Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A:
LEGISLATIVE POWER (a) No, the failure of congress to pass the budget will
not paralyze the operations of the Government.
Bar Question
Q: Are the following bills filed in Congress Section 25(7), Article VI of the Constitution
constitutional? provides:
(a) A bill originating from the Senate,
which provides for the creation of the “If, by the end of any fiscal year, the
Public Utility Commission to regulate Congress shall have failed to pass the general
public service companies and appropriations bill for the ensuing fiscal year, the
appropriating the initial funds needed general appropriations law for the preceding
to establish the same. Explain. fiscal year shall be deemed reenacted and shall
(b) A bill creating a joint legislative- remain in force and effect until the general
executive commission to give, on appropriations bill is passed by the Congress.
behalf of the Senate, its advice, (b) Yes, the provision authorizing the Chief of Staff,
consent and concurrence to treaties with the approval of the Secretary of National
entered into by the President. The Defense, to use savings to cover the losses
bill contains the guidelines to be suffered by the AFP Retirement and Separation
followed by the commission in the Benefits System is unconstitutional.
discharge of its functions. Explain.
Section 25(5), Article VI of the Constitution
A: provides:
(a) A bill providing for the creation of the
Public Utility Commission to regulate “No law shall be passed authorizing any
public service companies and transfer of appropriations; however, the
appropriating funds needed to establish President, the President of the Senate, the
it may originate from the Senate. It is Speaker of the House of Representatives, the
not an appropriation bill, because the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the
appropriation of public funds is not the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by
principal purpose of the bill. In law, be authorized to augment any item in the
Association of Small Landowner of the general appropriation law for their respective
Philippines, Inc. vs. Secretary of offices from savings in other items of their
Agrarian Reform, 175 SCRA 343, it was respective appropriations.”
held that a law is not an appropriation
measure if the appropriation of public In Philippine Constitution vs. Enriquez, 235
funds is not its principal purpose and the SCRA 506, 544, the Supreme Court held that a
appropriation is only incidental to some provision in the General Appropriation Act
other objective. authorizing the Chief of Staff to use savings to
(b) A bill creating a joint legislative- augment the funds or the AFP Retirement and
executive commission to give, on behalf Separation Benefits Systems was
of the Senate, its advice, consent and unconstitutional.
concurrence to treaties entered into by
the President is unconstitutional. The “While Section 25(5) allows as an exception
Senate cannot delegate this function to the realignment of savings to augment items in
such a commission, because under the general appropriations law for the executive
Section 21, Article VII of the branch, such right must and can be exercised
Constitution, the concurrence of at least only by the President pursuant to a specific law.”
two-thirds of Senate itself is required for
the ratification of treaties. Bar Question
Q: Explain how the automatic appropriation of public
funds for debt servicing can be reconciled with Article VI,
POWER OF APPROPRIATION Section 29(1) of the constitution. Said provision says that
“no money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in
Bar Question pursuance of an appropriation made by law”.
Q: Suppose the President submits a budget
which does not contain provisions for CDF A: As stated in Guingona vs Carague, 196 SCRA 221, the
(Countrywide Development Funds), popularly presidential decrees providing for the appropriation of funds to
pay the public debt do not violate Section 29(1), Article VI of
the Constitution. They provide for a continuing are not otherwise provided by law; and
appropriation, there is no constitutional prohibition (a.5) Those whom he may be authorized by
against this. The presidential decrees appropriate as law to appoint.
much money as is needed to pay the principal, (b) According to Sarmiento vs. Mison, 156 SCRA
interest, taxes and other normal banking charges on 549, the only officers whose appointments need
the loan. Although no specific amounts are confirmation by the Commission on
mentioned, the amounts are certain because they can Appointments are the head of executive
be computed from the books of the national Treasury. departments, ambassadors, other public
ministers and consuls, officers of the armed
Bar Question forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain,
Q: Upon request of a group of overseas contract and other officials whose appointments are
workers in Brunei, Rev. Father Juan de la Cruz, a vested in the President by the Constitution.
Roman Catholic priest, was sent to that country (c) Under Section 20, Article VII of the Constitution,
by the President of the Philippines to minister to the power of the President to contract or
their spiritual needs. The travel expenses, per guarantee loans on behalf of the Republic of the
diems, clothing allowance and monthly stipend of Philippines is subject to the prior concurrence of
P5, 000.00 were ordered charged against the the Monetary Board and subject to such
President’s discretionary fund. Upon post audit limitations as may be prescribed by law.
of the vouchers therefor, the Commission on (d) According to Section 28(2), Article VI of the
Audit refused approval thereof claiming that the Constitution, Congress may, by law, authorize
expenditures were in violation of the Constitution. the President to fix within specified limits, and
Was the Commission on Audit correct in subject to such limitations and restrictions it may
disallowing the vouchers in question? impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas,
tonnage and wharfage dues and other duties or
A: Yes, the Commission on Audit was correct in imposts within the framework of the national
disallowing the expenditures, Section 29(2), Article VI development program of the Government.
of the Constitution prohibits the expenditure of public
funds for the use, benefit or support of any priest.
The only exception is when the priest is assigned to LEGAL STANDING
the armed forces, or to any penal institution, or
government orphanage or leprosarium. The sending Bar Question
of a priest to minister to the spiritual needs of Q: When the Marcos administration was toppled by the
overseas contract workers does not fall within the revolutionary government, the Marcoses left behind
scope of any of the exceptions. several Old Masters’ paintings and antique silverware said
to have been acquired by them as personal gifts.
Negotiations were then made with Ellen Layne of London
APPOINTING POWER OF THE PRESIDENT for their disposition and sale at public auction. Later, the
government entered in a “Consignment Agreement”
Bar Question allowing Ellen Layne of London to auction off the subject
Q: art pieces. Upon learning of the intended sale, well-known
(a) What are the six categories of artists, patrons and guardians of the arts of the
officials who are subject to the Philippines filed a petition in court to enjoin the sale and
appointing power of the President? disposition of the valued items asserting that their cultural
(b) Name the category or categories of significance must be preserved for the benefit of the
officials whose appointments need Filipino people.
confirmation by the Commission on
Appointments? (a) Can the court take cognizance of the case?
(c) What are the restrictions prescribed (b) What are the requisites for a taxpayer’s suit
by the Constitution on the power of to prosper?
the President to contract or
guarantee foreign loans on behalf of A:
the Republic of the Philippines? (a) No, the court cannot take cognizance of the
Explain. case. As held in Joya vs. Presidential
(d) What are the limitation/restriction Commission on Good Government, 225 SCRA
provided by the Constitution on the 569, since the petitioners were not the legal
power of Congress to authorize the owners of paintings and antique silverware, they
President to fix tariff rates, import had no standing to question their disposition.
and export quotas, tonnage and Besides, the paintings and the antique silverware
wharfage dues. Explain. did not constitute important cultural properties or
national cultural treasures, as they had no
A: exceptional historical and cultural significance to
(a) Under Section 16, Article VII of the the Philippines.
Constitution, the six categories of (b) According to Joya vs. Presidential Commission
officials who are subject to the on Good government, 225 SCRA 568, for a
appointing power of the President are taxpayer’s suit to prosper, four requisites must be
the following: considered: (1) the question must be raised by
(a.1) Head of executive the proper party: (2) there must be an actual
departments; controversy; (3) the question must be raised at
(a.2) Ambassadors, other public the earliest possible opportunity: and (4) the
ministers and consuls; decision on the constitutional or legal question
(a.3) Officers of the armed forces must be necessary to the determination of the
from the rank of colonel or naval case. In order that a taxpayer may have
captain; standing to challenge the legality of an official act
(a.3) Other officers whose of the government, the act being questioned
appointments are vested in him by must involve a disbursement of public funds upon
the Constitution; the theory that the expenditure of public funds for
(a.4) All other officers of the an unconstitutional act is a misapplication of such
government whose appointments
funds, which may be enjoined at the (a) According to Section 1, Article VIII of the 1987
instance of a taxpayer. Constitution, judicial power is vested in one
Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may
be established by law. It includes the duty of the
JUDICIAL POWER courts of justice to settle actual controversies
involving rights which are legally demandable
Bar Question and enforceable, and to determine whether or not
nd
Q: Judicial power as defined in Section 1, 2 there has been a grave abuse of discretion
par., Article VIII, 1987 Constitution, now “includes amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the
the duty of the Courts of Justice to settle actual part of any branch or instrumentality of the
controversies involving rights which are legally Government.
demandable and enforceable, and to determine (b) No, the motion should not be granted. Section
whether or not there has been a grave abuse of 15(4), Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution
amounting to lack of excess of jurisdiction on the provides:
part of any branch or instrumentality of the
Government.” This definition is said to have “Despite the expiration of the applicable
expanded the power of the judiciary to include mandatory period, the court, without
political questions formerly beyond its prejudice to such responsibility as may have
jurisdiction. been incurred in consequence thereof, shall
(a) Do you agree with such as decide or resolve the case or matter
interpretation of the constitutional submitted thereto for determination, without
definition of judicial power that further delay.”
would authorize the courts to review
and, if warranted, reverse the
exercise of discretion by the political POWER OF LEGISLATIVE INVESTIGATION
departments (executive and
legislative) of the government, Bar Question
including the Constitutional Q:
Commissions? Discuss fully. A case was filed before the Sandiganbayan
(b) In your opinion, how should such regarding a questionable government transaction. In the
definition be construed so as not to course of the proceedings, newspaper linked the name of
erode considerably or disregard Senator J. de Leon to the scandal.
entirely the existing “political Senator de Leon took the floor of the Senate to
question” doctrine? Discuss fully. speak on a “matter of personal privilege” to vindicate his
honor against those “baseless and malicious” allegations.
A: The matter was referred to the Committee on
Accountability of Public Officers, which proceeded to
(a) Yes, the second paragraph of Section 1, conduct a legislative inquiry. The Committee asked Mr.
Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution has Vince Ledesma, a businessman linked to the transaction
expanded the power of the judiciary to and now a respondent before the Sandiganbayan, to
include political questions. This was not appear and to testify before the Committee.
found in the 1935 and the 1973 Mr. Ledesma refuses to appear and file suit before
Constitution. Precisely, the framers of the Supreme Court to challenge the legality of the
the 1987 constitution intended to widen proceedings before the Committee. He also asks whether
the scope of judicial review. the Committee had the power to require him to testify.
(b) As pointed out in Marcos vs. Identify the issues involved and resolve them.
Manglapus, 177 SCRA 668, so as not to
disregard entirely the political question A:
doctrine, the extent of judicial review The issues involved in this case are the following:
when political questions are involved (a) Whether or not the Supreme court has
should be limited to a determination of jurisdiction to entertain the case;
whether or not there has been a grave (b) Whether or not the Committee on
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or Accountability of Public Officers has the
excess of jurisdiction on the part of the power to investigate a matter which is
official whose act is being questioned. If involved in a case pending in court; and
grave abuse of discretion is not shown, (c) Whether or not the petitioner can invoke his
the courts should not substitute their right against self-incrimination.
judgment for that of the official
concerned and decide a matter which All these issues were resolved in the case of Bengzon
by its nature or by law is for the latter vs. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, 203 SCRA 767.
alone to decide.
The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over the case
Bar Question because it involves the question of whether or not the
Q: Committee on Accountability of Public Officers has the power
(a) Where is judicial power vested? to conduct the investigation. Under Section 1, Article VIII of
What are included in such power? the Constitution, judicial power includes the duty of the courts
(b) Despite the lapse of 4 months from to determine whether or not any branch of the government is
the time that the trial was terminated acting with grave of abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
and the case submitted for decision, jurisdiction.
the trial court failed to decide the
case. The defense counsel moved to The Committee on Accountability of Public Officers
dismiss the case on the ground that has no power to investigate the scandal. Since the scandal is
after the lapse of 90 days, the court involved in a case pending in court, the investigation will
had lost jurisdiction to decide the encroach upon the exclusive domain of the court. To allow the
case. Should the motion be investigation will create the possibility of conflicting judgments
granted? between the committee and the court. If the decision of the
committee were reached before e that of the court, it might
A: influence the judgment of the court.
6. A retired Justice of the Supreme Court;
The petitioner can invoke his right against and
self-incrimination, because this right is available in all 7. A representative of the private sector.
proceedings. Since the petitioner is a respondent in (Section 8(1), Article VIII of the
the case pending before the Sandiganbayan, he may Constitution)
refuse to testify.
The term of office of the regular members is
four (4) years. (Section 8(2), Article VIII of
EN BANC/DIVISION CASES the Constitution)
Answer:
Bar Question Yes, the resolution is constitutionally defensible.
Under Section 4, Article IX-C of the 1987 Constitution, during
Q: A, while an incumbent Governor of his the election period the Commission on Elections may
province, was invited by the Government of supervise or regulate the media of communication or
Cambodia as its official guest. While there the information to ensure equal opportunity, time, and space
among candidates with the objective of holding free,
orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections. To Alternative Answer:
allow candidates which are supported by more than Neither Jose Reyes nor Vicente Estrada has a better
one political party to purchase more air time and right to be appointed City Engineer. As held in Barrozo v. CSC,
advertising space than candidates supported by one 198 SCRA 487, the appointing authority is not required to
political party only will deprive the latter of equal time appoint the one next-in-rank- to fill a vacancy. He is allowed to
and space in the media. fill it also by the transfer of an employee who possesses civil
service eligibility.
Alternative Answer:
No. although the expenditure limitation 2) According to the ruling in Medalla v. Sto. Tomas,
applies only to the purchase of air time, thus leaving 208 SCRA 351, the Civil Service Commission cannot dictate to
political parties free to spend for other forms of the appointing power whom to appoint. Is function is limited to
campaign, the limitation nonetheless results in a determining whether or not the appointee meets the minimum
direct and substantial reduction of the quantity of qualification requirements prescribed for the position.
political speech by restricting the number of issues Otherwise, it would be encroaching upon the discretion of the
that can be discussed, the depth of appointing power.
their discussion and the size of the audience that can Bar Question
be reached, through the broadcast media. Since the
purpose of the Free Speech Clause is to promote the Q: The Constitution distinguishes between two types of
widest possible dissemination of information, and the owned and/or controlled corporations: those with original
reality is that to do this requires the expenditure of charters and those which are subsidiaries of such
money, a limitation on expenditure of money, a corporations. In which of the following rule/rules is such a
limitation on expenditure for this purpose cannot be distinction made? Consider each of the following items
justified, not even for the purpose of equalizing the and explain briefly your answer, citing pertinent
opportunity of political candidates. This is the ruling in provisions of the Constitution.
Buckley, v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), which
invalidated a law limiting the expenditures of 1. The rule prohibiting the appointment to certain
candidates for campaigning in the United States. In government positions, of the spouse and relatives
the Philippines, a provision of the Tanada- Singson of the President within the fourth degree of
Law, limiting the period for campaigning, was nearly consanguinity or affinity. (2%)
invalidated on this same principle, except that the
majority of court lacked one more vote to make their 2. The rule making it incompatible for members of
decision effective. (See Gonzalez v. Comelec, 27 Congress to hold offices or employment in the
SCRA 835(1969). government. (2%)
5. Section 5, Article IX-B of the Constitution which (5) Commissioned officers and enlisted men of the Armed
provides for the standardization of the compensation Forces;
of government officials and employees, distinguishes
between government corporations and their (6) Personnel of government – owned or controlled
subsidiaries, for the provision applies only to corporations, whether performing governmental or proprietary
government corporations with original charters. functions, who do not fall under the non-career service; and
(1) Open career position for appointment to which 2) Yes, X can run for the Senate in the 1998 election.
prior qualification in an appropriate examination is Under Section 7, Article X of the Constitution, having served
required; for three consecutive terms as Member of the House of
Representatives, X is only prohibited from running for the same
(2) Closed career positions which are scientific or position.
highly technical in nature;
Bar Question
(3) Positions in the career executive service;
Q: Pedro Cruz, the City Engineer of Baguio, retired. To fill
the vacant position, the City Mayor appointed Jose Reyes,
a civil engineer who formerly worked under Cruz 1) A is senior to B. In accordance with the ruling in
but has been assigned to the Office of the Mayor Summers v. Ozaeta, 81 Phil. 754, the ad interim appointment
for the past five years. extended to A is permanent and is effective upon his
acceptance although it is subject to confirmation by the
Vicente Estrada, the Assistant City Commission on Appointments.
Engineer filed a protest with the Civil Service
Commission claiming that being the officer next 2) If Congress adjourned without the appointments of
in rank he should have been appointed as City A and B having been confirmed by the Commission on
Engineer. Appointments, A cannot return to his old position. As held in
Summers v. Ozaeta, 81 Phil. 754, by accepting an ad interim
1) Who has a better right to be appointment to a new position, A waived his right to hold his
appointed to the contested position? old position. On the other hand since B did not assume the
2) Can the Civil Service Commission new position, he retained his old position.
revoke an appointment by the
appointing power and direct the
appointment of an individual of its Bar Question
choice?
Q: A City Mayor in Metro Manila was designated as
Answer: Member of the Local Amnesty Board (LAB) as allowed
under the Rules and Regulations Implementing Amnesty
1) On the assumption that Jose Reyes Proclamation Nos. 347 and 348, as amended by
possesses the minimum qualification requirements Proclamation No. 377. The LAB is entrusted with the
prescribed by law for the position, the appointment functions of receiving and processing applications for
extended to him is valid. Consequently, he has a amnesty and recommending to the National Amnesty
better right than Vicente Estrada. Commission approval or denial of the applications. The
term of the Commission and, necessarily, the Local
Amnesty Boards under it expires upon the completion of
its assigned tasks as may be determined by the President.
The claim of Estrada that being the officer
next in rank he should have been appointed as City May the City Mayor accept his designation
Engineer is not meritorious. It is a settled rule that the without forfeiting his elective position in the light of the
st
appointing authority is not limited to promotion in provision of Sec. 7, 1 par., Art. IX-B of the 1987
filling up vacancies but may choose to fill them by the Constitution which pertinently states that :[N]o elective
appointment of persons with civil service eligibility official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in
appropriate to the position, even if a vacancy were to any capacity to any public office or position during his
be filled by promotion, the concept of “next in rank tenure?”
thereto “shall be considered for promotion.” Espanol
v. Civil Service Commission, 206 SCRA 715. Discuss fully.