ARTICLE IV.

Legislative Department
Section 1. The legislative power shall be vested in the
Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate and
a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to
the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.

LEGISLATIVE POWER
- Authority to make laws and to alter or appeal them

Advantages of bi-cameralism
Body with national perspective
More careful study of legislation
Makes legislature less susceptible to control by the
Executive
Serves as training ground for national leaders

Two kinds of legislative power in republican systems
Original power is possessed by sovereign people
Derivative power has been delegated by the sovereign
people to legislative bodies and is subordinate to the
original power of the people

Other ways to classify legislative power
Constituent power to amend or revise the Constitution
o People exercise this through amendatory process
Ordinary power to pass ordinary laws
o The people exercise this through initiative and
referendum

Two kinds of limits on legislative power
Substantive curtail the contents of a law (ex. No law
which impairs freedom of speech may be passed)
Procedural curtail the manner of passing law

*Congress may legislate on any matter, but it cannot pass
irrepealable laws.

INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
- Power of the people directly to propose and enact laws
or approve or reject any act or law or part thereof passed
by the Congress or local legislative body
Garcia v. Commission on Elections (September 30, 1994)
Facts:
Pambayang Kapsyahan Blg 10 of Morong, Bataan agreed
for the inclusion of the municipality of Morong as part of
the Subic Special Economic Zone
Petitioners petitioned for local initiative and/or
referendum to annul the said resolution
Vice Mayor de Leon wrote a letter to COMELECs
Executive Director to deny the petition because it will
promote divisiveness, counter-productivity, and futility
COMELEC denied petition stating that it is merely a
resolution and not an ordinance
Court, however, granted the petition.
Statutes Involved:
RA 6745: Act providing for a system of initiative and
referendum and appropriating funds therefor.
RA 7160 or Local Government Code of 1991
Issue: WoN Pambayang Kapasyahan Blg. 10 is the proper
subject of the initiative
Respondent: Contends that under the LGC, only an
ordinance can be subject of initiative
Held/Ratio: Yes. Respondents reading of the LGC is rejected.
The Constitution includes ordinances, and resolutions.

NOTE:
Three systems of initiative:
Initiative on constitution petition proposing
amendments to the Constitution
Initiative on statutes petition proposing to enact a
national legislation
Initiative on local legislation petition proposing to enact
a regional, provincial, city, municipal, or barangay law,
resolution, or ordinance
NON-DELEGABILITY OF LEGISLATIVE POWER

Three ideas behind the non-delegability of legislative power:
Doctrine of separation of powers
Concept of due process of law
Delegata potestas non potest delegari - no delegated
powers can be further delegated

Theories for justification for delegating of legislative powers
unto administrative agencies:
Non-legislative body may be authoried to fill up the
details of a statute
So Congress may pass contingent legislative which leaves
another body the business of ascertaining the facts
necessary to bring the law into actual operation

Completeness and sufficiency of standards (to determine if it
is a valid delegation)
Completeness: it must set forth a policy that is complete
Standard: limits are sufficiently determinate or
determinable to which the delegate must conform in the
performance of his functions
Eastern Shipping Lines v. POEA
Facts:
Vitaliano Saco was Chief Officer of a boat when killed in
Tokyo, Japan
His widow sued for damages under EO 797 and Memo
Ciricular No. 2 of POEA
Petitioner, owner of the vessel, argues that complaint
should not have been cognizable by
Tablarin v. Gutierrez
Facts:
Petitions assail the constitutionality of RA 2382 as the
Board of Medical Education fails to establish the
necessary standard to be delegate
It was decided that the standards set for subordinate
legislation in the exercise of rule-making authority is
necessarily broad and abstract
o Mr. Justice Fernando in Edu v. Ericta:
Standard may be either expressed or
implied.
If expressed, non-delegation objection is
easily met.
It could be implied from the policy and
purpose of the act, considered as a whole
--- standard doesnt need to be spelled out
completely.
Free Telephone Workers Union v. Minister of Labor
Facts:
Petitioners assail the constitutionality of delegating the
Minister of Labor the jurisdiction over labor disputes
under Blg. 130
Decided that it is not on its face unconstitutional for
being violative of the delegation of power
Notes:
Doctrine of non-delegation has been made to adopt to the
complexities of modern governments
Difficulty lies in the fixing of the limit and extent of
authotiry
While the courts have created means to lay down general
principles, it is best to decide each case based on its
environment
A rigid application of the non-delegation doctrine would
be an obstacle to nationalefforts at development and
progress.
Professor Jaffe: power should be delegated where there
is agreement that a task must be performed and it cannot
be effectively performed by the legislature without
assistance of a delegate or without wasting time
o Delegation commonly indicated where the
relation to be regulated are highly technical or
regulation requires a course of continuous
decision

Cebu Oxygen & Acetylene Co., Inc. v. Secretary Drilon
Facts:
RA 6640 was passed directing the minimum wage rates.
Sec. Drilon issued pertinent rules implementing the
provision of RA 6640
o Added Section 8, which prohibits employer from
crediting anniversary wage increases negotiated
under a CBA against such.
Petitioner: this section is null and void because it unduly
expands provisions of the said law.
Issue: WoN an implementing order of the DOLE can provide
for a prohibition not contemplated by the law it seeks to
implement
Held: No. It is a fundamental rule that implementing rules
cannot add or detract from the provisions of law it is designed to
implement.
Tatad v. Secretary of Energy
Facts:
RA 8180 (which deregulates the downstream oil
industry) has two phases:
o Transition (August 12, 1996)
o Full deregulation (February 8, 1997)
implemented through EO 372
EO by Ramos declare the full deregulation of the
downstream oil industry
Petitioners challenge the constitutionality of RA 8180
and EO 392.
o It is undue delegation, does not define when it is
practicable to recommend to the president, no
specific standard. Fails the completeness and
sufficiency of standard test.
o EO advanced the date of full deregulation for it
illegally considered the depletion of the OPSF
fund as a factor.
Issue: WoN RA 8180 (Sec. 15) and EO 392 are constitutional.
Held:
1. RA 8180 - Yes. It is complete and sufficiently provides for
the standard.
2. EO 392 - No. Executive department failed to follow the
standards by RA 8180 when it considered the depletion
of OPSF fund. Executive is bereft of any right to alter
either by subtraction or addition the standards set in.
People v. Dacuycuy
RA 4670 describes a penalty, giving a range of the fine
(Php100-1000) and imprisonment but with no range of
how long.
Issue: WoN the penal provision is an undue delegation of
legislative power, the duration of penalty of imprisonment left
solely to the courts discretion
Respondent: prohibition against undue delegation of
power is concerned only with the power to make laws
and not to interpret it.
Held: Yes.
It is not for the courts to fix the term of imprisonment
where no points of reference have been provided by the
legislature.
When the courts are said to exercise discretion, it must
be a mere legal discretion that is exercised in discerning
the course prescribed by law and which when discerned
is the duty of the court to follow.
Employees Confederation v. National Wages Commission
Petition: ECOP is questioning the validity of Wage Order of
the Regional Tripartite Wages and Productivity Board,
promulgated by RA 6727 (An act rationalizing wage policy
determination by establishing the mechanism and proper
standards therefore / Labor code of the Philippines, fixing new
wage rates, providing wage incentives for industrial dispersal to
the countryside and other purposes)
Which provides for new wage rates, prescribing new
minimum wage rates for all regions
Facts:
Court tends to agree with the National Wages
Commission
There are 2 methods for wage determination*. And, shift
from first to second method brought about labor disputes
arising from wage distortions, which was resolved by
grievance procedures, perceived by lawmakers as
ineffective
Usually, disputes are subjects of CBAs however it is seen
that these didnt help that much in correcting wage
distortions
Thus, RA 6727 was created to rationalize wages by:
o Creation of the board to police wages
o By giving the board the power to do so
Court is not convinced that this is an unlawful act of
legislation because though the Congress has the power to
fix rates, it can delegate it provided that it leaves
sufficient standards. And it did in Art. 124.
Notes (not super important to the case, but Fr. B might ask):
2 methods of wage determination*
o Floor-wage method: fixing of determinate
amount that would be added to existing minimum
wage; was adopted in earlier wage orders
o Salary-ceiling method: wage adjustment is
applies to employees receiving a certain
denominated salary ceiling
Other cases
Gerochi vs. DENR
o Alleged that the power delegated to regulated
electricity charging is undue delegation of power
o Court: no, because it was complete and it has
standards
Attrition Act (RA 9335 of 1995)
o BIR and BOC to give awards to those who surpass
BIR target and impose sanctions on those who fall
short
o Validity of law was challenge on the ground that
delegation to the President the power to set
targets was invalid
o Court: law is complete and has standards
Penal rules
For administrative regulation to have the force of penal
law, necessary that such violation is made a crime by the
delegating statute PLUS the penalty, and regulation must
be published
Separation of powers in local governments
Separation of powers not strict on the level of LGUs
Local law-making bodies may be given executive
functions.
UNDERSTAND ME AGAIN LATER

Section 2. The Senate shall be composed of twenty-four
Senators who shall be elected at large by the qualified voters
of the Philippines, as may be provided by law.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator unless he is a natural-
born citizen of the Philippines and, on the day of the election,
is at least thirty-five years of age, able to read and write, a
registered voter, and a resident of the Philippines for not less
than two years immediately preceding the day of the election.
Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drugs Board
RA 9165 and COMELEC Res. No. 6486 is being contented.
This resolution prescribed rules and regulations on
mandatory drug testing of canddiates for public office.
Pimentel: this resolution illegally imposes another
qualification on candidates for senator.
o Beyond the 5 requirements and the nuisance
candidates provisions, candidates need not
possess any other qualification/
Court: RA 9165 unconstitutional.
Section 4. The term of office of the Senators shall be six years
and shall commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at
noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election.
No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms.
Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time
shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of
his service for the full term of which he was elected.

Section 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed
of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless
otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from legislative
districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the
Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of
their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and
progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall be
elected through a party-list system of registered national,
regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.
(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per
centum of the total number of representatives including
those under the party list. For three consecutive terms after
the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats
allocated to party-list representatives shall be filled, as
provided by law, by selection or election from the labor,
peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities,
women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by
law, except the religious sector.
(3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable,
contiguous, compact, and adjacent territory. Each city with a
population of at least two hundred fifty thousand, or each
province, shall have at least one representative.
(4) Within three years following the return of every census,
the Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative
districts based on the standards provided in this section.

Sectoral Representation and Party-list Representation
Sectoral representation: humble gesture of extending
protection to the interests of groups which are not
adequately attended to in normal deliberations
Party-list representation:
o Not synonymous with sectoral representation;
o Seeks to avoid the dilemma of choice of sectors who
constitute the members of the sectors;
o No reserved seats for sector every voter has 2 votes
Other notes
o Seats should be reserved to sectoral groups (borne
out of the fact that they have the inability to compete
in the political process)
o They should compete like any other party (meant to
motivate them to strentgen their organization)
o Religious sectors cannot be represented by law
But a member of the religious sector may be
sector rep, but not representing said sector.
o Temporary regime of sectoral representation

Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC
Facts:
COMELEC allegedly violated the 4 paramters in certain
resolutions
4 inviolable paramaters in determining the winners in a
Philippine-style party-list election:
o 20% allocation combined no. of all partylist
congressmen must not exceed 20% of the total
HOR, including those elected under it
o 2% threshold only parties garnering a
minimum of 2% of the total valid votes cast for
the party-list are qualified to have a seat in the
HOR
o 3-seat limit: each qualified party is entitled to a
max. of 3 seats one qualifying and 2 additional
seats
o Proportional representation: additional seats
shall be computed in proportion to their total
number of votes
Court: struck down the said resolutions in grave abuse of
discretion
o COMELECs duty is to craft rules, regulations,
methods & formulas
Congress enacted RA 7941, which will promote
proportional representation in the election of reps to the
HOR and a full, free, and open party system to attain the
broadest possible representation of the HOR
Issues:
Is the 20% allocation for party-list representatives
mandatory or merely a ceiling? (or should the 20% be
filled up the whole time?)
Is the 2% threshold and 3-seat limit constitutional?
How should the additional seats of a qualified party be
determined (if No. 2 answer is yes)?
Ratio/Held:
On the 20% allocation mandatory to be filled up or not?
o No.
o While Congress is vested power to define and
prescribe tge mechanics of the party-list system
of representation, the Constitution explicitly sets
down the percentage of the total members in the
HOR.
o Re: the strict application of 2% allocation will be
a mathematical impossibility, Congress has the
prerogative to change this requirement
On the 2% threshold is it unconstitutional?
o No.
o This law is consistent with the constitution and
essence of representation.
Three-seat per party-limit is it unconstitutional?
o No.
o Such three-limit ensures the enrty of various
interest-representations into the legislature; thus,
no single group, no matter how large the
membership, would dominate the party-list seats,
if not the entire House
Method of Allocating Additional Seats
o Step 1. Rank all participating parties according to
the votes they obtained
Ratio of party = votes/total votes
Highest votes = First Party
o Step 2. Determine no. of seats First Party is
entitled to
Other parties will have less seats than the
First Party
Ratio will always be less than 1:1
No rounding off
Fractional membership cannot be a whole
membership
Formula for additional seats for the First Party
o If votes without rounding off = at least 6% of total
valid votes first party will get 3 seats
o If votes without rounding off = 4% < x < 6%
First Part will get 2 seats
o If votes without rounding off = < 4% First
Party will just get 1 seat
o **applicable only in determining the first partys
additional seats; cannot be used for the
remaining parties.
Formula for Additional Seats of Other Qualified Parties
Discarded suggestion:
o allocate 1 seat for every additional proportion of
votes obtraned equavelnt to the 2% vote
requirement for the 1
st
seat
Simple and comprehensible
But problematic for lopsided votes.
THUS THIS SUGGESTION WAS
DISCARDED.
Ang Bagong Bayani v. COMELEC
Petition:
Challenging Omnibus Res. No. 3785, which approved the
participation of 154 parties, challenging specifically the
qualification of respondent parties (too many to
mention!), arguing that party-list was intended to benefit
marginalized and underrerpresented not the mainstream
political parties, and non-marginalized and over-
represented

Issues, HELD and RATIO:
Whether or not political parties may participate in the
party-list elections
o Yes. The purpose of the system is to open it, so
that they have a voice in the Assembly.
o Party either a political party or sectoral, or
coalition of parties.
Whether or not the party-list system is exclusive to
marginalized and underrepresented
o Though political parties may participate, it does
not mean that any party may join.
o Rationale of the policy:
Proportional representation
not about numbers, but
representation of MARGINALIZED
AND UNREPRESENTED, the
laborers, fisherfolks, etc.
Marginalized and underrepresented
Not enough to claim
representation; have to truly
represent it.
Lack of well-defined constituency
Points again with disparate
interested identified with the
marginalized and
underrepresented
o OSGs Contentions
WRONG. The super rich cannot be part of
a party-list because its only for the
marginalized.
No of votes of concerned party
No of votes of the First Party
x No. of additional
seats allocated to
first party
Notes:
Guidelines for Screening Participants
o Must represent the marginalized and
underrepresented, which must be shown through
its orgs laws, history, track records, etc.
o Major political parties are allowed but they must
represent the interests of the marginalized and
underrepresented
o Must not be disqualified
Not a religious sect
Not advocating violence
Not a foreign party
Not receiving support from foreign orgs
Not complying with election laws
Ceases to exist in 1 one year
Fails to get at least 2% votes in the last 2
election
o Must not organized by the government
o Nominees must comply with law
o Nominees also represent the underrepresented
sectors
o Nominiess must be able to contribute to the
formulation and enactment of laws benefitting
the nation as a whole

Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party, et al. vs. Comelec, et al.
Aside from those validly proclaimed, are there other
candidates that should be proclaimed as winners?
Issues:
Whether or not Labo v. Comelec and Grego v. Comelec be
deemed applicable to determining the winners
Whether or not the votes cast for disqualified groups be
deductions from the total votes cast for the party-list
system
Held/Ratio:
Labo and Grego not applicable.
o Ineligibility of a candidate receiving majority
votes does not entitle the eligible candidate
receiving the next highest number of votes be
declared
o Votes cast