great respect and
even finality by the appellate courts. This is because
administrative agencies possess specialized
knowledge and expertise in their respective fields. As
such, their findings of fact are binding upon the Court
unless there is a showing of grave abuse of
discretion, or where it is clearly shown that they were
arrived at arbitrarily or in disregard of the evidence on
record. (Japson v. Civil Service Commission
(G.R. No. 189479, 2011)
ELECTION
LAW

64
 A. SUFFRAGE B. QUALIFICATION
AND DISQUALIFICATION OF VOTERS
Q: What are the required qualifications for
voters?
1. Be a Filipino citizen
2. At least 18 years of age
3. Has resided in the Philippines for at
least 1 year
4. Has resided in the place where they
propose to vote for at least 6 months
immediately preceding election 5.
Free from disqualifications
No literacy, property, or other substantive
requirements shall be imposed on the
exercise
of suffrage. (PHIL CONST. art. V, § 1)
Q: Can the COMELEC authorize the
citizens arm to use election returns for
unofficial count?
YES. It may authorize the citizen’s arm to use
election returns for unofficial count.
(COMELEC
Resolution 8786)
Q: What are the grounds for
disqualification to vote? (FDI)
1. Sentenced by FINAL JUDGMENT to
suffer IMPRISONMENT NOT LESS
THAN 1
YEAR
2. Adjudged by final judgment by a
competent court of having committed any
crime involving DISLOYALTY to the duly
constituted government (e.g. rebellion or
crimes against national security)
For (1) and (2):
• Disqualification may be removed by
plenary pardon or amnesty
• Reacquire the right to vote upon
expiration of 5 years after service of
sentence
3. INSANE or INCOMPETENT persons as
declared by competent authority
C. REGISTRATION OF VOTERS
65
Q: Is registration to the biometrics system an
additional requirement before a person can
exercise his or her right to suffrage? No. The
biometrics registration requirement is not a
"qualification" to the exercise of the right of suffrage,
but a mere aspect of the registration procedure, of
which the State has the right to reasonably regulate.
Unless it is shown that a registration requirement
rises to the level of a literacy, property or other
substantive requirement as contemplated by the
Framers of the Constitution - that is, one which
propagates a socio-economic standard which is
bereft of any rational basis to a person's ability to
intelligently cast his vote and to further the public
good - the same cannot be struck down as
unconstitutional.
The assailed biometrics registration regulation on the
right to suffrage was sufficiently justified as it was
indeed narrowly tailored to achieve the compelling
state interest of establishing a clean, complete,
permanent and updated list of voters, and was
demonstrably the least restrictive means in promoting
that interest. (Kabataan
Partylist vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 221318, 2015)
Q: How does one change domicile for purposes
of voting?
To successfully effect a transfer of domicile, one must
demonstrate: (1) an actual removal or change of
domicile; (2) a bona fide intention of abandoning the
former place of residence and establishing a new
one; and (3) acts which correspond with that purpose.
There must be animus manendi coupled with animus
non revertendi. (Asistio v. Canlas, G.R. No. 191124,
2010)
D. INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION
PROCEEDINGS
Q: What are inclusion proceedings? Inclusion
proceedings are proceedings which may be filed any
time EXCEPT during 105 days before regular
elections or 75 days before special elections for any
of the followings grounds:
1. Application for registration has been
disapproved by the board
2. Name has been stricken out (Sec. 34,
R.A. No. 8189)
Q: What are Exclusion proceedings?
Exclusion proceedings are
proceedings, requiring a sworn petition,
which may be filed any time EXCEPT during
100 days before regular elections or 65 days
before special elections, on any of the
following grounds:
1. Not qualified or has DQ
2. Flying voters
3. Ghost voters (Sec. 35, R.A. No.
8189)
Q: What is a leadership issue?
A leadership issue within a political party is
one that the COMELEC had to settle.
However, the expulsion of a member is
purely a membership issue that had to be
settled within the party. It is an internal party
matter over which the COMELEC has no
jurisdiction. The COMELEC’s jurisdiction
over intra-party disputes is limited. It does
not have blanket authority to resolve any and
all controversies involving political parties.
Political parties are generally free to conduct
their activities without interference from the
state. The COMELEC may intervene in
disputes internal to a party only when
necessary to the discharge of its
constitutional functions. (Atienza v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 188920, 2010)
E. POLITICAL PARTIES
1. JURISDICTION OF THE COMELEC
OVER POLITICAL PARTIES
2. REGISTRATION
Q: What are political parties?
Political parties are organized groups of
persons pursuing the same ideology,
political ideas or platforms of government
including its branches
and divisions. (Sec. 60, Omnibus Election
Code)
Q: What organizations or parties cannot
register as political parties in this
jurisdiction? 1. Religious sects
2. Those which seek to achieve their goals
through unlawful means
3. Those which refuse to adhere to the
Constitution
4. Those which are supported by any foreign
government. (PHIL CONST. art. IX-C, §2(5))
66
Q: What are the qualifications of a party-
list nominee?
1. A natural-born citizen of the Philippines
2. A registered voter
3. A resident of the Philippines for a period
of not less than 1 year immediately
preceding the election day
4. Able to read and write
5. A bona fide member of the party he seeks
to represent for at least 90 days
preceding election day
6. At least 25 years of age on election day.
(Sec. 9, R.A. No. 7941)
Q: Which organizations are disqualified from
registering as party-list organizations?
(F2V2R COPS)
1. Foreign party or organization
2. Receives Foreign support
3. Advocates Violence
4. Violates election laws
5. Religious sect, denomination, organization
6. Ceased to exist for at least 1 year
7. Failed to Obtain at least 2% of the votes cast
under the party-list system in the 2 preceding
elections
8. Failed to Participate in the last 2 preceding
elections
9. Untruthful Statements in its petition (Sec. 6, R.A.
No. 7941)
Q: Rudy Domingo, 38 years old, natural-born
Filipino and a resident of the Philippines since
birth, is a Manila-based entrepreneur who runs
KABAKA, a coalition of peoples’ organizations
from fisherfolk communities.
KABAKA’s operations consists of empowering
fisherfolk leaders through livelihood projects and
trainings on good governance. The Dutch
Foundation on Good initiatives, a private
organization registered in the Netherlands,
receives a huge subsidy from the Dutch Foreign
Ministry, which, in turn is allocated worldwide to
the Foundation’s partners like KABAKA. Rudy
seeks to register KABAKA as a party-list with
himself as nominee of the coalition. Will KABAKA
and Rudy be qualified as a partylist and a
nominee, respectively?
KABAKA and Rudy are not qualified as a party list
and as nominee, since KABAKA is receiving a
subsidy from the Dutch Foreign Ministry. Under
Section 2(5), Article IX-C of the
Constitution, a political party which is supported by
any foreign government cannot be registered with the
COMELEC. (PHIL. CONST. art. IX-C,
§2(5))
Q: Explain the formula for allocating seats for
party-list representatives.
The 20% allocation - the combined number of all
party-Iist representatives shall not exceed 20% of the
total membership of the House of Representatives,
including those elected under the party list;
The 2% threshold - only those parties
garnering a minimum of 2% of the total valid
votes cast for the party-list system are
"qualified" to have a guaranteed seat in the
House of
Representatives. As such, this 2% threshold
is only important in determining which
parties have guaranteed seats for the first
round of
distributing the available seats;
The three-seat limit - each qualified party,
regardless of the number of votes it actually
obtained, is entitled to a maximum of three
seats; that is, one "qualifying" and two
additional seats; and
Q: For each of these rules, state the
constitutional or legal basis, if any, and
the purpose.
For the 20% allocation: the party-list
representatives should not exceed 20% of
the total membership of the House of
Representatives, because this is the
maximum number of party-list
representatives provided in Sec. 5(3), Art. VI
of the 1987 Constitution.
(Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC,
G.R.
No. 136781, 2000)
For the three-seat limit rule: under Sec.
11(b) of RA No. 7941, a party-list shall be
entitled to a maximum of three seats in the
House of Representatives regardless of the
votes they receive during elections. The limit
is imposed so that no single group will
dominate the party-list seats. (Veterans
Federation Party v. COMELEC,
G.R. No. 136781, 2000)
67
For the 2% threshold, the Court in the case
of BANAT v. COMELEC, struck this down in
relation to the distribution of the additional
seats as found in Sec. 11(b) of R.A. No.
7941. Thus, the 2% is only important in
determining which parties have guaranteed
seats (in the first round). In distributing the
additional seats (in the second round), even
parties which did not obtain at least 2% of
the votes cast may be entitled to seats in the
House of Representatives. For the
distribution of the additional seats, the basis
is proportional representation.
In computing the additional seats, the
guaranteed seats shall no longer be
included because they have already been
allocated, at one seat each, to every “two-
percenter.” Thus, the remaining available
seats for allocation as “additional seats” are
the maximum seats reserved under the
Party List System less the guaranteed seats.
Fractional seats are disregarded in the
absence of a provision in R.A. No. 7941
allowing for a rounding off of fractional seats.
(BANAT v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 179271,
2009)
Given these rules, the procedure in allocating party-
list seats in the House of Representatives is as
follows:
1. Rank all party-lists according to votes
received;
2. Determine the 2% qualifiers;
3. Determine the additional seats by deducting
the number of guaranteed seats (2%
qualifiers) from the maximum allowed seats
ex. 55 (220 x 20%) – 17 (17 2%
qualifiers in this case) = 38 seats left;
4. Divide the number of votes received by all
parties (2% qualifiers and nonqualifiers) by
the total number of votes cast;
5. Distribute the additional seats (rounded
down) in accordance to the ranking. (BANAT
v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
179271, 2009)
Q: May a nominee of a sectoral party who
changes his sectoral affiliation within the same
party be eligible for nomination under the new
sectoral affiliation?
It depends. Section 15 of RA 7941 provides that a
nominee of a sectoral party who changes his sectoral
affiliation within the same party is not eligible for
nomination under the new sectoral affiliation, unless
such change occurred at least six months before the
elections. Section 15 clearly covers changes in both
political party and sectoral affiliation within the same
party.
(Amores v. HRET, G.R. No. 189600, 2010)
Q: Is moral disapproval a ground to justify
exclusion from the party-list system? (DEL
CASTILLO)
No. Moral disapproval is not a sufficient governmental
interest to justify exclusion of homosexuals from
participation in the party-list system. (Ang Ladlad
LGBT Party v. COMELEC,
G.R. No. 190582, 2010)
F. CANDIDACY
1. QUALIFICATIONS OF CANDIDATES
2. FILING OF CANDIDACY
Q: What are the grounds for
disqualification of candidates? (LFFD-
NEDS)
1. Lacking qualifications
2. Filing a COC for more than 1 office
3. False and material representation in
the COC
4. Disqualifications under the LGC
5. Nuisance candidate
6. Election offenses enumerated under
Sec. 68 of the Omnibus Election
Code
7. Declared insane or incompetent by
competent authority
8. Sentenced by final judgment for
subversion, insurrection, rebellion or
an offense which he has been
sentenced to a penalty of more than
18 months, or a crime involving moral
turpitude, unless given plenary
pardon/ amnesty
Q: Why is Erap Estrada allowed to be a
candidate in the elections?
Former President Estrada was granted an
absolute pardon that fully restored all his civil
and political rights, which naturally includes
the right to seek public elective office. The
wording of the pardon extended to him is
complete, unambiguous, and unqualified.
(Risos-Vidal v. COMELEC and Estrada, G.R.
No. 206666,
68
2015)
Q: Governor Paloma was administratively
charged with abuse of authority before the
Office of the President. Pending hearing,
he ran for reelection and won a second
term. He then moved to dismiss the
charge against him based on this
supervening event. Should the motion be
granted?
No. Election is not a mode of condoning an
administrative offense, and there is simply no
constitutional or statutory basis in our
jurisdiction to support the notion that an
official elected for a different term is fully
absolved of any administrative liability arising
from an offense done during a prior term.
(Carpio-Morales v.
Binay, G.R. No. 217126-27, 2015)
Q: When is there false
and material misrepresentation?
There is false and material misrepresentation
in a certificate of candidacy when the
misrepresentation is:
1. FALSE
2. MATERIAL (goes into
one’s qualifications)
3. DELIBERATE and there is an
intention to defraud the electorate.
(Tecson v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, 2004)
Q: When is there no false and material
misrepresentation?
1. When a candidate uses the name of her long-
time live-in partner OR states a false
profession (Salcedo v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
135886, 1999)
2. When the candidate is actually qualified even
if the entries in the COC as filled up by the
candidate will show that he is not
(Romualdez-Marcos v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
119976, 1995)
3. When the candidate, supported by a
preponderance of evidence, believed that he
was qualified since there was no intention to
deceive the electorate as to one’s
qualifications for public office
(Tecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
161434, 2004)
Q: What is the duty of COMELEC in cases
involving false and material misrepresentation?
The COMELEC must determine whether or not the
candidate deliberately attempted to mislead,
misinform or hide a fact about his or her residency
that would otherwise render him or her ineligible for
the position sought. The COMELEC gravely abused
its discretion in this case when, in considering the
residency issue, it based its decision solely on very
personal and subjective assessment standards, such
as the nature or design and furnishings of the dwelling
place in relation to the stature of the candidate.
(Mitra v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 191938, 2010)
Q: Who are covered by the ban on partisan
political activity?
The ban against partisan political activity is
addressed to appointive and NOT elective public
officials. (Quinto v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
189698, 2010)
Q: Person A was declared winner in the elections
for mayor. Person B, the 2nd placer, filed a petition
to disqualify, contending Person A wasn’t a
Filipino citizen. The Supreme Court declared
Person A as not a Filipino Citizen. Can Person B
be proclaimed as winner in the election?
Yes. When a person who is not qualified is voted for
and eventually garners the highest number of votes,
even the will of the electorate expressed through the
ballot cannot cure the defect in the qualifications of
the candidate. To rule otherwise is to trample upon
and rent asunder the very law that sets forth the
qualifications and disqualifications of candidates.
When there are participants who turn out to be
ineligible, their victory is voided and the laurel is
awarded to the next in rank who does not possess
any of the disqualifications nor lacks any of the
qualifications set in the rules to be eligible as
candidates. Knowledge by the electorate of a
candidate’s disqualification is not necessary before a
qualified candidate who placed second to a
disqualified one can be proclaimed as the winner
(Maquiling v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No.
195649, 2013).
G. CAMPAIGN
1. PREMATURE CAMPAIGNING
2. PROHIBITED CONTRIBUTIONS
3. LAWFUL AND PROHIBITED
ELECTION PROPAGANDA
4. LIMITATIONS ON EXPENSES
69
5. STATEMENT OF CONTRIBUTION
AND
EXPENSES
Q: What acts are to be considered as
premature campaigning?
A candidate is liable for an election offense
only for acts done during the campaign
period, not before. The act of engaging in an
election campaign or partisan political activity
to “promote the election or defeat of a
particular candidate or candidates” before the
start of the campaign period, is what was
commonly known as premature campaigning.
Because premature campaigning requires the
existence of a “candidate” and because there
is no “candidate” to speak of until the start of
the campaign period, there is no premature
campaigning yet.
(Penera v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 181613,
2009)
H. BOARD OF ELECTION
INSPECTORS AND BOARD OF
CANVASSERS
1. COMPOSITION
2. POWERS
I. REMEDIES AND JURISDICTION IN
ELECTION LAW
1. PETITION NOT TO GIVE DUE
COURSE
TO CANCEL A CERTIFICATE OF
CANDIDACY
2. PETITION FOR DISQUALIFICATION
3. PETITION TO DECLARE FAILURE
OF ELECTIONS
4. PRE-PROCLAMATION
CONTROVERSY
5. ELECTION PROTEST
6. QUO WARRANTO
Q: Who may initiate a petition to deny due course
or petition for disqualification?
COMELEC may MOTU PROPIO or upon
VERIFIED PETITION of any interested party refuse
to give due course or cancel a CoC when:
1. The CoC has been filed to put the election
process in mockery or disrepute
2. Causes confusion among the voters by the
similarity of the names of the registered
candidates
 3. Other circumstances which clearly withdraws his certificate of candidacy,
demonstrate that the candidate has no bona can he be substituted as candidate? If so,
fide intention to run for the office. by whom and why? If not, why not?
(Sec. 69, Omnibus Election Code) If Gabriel withdraws, he may be substituted
by a candidate nominated by his political
Q: Differentiate petition for disqualification and party. Section 77 of the Omnibus Election
petition to deny due course/to cancel certificate Code states: “If after the last day for filing of
of candidacy. certificates of candidacy, an official
candidate of a registered or accredited
Petition for Petition to Deny Due political party dies, withdraws or is
Disqualification Course/to Cancel disqualified for any cause, only a person
Certificate of belonging to, and certified by, the same
Candidacy political party may file a certificate of
A person who is A petition to deny due candidacy to replace the candidate who
disqualified under course or cancel dies, withdrew or was
Section 68 is merely certificate of candidacy disqualified.”
prohibited to continue as is grounded on a
a candidate. statement of a material
representation in the Q: If the action/s instituted should be
Thus, a candidate who is said certificate that is dismissed with finality before the
disqualified under false. election, and Gabriel assumes office after
Section 68 can validly be being proclaimed the winner in the
substituted under The person whose election, can the issue of his candidacy
Section 77 of the OEC certificate is cancelled or and/or citizenship and residence still be
because he/she remains denied due course is not questioned? If so, what action or actions
a candidate until treated as a candidate at
may be filed and where? If not, why not?
all, as if he/she never
disqualified. The question of the candidacy and residence
filed a CoC. A person
whose CoC has been of Gabriel can be questioned in the House of
denied due course or Representatives Electoral Tribunal by filing a
cancelled under Section quo warranto case. Since it is within its
78 cannot be substituted jurisdiction to decide the question of the
because he/she is never qualification of Gabriel, the decision of the
considered a candidate
COMELEC does not constitute res judicata.
Sec. 12, 68, OEC Sec. 78, OEC (Jalandoni v. Crespo, HRET Case No. 01-
Sec. 40, LGC 020, 2003) Once a candidate for member of
the House of Representatives has been
Q: Despite lingering questions about his Filipino proclaimed, the House of Representatives
citizenship and his one-year residency in the Electoral Tribunal acquires jurisdiction over
district, Gabriel filed his certificate of candidacy the lection contest relating to his
for congressman before the deadline set by law. qualifications. (Guerrero v.
His opponent, Vito, hires you as lawyer to contest COMELEC, G.R. No. 137004, 2000)
Gabriel’s candidacy. Before election day, what
action or actions will you institute against Q: Differentiate petition to deny due
Gabriel, and before which court, commission or course/cancel CoC and petition for quo
tribunal will you file such action/s? warranto.
I will file a petition to cancel the certificate of
candidacy of Gabriel in the COMELEC Petition to Deny Due Petition for Quo
because of the false material Course/Cancel Warranto
misrepresentation that he is qualified to run Certificate of
for congressman. (Sec. 78, OEC; Fermin v. Candidacy
COEMELEC, G.R. No. 179695, 2008). Initiated before Initiated after
elections elections
Q: If, during the pendency of such
action/s but before election day, Gabriel

70
 Misrepresentation in (1) Ineligibility; or effect, the COMELEC, without the proper
the Certificate of (2) Disloyalty to the proceedings, cancelled Hans Roger’s certificate of
Candidacy Republic of the candidacy and declared the substitution of Luna
(Sec. 78, OEC) Philippines invalid. (Luna v. COMELEC,
G.R. No. 165983, 2007)
The petition must be
initiated within ten
Q: Is the decision of the COMELEC in a
days after the
proclamation of the proceeding for disqualification final?
election results. A No. A COMELEC resolution declaring a
candidate is candidate disqualified for the said position is
ineligible if he is not yet final if a motion for reconsideration has
disqualified to be been timely filed. At that point, he still remains
elected to office, and qualified and his proclamation thereafter is
he is disqualified if he
valid. As a result, COMELEC's jurisdiction to
lacks any of the
qualifications for contest his citizenship ends, and the HRET's
elective office. (Sec. own jurisdiction begins. (Gonzales v.
253, Omnibus COMELEC,
Election G.R. No. 192856, 2011)
Code)
Q: What is the proper procedure to be
Q: Hans Roger filed his certificate of candidacy resorted to in case of a tie?
but withdrew the same. He was substituted by Joy FOR PRESIDENT OR VICE PRESIDENT: A
Luna but the COMELEC denied due course to her tie among two or more candidates for
certificate on the ground that Hans, being under President or Vice President shall be broken
age, could not have filed a valid certificate of by majority vote of both houses of Congress
candidacy. There was, however, no petition to voting separately (Sec. 4, Art. VII of 1987
deny Hans’ certificate of candidacy. Did the Constitution).
COMELEC act correctly? Why or why not? No.
The COMELEC acted with grave abuse of discretion FOR OTHER POSITIONS: In the case of
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in declaring other positions, the tie shall be broken by the
that Hans Roger, being under age, could not be drawing of lots (Sec. 240, Omnibus Election
considered to have filed a valid certificate of Code;
candidacy and, thus, could not be validly substituted Tugade vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 171063,
by Luna. The COMELEC may not, by itself, without 2007)
the proper proceedings, deny due course to or cancel
a certificate of candidacy filed in due form. (Cipriano Q: When is there failure of elections?
v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 158830, 2004) The question There is a failure to elecT when nobody can
of eligibility or ineligibility of a candidate for non-age be declared as a winner because the will of
is beyond the usual and proper cognizance of the the majority has been defiled and cannot be
COMELEC. (Sanchez v. Del Rosario, G.R. No. L- ascertained.
16878, 1961)
Q: When may failure of elections be
If Hans Roger made a material misrepresentation as declared?
to his date of birth or age in his certificate of 1. Election was suspended before the hour
candidacy, his eligibility may only be impugned fixed by law for the closing of the voting
through a verified petition to deny due course to or (5 P.M.)
cancel such certificate of candidacy under Section 78 2. Election in any polling place was not held
of the Election Code. on the date fixed
3. election RESULTS in a failure to elect
In this case, there was no petition to deny due court (after the voting and during the
to or cancel the certificate of candidacy of Hans preparation and transmission of the
Roger. The COMELEC only declared that Hans election returns or in the custody or
Roger did not file a valid certificate of candidacy. In canvass thereof) (Sison v.

71
 COMELEC, G.R. No. 134096, 1999)
Q: When can elections be annulled?
1. Winner cannot be determined
2. Illegality must affect more than 50% of the
votes cast
3. Good votes cannot be distinguished from
the bad votes (Carlos v. Angeles, G.R.
No.
142907, 2000)
Q: What is a pre-proclamation controversy? Any
question pertaining to or affecting the proceedings of
the Board of Canvassers which may be raised by any
candidate or registered political party, or coalition.
(Sec. 241, Omnibus
Election Code)
Q: What are grounds for pre-proclamation
controversies? The grounds are:
1. Illegal composition or proceedings of the board of
canvassers
2. Irregularities in relation to the preparation,
transmission, receipt, custody, and appreciation
of election returns and certificates of canvass.
3. Canvassed returns are incomplete, contain
material defects.
4. ERs prepared under duress, threats, coercion,
intimidation, obviously manufactured.
5. Substitute or fraudulent returns in controverted
polling places are canvassed, and the results
materially affect the standing of candidates (Sec.
243, Omnibus Election Code)
Q: Are pre-proclamation cases allowed for
President, Vice President, Senator and members
of the House of Representatives? As a general
rule, pre-proclamation cases are NOT allowed in
elections for the President, Vice President, Senator
and members of the House of Representatives.
(Chavez v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 162777, 2004;
Cerbo v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 168411, 2007).
However, they are allowed when there are:
1. Manifest Errors in the ERs or CoCs. These may
be corrected motu propio or upon written
complaint of any interested person.
2. Questions affecting the composition or
proceedings of the board of canvassers,
which may be initiated in the board or directly with
the Commission in accordance with Section 19,
RA 7166.
72
Q: When are pre-proclamation cases deemed
terminated?
1. At the beginning of the term of the office
involved and the rulings of the BOC
concerned are deemed affirmed.
2. This is without prejudice to the filing of a
regular election protest by the aggrieved
party. (Sarmiento v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
105628, 1992)
Q: May the proceedings continue even if
they are deemed terminated?
1. COMELEC determines that the petition is
meritorious and issues an order for the
proceedings to continue
2. The SC issues an order for the
proceedings to continue in a petition for
certiorari. (Sec.
16, R.A. No. 7166)
Q: Differentiate between pre-proclamation
controversy and election contests.
Pre-proclamation controversy involves those
before proclamation of candidate. Jurisdiction
of COMELEC is administrative or quasi-
judicial. (Macabago v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
152163,
2002)
For election contests, they are after
proclamation of candidate, and jurisdiction of
COMELEC is quasi-judicial. (Tecson v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, 2004)
Q: Where do you bring matters regarding
the preparation, transmission, receipt,
custody, and appreciation of election
returns? Matters regarding the preparation,
transmission, receipt, custody, and
appreciation of election returns shall be
brought, in the first instance, before the
boards of canvassers, not the COMELEC.
(Fernandez v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
171821, 2006)
Q: May the COMELEC go beyond the face
of the election return?
As a general rule, COMELEC cannot go
beyond the face of an election return, except
when there is prima facie showing that the ER
is not genuine. Example: when several entries
 have been omitted. (Lee vs. COMELEC, G.R.
No.
157004, 2003)
Q: The 1st Legislative District of South
Cotabato is composed of General Santos
and three municipalities including
Polomolok. During the canvassing
proceedings before the District Board of
Canvassers in connection with the 2007
congressional election, candidate MP
objected to the certificate of canvass for
Polomolok on the ground that it was
obviously manufactured, submitting as
evidence the affidavit of a mayoralty
candidate of Polomolok. The certificate of
canvass for General Santos was likewise
objected to by MP on the basis of the
confirmed report of the local NAMFREL
that 10 election returns from non-existent
precincts were included in the certificate.
MP moved that the certificate of canvass
for General Santos be corrected to
exclude the result from the non-existent
precincts. The District Board
Canvassers denied both objections and
ruled to include the certificate of canvass.
May MP appeal the rulings to the
COMELEC? Explain.
No, MP cannot appeal the rulings to the COMELEC.
Under Sec. 15 of RA 7166, no preproclamation
controversies regarding the appreciation of election
returns and certificates of canvass may be
entertained in elections for members of the House of
Representatives. The canvassing body may correct
manifest errors in the certificate of canvass. His
recourse is to file a regular election protest before the
HRET. (Pimentel v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 178413,
2008)
Q: Who has jurisdiction over contests involving
the composition of the board or proceedings
before it?
Contests involving composition or proceedings of the
Board of canvassers, EXCEPT Congress, may be
initiated in the Board of Canvassers or
COMELEC. (Sec. 15 and 17, R.A. No. 7166)
Q: Who has jurisdiction over contests involving
election returns?
Contests involving election returns should be brought
in the first instance before the board of
canvassers only. (Sec. 17, R.A. NO. 7166)
Q: What is the two-objection rule?
According to the two-objection rule, oral objection and
written objection must be submitted simultaneously to
the Board of Canvassers chairperson before ERs
have been canvassed. There is substantial
compliance even if the oral objection is filed first, then
the written objection with evidence is submitted within
24 hours. (Marabur v. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 169513, 2007)
Q: Who may prosecute a candidate who commits
vote buying on Election Day itself? A candidate
who commits vote buying on Election Day itself shall
be prosecuted by the COMELEC. (Nolasco v.
COMELEC, G.R. No.
122250, 1997)
Q: The COMELEC en banc cannot hear
and decide a case at first instance. What
is the exception?
The exception is when the case involves a
purely administrative matter.
of Q: What are the grounds for a recount?
1. There are material defects in the ERs
2. The ERs are tampered or falsified
3. There are discrepancies in the ERs
Q: What is the rule for recounts in regular
elections?
In regular election contests, the general
averment of fraud or irregularities in the
counting of votes justifies the examination of
the ballots and recounting of votes. This
process of examination is the revision of the
ballots pursuant to Section 6, Rule 20 of the
1993 COMELEC Rules of Procedure. The
protests involved herein assailed the
authenticity of the election returns and the
veracity of the counting of the ballots. In that
regard, the ballots themselves are the best
evidence. The only means to overcome the
presumption of legitimacy of the election
returns is to examine and determine first
whether the ballot boxes have been
substantially preserved in the manner
mandated by law. Hence, the necessity to
issue the order of revision. (Tolentino v.
COMELEC,
G.R. No. 187958, April 7, 2010)
73
 Q: What is the objective of an election Grounds: Grounds:
contest? (1) Election Fraud (1) Disloyalty
The objective of election contests is to (2) Irregularities in (2) Ineligibility
dislodge the winning candidate from office the casting and
and determine the true winner. counting of
votes or in the
Q: What is the jurisdiction of COMELEC preparation of
over election contests? the ER
• ORIGINAL Jurisdiction over contests The protestee may be The respondent may
relating to elections, returns, and unseated and the be unseated, but the
qualifications of all elective: protestant may be petitioner may or may
1. Regional installed into the office not be installed into
2. Provincial vacated. the office vacated.
3. City officials
• APPELLATE Jurisdiction over Q: What are examples of irregularities to
contests involving: constitute an election protest?
1. Elective Municipal officials 1. Misappreciation
decided by trial courts of 2. Violence
GENERAL jurisdiction 3. Intimidation
2. Elective Barangay officials 4. No padlock
decided by trial courts of 5. Padding of votes
LIMITED jurisdiction
(PHIL. Q: When is there abandonment of an election
CONST. art. IX-C, §2(2)) protest?
a. COMELEC may issue extraordinary writs of A protestant who runs for another office is deemed to
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus have abandoned his protest. This is especially true in
(Relampagos v. Cumba, a case where the protestant pending the election
G.R. No. 118861, 1995). protest, ran, won, assumed the post and discharged
the duties as such. (Idulza vs. COMELEC, G.R. No.
Q: What are the types of election contests? 160130, 2004) Q: Abdul ran and won in the May
There are two types of election contests: 1. 2001, 2004 and 2007 elections for Vice-Governor
Election protest; and 2. Quo Warranto. of Tawi-Tawi. After being proclaimed
ViceGovernor in the 2004 elections, his
Q: Differentiate between election protest and quo opponent, Khalil, filed an election protest before
warranto. the Commission on Election. Ruling with finality
on the protest, the COMELEC declared Khalil as
the duly elected ViceGovernor though the
decision was promulgated only in 2007, when
Election Protest Quo Warranto Abdul had fully served his 2004-2007 term and
Contest between a It is a proceeding to was in fact already on his 2007-2010 term as Vice
winning candidate and a unseat an ineligible Governor. Abdul now consults you if the can still
defeated candidate person from office. run for Vice-Governor of Tawi-Tawi in the
forthcoming May 2010 election on the premise
It is filed only by a It may be filed by any
that he could not be considered as having served
candidate who has duly voter
as Vice-Governor from 20042007 because he was
filed a CoC to the same not duly elected to the post, as he assumed office
office and has been merely as a presumptive winner and that
voted for. presumption was later overturned when
COMELEC decided with finality that had lost in
the May 2004 elections. What will be your advice?
I shall advise Abdul that he cannot run for
ViceGovernor of Tawi-tawi in the May 2010
elections. His second term should be counted

74
 as a full term served in contemplation of the through his accusation and prove his complaint.
threeterm limit prescribed by Sec. 8, Art. X of (Kilosbayan v.
the Constitution. Since the election protest COMELEC, G.R No. 128054, 1997)
against him was decided after the term of the
contested office has expired, it had no Under Article IX-A, Section 2(b) of the Constitution,
practical and legal use and value. (Ong v. the COMELEC is empowered to investigate and,
Alegre, G.R. No. 163295, when appropriate, prosecute election offenses.
2006) Under Section 265 of the Omnibus Election Code, the
COMELEC, through its duly authorized legal officers,
Q: Abdul also consults you whether his has the exclusive power to conduct preliminary
political party can validly nominate his investigation of all election offenses punishable under
wife as susbtitute candidate for Vice- the Omnibus Election Code, and to prosecute the
Mayor of Tawi-Tawi in May 2010 elections same. (COMELEC vs. Español,
in case the COMELEC disqualifies him and G.R. No. 149164-73, 2003)
denies due course to or cancels his
certificate of candidacy in view of a false K. ELECTION AUTOMATION LAW
material representation therein. What will
be your advice? Q: What is the difference between a paperbased
I shall advise Abdul that his wife cannot be and direct record election system?
nominated as substitute candidate for
ViceGovernor of Tawi-tawi. The denial of due DIRECT RECORD
course to and cancellation of a certificate of PAPER-BASED ELECTRONIC
candidacy is not one of the cases in which a ELECTION SYSTEM ELECTION
candidate may validly be substituted. A
SYSTEM
cancelled certificate does not give rise to a
A type of automated A type of
valid candidacy. Under Sec. 77 of the
election system that automated election
Omnibus Election Code, a valid certificate of
uses paper ballots, system that uses
candidacy is an indispensable requisite in records and counts electronic
case of substitution of a disqualified votes, tabulates, ballots records
candidate. (Miranda v. Alegre, G.R. No. consolidates/canvass votes by means of
136351, es and transmits a ballot
1999) electronically the display provided
with mechanical or
electro-optical
Q: How should one view the actual ballots in results of the vote components
election contests? count that can be
Ballots are the best and most conclusive evidence in activated by
an election contest where the correctness of the the
number of votes of each candidate is involved. But, voter,
election returns are the best evidence when the processes
ballots are lost, destroyed, tampered with or fake. data by means
(Delos Reyes v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 170070, 2007) of a
computer
J. PROSECUTION OF ELECTION OFFENSES program,
records voting
Q: What is the task of COMELEC in the data and ballot
prosecution of election offenses? images,
The task of the COMELEC as investigator and and transmits
prosecutor, acting upon any election offense voting results
complaint, is not the physical searching and gathering electronically
of proof in support of a complaint for an alleged
commission of an election offense. A complainant Q: Which system must COMELEC use?
has the burden, as it is his responsibility, to follow The Commission on Elections may use either

75
 a paper-based or a direct recording electronic
election system as it may deem appropriate
and practical for the process of voting,
counting of votes and
canvassing/consolidation and transmittal of
results of electoral exercises. (R.A.
No. 9369)
Q: What is a random manual audit?
It is a random manual audit in one precinct per
congressional district randomly chosen by the
COMELEC in each province and city. Any
difference between the automated and
manual count will result in the determination
of root cause and initiate a manual count for
those precincts affected by the computer or
procedural error. (Sec. 29, RA 9369)
Q: What is a VVPAT?
The Voter Verification Paper Audit Trail
(VVPAT) functionality is in the form of a
printed receipt and a touch screen reflecting
the votes in the vote-counting machine. It
ensures that the candidates selected by the
voter in his or her ballot are the candidates
voted upon and recorded by the vote-
counting machine. The voter himself or
herself verifies the accuracy of the vote. In
instances of Random Manual Audit and
election protests, the VVPAT becomes the
best source of raw data for votes
(BagumbayanVNP Movement, Inc. v.
COMELEC, G.R. No.
222731, March 8, 2016)
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
A. PUBLIC CORPORATIONS
1. CONCEPT
(a) Distinguished from government-owned
or controlled corporation
2. CLASSIFICATIONS
(a) Quasi-corporations
(b) Municipal corporations
B. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS
1. ELEMENTS
2. NATURE AND FUNCTIONS
Q: What is a municipal corporation by estoppel?
A municipal corporation by estoppel is a corporation
which is so defectively formed as not to be a de facto
corporation but is considered a corporation in relation
76
to someone who dealt with it and acquiesced in its
exercise of its corporate functions or entered into a
contract with it.
3. REQUISITES FOR CREATION,
CONVERSION, DIVISION, MERGER, OR
DISSOLUTION
C. PRINCIPLES OF LOCAL AUTONOMY D.
POWERS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS
(LGUS)
1. POLICE POWER (GENERAL WELFARE
CLAUSE)
Q: ABC operates an industrial waste processing
plant within Laoag City. Occasionally, whenever
fluid substances are released through a nearby
creek, obnoxious odor is emitted causing
dizziness among residents in Baranggay La Paz.
On complaint of the Punong Baranggay, the City
Mayor wrote ABC demanding that it abate the
nuisance. This was ignored. An invitation to
attend a hearing called by the Sangguniang
Panglungsod was also declined by the President
of ABC. The city government thereupon issued a
cease and desist order to stop operations of the
plant, prompting ABC to file a petition for
injunction before the RTC, arguing that the city
government did not have any power to abate the
alleged nuisance. Decide with reasons. The city
government has no power to stop the operations of
the plant. Since its operations is not a nuisance per
se, the city government cannot abate it
extrajudicially. A suit must be first filed in court. (AC
Enterprises, Inc. v. Frabelle Properties Corporation,
G.R. No.
166744, 2006)
Q: Can a Barangay Assembly exercise any police
power?
No, the Barangay Assembly cannot exercise any
police power. It can only recommend to the
Sangguniang Barangay the adoption of measures for
the welfare of the barangay and decide on the
adoption of an initiative (Republic Act No, 7160, Sec.
398).
2. EMINENT DOMAIN
Q: Is a valid and definite offer to buy a
property a prerequisite to expropriation
initiated by a local government? Yes.
Under Section 19 of the Local Government
Code of 1991, a valid and definite offer to buy
 a property is a pre-requirement to
expropriation initiated by a local government
(Republic Act No, 7160, Sec. 19).
Q: Can reclassification of land by a local
government unit be done through a
resolution?
No. Under the Section 2 of the Local
Government Code, the enactment of an
ordinance is required for land reclassification
by an LGU (Republic Act No, 7160, Sec. 2).
Q: The Sangguniang Bayan of the
Municipality of Santa, Ilocos Sur passed
Resolution No. 1 authorizing its Mayor to
initiate a petition for the expropriation of a
lot owned by Christina as site for its
municipal sports center. This was
approved by the Mayor. However, the
Sangguniang
Panlalawigan of Ilocos Sur disapproved
the Resolution as there might still be other
available lots in Santa for a sports center.
Nonetheless, the Municipality of Santa,
through its Mayor, filed a complaint for
eminent domain. Christina opposed this
on the following grounds: 1) the
Municipality of Santa has no power to
expropriate; 2) Resolution No. 1 has been
voided since the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan disapproved it for being
arbitrary; and 3) the Municipality of Santa
has other and better lots for that purpose.
1. The Municipality of Santa has the
power to expropriate. Section 19 of the LGC
grants all local government units the power of
eminent domain. However, Section 19 of the
LGC required an ordinance, not a resolution,
for the exercise of the power of eminent
domain. (Heirs of Saguitan v. City of
Mandaluyong, G.R. No.
135087, 2000)
2. The disapproval of Resolution No. 1
by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Ilocos
Sur on the ground that there may be other lots
available in Santa is invalid, because it can
disapprove Resolution No. 1 solely on the
ground that it is beyond the power of the
Sangguniang Bayan of
Santa. (Moday v. CA, G.R. No. 107916, 1997)
77
3. If there are other lots that are better
and more appropriate for the municipal sports
center, the lot owned by Christina should not
be expropriated. Its choice is arbitrary.
(Municipality
of Meycauayan v. IAC, G.R. No. 72126, 1988)
3. TAXING POWER
4. CLOSURE AND OPENING OF ROADS
5. LEGISLATIVE POWER
(a) Requisites for valid ordinance
Q: The Sangguniang Panglungsod of Pasay City
passed an ordinance requiring all disco pub
owners to have all their hospitality girls tested for
AIDS virus. Both disco pub owners and the
hospitality girls assailed the validity of the
ordinance for being violative of their
constitutional rights to privacy and to freely
choose a calling or business. Is the ordinance
valid? Explain.
The ordinance is a valid exercise of police power. The
right to privacy yields to certain paramount rights of
the public and defers to the exercise of police power.
The ordinance is not prohibiting the disco pub owners
and the hospitality girls from pursuing their calling or
business but merely regulating it. (Social Justice
Society v. Dangerous Drugs Board, G.R. No. 157870,
2008). The ordinance is a valid exercise of police
power, because its purpose is to safeguard public
health. (Beltran v. Secretary of
Health, G.R. No. 133640, 2005)
Q: The Municipality of Bulalakaw of Leyte passed
an ordinance authorizing the expropriation of two
parcels of land situated in the poblacion as the
site of a freedom park, and appropriating the
funds needed therefor. Upon review, the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Leyte disapproved
the ordinance because the municipality has an
existing freedom park which, though smaller in
size, is still suitable for the purpose, and to
pursue expropriation would be needless
expenditure of the people’s money. Is the
disapproval of the ordinance correct?
Explain.
The disapproval of the ordinance is not correct.
Under Section 56 (c) of the LGC, the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Leyte can declare the
ordinance invalid only if it is beyond the power of the
Sangguniang Bayan of Bulalakaw. In the instant
case, the ordinance is well within the power of the
Sangguninag Bayan. The disapproval of the
ordinance by the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Leyte was
outside of its authority having been done on a
matter pertaining to the wisdom of the
ordinance.
(Moday v. CA, G.R. No. 107916, 1997)
Q: Can a governors or mayors veto
ordinance and resolution? Can the
sanggunian override the veto?
Yes. The local chief executive, except the
punong barangay, shall have the power to
veto any ordinance of the sanggunian
panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, or
sanggunian bayan on the ground that it is
ultra vires or prejudicial to the public welfare,
stating his reasons therefor in writing. The
local chief executive may veto an ordinance
or resolution only once. The sanggunian may
override the veto of the local chief executive
concerned by 2/3 vote of all its members,
thereby making the ordinance effective even
without the approval of the local chief
executive concerned. (Sec. 55, 1991 Local
Government Code)
Q: A municipality passed an ordinance
penalizing any person or entity engaged in
the business of selling tickets to movies
or other public exhibitions, games or
performances which would charge
children between 7 and 12 years old the
full price of admission tickets instead of
only one-half of the amount thereof. Is the
ordinance a valid exercise of legislative
power by the municipality? Why?
The ordinance is void because it is
unreasonable. It deprives the sellers of the
tickets of their property without due process.
A ticket is a property right and may be sold for
such price as the owner of it can obtain. There
is nothing malicious in changing children the
same price as adults. (Balacuit v. CFI of
Agusan del
Norte, G.R. No. L-38429, 1988)
Q: Can the Liga ng mga Barangay exercise
legislative powers?
The Liga ng mga Barangay cannot exercise
legislative powers. It is not a local government
unit and its primary purpose is to determine
representation of the liga in the sanggunians,
78
to ventilate, articulate and crystallize issues
affecting barangay government
administration, and to secure solutions for
them through proper and legal means. (Onon
v. Fernandez, G.R. No.
139813, 2001)
(b) Local initiative and referendum
Q: MADAKO is a municipality composed of 80
barangays, 30 in the west of Madako River and 50
in the east thereof. The 30 western barangays
feeling left out of economic initiatives wish to
constitute themselves into a new and separate
town to be called
Masigla.
1) Granting that Masigla’s proponents
succeed to secure a law in their favor, would a
plebiscite be necessary or not? If it is necessary,
who should vote or participate in the plebiscite?
Discuss.
2) Suppose that one year after Masigla was
constituted as a municipality, the law creating it
is voided because of defects. Would that
invalidate the acts of the municipality and/or its
municipal officers? Explain.
1. A plebiscite is necessary, because this is
required for the creation of a new municipality.
(PHIL. CONST., art. X, § 10) The voters of both Madako
and Masigla should participate in the plebiscite,
because both are directly affected by the creation of
Masigla. The territory of Madako will be reduced. (Tan
v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 103328, 1992)
2. Although the municipality cannot be
considered as a de facto corporation, because there
is no valid law under which it was created, the acts of
the municipality and of its officers will not be
invalidated, because the existence of the law creating
it is an operative fact before it was declared
unconstitutional. Hence, the previous acts of the
municipality and its officers should be given effect as
a matter of fairness and justice.
(Municipality of Malabang v. Benito, G.R. No. L-
28113, 1969)
6. CORPORATE POWERS
(a) To sue and be sued
Q: The Municipality of Pinatukdao is sued for
damages arising from injuries sustained by a
pedestrian who was hit by a glass pane that fell
from a dilapidated window frame of the municipal
hall. The municipality files a motion to dismiss
the complaint, invoking state immunity from suit.
Resolve the motion with reasons.
The motion to dismiss should be denied. Under
Section 24 of the LGC and Article 2189 of the New
Civil Code, the Municipality of Pinatukdao is liable for
damages arising from injuries to persons by reason
of negligence of local government units on the
defective condition of the municipal hall, which is
under their control and supervision (Republic Act No.
7160, § 24; Republic Act No 386, art. 2189).
Q: An aggrieved resident of the City of
Manila filed mandamus proceedings
against the city mayor and the city
engineer to compel these officials to
remove the market stalls from certain city
streets which they had designed as a flea
market. Portions of the said city streets
were leased or licensed by the respondent
officials to market stallholders by virtue of
a city ordinance. Decide the dispute.
The petition should be granted. Since public
streets are properties for public use and are
outside the commerce of man, the City Mayor
and the City Engineer cannot lease or license
portions of the city streets to market
stallholders.
(Macasiano v. Diokno, G.R. No. 97764, 1992)
(b) To acquire and sell property
(c) To enter into contracts
i. Requisites
ii. Ultra vires contracts
7. LIABILITY OF LGUS
8. SETTLEMENT OF BOUNDARY
DISPUTES
Q: May boundary disputed between and
among municipalities in the same
province be filed immediately with the
Regional Trial Court?
No. According to Section 118 of the Local
Government Code, boundary disputes should
be referred for settlement to the sangguniang
panlalawigan. (Municipality of Sta. Fe v.
Municpality of Artao, G.R. No. 140474, 2007)
Q: There was a boundary dispute between
a municipality and an independent
component city, both located the same
province. How should the two LGUs settle
their boundary dispute?
79
Since there is no law providing for the
jurisdiction of any court or quasi-judicial body
over the settlement of a boundary dispute
between a municipality and a component city,
the Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction to
adjudicate it. Under Section 19 (6) of the
Judiciary Reorganization Act, the RTC has
exclusive original jurisdiction in all cases not
within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court or
quasi-judicial agency. (Municipality of
Kananga v. Madrona, G.R. No. 141375,
2003)
9. SUCCESSION OF ELECTIVE OFFICIALS
Q: On August 8, 2008, the Governor of Bohol dies
and Vice-Governor Cesar succeeded him by
operation of law. Accordingly, Benito, the highest
ranking member of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan was elevated to the position of
Vice-Governor. By the elevation of Benito to the
office of ViceGovernor, a vacancy in the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan was created. How
should the vacancy be filled?
In accordance with Section 45 of the LGC, the
vacancy should be filled by appointment by the
President of the nominee of the political party of
Benito since his elevation to the position of
ViceGovernor created the last vacancy in the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan. If Benito does not belong
to any political party, a qualified person
recommended by the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan should be appointed. (Navarro v.
CA, G.R. No. 121087, 1999)
10. DISCIPLINE OF LOCAL OFFICIALS
(a) Elective officials
i. Grounds
ii. Jurisdiction
iii. Preventive suspension iv. Removal
v. Administrative appeal
vi. Doctrine of condonation
Q: Can public officials be still held
administratively liable for a misconduct
commited during a prior term? Yes. Public office is
a public trust and as mandated under the 1987
Constitution, it is plainly inconsistent with the idea that
an elective local official's administrative liability for a
misconduct committed during a prior term can be
wiped off by the fact that he was elected to a second
term of office, or even another elective post. Election
is not a mode of condoning an administrative offense,
and there is simply no constitutional or statutory basis
in our jurisdiction to support the notion that an official
elected for a different term is fully absolved of any
administrative liability arising from an offense done
during a prior term.
However, the doctrine of condonation should be, as a
general rule, recognized as good law prior to its
abandonment. (Carpio-Morales v. CA, G.R. Nos.
217126-27, 2015)
11. RECALL
Q: Governor Diy was serving his third term
when he lost his governorship in a recall
election.
1.) Who shall succeed Governor Diy
in his office as Governor?
2.) Can Governor Diy run again as
governor in the next election?
3.) Can Governor Diy refuse to run in
the recall election and instead resign from
his position as governor?
1. The candidate who received the highest
number of votes in the recall will succeed
Governor Diy. (Local Government Code,
§72)
2. Governor Diy can run again as governor.
He did not fully serve his third term,
because he lost in the recall election. His
third term should not be included in
computing the three-term limit.
(Lonzanida v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
135150, 1999)
3. Governor Diy cannot refuse to run in the
recall election. He is automatically
considered as a duly registered
candidate. (Local Government Code,
§71) He is not allowed to resign. (Local
Government Code,
§73)
12. TERM LIMITS
Q: What is the term limit for all local
elective officials?
No local elective official may serve for more
than three consecutive terms (Local
Government Code, §43).
Q: Manuel was elected Mayor of
Municpality of Tuba in the elections of
80
1992, 1995 and 1998. He fully served his
first two terms, and during his third term,
the municipality was converted into the
component City of Tuba. The said charter
provided for a hold-over and so without
interregnum, Manuel went on to serve as
the Mayor of Tuba. In the 2001 elections,
Manuel filed his certificate of candidacy
for City Mayor. He disclosed, though, that
he had already served for three
consecutive terms as elected Mayor when
Tuba was still a municipality. He also
stated in his CoC that he is running for the
position of Mayor for the first time now
that Tuba is a city. Reyes, an adversary,
ran against Manuel and petitioned that he
be disqualified because he had already
served for three consecutive terms as
Mayor. The petition was not timely acted
upon, and Manuel was proclaimed the
winner with 20,000 votes over the 10,000
votes received by Reyes as the only other
candidate. It was only after Manuel took
his oath and assumed office that
COMELEC ruled that he was disqualified
for having ran and served for three
consecutive terms.
1.) What is a possible argument to prevent
his disqualification and removal?
2.) Is Manuel eligible to run as Mayor of the
newly created City of Tuba immediately after
having served for three consecutive terms as
Mayor of Municipality of Tuba?
3.) Assuming Manuel is ineligible, should
Reyes be declared the winner?
1. One possible argument is that when the
municipality was converted into a city, it became
a different juridical personality. Hence, when he
ran for city mayor, he was not running for the
same office as that of municipal mayor.
2. Manuel is not eligible to run as mayor of the City
of Tuba. While it acquired a new corporate
existence separate and distinct from that of the
municipality, this does not mean that for the
purpose of applying the constitutional provision
on term limitations, the office of the municipal
mayor should be considered as different from the
office of the city mayor. The framers of the
Constitution intended to avoid the evil of a single
person accumulating excessive power over a
 particular territorial jurisdiction as a result of a citizens
prolonged stay in the office. To allow Manuel to 2. All agreements with the qualified private
vie for the position of city Mayor after having sector may be for a period not
served for three consecutive terms as municipal exceeding, 25 years, renewable for not
mayor will defeat the intent of the framers of the more than 25 years.
Constitution. (Latasa v. COMELEC, G.R. No. EXCLUDING: Water rights, water
154829, supply, fisheries, industrial uses
2003) other than the development of water
power wherein the beneficial use
3. Yes, Reyes should be considered the winner. may be the measure and limit of the
When there are participants who turn out to be grant.
ineligible, their victory is voided and the laurel is 3. The use and enjoyment of the marine
awarded to the next in rank who does not wealth of the archipelagic waters,
possess any of the disqualifications nor lacks any territorial sea and exclusive economic
of the qualifications set in the rules to be eligible zones shall be reserved for Filipino
as candidates. The electorate’s awareness of the Citizens.
candidate’s disqualification is not a prerequisite 4. Utilization of natural resources in rivers,
for the disqualification to attach lakes, bays and lagoons may be allowed
to the candidate. The very existence of a on a “small-scale” to Filipino citizens or
disqualifying circumstance makes the cooperatives—with priority for
candidate ineligible. Knowledge by the subsistence fishermen and fish workers
electorate of a candidate’s (by law) (PHIL. CONST. art. 12, §2).
disqualification is not necessary before a
qualified candidate who placed second to B. NATIONALIST AND CITIZENSHIP
a disqualified one can be proclaimed as REQUIREMENT PROVISIONS
the winner. The secondplacer in the vote
count is actually the firstplacer among the Q: What are the citizenship requirements under
qualified candidates. (Maquiling v. the 1987 Constitution?
COMELEC, G.R. NO. 195649, ACTIVITY CITIZENSHIP AND/OR EQUITY
2013) REQUIREMENTS
Exploitation • Filipino citizens
of • Domestic Corporations (60%
NATIONAL ECONOMY AND natur Filipino owned)
PATRIMONY al resources
Operation of • Filipino citizens
A. REGALIAN DOCTRINE Public • Domestic Corporations (60%
Utilities Filipino owned)
Q: What are the limits on the Jura Regalia Acquisition • Filipino citizens
of the State? of alienable • Domestic Corporations (60%
Only agricultural lands of the public domain lands of the Filipino owned)
may be alienated. public • Former natural-born citizens of
1. The exploration, development and domain PHL (as transferees with
utilization of all natural resources shall certain legal restrictions)
be under the full control and supervision • Alien heirs (as transferees in
of the State through: case of intestate succession)
a. Directly undertaking such activities Practice • Filipino citizens only (natural
b. Or entering into co-production, joint of persons)
venture or production-sharing ALL • Congress may, by law,
arrangements with Filipino citizen or professions otherwise prescribe
Corporation or association at least
Mass media • Filipino citizens
60% of whose capital is owned by
• Domestic Corporations (100%
such
Filipino owned)

81
Advertising • Filipino citizens
• Domestic Corporations (70%
Filipino owned)
Educational • Filipino citizens
Institution • Domestic Corporations (60%
Filipino owned)
• EXCEPTION: Schools
established by religious groups
and mission boards.
• Congress may, by law, increase
requirements for ALL
educational institutions
Other • Congress may, by law, reserve
economic to Filipino citizens or to
activities Domestic Corporations (60%
Filipino owned or higher) certain
investment areas.
C. EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT AND
UTILIZATION OF NATURAL
RESOURCES D. FRANCHISES,
AUTHORITY AND CERTIFICATES FOR
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Q: What does the term “capital” under the
Constitution mean with respect to equity
participation?
For purposes of determining compliance with
the constitutional or statutory ownership, the
required percentage of Filipino ownership
shall be applied to BOTH (a) the total number
of outstanding shares of stock entitled to vote
in the election of directors; AND (b) the total
number of outstanding shares of stock,
whether or not entitled to vote. (Roy III v.
Herbosa, G.R.
No. 207246, 2017)
Q: What tests are used to determine
Nationality of a Corporation?
1. Voting Control Test – the ownership
threshold must be complied by the
voting shares.
2. Beneficial Ownership Test – the
ownership threshold must also apply
to the outstanding capital. (Gamboa
v.
Teves, G.R. No. 176579, 2011)
Q: What is the rule on large-scale
exploration of mineral resources?
82
1. The President may enter into agreements
with foreign owned corporations involving
technical or financial assistance for
largescale exploration etc. of minerals,
petroleum, and other mineral oils. These
agreements should be in accordance with
the general terms and conditions
provided by law.
2. They should be based on the real
contributions to economic growth and
general welfare of the country.
3. In the agreements, the State should
promote the development and use of
local scientific and technical resources.
4. The President should notify Congress of
every contract under this provision within
30 days from its execution.
5. Management and service contracts are
not allowed under this rule (PHIL. CONST.
art. 12, §2(4); La Bugal- B’laan v. DENR,
G.R. No.
127882, 2004)
Q: Can the state enter into FTAA with
foreign corporations?
The State may enter into FTAAs (Financial
and Technical Assistance Agreement) with
foreign owned corporations provided that
such service contracts may be entered into
only with respect to minerals, petroleum and
other mineral oils. Also, the grant of such
service contracts must be subject to the
following safeguards:
1. In accordance with a general law
2. President must be the signatory
for the government
3. President must report the
executed agreement to Congress
within 30 days. (La Bugal B’laan
v. DENR, G.R. No.
12788, 2005)
Q: What is the difference between “ownership of
public utility” and “operation of public utility”?
Operation Ownership
of a Public Utility of Public Utility
• May exist • Relation in law by independently and
virtue of which a thing separately from the
pertaining to one ownership of the person is
completely facilities subjected to his will in
• One can own said everything not facilities 1. They can only hold 1. Can lease up to
without prohibited by law or operating them alienable lands of 500 hectares
as the concurrence with a public utility, or the the public domain 2. Can ACQUIRE not
rights of another conversely, one • The exercise BY LEASE. more than 12
of the may operate a rights • Period: Cannot hectares by
encompassed in public utility without ownership exceed 25 years, purchase,
is limited by owning the facilities law so that renewable for not homestead
a property used to serve the cannot be operated more than 25 years or grant
public. and used to serve the public as • Area: Lease
a public utility unless the cannot exceed
operator has a franchise. 1,000 hectares.
(Tatad v. Garcia, Jr., G.R. No. 114222, 1995) 2. They may NOT
acquire PUBLIC
Q: Can administrative agencies be granted the LAND, albeit
power to issue franchise? alienable
Yes. Administrative agencies may be empowered by 3. BUT they may
the Legislature by means of a law to grant franchises acquire PRIVATE
or similar authorizations. An example would be the LAND.
law granting the Toll Regulatory Board (TRB) to grant
a franchise for toll road projects. While the TRB is NOTE: A corporation
vested by law with the power to extend the sole is treated like
administrative franchise or authority that it granted, it other private
cannot do so for an accumulated period exceeding 50 corporations for the
years. Otherwise, it would violate the proscription purpose of acquiring
under Article XII, Section public lands.
11 of the 1987 Constitution, which provides that no
public utility franchise shall be for a longer period than F. PRACTICE OF PROFESSIONS G.
50 years. ORGANIZATION AND REGULATION
(Francisco v. TRB, G.R. No. 166910, 2010) OF CORPORATIONS, PRIVATE AND
PUBLIC H. MONOPOLIES,
E. ACQUISITION, OWNERSHIP AND RESTRAINT OF TRADE AND UNFAIR
TRANSFER OF PUBLIC AND COMPETITION
PRIVATE LANDS

Q: What is the rule on acquisition,

ownership and transfer of public and
private Lands? PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL
LAW
PRIVATE FILIPINO CITIZENS/
CORPORATIONS QUALIFIED
INDIVIDUALS A. CONCEPTS

1. OBLIGATIONS ERGA OMNES

Q: What are obligations erga omnes?

Obligations owed by states towards the community of
states as a whole as compared to those arising vis-à-
vis another state in the field of diplomatic protection.
In view of the importance of the rights involved, all
states can be held to have a legal interest in their
protection.

2. JUS COGENS

83

Q: What is Jus Cogens?
Jus cogens, or peremptory norm of international law,
means “a norm accepted and recognized by the
international community of States as a whole as a
norm from which no derogation is permitted and
which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of
general international law having the same character.
ELEMENTS:
1. A norm accepted and recognized by
2. The international community of states as a
whole
3. No derogation is permitted
4. Which can only be modified by a subsequent
norm having the same character. (Vienna
Convention on
Treaties, art. 53)
3. CONCEPT OF EXT AEQUO ET BONO
Q: Distinguish between Equity and Ex Aequo et
Bono.
Equity – when accepted, is an instrument whereby
conventional or customary law may be supplemented
or modified in order to achieve justice. Procedurally,
it means a mandate given to a judge to exercise
discretion in order to achieve a determination that is
more equitable and fair.
Ex Aequo Et Bono – pertains to the power of the
International Court of Justice to decide a case
equitably outside the rules of law at the instance of
the parties to the case.
The power to apply principles of equity in no way
restricts the power of the ICJ to decide cases based
on Ex Aequo et Bono should the parties so agree that
the controversy is to be decided on the said principle.
B. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND NATIONAL LAW
Q: What happens when there is a conflict
between International law and Domestic
law? It depends on whether the case goes to
a domestic court or to an international
tribunal.
International Rule – It is an established
principle that, before an international tribunal,
a state may not plead its own law as an
84
excuse for failure to comply with international
law. A state which has contracted valid
international obligations is bound to make in
its legislation such modifications as may be
necessary to ensure the fulfillment of the
obligations undertaken. (Deutsche Bank AG
Manila v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue,
G.R. No. 188550, Aug. 19, 2013 citing
Tanada v. Angara, 388 Phil. 546, 592 (1997)).
Municipal Rule – When it comes before a
domestic court, domestic courts are bound to
apply the local law.
Treaty v. Constitution – when the
constitutional violation is manifest and
concerns a rule of internal law of
fundamental importance, state may
deviate
from treaty obligation
Treaty v. domestic legislation –when
the two instruments relate to the same
subject, try to give effect to both; if
inconsistent, the later in date will control,
provided that the treaty stipulation is self
executing. But this rule only applies in
the domestic sphere. A treaty, even if
contrary to a later statute, is binding in
international law. (Bernas, Public
International Law, 2009)
Q: Did EDCA violate the Constitutional
provision on Senate concurrence on
treaties?
No. EDCA is not a treaty; Senate concurrence
is not required. EDCA remained within the
parameters set by the two treaties (the MDT
and the VFA). Mere adjustments in detail to
implement the MDT and the VFA can be in the
form of executive agreements. The “activities”
referred to in the MDT are meant to be
specified and identified in further agreements.
EDCA is an example of such agreement. The
President’s choice to enter into EDCA by way
of executive agreement is in view of the vast
constitutional powers and prerogatives
granted to him in the field of foreign affairs.
(Saguisag v. Executive Secretary, G.R. Nos.
212426/212444, 2016)
C. SOURCES OF OBLIGATION
IN INTERNATIONAL LAW
Q: What are the sources of international law?
1. Treaties or International Conventions
2. Custom or Customary international law
3. General principles of law recognized by civilized
nations
4. As subsidiary means of determining
International law:
(a) Judicial decisions
(b) Teachings of the most highly qualified
writers and publicists (ICJ
Statute, art. 38(1))
Q: What is a treaty?
An international agreement concluded between
States in written form and governed by international
law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in
two or more related instruments and whatever its
particular designation (Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties, art. 2).
Q: What is a custom under international law? It is
an evidence of a general practice accepted as law.
ELEMENTS:
1. Duration of practice
2. Uniformity, consistency of practice
3. Generality (majority of specially affected
States)
4. Opinion juris (objective and subjective)
Q: The legal yardstick in determining whether
usage has become customary international law is
expressed in the maxim “opinion jurissve
necessitates” or “opinion juris” for short. What
does this maxim mean?
It means that as an element in the formation of
customary norm in international law, it is required that
states in their conduct amounting to general practice,
must act out a sense of legal duty and not only by the
motivation of courtesy, convenience or tradition.
Not only must acts amount to a settled practice, but
they must also be such or be carried out in such a
way, as to be evidence of a belief that this practice is
rendered obligatory by the existence of a rule of law
requiring it (International Court of Justice in the North
Sea Continental Shelf Cases, cited in Mijares v.
Ranada, G.R. No. 139325, 2005)
85
D. SUBJECTS
1. STATES
2. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
3. INDIVIDUALS
Q: Is there a right to unilateral secession
or external self-determination under
International Law?
General Rule: The people's right to
selfdetermination should not be understood
as extending to a unilateral right of secession.
Exception: International law, at best, only
recognizes the right to external
selfdetermination in situations of (1) former
colonies; (2) where a people is oppressed, as
for example under foreign military occupation;
or (3) where a definable group is denied
meaningful access to government to pursue
their political, economic, social and cultural
development (North Cotabato v. GRP citing In
reference to the Secession of Quebec, G.R.
No. 183591,
2008)
E. BASIC PRINCIPLES IN
DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR LAW
Q: Differentiate diplomats and consuls.
DIPLOMATS CONSULS
Political relations Administrative and
of the state economic issues of
the state
NOTE:
a. In the Philippines, immunity is claimed by
request of the foreign state for
endorsement by the Department of
Foreign Affairs.
b. The determination by the department is
considered a political question that is
conclusive upon Philippine Courts.
c. Diplomatic immunity ceases to be
enjoyed at the moment diplomat LEAVES
the country or on EXPIRY of a reasonable
period in which to do so.
DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR IMMUNITY
1. Personal Inviolability
2. Immunity of premises
3. Right of protection
 4. Immunity from local jurisdiction on the GR: A diplomatic agent GR: Members of the
basis of international custom shall enjoy immunity from consular post shall enjoy
5. Exemption from taxes and personal the jurisdiction of the immunity from the
receiving state except in jurisdiction of the receiving
services
case of: state in respect of acts
6. Inviolability of means of communication performed in the
7. Immunity from search of bag (Vienna 1. REAL ACTION relating EXERCISE OF
Convention on Diplomatic Relations, to private immovable CONSULAR FUNCTION
1961) property except in case of:
EXCEPTION: He
DIPLOMATIC CONSULAR IMMUNITY holds it on behalf of 1. Civil action arising out of
IMMUNITY (Vienna (Vienna Convention on the sending state for a contract concluded by
Convention on Consular Relations) the purpose of the a person who DID NOT
Diplomatic Relations) mission CONTRACT
expressly or impliedly as
“Premises of the mission” “Consular premises” -
Include the BUILDINGS or an AGENT of the
- Include the BUILDINGS
or parts of buildings and parts of buildings and the 2. Actions for sending state
the LAND irrespective of LAND irrespective of SUCCESSION 2. Civil action by a third
ownership used exclusively 3. Professional or party for damage
ownership used for the
for the purposes of consular commercial arising from an
purpose of the mission
post. activity ACCIDENT in the
including the
receiving state caused
RESIDENCE of the head by a
of mission. VEHICLE, VESSEL or
The agents of The agents of the receiving AIRCRAFT
the receiving state may NOT ENTER the A diplomatic agent is NOT Members of the consular
state may premises except with obliged to give evidence post MAY be called upon to
NOT ENTER the CONSENT of the head of as a attend as
premises except with the consular post. WITNESS. WITNESSES.
CONSENT of the head of
the mission. The consent may be
If a consular officer should
ASSUMED in case of fire or
decline to do so, no
other disaster requiring
coercive measure /
prompt protective action.
penalty may be applied.
The diplomatic bag shall The consular bag shall not
not be opened or be opened or detained.
detained. The Agreement between the Asian
Authorities may request that Development Bank and the Philippines only
the bag be opened in their provides officers and staff of the bank
presence immunity from legal process with respect to
by an acts performed by them in their official
AUTHORIZED capacity except when the Bank waives the
representative of immunity. Slander cannot be considered as
the sending state if
falling within the purview of the immunity
they have
SERIOUS REASON to granted since it is not an act performed in an
believe that the bag official capacity. (Liang v. People of the
contains objects other than Philippines, G.R. No. 125865, 2001)
articles, documents,
correspondence or articles. (DEL CASTILLO) The question whether the
Philippine government should espouse
claims of its nationals against a foreign
government is a foreign relations matter, the
authority for which is demonstrably committed
by our Constitution not to the courts but to the
political branches. In the
Comfort Women Case, the Executive

86
 Department has decided that it is to the best
interest of the country to waive all claims of its
nationals for reparations against Japan in the
Treaty of Peace of 1951. The wisdom of such
decision is not for the courts to question, thus,
said determination by the Executive
Department cannot be questioned through a
petition for certiorari. (Vinuya v. ROMULO
(G.R. No.
162230, 2010).
Q: What is the restrictive rule of State
Immunity?
The traditional rule of State immunity which
exempts a State from being sued in the courts
of another State without the former's consent
or waiver has evolved into a restrictive
doctrine which distinguishes sovereign and
governmental acts (jure imperii) from private,
commercial and proprietary acts (jure
gestionis). Under the restrictive rule of State
immunity, State immunity extends only to acts
jure imperii. The restrictive application of
State immunity is proper only when the
proceedings arise out of commercial
transactions of the foreign sovereign, its
commercial activities or economic affairs.
(Arigo v. Swift, G.R. No. 206510 (2014), citing
USA v. Ruiz, 221 Phil. 179 (1985)).
F. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF TREATY LAW
Q: May a treaty violate international law? If your
answer is in the affirmative, explain when such
may happen. If your answer is in the negative,
explain why.
Yes, a treaty may violate international law if it conflicts
with a peremptory norm or jus cogens of international
law. A treaty is void, if at the time of its conclusion, it
conflicts with jus cogens norm. If a new peremptory
norm of general international law emerges, any
existing treaty which is in conflict with that norm
becomes void and is terminated (Vienna Convention
on the Law on Treaties, art. 53.).
Q: Differentiate pacta sunt servanda and rebus
sic stantibus.
Pacta sunt servanda means every treaty is binding
upon the parties to it and must be performed by them
in good faith. (Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties, art. 26) A state can avoid performance if the
treaty collides with its Constitution, but it cannot
87
escape liability that it may incur as a result of such
nonperformance.
Rebus sic stantibus means a fundamental change of
circumstances is not a ground for a treaty to be
suspended or terminated. Except when:
1. The circumstance is the essential basis of
consent, or
2. The obligation is transformed radically that it
becomes burdensome or unreasonable.
Exceptions to the Exceptions:
1. If the treaty establishes a boundary;
2. If the fundamental change is the result of a
breach by the party invoking it either of an
obligation under the treaty or of any other
international obligation owed to any other party to
the treaty. (Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties, art. 62)
In sum, rebus sic stantibus is an exception to the rule
of pacta sunt servanda.
G. NATIONALITY AND
STATELESNESS
Q: Who is a Refugee?
A refugee is one who, owing to a well-founded
fear of being persecuted for reason of race,
religion, nationality, membership of a
particular social group or political opinion, is
outside the country of his nationality, and is
unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling
to avail himself of the protection of that
country. (1951 Convention
Relating to the Status of Refugees, art. 1)
A person who has left their country of origin
and formally applied for asylum in another
country but whose application has not yet
been concluded.
Q: Who is an Internally displaced person?
An internally displaced person (IDP) is a
person who has been forced or obliged to flee
or to leave his or her home or place of habitual
residence, in particular as a result of, or in
order to avoid the effects of armed conflict,
situations of generalized violence, violations
of human rights or natural or human-made
disasters, and who have not crossed an
internationally recognized State border. (UN
Guiding Principles
 on Internal Displacement, par. 2)
Q: Who is a stateless person?
A stateless person is a person who is not
considered as a national by any State under
the operation of its law. (1954 Convention
Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons,
art. 1).
Q: What is the Philippine rule on
foundlings? A child, whose parents are both
unknown, shall have the nationality of the
country of his or her birth. A foundling is, until
the contrary is proved, presumed to have
been born on the territory of the State in which
he or she was found. (PoeLlamanzares v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697, 2016, citing
1961 Convention on the Reduction of
Statelessness, art. 2; 1930 Hague
Convention on Certain Questions Relating to
the Conflict of
Nationality Laws, art. 14)
This presumption in favor of foundlings is a
generally accepted principle of international
law.
(Poe-Llamanzares v. COMELEC, supra).
While the Philippines is not a party to the 1961
Convention on the Reduction of
Statelessness (UNCRS) and the 1930 Hague
Convention, it is a signatory to the Universal
Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR). Article
2 of the UNCRS and Article 14 of the Hague
Convention merely give effect to Article 15(1)
of the UDHR. (PoeLlamanzares v.
COMELEC, supra).
H. DOCTRINE OF STATE
RESPONSIBILITY
Q: What is the principle of non-refoulement? No
Contracting State shall expel or return a refugee in
any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories
where his life or freedom would be threatened on
account of his race, religion, nationality, membership
of a particular social group or political opinion. (1951
Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, art.
33)
I. JURISDICTION OF STATES
1. TERRITORIALITY PRINCIPLE
88
2. NATIONALITY PRINCIPLE AND
STATELESSNESS
3. PROTECTIVE PRINCIPLE
4. UNIVERSALITY PRINCIPLE
5. PASSIVE PERSONALITY PRINCIPLE
J. TREATMENT OF ALIENS
1. EXTRADITION
(a) Fundamental principles
Q: What is extradition and what are the general
principles governing extradition? Extradition is the
surrender of an individual by the state within whose
territory he is found to the state under whose laws he
is alleged to have committed a crime or to have been
convicted of a crime. It is a process that is governed
by treaty. (See P.D. No. 1069, Sec. 2 (a).)
The removal of an accused from the Philippines with
the object of placing him at the disposal of foreign
authorities to enable the requesting state or
government to hold him in connection with any
criminal investigation directed against him or the
execution of a penalty imposed on him under the
penal or criminal law of the requesting state or
government. (P.D. No. 1069, Sec. 2 (a).).
PRINCIPLES:
1. No state is obliged to extradite unless there is
a treaty;
2. Differences in legal system can be an
obstacle to interpretation of what the crime is
(apply the principle of double criminality);
3. Religious and political offenses are NOT
extraditable. (Bernas, Public International
Law, 2009)
EXCEPT: “ATTENTAT CLAUSE” –
assassination of the head of state or
any member of his family is not
regarded as political offense for
purposes of extradition. It also
applies for the crime of genocide.
Q: What is the principle
of double criminality?
According to this principle, a person may be
extradited only when his/her actions
constitute an offense in both the requesting
and requested states. This principle is now
commonly accepted by States and is
embodied in extradition treaties.
 Q: Can bail be granted in an extradition
case?
Yes. The modern trend in international law is
the primacy on the worth of the individual
person and the sanctity of human rights.
While extradition is NOT a criminal
proceeding (it is sui generis), it is
characterized by the following:
1. It entails a deprivation of liberty on the
part of the potential extradite; and
2. The means employed to attain the
purpose of extradition is also the
machinery of criminal law
While our extradition law (PD 1069) does not
provide for the grant of bail, there is no
provision prohibiting the extraditee from
filing a motion for bail, a right to due process.
The extraditee must establish “clear and
convincing proof” that he or she is not a flight
risk and will abide with all the orders of the
extradition court (Government of
Hong Kong v. Olalia, G.R. No. 153675, 2007)
(b) Procedure
Q: What is the procedure for extradition in
the Philippines?
1. Foreign diplomat of the requesting state
or government REQUESTS for
extradition with Secretary of Foreign
Affairs
2. DFA FORWARDS request to DOJ
3. DOJ FILES petition for extradition with
RTC
4. RTC issues SUMMONS or WARRANT
OF ARREST to compel the appearance
of the
individual
5. HEARING (provide counsel de officio if
necessary)
6. Appeal to the CA within 10 days whose
decision shall be final and executory
7. Decision FORWARDED to DFA through
the DOJ
8. Individual PLACED at the disposal of the
authorities of requesting state-costs and
expenses to be shouldered by requesting
state (P.D. No. 1069, Secs. 4-7, 12, 14,
1618).
Q: Lawrence is a Filipino computer expert based
in Manila who invented a virus that destroys all
89
files stored in a computer. In May 2005, this virus
spread all over the world and caused $50 million
in damage to property in the United States, and in
June 2005, he was criminally charged before the
US courts under their Anti-Hacker Law. In July
2005, the Philippines adopted its own Anti-
Hacker Law, to strengthen existing sanctions
already provided against damage to property.
The US requested the Philippines to extradite him
to US courts under the RP-US Extradition Treaty.
Is the Philippines under the obligation to
extradite Lawrence? State the applicable rule and
its rationale.
If there was no anti-hacker law in the Philippines
when the US requested the extradition, Philippines is
under no obligation to extradite him. Under the
principle of double criminality, extradition is available
only when the act is an offense in both countries.
Q: May a State ask for the extradition of a person
for a crime committed before the effectivity of an
extradition treaty?
A party to an extradition treaty may ask the other
party to extradite a person for a crime committed
before the effectivity of a treaty. It does not violate the
prohibition against ex post facto laws. The
constitutional prohibition applies to penal laws only.
The extradition treaty is not a penal
law. (Wright v. CA, G.R. No. 113213, 1994)
(c) Distinguished from deportation
Q: Distinguish extradition from deportation
EXTRADITION DEPORTATION
Removal of an Act or an instance of
accused from the removing a person to
Philippines with the another country
object of placing him at (Black’s Law
Dictionary, 504,
the disposal of foreign
2004).
authorities. (PD 1069,
§2(a)). each individual State has the responsibility to
It is exercised by the protect its populations from genocide, war
It is a form of President to expel or crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against
international judicial deport aliens whose humanity, the international community also
assistance designed to presence is deemed has the same responsibility towards the
deny criminals a safe inimical to the public
interest. (Djumantan
citizens of a State. The Right to Protect was
haven abroad.
v. Domingo, G.R. No. envisaged as a replacement for unilateral
It is a formal procedure 99358, 1995). humanitarian intervention. However, there is
whereby an individual, no support on the Right to Protect to justify
accused or convicted unilateral use of force.
of a crime under the (2005 World Summit Outcome, UN doc. A/RES/60/1,
laws of one State, is 2005; Crawford, Brownlie’s
arrested in another Principles of Public International Law).
State and handed over
to the former State, at
that State’s request, for
trial or punishment. 1. CATEGORIES OF ARMED CONFLICTS
(Boczek, (a) International armed conflicts
The A to Z of (b) Internal or non-international armed conflict
International Law, 60, (c) War of national liberation
2010). 2. R.A. 9851 (PHILIPPINE ACT ON CRIMES
AGAINST INTERNATIONAL
K. INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS HUMANITARIAN LAW, GENOCIDE, AND
LAW OTHER CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY)
1. UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF
HUMAN RIGHTS A. LAW OF THE SEA
2. INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON 1. BASELINES
CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS 2. ARCHIPELAGIC STATES
3. INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON (a) Straight archipelagic baselines
ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL (b) Archipelagic waters
RIGHTS (c) Archipelagic sea lanes passage
(d) Regime of islands
L. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF
INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN Q: What is the “regime of islands” principle?
LAW Under Article 121 of the UNCLOS, “the regime of
islands” is:
Q: What is international humanitarian law? 1. An island naturally formed area of land,
Set of rules which seek, for humanitarian surrounded by water which is above water at
reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflict. high tide.
It protects persons who are not or are no 2. Except as provided for in the next number,
longer participating in the hostilities and the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the
restricts the means and methods of warfare. exclusive economic zone and the continental
International humanitarian law is also known shelf of an island are determined in
as the law of war or the law of armed conflict. accordance with the provisions of this
(Advisory Service on International Convention applicable to other land territory.
Humanitarian Law, International Committee 3. Rocks which cannot sustain human
on Red Cross, 2004). habitation or economic life of their own shall
have no exclusive economic zone or
Q: What is the Principle of Right to continental shelf.
Protect? This doctrine contemplates
international action where a state fails to 3. INTERNAL WATERS
protect its own citizens. 4. TERRITORIAL SEA
The United Nations General Assembly 5. EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE
articulated this principle, stating that while 6. CONTINENTAL SHELF

90
(a) Extended economic zone 3. Possibility of serious harm (International Service
7. INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech v.
LAW OF THE SEA Greenpeace, G.R. No. 209271, 2015)

Q: What is the “regime of islands” principle?

Under Article 121 of the UNCLOS, the “the regime of
islands” is:
4. an island naturally formed area of land,
surrounded by water which is above water at
high tide.
5. Except as provided for in the next number,
the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the
exclusive economic zone and the continental
shelf of an island are determined in
accordance with the provisions of this
Convention applicable to other land territory.
6. Rocks which cannot sustain human
habitation or economic life of their own shall
have no exclusive economic zone or
continental shelf.

B. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
LAW

Q: What is Principle 21 of the Stockholm

Declaration?
“States have, in accordance with the Charter of the
United Nations and the principles of international law,
the sovereign right to exploit their own resources
pursuant to their own environmental policies and the
responsibility to ensure that activities within their
jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the
environment of other States or of other areas beyond
the
limits of natural jurisdiction.”

Q: What is the precautionary principle?

The precautionary principle is used when there is a
lack of full scientific certainty in establishing a causal
link between human activity and environmental effect.
The precautionary principle, as a principle of last
resort, shifts the burden of evidence of harm away
from those likely to suffer harm and onto those
desiring to change the status quo. (International
Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech v.
Greenpeace,
G.R. No. 209271, 2015)

Q: What are the elements for the application of

the precautionary principle? 1. Uncertainty
2. Possibility of irreversible harm

91
 TABLE OF ENUMERATIONS
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1
How States may CAPO 1. Cession
acquire or lose 2. Accretion
territory 3. Prescription
4. Occupation
Function of a State CM 1. Constituent – compulsory functions which constitute
the very bonds of society
2. Ministrant – optional functions of the government
When suit is NUO 1. The republic is sued by name
considered against 2. Suits against an unincorporated agency
the State 3. Suit is against a government official, but is such that
ultimate liability will devolve on the government
Consent by the BPPI 1. State enters into an operation that is essentially a
State is given Business operation
impliedly by 2. The State enters into a Private contract
3. State files suit against a Private party
4. Suit against an Incorporated government agency
Elements of a State GSPoT 1. Government
2. Sovereignty
3. Population
4. Territory
Test of Valid CS 1. Completeness Test
Delegation 2. Sufficiency of Standard
Exceptions to the PLATE 1. To the extent reserved to the People by the
principle of provision on initiative and referendum Delegation to
nondelegation of 2. Local government
legislative power 3. Delegation to Administrative bodies
4. Congress may delegate Tariff powers to the President
5. Emergency powers delegated by Congress to the
President
Requisites of a Must NOT 1. Must not Contravene the Constitution or any statute
Valid Ordinance CUPPU, 2. Must not be Unfair or oppressive
must be 3. Must not be Partial or discriminatory
GC 4. Must not Prohibit, but may regulate trade
5. Must not be Unreasonable
6. Must be General and Consistent with public policy

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 92

Three types of CSL 1. Initiative on the Constitution
initiative 2. Initiative on Statutes
3. Initiative on Local Legislation
Required Petition RS10R3 1. Petition should be Registered with the Commission on
for Referendum Elections
2. Should be Signed by at least 10% of the total number

of registered voters
3. Every legislative district must be Represented by at
least 3% of the registered voters thereof
Rule on UCPP-R3 1. It must be based on uniform and progressive ratio
Apportionment 2. Each city with at least 250,000 inhabitants shall be
entitled to at least 1 representative
3. Each province, irrespective of number of inhabitants,
shall be entitled to at least 1 representative
4. Each legislative district shall comprise as far as
practicable, contiguous, compact, and adjacent
(PCCA) territory.
5. Reapportionment is done by Congress within 3 years
following the return of every census
How can a party-list RA 1. Registration; and
join an electoral 2. Accreditation
contest?
Who may NRS 1. National parties/organizations
participate in 2. Regional parties/organizations
partylist elections? 3. Sectoral parties/organization
Each Electoral ERQ 1. Election contests
Tribunal shall be 2. Qualification
the sole judge of all 3. Returns
contests relating:
Bills that must PuP-TL 1. Bills authorizing the increase of Public debt
originate in the 2. Private Bills
House 3. Tariff Bills
4. Bills of Local Application
Requisites for valid LSA 1. There is a Law authorizing the President, Senate
transfer of President, Speaker, Chief Justice, and heads of the
appropriated funds Constitutional Commissions;
under Art. 6, Sec. 2. The funds to be transferred are Savings generated
25(5) from the appropriations for their respective offices;
and

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 93

 3. The purpose of the transfer is to Augment an item in
the general appropriations law for their respective
offices
Limitations on UP-PED 1. The rule of taxation should be Uniform
power to tax 2. Congress should evolve a Progressive system of
taxation
3. The power to tax must be exercised for Public
purpose
4. It should be Equitable
5. The Due process and equal protection clauses of the
Constitution should be observed
Officers subject to PVM2O 1. President
impeachment 2. Vice-President

3. Members of the SC
4. Members of the Constitutional Commission
5. Ombudsman
Grounds for CTG-B2O 1. Culpable violation of the Constitution
Impeachment 2. Treason
3. Graft and Corruption
4. Bribery
5. Betrayal of Public Trust
6. Other high crimes
Regular HA2C 1. Heads of executive departments
Appointments 2. Ambassadors, consuls, and other public ministers
Requiring Consent 3. Officers of AFP from the rank of colonel or naval
of CA captain
4. Other officers whose appointment is vested in him by
the Constitution, such as: (CJOS)
a. Chairmen and members of the COMELEC,
COA, and CSC.
b. Regular members of the JBC.
c. The Ombudsman and his deputies.
d. Sectoral representatives in Congress, as
provided in Transitory Provisions
Suspension AP 1. Actual, and not merely imminent Invasion or Rebellion
Privilege Of Writ Of 2. Public safety requires it
HC & Martial Law
Declaration

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 94

Limitations on the 60-R48- 1. Suspension or proclamation is effective only for 60
suspension of the RE days
Privilege of the Writ 2. Within 48 hours from the declaration of suspension,
of Habeas Corpus the President must submit a Report in person or in
writing to Congress
3. Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a
majority, may Revoke the same, and the President
can not set aside the revocation
4. Upon the President’s initiative, Congress may Extend
the proclamation or suspension for a period
determined by the Congress if invasion or rebellion
persists and public safety requires it.
Requisites of REALS 1. The question involved must be Ripe for adjudication
Judicial Review 2. The question of constitutionality must be raised in the
first instance, or at the Earliest opportunity.
3. An Actual case calling for the exercise of judicial
power.
4. Resolution of the issue of constitutionality is
unavoidable or is the very lis mota of the case.
5. The person challenging the governmental act must have
‘Standing’ (Locus Standi)
Requisites for IRH 1. The litigant must have suffered an Injury-in-fact;

Third-Party 2. The litigant must have a close Relation to the third party;
Standing (jus tertii) and
3. There must exist some Hindrance to the third party's
ability to protect his or her own interests.
Exceptions to the GERF 1. There is a grave violation of the Constitution;
rule that the Courts 2. The situation is of an exceptional character and
will not entertain paramount public interest is involved;
moot questions 3. The 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
Scope of the Civil BIGAS 1. Branches
Service 2. Instrumentalities
Commission 3. GOCCs with original charter
4. Agencies of the Government
5. Subdivisions
Non-competitive PPH 1. Policy determining
positions covered 2. Primarily confidential
by security of 3. Highly technical
tenure

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 95

Determination RCA 1. The employee’s Relationship to the item seized
whether an 2. Whether the item was in the immediate Control of the
employee has a employee
reasonable 3. Whether the employee took Actions to maintain his
expectation of privacy in the item
privacy
Acquisition of FFA 1. Filipino citizens
Alienable Lands of 2. Former natural-born citizens of RP (as transferees
the Public Domain with certain legal restrictions
3. Alien heirs (as transferees in case of intestate
succession)
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2
Elements of due Ju3NO 1. An impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial power
process in judicial to hear and determine the matter before it. Jurisdiction
proceedings 2. must be lawfully acquired over the person or subject
matter.
3. Judgment must be rendered upon a lawful hearing.
4. The defendant must be given notice and an
opportunity to be heard.
Elements of due HIP DESK 1. The right to a hearing, which includes the right to
process in present one’s case and submit evidence in support
administrative thereof.
proceedings 2. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its
or own independent consideration of the law and facts
of the controversy.
3. The decision must be based on the evidence

presented at the hearing or at least contained in the

record and disclosed to the parties affected.
4. The decision must have something to support itself.
5. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented.
6. Evidence supporting the conclusion
must be substantial.
7. The board or body should render its decision in such a
manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the
various issues involved and the reasons for the
decision rendered.
Requirements of SP-CP 1. Charges against alien must Specify the acts or
due process in omissions complained of
deportation 2. Preliminary investigation
proceedings 3. Follow rules of Criminal procedure

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 96

 4. Private prosecutors should NOT be allowed to
intervene.
Requisites for Valid GEES 1. Germane to the purposes of the law
Classification 2. Not limited to Existing conditions only
3. Applied Equally to all members of the same class.

4. Rest on Substantial distinctions

Requisites for a PDEP 1. It must be based on Probable cause;

valid warrant 2. Probable cause must be Determined personally by a
judge;
3. The judge must Examine under oath or affirmation the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce;
4. The warrant must Particularly describe the place to be
searched and the person or things to be seized
Requisites for JPEPO 1. The existence of probable cause is determined
SEARCHES AND personally by the Judge.
SEIZURES with a 2. It must be issued upon a finding of Probable cause.
valid warrant 3. The judge must Examine under oath the complainant
and the witnesses he may produce.
4. The warrant must Particularly describe the place to be
searched and person or things to be seized.
5. It must be in connection with One specific offense.
Warrantless WIPE MS 1. Waiver of right
Searches CAC 2. Incidental to a lawful arrest
3. Plain view doctrine
4. During exigent and emergency situations
5. Moving vehicle
6. Stop and frisk rule
7. Seizure of goods concealed to avoid customs duties
8. Airport searches
9. Checkpoints
Circumstances PPP 1. In his presence, person committed, actually
where warrantless committed, will commit an offense
arrests can be 2. Offense has been committed and he has personal

made knowledge
3. Prisoner who has escaped
2 Kinds of Prior NB 1. Content-Neutral
Restraint 2. Content-Based

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 97

Government WI-FU- 1. It is within the constitutional power of the government
Regulation is UN-NO 2. It furthers a substantial government interest
Justified if (also 3. The governmental interest is unrelated to the
known as Content- suppression of free expression
Neutral 4. The incidental restriction is no greater than essential to
Regulations/O’Brien the furtherance of the interest.
Test):
Exceptions to WOS 1. When the nation is at war
freedom from prior 2. Obscene publications
restraint 3. Security of community life may be protected against
incitements to violence or overthrow of orderly
government.
Test for Obscenity POL 1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary
(Miller Doctrine) community standards, would find the work, taken as a
whole, appeals to the prurient interest.
2. Whether the work depicts or describes, in patently
offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by
the applicable state law.
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious
literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
Compelling State SLL 1. The courts should look into the Sincerity of the
Interest test religious belief without inquiring into the truth of the
belief
2. The state has to establish that its purposes are
Legitimate and compelling
3. The state used the Least intrusive means possible.
Exceptions to the BENT 1. Banking transactions
right to information DISC 2. Executive sessions
3. National security matters
4. Trade secrets
5. Diplomatic correspondence
6. Intelligence information
7. Supreme court deliberations
8. Closed door cabinet meetings
Requisite before OPJO 1. An ORDINANCE is enacted by the local legislative council
and LGU can authorizing the local chief executive;
2. The power of eminent domain is exercised for PUBLIC
exercise the power
USE, PURPOSE or welfare;
of eminent domain 3. There is payment of JUST COMPENSATION; and
4. A valid and definite OFFER has been previously made
to the owner of the property sought to be expropriated,
but said offer was not accepted.

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 98

Elements of taking BEAPP 1. Utilization of the property must be in such a way as to
private property oust the owner and deprive him of the beneficial
enjoyment of his property.
2. The expropriator enters the property
3. Entry is made under warrant or color of legal authority
4. Property is devoted to public use
5. The entrance must be permanent
Matters that can be ANP 1. The A of the compensation
judicially reviewed 2. The NECESSITY of the taking
in expropriation 3. The PUBLIC USE character of the taking.
cases
Constitutional PITCHES 1. PRESUMPTION of innocence
Rights of the MACA 2. Right to be INFORMED of nature and cause of
Accused accusation against him
3. Right to TESTIFY as a witness in his own behalf
4. Right to COMPULSORY process to secure
attendance of witnesses and production of evidence
5. Right to be HEARD by himself and counsel
6. Right to be EXEMPT from being compelled to be a
witness against himself
7. Right to SPEEDY, impartial and public trial
8. Right to MEET witness face to face
9. Trial in ABSENTIA - mandated only after arraignment
and absence unjustified
10. CRIMINAL due process:
a. Accused to be heard in court of competent
jurisdiction
b. Accused proceeded against under orderly
processes of law
c. Accused given notice and opportunity to be
heard
d. Judgment rendered was within authority of a
constitutional law
11. To APPEAL in all cases allowed and in the manner
prescribed by law
Requisites of Trial ANU 1. The accused has been validly Arraigned and
in Absentia 2. Accused has been duly Notified
3. His failure to appear is Unjustifiable

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 99

Requisites for ATS 1. 1st jeopardy must have attached prior to the second
double jeopardy 2. The 1st jeopardy must have terminated
3. The 2nd jeopardy must be for the same offenses as
that in the 1st.
How jeopardy CICAP 1. A person is charged
attaches 2. Under a complaint or information sufficient in form and
substance to sustain a conviction
3. Before a court of competent jurisdiction
4. After the person is arraigned

5. Such person enters a valid plea.

How 1st Jeopardy ACD 1. Acquittal
terminated 2. Conviction
3. Dismissal without the express consent of the accused
(S2M2D)
a. Dismissal based on violation of the right to a
speedy trial amounts to an acquittal
b. Discharge of an accused to be a state witness
(amounts to acquittal)
c. Dismissal on the merits
d. Dismissal on motion of the prosecution,
subsequent to a motion for reinvestigation
filed by the accused
e. Dismissal based on demurrer to evidence is a
dismissal on the merits
Modes of acquiring CoRN 1. Direct act of Congress
citizenship 2. Repatriation
3. Naturalization

LAW N PUBLIC OFFICERS

O
Elements of public LSCIP 1. Created by law or by authority of law;
office 2. Possess a delegation of portion of sovereign powers
of government, for benefit of the public;
3. Powers conferred and duties imposed defined by
Constitution, legislature, or by its authority;
4. Duties performed independently and only controlled
by law unless placed under general control of
superior office or body;
5. Permanent or continuous.
How appointments NCIA 1. Nomination
by the President 2. Confirmation
made 3. Issuance of Confirmation

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 100

 4. Acceptance by the appointee
Exceptions to the CTAP 1. Persons employed in confidential capacity
rule on nepotism 2. Teachers
3. Physicians
4. Members of AFP
Who are required PVCCSCOA 1. President
to file SALN 2. Vice-President
3. Members of the Cabinet
4. Members of Congress
5. Justices of the Supreme Court
6. Members of Constitutional Commissions
7. Other constitutional offices
8. Officers of the Armed Forces with general or flag rank
Kinds of Preventive IA 1. Preventive suspension pending Investigation
Suspension 2. Preventive suspension pending Appeal

Conditions before IU 1. The employee must be found innocent of the charges;

employee entitled and
to back salaries in 2. His suspension must be unjustified or the official was
preventive innocent.
suspension
Personnel actions SCD2 1. Shortening term
amounting to 2. Control does not extend to removal
removal 3. Demotion
4. Denial of optional retirement and refusal to reinstate
Effects of LDR 1. Officer still Liable to prosecution, trial, and punishment
Impeachment if the impeachable offense committed also constitutes
a felony or crime
2. Disqualification to hold any office
3. Removal from office of the official concerned
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 101

Non-applicability of DARNN 1. If it should appear that an IRREPARABLE DAMAGE
doctrine of JP LICD will be suffered by a party unless resort to the court is
exhaustion of DRIED immediately made.
administrative LPS Quo 2. When the respondent is the ALTER EGO of the
remedies President
3. When no administrative REVIEW is provided as a
condition precedent for court action
4. Where insistence on its observance would result in the
NULLIFICATION of the claim asserted
5. When there was NO DECISION rendered
6. When there are special circumstances demanding
immediate JUDICIAL INTERVENTION
7. When the administrative remedy is PERMISSIVE or
concurrent
8. When the question raised is ESSENTIALLY AND
PURELY LEGAL
9. When strong PUBLIC INTEREST is involved
10. Where the issue raised is the CONSTITUTIONALITY
of the statute, rule or regulation
11. Where it is a civil action for DAMAGES
12. Where the officer acted in utter DISREGARD OF DUE
PROCESS
13. When there is NO OTHER plain, speedy, adequate
REMEDY
14. When act complained of is PATENTLY ILLEGAL
15. When the administrative body or the person invoking
the doctrine is in ESTOPPEL
16. When there is long-continued and UNREASONABLE
DELAY
17. When the subject of controversy is PRIVATE LAND
18. When the controversy involves POSSESSORY
ACTION involving public lands
19. When the claim involved is SMALL so that to require

exhaustion would be oppressive and unreasonable

20. In QUO WARRANTO proceedings

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 102

Non-applicability of SPA-DIVE 1. To grant relief to preserve Status quo pending further
finality of action by the administrative agency;
administrative 2. Essential to the Protection of rights asserted;
action 3. When Allowed by law;
4. When the order is not reviewable and the complainant
will suffer great and obvious Damage if the order is
carried out;
5. An Interlocutory order affecting the merits of a
controversy;
6. An administrative officers acts in Violation of
constitution and other laws; and
7. To an order made in Excess of power
ELECTION LAW
Required CD R2 18 1. Citizen of the Philippines
qualifications for 2. Not Disqualified by law
voters 3. Resident of the Philippines for at least 1 YEAR
4. Resident of the place wherein he proposes to vote
for at least 6 months immediately preceding the election
5. At least 18 years old
Grounds for FDI 1. Sentenced by FINAL JUDGMENT to suffer
disqualification to IMPRISONMENT NOT LESS THAN 1 YEAR
vote 2. Adjudged by final judgment by a competent court of
having committed any crime involving DISLOYALTY
to the duly constituted government
For (1) and (2):
a. Disqualification may be removed by plenary
pardon or amnesty
b. Reacquire the right to vote upon expiration of 5
years after service of sentence
3. INSANE or INCOMPETENT persons as declared by
competent authority
Grounds for DS 1. Application for registration has been disapproved by
inclusion the board
proceedings 2. 2. Name has been stricken out
Grounds for Nq-FG 1. Not qualified or possessing disqualification
exclusion 2. Flying voters
proceedings 3. Ghost voters
Grounds for N-F3I2BS2 1. Not prepared in accordance with law
annulment of book 2. Prepared through:
of voters a. Fraud
b. Forgery
c. Force
d. Intimidation
e. Impersonation

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 103

 f. Bribery
g. Similar irregularity
h. Contains data that are Statistically improbable

Grounds for DWD 1. Death

substitution 2. Withdrawal
3. Disqualification
Grounds for LFFD- 1. Lacking qualifications
disqualification of NEDS 2. Filing a COC for more than 1 office
candidates 3. False and material representation in the COC
4. Disqualifications under the LGC
5. Nuisance candidate
6. Election offenses enumerated under Sec. 68 of the
Omnibus Election Code
7. Declared insane or incompetent by competent
authority
8. Sentenced by final judgment for subversion,
insurrection, rebellion or an offense which he has
been sentenced to a penalty of more than 18 months,
or a crime involving moral turpitude, unless given
plenary pardon/ amnesty
Disqualifications MAO-PDF 1. Sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving
under LGC Moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by 1 year
or more of imprisonment within 2 years after serving
sentence.
2. Removed from office as a result of an Administrative
case.
3. Convicted by final judgment for violating the Oath of
allegiance to the Republic.
4. Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who
have acquired the right to reside abroad and continue
to avail of the same right.
5. Dual allegiance.
6. Fugitives from justice in criminal or non-political cases
here or abroad.
Grounds for false FMD 1. Must be False
and material 2. Must be Material
misrepresentation 3. Must be Deliberate and there is an intention to defraud
the electorate
Prohibited UF2 1. Public Utilities or those exploiting natural resources of
Contributions PLAC2E the nation

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 104

 2. Public or private Financial institutions, except loans to
a candidate or political party
3. Foreigners and foreign corporations
4. Grantees of franchises, incentives, exemptions,
allocations or similar Privileges or concessions by the
government

5. Persons who, within 1 year prior to the date of the

election, have been granted Loans or other
accommodations in excess of P100,000 by the
government
6. Members of the Armed forces of the Philippines
7. Officials or employees in the Civil service
8. Persons with Contracts to supply the government with
goods or services or to perform construction or other
works
9. Educational institutions which have received grants of
public funds not less than P100,000 by the government

When Failure of SNR 1. Election was Suspended before the hour fixed by law
Elections may be for the closing of the voting
declared 2. Election in any polling place was Not held on the date
fixed
3. Elections Results in a failure to elect (after the voting
and during the preparation and transmission of the
election returns or in the custody or canvass thereof).
Grounds for a MTD 1. There are material defects in the Election Returns The
recount 2. ERs are tampered or falsified
3. There are discrepancies in the ERs
Types of Election EQ 1. Election protest; and Quo
Contests 2. Warranto
Grounds for IN MVP 1. Intimidation No
Election Protest 2. padlock
3. Misappreciation
4. Violence
1. Padding of votes
Requisites for Quo VID 10 1. Filed by any registered Voter in the constituency;
Warranto Grounds:
a. Ineligibility
b. Disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines
2. Within 10 days from proclamation of results

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 105

 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Indicators for the LIP 1. Land
creation or 2. Income
conversion of an 3. Population
LGU
Corporate powers of PSC3 1. Acquire and convey real/personal Property Sue
an LGU 2. and be sued
3. Continuous succession in its corporate name
4. Have and use a Corporate seal
5. Enter into Contracts
When there is F2VR2-DP 1. Elective local official Fills a higher vacant office
Permanent 2. Refuses to assume office Fails to qualify
Vacancy 3. Voluntarily resigns
4. Refuses to assume office
5. Removed from office
6. Dies
7. Permanently incapacitated to discharge the functions
of his office
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

Elements of Jus SAD 1. It can only be modified by a Subsequent norm having

Cogens the same character.
2. A norm Accepted and recognized by the international
community of states as a whole.
3. No Derogation is permitted.
Grounds for DJ-FEC 1. Duress
Invalidity of Treaty 2. Jus cogens
3. Fraud
4. Error of fact
5. Corruption
Grounds for RAIN- 1. Rebus sic stantibus
Termination DOVE-EL 2. Accomplishment of purpose
3. Impossibility of performance
4. Novation
5. Desistance of parties
6. Outbreak of war

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 106

 7. Voidance of treaty
8. Extinction of one of parties, if treaty is bipartite
9. Expiration of Term
10. Loss of subject matter

POLITICAL LAW PRE-WEEK REVIEWER 107