MIDTERM NOTES -Phil merely consent that USA exercise jurisdiction in some

I. SOVEREIGNTY cases; consent given purely as a matter of comity, courtesy,

expediency
-the supreme & uncontrollable power of the state to govern
itself -HENCE, in ceding territory, not surrendering sovereignty,
only exercise of sovereignty. Why? Because sovereignty is
Characteristics/2 aspects:
absolute, indivisible & inalienable, hence, sovereignty cant
a. Internal- manifested by ability of state to govern its be ceded
territory, passage of laws, territoriality
2. Tanada vs Angara- entered, signed & ratified membership
b. External- freedom from external control , exclusion of
in WTO
external actors from domestic authority structures;
theres still this if theoretically a state has the final s a y on -treaties really limit/restrict the absoluteness of (exercise of)
matters sovereignty. By their voluntary act, nations may surrender
some aspects of their state power in exchange for greater
Westphalian Concepts: 3 key principles of sovereignty (as
benefits granted/derived from a convention/pact
found in the Westphalian Treaty)
-in pursuit of mutual objectives & benefits, states commonly
1. The principle of the sovereignty of states & the
agree to limit exercise of absolute rights
fundamental right of political self-determination
2. Principle of equality between states -(exercise of ) sovereignty of state cannot in reality be
3. Principle of non-intervention of one state in the internal absolute because of restrictions: 1. Limitations imposed by
affairs of another state membership in the family of nations, 2. Limitations imposed
by treaty stipulations | interdependence
Modern Concept: Sovereignty Modern by Jackson (opposed
to vacuum principles of Westphalia)
-there are cases that the world must resolve by II. Sovereign Immunity: Doctrine of Non-Suability of State
explicit/implicit departures from traditional sovereignty Related concept with sovereignty
concepts (Westphalian) Bases/Reasons/Grounds
1. Constitutional Basis- Article 16, section 3, 1987 Consti,
-recognize certain international institutions as the legitimate
The State may not be sued without its consent.
entities to decide on some parameters; provide also for a
2. Philosophical Basis- there can be no legal right as a ga i ns t
system of checks & balances of those institutions
the authority that makes the law on which the right
-traditional concepts themselves must evolve & be redefined depends (RP vs Villasor)
-develop the international community 3. Sociological/Practical Basis - there would be loss of time
and energy; divert time & resources of state (RP vs
-use concept of interdependence to justify new norms &
Villasor)
persuade nations to give consent
CASE: RP vs Villasor
-break down the complex array of sovereignty concepts &
examine particular aspects in detail -judge rendered decision to get funds of AFP

CASES -state consent limits claimants action only up to the

completion of proceedings anterior to the stage of execution
1. Reagan vs CIR- Reagan disputes payment of income tax
& power of courts ends when judgment is rendered since
from sale of his car
government funds may not be seized to satisfy judgments
-(internal sovereignty) Phil is independent & sovereign, its
authority may be exercised over its entire domain; no portion Why is doctrine of non-suability not unjust? Go back to the
thereof that is beyond its power bases
-within its limits, its decrees are supreme, commands State may not be 1)sued without its 2)consent
paramount; laws govern therein; extent of its jurisdiction
-determine first if its suit against the state before getting
both personal & territorial
consent
-Doctrine of Auto-limitation- the property of a state-force
due to which it has the exclusive capacity of legal self- When is it a suit against a state? 3 instances (enumerated)
determination & self-restriction. A state, if it chooses to, may 1. Suing the state by its name (but name is just an indicator)
refrain from the exercise of what otherwise is illimitable TESTS: a) whether state will be asked to do an affirmative
competence; state asserts sovereignty
act: a1)release funds, a2)release property
-such areas do not become impressed with an alien
-if no affirmative act is needed, even if vs. RP, not truly suit
character; they retain their status as native soil; its
against the state
jurisdiction may be diminished but it does not disappear ; a r e
not & cannot be foreign territory; jurisdiction of the nation -b) whether state is performing governmental function; if
susceptible of no limitation not impos ed by itself; can flow state is engaged in commercial/business transaction
(proprietary), it descends to the level of a private individual &
from no other legitimate source other than the state
can then be sued (implied)
-not even the embassy premises of a foreign power are to be
Example: Largo vs RP- prima facie suit against the state, but
considered outside the territorial domain of the host state
not conclusively suit against the state
-When can this be a suit against the state? If state is asked to CASES:
do an affirmative act, release funds/property, and if state 1. RP vs Feliciano
performed governmental function
- Feliciano wants to be declared rightful owner of property in
-If I file a case against state to give back property, is it suit question vs. NARRAs claim
against the state? Yes since Im asking state to do an
-action is directed against the RP, represented by the Land
affirmative act which is to release property
Authority, a governmental agency created by RA
-If a state is sued by name, is it suit against the state? May
-failure of RP to assert defense of immunity from suit when
be, may be not if state not asked to do affirmative acts to
the case was tried before a lower court: now settled that such
satisfy eventual judgment such as releasing funds/property
defense may be invoked by the courts at any stage of the
CASES proceedings
1. Del Mar vs Phil Veterans Association- del Mar receiving -consent of state to be sued must emanate from statutory
pensions from both Phil & USA, but Phil cancelled 1 of his authority; can only be made by an act of the legislative body
pensions
2. Professional Video vs TESDA- TESDA & PROVI entered into
-exception to doctrine: a claimant institutes an action against contract for I.D.s
a functionary who fails to comply with his statutory duty to
-TESDA is an instrumentality of the government undertaking
release the amount claimed from the public funds already
governmental functions; unincorporated instrumentality of
apportioned by statute for benefit of said claimant
the government operating under its own charter; as an
2. USA vs Ruiz- USA sued to allow company to perform work agency, cannot be sued without consent of state
on the sea wall/wharf
-the fact that a non-corporate government entity performs a
-sovereign, governmental acts (jure imperii) & private, proprietary function does not necessarily result in its being
commercial, proprietary acts (jure gestionis); state immunity suable; not suable if said proprietary function is undertaken
extends to jure imperii only as an incident to its governmental function
-restrictive application of state immunity is proper only when -public funds cannot be object of garnishment proceedings
the proceedings arise out of commercial transactions of the even if consent to be sued is given by sta te & liability is
foreign sovereign. A state may be said to have descended to adjudged; need corresponding appropriation law
the level of an individual & can be deemed to have tacitly
3. Air Transportation Office vs. Spouses Ramos- land dispute
given its consent to be sued only when it enters into
business contracts -non-suability does not extend to an agency engaged in a
function which is essentially a business; not regarded a s s ui t
-does not apply when contract relates to the exercise of its
against the state; here, ATO was engaged in management &
sovereign functions; here, projects are integral part of naval
maintenance of Loakan Airport; ATO is also an incorporated
base, hence not dedicated to business purposes, still need
agency
consent
4. SHELL vs Jalos- Shell sued for its pipes causing pollution
-correct test for application of state immunity is not
conclusion of contract by a state but the legal nature of the -Shell not an agent of the state; only a service-contractor for
act exploration & development

2. Suit against governmental agency -an agent is any person who binds himself to render some
service in representation of another, with the consent of the
-Why/When is it suit in reality against the state even if
latter; Shell doesnt represent; not an agent & can be sued
against governmental agency only? If it is against
without states consent
unincorporated government agency where such government
agency will have to go back to state for satisfaction of 3. Suit against a government official
judgment; so ultimately it is a suit against the state -When is it suit in reality against the state even if against
Steps in ascertaining if its suit against state: government official only? IF these allegations are made:

a) Check what kind of agency is involved in the suit (& not the a) Suing government official in his official capacity
function) b) The government official acted without bad faith, malice,
b) If the agency involved is unincorporated, determine if it is negligence & corruption
doing a governmental/proprietary function
c) Suing government official not in his personal capacity
c) If doing governmental function, it is a suit against the s ta te
& one will need its consent If theres ANY of these allegations, NOT SUIT against the
state but against the official only:
Kinds of government agency:
a) Government officials actions were unlawful & injurious to
a) Unincorporated government agency- no charter of its own;
the rights of others
merged with whole governmental machinery; no personality
b) Suing government official i n his personal capacity
of its own; derive personality from state itself
b) Incorporated government agency- has personality of its CASES:
own, so suit is against it, not against the state; has personality 1. Lansang vs CA- Lansang sought to evict GABI from selling in
separate & distinct from state; case you file is a case against it Rizal Park
only; can be sued even if doing governmental/proprietary
functions
-rule is that the suit must be regarded as one against the SUABILITY not equal to LIABILITY
state if satisfaction of judgment against the public official -consent to be sued only extends to proceedings anterior to
concerned will require the state itself to perform a positive the stage of execution & power of courts ends when
act, such as appropriation of the necessary amount judgment is rendered; only to prove liability
-does not apply where official is charged in official capacity -to make state liable, one needs separate appropriation for
for acts that are unlawful & injurious to the rights of others; money claim
bad faith
GENERAL PROCESS IN SUING THE STATE:
-neither when sued in his personal capa city although he
a) Identify if its a suit against the state; obtain consent
committed acts complained of while he occupied a public
b) Prove state is liable
position
c) If liable, ask state to make separate appropriation through
2. Calub vs CA Forest Protection team confiscated legislature
motorcycles & owners want them back d) If no appropriation is made, compel legislature through
-immunity applies to officials performing activities within mandamus
their authority in good faith, without willfulness, -process is long, hence, there is no practical benefit in suing
malice/corruption the state
-performed by them in the discharge of their official duties
-here, cannot prosper without states consent GENERAL PROCESS FOR MONEY CLAIMS ARISING FROM
QUESTIONS: CONTRACTS:
-When is a suit against the state? 3 instances (above) -Under CA No. 327, as amended by PD No. 1445, a claim
-Given its a suit against the state, what will happen to the against the government must first be filed with the
suit? If there is no consent, case will be dismissed. If with Commission on Audit, which must act upon it within sixty
consent, case may proceed days. If the claim is rejected the claimant is authorized to
elevate the matter to the Supreme Court on certiorari and in
-If it is a suit against the state, what do you do next? Obtain
effect sue the State with its consent.
CONSENT of state:
-If case is won for money claim , there must be a separate
a) Express- only through law (not by president/sol gen, etc.)
appropriation to get the money claim or purpose.
A1. General law
STEPS FOR MONEY CLAIMS ARISING FROM CONTRACTS:
-Art. 2180, New Civil Code: (express) consent is given by state
1. File with the Commission on Audit to determine if the
if filed against a special agent of the state (here, consent to
complaint is tenable which must act upon it.
be sued is given to anyone who comes within this provision)
2. If rejected, the claimant is authorized to elevate the matter
-Money claims arising from contracts: one can lodge money
to the Supreme Court on Certiorari.
claim with Commission on Audit; if not acted upon within 60
days, one can file a case in court 3. In effect, the claimant can sue the State with its consent.

A2. Special law- pass law giving consent to be sued for a 4. If the claimant won the case, when final judgment of the
particular person, e.g. Meritt Supreme Court rendered, he will return to Commission on
Audit.
b)Implied consent
5. Commission on Audit will submit a letter to the President
b1. When there is a valid claim for compensation arising from
in which the latter will may recommend to the Congress to
the taking without just compensation & proper expropriation
make an appropriation law in the claimants favor.
proceedings
6. If the Congress doesnt make a law, the claimant may file a
b2. When state sues, it opens itself for counterclaims
petition for mandamus to compel the former to make a bill
b3. When the state engages in commercial/business for his claims enactment and approval of the necessary
transactions appropriation ordinance and the corresponding disbursement
b4. When injustice is done on a citizen of funds

CASE: Merritt vs Phil

-Merritt had accident with General Hospital ambulance III. GOVERNMENT

-government passed act authorizing Merritt to bring suit -is the agency of the state through which the will of the state
is formulated, expressed & carried out
-state only liable for acts of its agents, employees when they
act as special agents; in this case, chauffer of the ambulance -here, government is the agent and the state is the principal
was not a special agent -order of the state: to do that which is beneficial, State can
-whether state intends to make itself liable rests only with do no wrong
legislature & not with courts CASE: US vs Dorr
-defendants convicted of libel against state
- contains no attack upon the governmental system by which
the authority of the U.S. is enforced in these islands. The form
of Goverment by a Civil Commission and a Civil Governor is intraconstitutional & can be subject to judicial review; 1 is a
not assailed. It is the character of the men who are instructed political question & 2 is a justiciable question
with the administration of the government that the writer is Kinds of Government
seeking to bring into disrepute
1. based on number of persons holding power
-Administration means the aggregate of those persons in a) monarchy b) oligarchy
whose hands the reins of the govt are for the time being b) democracy- direct/pure democracy (people take part
-Government is the agency of the state through which the in passage of laws)
will of the state is formulated, expressed & carried out -indirect/republican (through reps)
if government no longer does will of the state/mandate of 2. based on relationship between legislative & executive
the principal/do acts which are beneficial, replace the a) presidental b) parliamentary
agent/government through the people & through the
3. based on power of central authority
Doctrine of Revolution/ Doctrine of Direct State Action
a) federal
-Rebellion is an unsuccessful revolution; did not succeed
hence it becomes a crime, vs. b) unitary Phils is unitary; what has been decentralized is
only function, not power
-Revolution/Direct State Action- able to unseat the
government since the state acted directly; successful 4. other class
revolution a) de jure- government that has a valid title but no actual
-Definition (Concurring Opinion Mendoza): an inherent right control
of people to cast out their rulers, change their policy or effec t b) de facto- no valid title but with actual control
radical reforms in their system of government or institutions
-Is our present government de facto/de jure? Neither; this
by force or a general uprising when the legal and
class is only during the war when theres both de facto & de
constitutional methods of making such change have proved
jure existing; now, Phils has only one government & we are
inadequate or are so obstructed as to be unavailable. The
not at war
locus of positive law-making power lies with the people to
abolish, to reform and to alter any existing form of CASES:
government without regard to the existing constitution 1. Co Kim Cham vs Tan Keh- wants to continue proceedings in
- Is revolution illegal? cannot be illegal since performed by civil case since war is now over & japs have left
the state -THREE Kinds of de facto government:
-Is it constitutional? revolution cannot be deemed A) that government that gets possession & control of, usurps,
unconstitutional/constitutional because it is not provided in by force/voice of majority, the rightful legal government &
the constitution; it is extraconstitutional since this orbits maintains itself against the will of the latter
outside the loop of the constitution; right to revolt cant be B) that which is established & maintained by military forces
placed in the constitution because state would then be who invade & occupy a territory of the enemy in the course
planting the seeds of its own destruction of war
-When is an act unconstitutional? when there is a provision -What is the effect of belligerent occupation?
in the constitution and the act violates it
There is no change in sovereignty (de jure sovereign is the
-Right to revolt cannot be recognized as a constitutional one not in control & de facto sovereign is the occupant).
principle; a constitution to provide for the right of the people Political laws, except the law on treason, are suspended;
to revolt will carry with it the seeds of its own destruction; it municipal laws remain in force unless repealed by the
orbits outside the loop of the constitution. Rather, the right belligerent occupant. However at the end of the belligerent
to revolt is affirmed as a natural right occupation, when the occupant is ousted from the territory,
-Can Direct State Action/Revolution emanate from Art 2, sec the political law which had been suspended during the
1 The Phils is a democratic & republican state. Sovereignty occupation shall automatically become effective again, under
resides in the peope & all government authority derives the principle of postliminy
from them? No because sovereignty of the people is only -On our Political Laws- immediately cease to have effect,
manifested through the ballot and nothing else except insofar as they are continued in force by the express
CASE: Estrada vs Arroyo consent of the ne sovereign
-Arroyo became president after Estrada was forced to leave -On our Municipal Laws- those which are not in conflict with
-government of Arroyo is not revolutionary in character; oath the laws of the new sovereign may continue in force with the
express consent of the new sovereign or until changed by the
she took is under 1987 consti; she swore to preserve &
defend the 1987 consti; discharged powers of president sovereign through legislative acts; not changed merely by
under 1987 consti change of sovereignty

-distinction between EDSA 1 & 2: 1 involves the exercise of -On Judicial Decisions- good & valid during the occupation
people power of revolution which overthrew the whole and even beyond except those of a political complexion
government; 2 Is an exercise of people power of freedom of which are automatically annulled as soon as the legitimate
speech & assembly. 1 is extraconstitutional & 2 is authority is restored
Basis: Sec. III of the Hague Convention of 1907 - powers and democracy; also, people legislating thru initiative &
duties of de facto governments regulated referendum is purely democratic & not republican since they
-Belligerent occupant has the right and is burdened with duty can directly exercise powers of government
to insure public order and safety during military occupation. Ways by which people directly exercise sovereignty:
-He can suspend the old laws and promulgate new one and a)Election b)plebiscite c)initiative d)recall e)referendum
make such changes in the old as he may see fit.
Democracy & Republicanism (Dissenting of Puno)
-He is enjoined to respect, unless absolutely prevented by the
circumstances, the municipal laws in force in the country - a) Plato- did not want democracy; those of low quality would
enforce public order and regulate social and commercial life dominate the state by mere numerical superiority
of the country. b) Aristotle- democracy could be done if upper class govern
-BUT, laws of political in nature are suspended for they represent people of greatest refinement & quality
PRINCIPLE OF POSTLIMINY (POSTLIMINIUM) c) Middle Ages- industrial revolution enabled Europe to rise
because of the efforts of individuals; theory of popular
-the fact that a territory which has been occupied by an
enemy comes again into the power of its legitimate sovereignty developed where all people were equal; social
government of sovereignty, does not except in a very few contract theory also came where it is the act of people
cases, wipe out the effects of acts done by an invader, which exercising their sovereignty & creating a govt to which they
for one reason or another it is within his competence to do. consent
-Judicial acts done under his control, when they are not of a d) John Locke- democracy should be limited to people with
political complexion, administrative acts so done, to the personal stake in society: land owners
extent that they take effect during the continuance of his e) Thomas Jefferson- people including ordinary folk should be
control, and the various acts done during the same time by
given chance to govern since they are the only competent
private persons under the sanction of municipal law, remain
guardians of their liberties
good.
C) that established as an independent government by the RIGHT OF REVOLUTION (Concurring Opinion Mendoza )-
inhabitants of the country who rise in insurrection against the inherent right of the people to cast out their rulers, change
parent state their policy or effect radical reforms by force

2. Lawyers League vs Aquino- issue is Aquinos govt -sovereign will of people expressed through ballot; any
exercise of the powers of sovereignty in any other way is
-legitimacy of Aquino govt is not justiciable but belongs to the
unconstitutional
realm of politics where only the peope are the judge
-right to revolt cannot be recognized as a consti principle; it is
-not merely de facto but a de jure govt; accepted by the
only affirmed as a natural right & must be exercised only for
people & community of nations
weighty & serious reasons
Functions of government
2. Sec 2, The Phils renounces war as an instrument of
1. Constituent function- those which constitute the bond of national policy, & adopts the generally accepted principles of
society & are therefore compulsory & not optional such as international law as part of the law of the land.
keeping of order & providing protection
-not renouncing defensive war, only aggressive war, so there
2. Ministrant- undertaken only to advance the general
is still need to maintain AFP
interest of society & are optional
-now, distinction between constituent & ministrant is -DOCTRINE OF INCORPORATION vs DOCTRINE OF
already blurred TRANSFORMATION
3. Doctrine of Parens Patriae- parent of the people; the state Distinguish first:
has the sovereign power of guardianship over persons 1. Domestic/municipal law- national laws; statutes
under disability 2. Generally accepted principles of international law (GAPIL)-
CASE: Govt vs de Piedad never just international law; has to be GAPIL, e.g.
-money loaned to de piedad; state now has to get it back for prohibition on genocide
those damaged by earthquake DOCTRINE OF INCORPORATION: GAPIL is adopted as part of
-duty of the government to exercise supervision & control the law of the land & accepted
over the money & devote it to the object for which it was DOCTRINE OF TRANSFORMATION: Congress has to make
originally destined GAPIL into national legislation before anyone can invoke a
-in bringing this suit, government is exercising its sovereign GAPIL
functions or powers and its being the parent of the people -in Phils, we adhere to Incorporation as stated in Sec 2
Problem: What if domestic law in conflict with GAPIL? FIRST,
IV. Principles of Goverment try to harmonize both. Only in case of irreconcilable conflit
should one apply rules; cant directly uphold domestic law
ARTICLE 2:
since its equal in footing with GAPIL; except if GAPIl conflic ts
1. Sec 1, The Phils is a democratic & republican state. with Consti; then Consti prevails
Sovereignty resides in the people & all government
CASES:
authority emanates from them.
1. Philip Morris vs CA- Morris sued Fortune since latter used
-Is stating democratic & republic redundant? No; if you leave
similar trademark of MARK, MARK TEN and LARk
only republican, you leave out philosophical basis which is
-our municipal law on trademarks regarding requirement of b) free exercise of religion- state cant establish religion, but
actual use in Phil. must subordinate an international when one chooses religion, state should allow its exercise
agreement inasmuch as the apparent clash is being decided a. freedom to believe
by a municipal tribunal b. freedom to act in accordance with ones
-fact that intl law has been made part of the law of the land belief
doesnt mean primacy of intl law over municipal law 5.2 Art 6, sec 28, par 3, Charitable institutions, churches
and parsonages or convents appurtenant thereto,
-under doc of incorporation, intl law is given equal standing
mosques, non-profit cemeteries & all lands buildings,
to national law
improvements actually, directly & exclusively used for
2. Sec of Justice vs Lantion- extradition case religious, charitable or educational purposes shall be
-pacta sunt servanda- parties to a treaty must keep their exempt from taxation
agreement in good faith -state has to exempt from tax in order to avoid establishment
-under doc of incorporation, no further legislative action is of religion
needed to make intl rules applicable in the domestic sphere -avoid excessive entanglement with religion; avoid constant
-if conflict is irreconcilable, municipal law should be upheld contact; if you tax them, they will keep on coming back to the
since courts are organs of municipal law & accordingly bound state & this will foster excessive entanglement
by it under all circumstances 5.3. Art 6, sec 29, par 2 No public money shall be
3. Sec 3, Civilian authority is at all times supreme over the appropriated for any church except when such priest is
military. The AFP is the protector of the people & the state. assigned to the AFP, or to any penal institution, or
Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the state & the government orphanage or leprosarium.
integrity of the national territory. -allowed to be appropriated since people who are in said
a) The principle of civilian supremacy institutions have limited mobility; so as not to curtail their
-this is in line with the principle that sovereignty resides in practice of religion, priests are allowed to go to these
the people and all government authority emanates from institutions
them, and this supremacy is at all times, supreme over the Estrada v Escritor
military.
- invoked religion when he was found with another woman
b) The principle that the AFP is the protector of the people
and the State. - in resolving claims involving religious freedom,
- if the President of the RP, or high government officials are
the ones committing abuses while in the performance of their
CASE: Aglipay vs Ruiz
duties, the AFP is obliged, under Sec. 3, to protect the people
of the State, against their abuses. In other words, the interest - government sold postage stamps commemorati ve of the
of the people is more supreme than officials interest 33 rd Intl Eucharistic Congress
-President is commander in chief; even in martial law, - union of church & state is prejudicial to both
President is highest civil authority
- the act here does not contemplate a religious purpose;
4. Sec 4, The prime duty of the government i s to serve & issuance by postage stamps not inspired by any
protect the people. The government may call upon the denomination; not sold for the benefit of the Roman Catholic
people to defend the state; all citizens may be required by Church
law to render personal, military or civil service.
-selling the stamps was to advertise the Phil. & attract more
-government as protector of the people & people as tourists; officials merely took advantage of an event
defenders of the state considered as national importance
5. Sec 6, The separation of church & state shall be -on the stamp, what is shown is not chalice but map of Phil.;
inviolable. whats emphasized is Manila as seat of that congress, not the
-this is a requirement to the state; as long as state doesnt congress; these are mere incidental results
breach the wall; let the church be even if they do something CASES/ OTHER Policies of government:
Implemented by: 1. Manila Prince Hotel vs GSIS- FILIPINO FIRST POLICY
5.1 Art 3, sec 5, Freedom of Religion Clause, No law shall -Filipinos (qualified) should be given preference in the grant
be made respecting an establishment of religion, or of concessions, privileges & rights covering national
prohibiting the free exercise thereof. patrimony
2-fold concept: This policy is product of Phil nationalism
a) non-establishment of religion - but there is operation of 2. Tanada vs Angara- ECONOMIC NATIONALISM
sectarian schools, religious instruction in publ ic s chool s,
-Consti mandates a bias in favor of Filipino goods, but i t a l s o
tax exemption, public aid to religion
recognizes the need for business exchange with the rest of
a. state cannot establish, one, some, or all religions
the world; limits protection of Filipino enterprises only
b. why State allows religious holidays, religion to
against foreign competition & trade practices that are unfair
be taught in schools? State allows if primary
purpose is secular, even if there is incidental
benefit of religion
-policy of SELF-RELIANT & INDEPENDENT NATIONAL 1) the powers of government are divided into 3, legislative,
ECONOMY- does not rule out foreign competition; not executive & judicial
intended to be an isolationist policy 2) these 3 powers are distributed to 3 branches
3. Calalang vs Williams - SOCIAL JUSTICE 3)these 3 branches are separate & co-equal (exc. when there
-animal drawn vehicles prohibited from passing in certain is blending of powers)
street Purpose? To prevent concentration of powers
-Social justice: insure the well -being & economic security of Where in the Constitution is Separation of Powers found?
the people; humanization of laws & equalization of social & Art 6, 7, 8; legislative, executive & judicial powers are actually
economic forces of the state; bringing greatest good to the distributed in the constitution
greatest number; salus populi est supreme lex
CHECKS & BALANCES- to look into the action of one branch to
- those who have less in life should have more in law ensure that the other branch performs its power/duty
4. Oposa vs Factoran- PROMOTION OF BALANCED & 1) Check on Congress:
HEALTHFUL ECOLOGY
-by Judiciary: judicial review
-twin concepts: intergenerational responsibility &
-by President- veto power
intergenerational justice
2) check on President
-represent their (minors) generation & generations yet
unborn -by judiciary: judicial review

-the judicious management & conservation of the countrys -by Congress: concurrence (in treaties), check on
resources; duty to refrain from impairing the environment appointments, impeachment, override veto

5. Valmonte vs Belmonte- HONEST PUBLIC SERVICE & FULL 3) check on judiciary:

DISCLOSURE -by President: can grant pardon to convict to temper
-to furnish copy to media of those who obtained clean loan harshness of sentence

-right of the people on matters of public concern shall be -by Congress: can limit jurisdiction of courts
recognized; an informed citizenry is vital to the democratic NOT A VALID CHECK- when Congress passes law that does
government not set forth policy but interprets the law interpretation
-right to information is premise of right to speech & of the law is not the province of the legislature
expression; goes hand in hand with full public disclosure & DIRECT CHECK ON JUDICIARY- when Congress passes a law
honest public service that changes the conditions on which the law is based
-2 reqs for right to information: limited to transactions -BLENDING OF POWERS- instances of sharing powers among
involving public interest; no exact definition for public the 3 branches
interest; court has to determine on case-to-case basis; & CASE: Separate Opinion, Justice Puno
information sought not among those excluded by law
- prevents the concentration of legislative, executive, and
-GSIS funds assume public character since GSIS is trustee of judicial powers to a single branch of government by deftly
govt & its employees allocating their exercise to the three branches
6. Akbayan vs Aquino- HONEST PUBLIC SERVICE & FULL -dates back from the time of Aristotle but the modern
DISCLOSURE concept owes to Locke and Montesquieu
-demand copy of JPEPA full text including negotiations -Locke: advocated the proper division of the legislative,
- diplomatic negotiations are covered by the doctrine of executive and federative powers; that executive powers
executive privilege, thus constituting an exception to the should not be placed in one person or group of persons
right to information and the policy of full public disclosure exercising legislative power because it may be too great a
temptation to human frailty
-information on inter-government exchanges prior to
conclusion of treaties may be subject to reasonable - Montesquieu: redefined concept; legislative and executive
safeguards for the sake of national interest powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of
- recognized exceptions: privileged information, military and magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions
may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact
diplomatic secrets and similar matters affecting national
tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner
security and public order
-American Revolution: separation of powers requires a
-presumption that the public interest favors confidentiality
can be defeated only by a strong showing that the watertight compartmentalization of the executive, judicial,
and legislative functions and permits no sharing of
responsibilities of that institution cannot responsibly be
government
fulfilled without access to records of the President's
deliberation -In our constitution, it obtains not through express provision
in the Consti but by actual division in our consti
-principle of separation of powers (1) allows the blending
V. POWERS & STRUCTURE OF PHIL GOVERNMENT:
DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS of some of the executive, legislative, or judicial powers in one
body; (2) does not prevent one branch of government from
-Doc of Separation of Powers has 3 assumptions:
inquiring into the affairs of the other branches to maintain conflict with the Constitution 3) there must be a plebiscite in
the balance of power; (3) but ensures that there is no the political units affected
encroachment on matters within the exclusive jurisdiction of - a province cannot be created without a legislative
the other branches district/city with a population of 250,000/more cannot also
be created without a legislative district
-power to increase allowable membership in the HOR & to
VI. LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT: STRUCTURE
reapportion legislative districts, vested exclusively in
Article 6 Congress
Sec 1 The Legislative power shall be vested in the Congress -when a province is created, a legislative district is created by
of the Phil which shall consist of a Senate & HOR, except to operation of the Consti because the Consti provides that
the extent reserved to the people by the provision on "each province shall have at least 1 representative" in HOR
initiative & referendum.
2 kinds of members of HOR:
-legislative power not exclusive to Congress ; shared with the
1. District representatives- created in 3 ways
people under system of initiative & referendum
2. Party-list- 20 percent of the total number of
-initiative on Consti - no enabling law yet; only for national & representatives including those under the party list
local legislation -To compute: Formula in BANAT
Sec 2 The Senate shall be composed of 24 Senators who Qualifications/disqualifications as a registered party list
shall be elected at large by the qualified voters of the Phils, as (Bagong Bayan):
may be provided by law 1. Represent the marginalized and the underrepresented-
Sec 5, 1 The HOR shall be composed of not more than 250 examples are labor, peasant
members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected 2. Major political parties can be a party-list- show that they
from legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, represent the marginalized and underrepresented
cities, & the Metropolitan Manila Area & those who, as Whats prohibited is registration of religious group; but if
provided by law, shall be elected through a party-list you didnt register your religious org, you can
system.. 3. must not be funded by the government

Sec 5, 2 The party-list reps shall constitute 20 percentum of

the total number of reps including those under the party-list. Seats for the Party-list (VETERANS)
For 3 consecutive terms after the ratification of the COnsti, 1. 20 percent allocation for party-list inviolable
of the seats allocated to party-list reps shall be filled from 2. 2% threshold minimum 2% of the total valid votes cast
the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural for the party-list = entitled to one seat
communities, women, youth.. exc. the religious sector 3. Three-seat limit rule
4. Proportional representation
Structure of Legislative Department- composed of the 1,2,3 rule- different scenarios / Veterans Ruling
Congress of the Phil2 houses Knowing how to compute additional seats
1. Determine the first party (highest votes for party-list)-
-Senate 24 senators; Can only be increased by
give maximum number to the first party (3 seats), to the
constitutional amendment
next parties, cant get 3 seats anymore
-House of Reps not more than 250 2. Determine additional seats to be given to the first party
Can this be increased by legislation/law? Ways of creating if you can only give 1 to fi rst party, cant give additional
legislative district, thereby increasing number of seats to next parties (proportion and rule- cant give
representatives: more seats to those below first party) then possible cant
fill up entire 55 seats
1. Create a province (in the constitution)- allocate a seat for
one representative NEW RULING: BANAT CASE for computation of additional
2. create a city with a pop of at least 250 thousand seats; VETERANS, only for inviol able parameters & first round
(allocating one seat) of allocating seats
3. Pass a district apportionment law/ general CASES:
reapportionment law- create a legislative district: req:
1. Navarro vs Ermita- creation of Province of Dinagat Islands
contiguous (close by, nearby), compact, adjacent
territories -A province may be created: if it has an average annual
Reason for req.? to prevent gerrymandering unfair income, as certified by the Department of Finance, of not less
distribution of legislative district than P20,000,000.00 based on 1991 constant prices & either
Exception: no decided case yet if req. is mandatory, to be of the following requisites: contiguous territory of at least
interpreted literally. Required only as far as practica ble 2,000 sq km, as certified by the Lands Management Bureau or
CASE: Sema vs COMELEC pop of not less than 250,000 as certified by the NSO;
-creation of Shariff Kabunsuan as province provided that the territory need not be contiguous if it
-the creation of any of the four local government units comprises 2/more islands or is separated by a chartered city
province, city, municipality or barangay must comply with or cities w/c do not contribute to the income of the province
three conditions: 1) creation of a local government unit must
follow the criteria fixed in the LGC 2)such creation must not
- territory has reference only to the mass of land area & -to hold that reapportionment can only be made through a
excludes the waters over w/c the political unit exercises general apportionment law, with a review of all the legislative
control districts allotted to each local government unit nationwide,
-failed to comply with pop/territory req would create an inequitable situation where a new city or
province created by Congress will be denied legislative
-gerrymandering is the formation of one legislative district
representation for an indetermi nate period of time
out of separate territories for the purpose of favoring a
candidate or a party - stood at four hundred fifty thousand (450,000), its LD may
still be increased since it has met the minimum population
2. Aquino vs COMELEC- created additional legislative district
requirement of two hundred fifty thousand 250,000;
(LD) for the Province of Camarines Sur by reconfiguring the
not0;necessary it reaches 500,00; a city whose population has
existing 1 st & 2nd LD of the province
increased to more than two hundred fifty thousand (250,000)
- There is no specific provision in the Consti that fixes a shall be entitled to at least one congressional representative
250,000 minimum population that must compose an LD
6. Veterans vs COMELEC- 4 INVIOLABLE PARAMETERS FOR
- a 250,000 minimum population only for a city to be entitled PARTY-LIST
to a representative
a) the 20 percent allocation - the combined number of all
- a city with a population of at least two hundred fifty party-list congressmen shall not exceed twenty percent of the
thousand (250,000) shall have at least one representative total membership of the House of Representatives, including
those elected under the party list.
- its legislative district may still be increased since i t ha s met
b) the 2 percent threshold - only those parties garnering a
the minimum population requirement of 250,000
minimum of two percent of the total valid votes cast for the
-Mariano case limited the application of the 250,000 party-list system are qualified to have a seat in the HOR
minimum pop requirement for cities only to its initial LD. c) the three-seat limit - each qualified party, regardless of the
While Section 5(3), Article VI of the Constitution requires a number of votes it actually obtained, is entitled to a
city to have a minimum pop of 250,000 to be entitled to a maximum of three seats; that is, one qualifying and two
representative, it does not have to increase its pop by additional seats.
another 250,000 to be entitled to an additional district d) proportional representation - the additional seats which a
3. Aldaba vs COMELEC- If laws creating LD are unquestionably qualified party is entitled to shall be computed in proportion
within the ambit of this Courts judicial review power, then to their total number of votes.
there is more reason to hold justiciable subsidiary ques ti ons - Determination of the Total Number of Party-Lists:
impacting on their constitutionality, such as compliance wi th No. of district representatives
constitutional limitation under Section 5(3), Article VI of the ---------------------------------- x .20 = No. of party-list
1987 Consti that only cities with at least 250,000 constituents
.80 representatives
are entitled to representation in Congress
- This formulation means that any increase in the number of
- compliance with the pop requirement in the creation & district representatives, as may be provided by law, will
conversion of LGUs shall be proved exclusively by an NSO necessarily result in a corresponding increase in the number
certification of party-list seats
-the creation by RA 9591 of a legislative district for Malolos -20 percent allocation a mere ceiling
City, carving the city from the former 1st Legislative District, -PROCESS FOR 1 st ROUND:
leaves the town of Bulacan isolated from the rest of the a) is to rank all the participating parties according to the votes
geographic mass of that district. This contravenes the they each obtained
requirement in Section 5(3), Article VI that each LD shall b) The percentage of their respective votes as against the
"comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact, and total number of votes cast for the party-list system is then
adjacent territory determined. All those that garnered at least 2 percent of the
total votes cast have an assured or guaranteed seat in the
4. Tobias vs Abalos- An Act Converting the Mun. of
HOR
Mandaluyong into a Highly Urbanized City to be known as the
-process for 2 nd round/distribution of additional seats see
City of Mandaluyong
BANAT ruling since computation here was overruled
-the creation of a separate congressional district for
Mandaluyong is not a subject separate & distinct from the
7. Bantay Rep vs COMELEC- party list elections must not be
subject of its conversion into a highly urbanized city but is a personality oriented; the people are to vote for sectoral
natural & logical consequence of its conversion into a highly parties, organizations, or coalitions, not for their nominees
urbanized city - Comelec has a constitutional duty to disclose and rel ease
- the present limit of 250 members is not absolute; may be the names of the nominees of the party-list groups
increased, if Congress itself so mandates through a legislative 8. CIBAC vs COMELEC- equal to at least six percent of the total
enactment valid votes cast for all the party list groups, then the first
party shall be entitled to two additional seats or a total of
5. Mariano vs COMELEC- Converting the Mun. of Makati Into
three seats overall
a Highly Urbanized City to be known as the City of Makati
-overruled by BANAT
-reapportionment of legislative districts may be made
9. Bagong Bayani vs COMELEC- party-list system is a social
through a special law justice tool designed not only to give more law to the great
masses of our people who have less in life, but also to ena bl e
them to become veritable lawmakers themselves, needs of a community & not identified with the latter from
empowered to participate directly in the enactment of laws [seeking] an elective office to serve that community
designed to benefit them; intends to make the marginalized -He owned a house in the city & resided there together with
& underrepresented not merely passive recipients of the his family; paid his 1998 community tax & registered as a
State's benevolence, but active participants in the voter therein. To all intents and purposes of the Constitution
mainstream of representative democracy & the law, he is a resident of Cagayan de Oro City & eligible to
- a "party" is "either a political party or a sectoral party or a run for mayor thereof
coalition of parties."; law defines "political party" as "an -the actual, physical & personal presence of herein private
organized group of citizens advocating an ideology or respondent in Cagayan de Oro City is substantial enough to
platform, principles & policies for the general conduct of show his intention to fulfill the duties of mayor & for the
government and which, as the most immediate means of voters to evaluate his qualifications for the mayorship
securing their adoption, regularly nominates and supports
certain of its leaders and members as candidates for public 11. BANAT vs COMELEC- the Constitution left the manner of
office allocating the seats available to party-list reps to the wi s dom
of the legislature
- political parties even the major ones -- may participate in
the party-list elections; but the requisite character of these -In computing the additional seats, the guaranteed seats
parties must be consistent with the purpose of the party-list shall no longer be included because they have already been
system allocated, at one seat each, to every two-percenter. Thus, the
remaining available seats for allocation as "additional s ea ts "
- Filipino-style party-list system, which will "enable" the are the maximum seats reserved under the Party List System
election to the House of Representatives of Filipino citizens, less the guaranteed seats
1. who belong to marginalized &underrepresented sectors, - we do not limit our allocation of additional seats in to the
organizations and parties; and two-percenters
2. who lack well-defined constituencies; but - TWO STEPS IN THE SECOND ROUND OF SEAT ALLOCATION:
3. who could contribute to the formulation & enactment of a) the percentage is multiplied by the remaining available
appropriate legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole seats; the whole integer of the product of the percentage and
- not enough for the candidate to claim representation; party- of the remaining available seats corresponds to a partys
list organization or party must factually & truly represent the share in the remaining available seats
marginalized and underrepresented constituencies b) assign one party-list seat to each of the parties next in rank
A party/organization must not be disqualified under Section 6 until all available seats are completely distributed
of RA 7941, which enumerates the grounds for -20% allocation of party-list representatives is merely a
disqualification as follows: ceiling; however, we cannot allow the continued existence of
(1) It is a religious sect or denomination, organization or a provision in the law which will systematically prevent the
association organized for religious purposes constitutionally allocated 20% party-list representatives fr om
(2) It advocates violence/ unlawful means to seek its goal; being filled

(3) It is a foreign party/organization; - In the second round allocation of additional seats, there is
no minimum vote requirement to obtain a party-list seat
(4) It is receiving support from any foreign government,
foreign political party, foundation, organization, whether -However, a party-list organization has to obtain a sufficient
directly or through any of its officers or members or indirectly number of votes to gain a seat in the 2nd round of seat
through third parties for partisan election purposes; allocation. What is deemed a sufficient number of votes is
dependent upon the circumstances of each election
(5) It violates/ fails to comply with laws, rules or regulations
relating to elections; 12. Ladlad vs COMELEC- choices are not to be legally
prohibited merely because they are different; COMELEC
(6) It declares untruthful statements in its petition; refused to enlist Ladlas as party-list
(7) It has ceased to exist for at least 1 year; or - the enumeration of marginalized & under-represented
(8) It fails to participate in the last 2 preceding elections/ fails sectors is not exclusive; crucial element is not whether a
to obtain at least 2% of the votes cast under the party-list sector is specifically enumerated, but whether a particular
system in the 2 preceding elections for the constituency in organization complies with the requirements of the
which it has registered Constitution and RA 7941
-Qualifications of Party-List Nominees: No person shall be - governmental reliance on religious justification is
nominated as party-list rep unless he is a natural -born citizen inconsistent with this policy of neutrality
of the Philippines, a registered voter, a resident of the - As such, we hold that moral disapproval, without more, is
Philippines for a period of not less than one (1) year not a sufficient governmental interest to justify exclusion of
immediately preceding the day of the election, able to read homosexuals from participation in the party-list system
and write, a bona fide member of the party or organization
which he seeks to represent for at 90 days preceding the day 13. Brotherhood vs COMELEC- The disqualification for fai lure
of the election, and is at least 25 years of age on the day of to get 2% party-list votes in 2 preceding elections should be
the election understood in light of the Banat ruling that party-list groups
or organizations garnering less than 2% of the party-list votes
10. Torayno vs COMELEC- disqualification of Emano as may yet qualify for a seat in the allocation of additional sea ts
mayoral candidate; failed to meet the one-year residence
requirement - a party-list group or organization which qualified in the
second round of seat allocation cannot now validly be
-in requiring candidates to have a mini mum period of delisted for the reason alone that it garnered less than 2% in
residence in the area in which they seek to be elected, the the last two elections
Consti or the law intends to prevent the possibility of a
"stranger or newcomer unacquainted with the conditions &
VII. QUALIFICATIONS & TERM OF OFFICE
Section 3. No person shall be a Senator unless he is a natural - in the continuity of his service for the full term of which he
born citizen of the Philippines and, on the day of the election, was elected
is at least thirty-five years of age, able to read and write, a -Problem: When you are removed from office, can you run
registered voter, and a resident of the Philippines for not les s
again (making it 3 rd term for senator)? if middle of term you
than two years immediately preceding the day of the election
were removed from office, will running again make it 2 terms
Section 4. The term of office of the Senators shall be six years
still? YES. It was interrupted. Involuntary (interrupted term i s
and shall commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at
noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their not consecutive with the next term. Only uninterrupted is
election. No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive)
consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for CASES:
any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption
in the continuity of his service for the full term of which he 1. Dimaporo vs. Mitra- Dimaporo was elected Rep for
was elected the 2nd LD of Lanao del Su; filed COMELEC a Certificate of
Section 6. No person shall be a Member of the House of Candidacy for the position of Regional Governor of the
Representatives unless he is a natural -born citizen of the ARMM so the HOR excluded him from the roll
Philippines and, on the day of the election, is at least twenty- Grounds by which term may be shortened:
five years of age, able to read and write, and, except the
party-list representatives, a registered voter in the district in a) Section 13, Article VI: Forfeiture of his seat by holding any
which he shall be elected, and a resident thereof for a period other office or employment in the government or any
of not less than one year immediately preceding the day of subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including
the election.cralaw government-owned or controlled corporations or
subsidiaries;
Section 7. The Members of the House of Representatives
shall be elected for a term of three years which shall begin, b) Section 16 (3): Expulsion as a disciplinary action for
unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth disorderly behavior;
day of June next following their election. No Member of the c) Section 17: Disqualification as determined by resoluti on of
House of Representatives shall serve for more than three the Electoral Tribunal in an election contest; and,
consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for
d) Section 7, par. 2: Voluntary renunciation of office
any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption
in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he -rather than cut short the term of office of elective public
was elected.cralaw officials, this statutory provision seeks to ensure that such
Section 8. Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular officials serve out their entire term of office by discouraging
election of the Senators and the Members of the House of them from running for another public office and thereby
Representatives shall be held on the second Monday of May cutting short their tenure by making it clear that should they
CASE: SJS vs Drug Board fail in their candidacy, they cannot go back to their former
-Aquilino Pimentel, Father of LGC position
-students, private employees, public employees can be - term of office: may not be extended or shortened by the
required to undergo drug testing legislature; tenure: the period during which an officer
-candidates for public office, cant be required; add actually holds the office may be affected by circumstances
qualification by consti amendment within or beyond the power of said officer. Tenure may be
NATURE of qualifications: shorter than the term or it may not exist at all. These
-exclusive & continuing (they must be possessed for the situations will not change the duration of the term of offic e
entire duration of members incumbency) -when an elective official covered thereby files a certificate of
candidacy for another office, he is deemed to have
RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT: voluntarily cut short his tenure, not his term. The term
Residence to be construed as domicile, not actual residence remains and his successor, if any, is allowed to serve its
unexpired portion
-How to prove intent to return? establish some degree of
permanence (beach house not of that nature); intention not 2. Gaminade vs COA- term of CSC chairman & members:
to abandon/animus manendi (left place only to pursue appointed by the President with the consent of the COA for a
studies); intent to return/animus revertendi term of 7 years without reappointment
-Separate Opinion of Justice Puno: Domicile has been defined -term: the time during which the officer may claim to hold
as an individuals permanent home or the place to which office as of right, and fixes the interval after which the several
whenever absent for business or for pleasure, one intends to
incumbents shall succeed one another | tenure: period of
return and depends on facts and circumstances in the sense
time during which the incumbent actually holds the office
that they disclose intent.
-Macalintalvs COMELEC: domicile of origin is not easily lost. - served as de facto officer in good faith until 2000 & thus
To successfully effect a change of domicile, one must entitled to receive her salary and other emoluments for
demonstrate an actual removal or an actual change of actual service rendered
domicile; bona fide intention of abandoning the former place 3. Socrates vs COMELEC- recall of Socrates
of residence and establishing a new one; and acts which
correspond with purpose - After3 consecutive terms, an elective local official cannot
seek immediate reelection for a 4th term. The prohibited
election refers to the next regular election for the same
TERM VS. TENURE office following the end of the third consecutive term. Any
Section 4 (2), No Senator shall serve for more than two subsequent election, like recall election, is no longer covered
consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for by the prohibition for two reasons: a subsequent election like
any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption a recall election is no longer an immediate reelection after3
consecutive terms; the intervening period constitutes an
involuntary interruption in the continuity of service.

President: Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III

Vice: Jejomar Binay
Senate President: Juan Ponce Enrile
House Speaker: Feliciano Belmonte, Jr.

-TREATY: must be concurred in by at least 2/3 of all members

of Senate
-each house may determine the rules of its proceedings.. &
with concurrence of two-thirds of all its members, suspend,
expel a member