ARTICLE IX

A. Common Provisions
Section 1 The Constitutional Commissions, which shall be independent,
are the Civil Service Commission, the Commission on Elections, and the
Commission on Audit.
As we were saying, you take note that under section 1, it says which shall be
independent because this is very significant. This phrase justifies why the 3
Constitutional Commissions are called Constitutional Commissions. If you are asked,
What are the Constitutional Commissions provided in the Constitution? It will also
be correct to say that aside from the Civil Service Commission, the Commission
on Elections, and the Commission on Audit, it is also correct to say Human
Rights Commission because that is also a commission that is provided in the 1987
Philippines Constitution and likewise the Office of the Ombudsman, it is also a
Constitutional Office.
But what makes the 3 Constitutional Commissions the important
commissions?
Why are they so called Constitutional Commissions?
What sets them apart from Human Rights Commission and Office of the
Ombudsman and such other constitutional offices?
They are called Constitutional commissions because they perform vital
functions of the Government. It is essential that their independence must be
protected against outside influences, and political pressures, as such they enjoy
independent power of appointment etc., which is found in Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6.
So what are the Constitutional Commissions? Why are they called independent?
There is justification for that, in section 2.
Section 2 No member of a Constitutional Commission shall, during his
tenure, hold any other office or employment. Neither shall he engage in
the practice of any profession or in the active management or control of
any business which, in any way, may be affected by the functions of his
office, nor shall he be financially interested, directly or indirectly, in any
contract with, or in any franchise or privilege granted by the Government,
any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including
government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries.
Take note practice of profession does not include teaching. A
commissioner of any Constitutional Commission who is a lawyer, if he teaches
that is not considered practice of a profession. In regard to business, only
active management of a business is prohibited. Ownership of business is not
prohibited.

Section 3 The salary of the Chairman and the Commissioners shall be fixed
by law and shall not be decreased during their tenure.

Then salary in section 3, take note the important part of sec. 3 is shall not
be decreased during their tenure because that is one of the conditions that
makes the Commission and the commissioners significant or important.

Section 4 The Constitutional Commissions shall appoint their officials and

employees in accordance with law.

And then sec. 4, they will appoint their employees in accordance with law,
but when these independent commissions appoint their officials they must do so in
accordance with Civil Services Law, Rules and Regulations

Section 5 The Commission shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Their approved

annual appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released.

Then The Commission shall enjoy fiscal autonomy, what is meant by

this phrase? It means their approved annual appropriations shall be
automatically and regularly released, that is the meaning of fiscal autonomy.

So therefore what are the constitutional guarantees of the independence of

the commissions?

1. Section 3, Protecting the salary of the members

2. Section 4, They have Independent power to appoint their employees
3. Section 5, They enjoy fiscal autonomy, meaning to say that their budget
shall be automatically and regularly released
4. Section 6 Power sitting en banc, to promulgate their own rules of procedures

5. Section 1 Article 9 b c and d. meaning to say it is found in all the

Constitutional Commissions. The members are given a fixed term.
6. Section 2 Article 11 They are removable only by impeachment
7. No member of the Commission may be appointed or designated in the
temporary or acting capacity.
So these are the reasons why the Constitutional Commissions are deemed
independent.

Section 6 Each Commission en banc may promulgate its own rules

concerning pleadings and practice before it or before any of its offices.
Such rules, however, shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive
rights.

The Supreme Court may not dis-approve internal rules promulgated by the
Commissions because these commissions are independent bodies. The power of the
SC overrules issued by quasi-judicial bodies found in Article 8 Section 5 Number 5
does not apply to Constitutional Commissions because under Article 8 Section 5
Number 5 the SC has the power overrules issued by quasi-judicial bodies. ???

Section 7 Each Commission shall decide by a majority vote of all its

Members, any case or matter brought before it within sixty days from the
date of its submission for decision or resolution. A case or matter is
deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last
pleading, brief, or memorandum required by the rules of the Commission
or by the Commission itself. Unless otherwise provided by this
Constitution or by law, any decision, order, or ruling of each Commission
may be brought to the Supreme Court on on certiorari by the aggrieved
party within thirty days from receipt of a copy thereof.
In section 7 take note of all its Members the provision itself defines when
a decision is deemed submitted for decision, a decision deemed submitted for
resolution or decision upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or memorandum
required by the rules of the Commission or by the Commission itself. Then the ruling
of the Commission will be brought to the SC on on certiorari within thirty days from
receipt of a copy the decision.
In Estrella vs. COMELEC, the rule, the provision is reiterated that each
Commission shall decide by a majority vote of all its Members any case of matter

brought before it. I emphasized the word all its Members to differentiate it from
the rule in the SC that cases or matters shall be decided by the SC by only those
members who participated in the deliberations. If any member of the SC did not
participate in the deliberations and voted thereon, then they are not included in the
votation. That is the difference between the SC and the Commissions.
In Ambil vs. COMELEC, before a resolution or decision is signed or
promulgated, there is no valid resolution or decision. A final decision becomes
binding only after it is promulgated, promulgation means to say is that all the
Commissioners have already signed and then it goes through the process of
releasing the decision. If the decision or draft of the decision is still being
rounded to the Commissioners then there is no decision yet. It has not
been promulgated.
In the case of Dumayas vs. COMELEC, it happened that there were only 4
remaining Members of the COMELEC. If there are only 4 remaining members of
the COMELEC out of 7, a 3 against 1 vote is a valid decision en banc,
because there are 7 Commissioners, majority of the 7 is 4 then they can
validly decide a case, wala namang iba na eh. There were only 4 of them left as
members of the Commission, so if they vote on a case and the voting is 3
against 1, then there is valid decision. It is a decision en banc.
Under section 7 decisions of the Commissions could be reviewed only by the
SC by on certiorari under rules 65. However under the revised administrative
circular RA 7902, Judgments or final orders of quasi-judicial agencies may be
appealed to the Court of Appeals within 15 days from notice. This is
pursuant to section 7 which says unless otherwise provided by the
Constitution or by Law.
On certiorari to the SC may be resorted to, when there is no other speedy or
adequate remedy. A case before the COMELEC may be brought to the SC in on
certiorari only after the requisite motion for reconsideration has been filed and
resolved by it.
In the COMELEC, a case is decided by any of the 2 sub-commissions and if
the aggrieved party will now file first a motion for reconsideration but the motion for
reconsideration is filed in the en banc. So before a case may be appealed to
the SC by on certiorari there must be a motion for reconsideration and the
motion must be filed in the en banc. All of the 7 commissioners will have to decide
on the motion for reconsideration and only when it is denied then the aggrieved
party may go to the SC on certiorari.
What we just stated is the general rule but there is an exemption to that, the
exception is that when the issue raised is one purely of law. The general
rule is when a motion for reconsideration must be filed in the en banc from
a decision of a division. There are 2 divisions in the COMELEC and then the
aggrieved party in a division decision must file a motion for reconsideration

first in the en banc before it can go to the SC on certiorari. That is the

general rule.
This is the case of Guzman vs. COMELEC, Ting and Garcia. This was a case
that was file against Ting and Garcia for issuing a treasury warrant during the
prohibited period, this is the election period. Actually there were 2 cases that were
filed against Ting and Garcia. One is that they were engaged in the violation of the
Omnibus Election Code in engaging on public works because they purchased the
land for the cemetery, the one that is flooded every time. The parcel of land was
bought during the election period. The second case is because Ting and Garcia
issued treasury warrants in payment thereof.
The case was filed here in Cagayan, which was later on dismissed (takot daw
ung mga tao ). Guzman went to COMELEC; it was dismissed again by the division
so the next step would have been if we follow the general rule which is to file a
motion for reconsideration to the en banc, but what they did was to go directly to
the SC on certiorari. It was contested by Ting and Garcia, but the SC said it is alright
because the case was an exemption to the rule. They can go directly to the SC
because the issue was about purely an interpretation of the law; the issue
is purely a legal issue. Whether or not it is against the Omnibus Election
Code to issue a treasury warrants and to engage to public works.
When the SC made that decision, they had the occasion to define what is
public works? And they said that the buying of the cemetery is not considered as
public works. Public works means you build a bridge, you construct a road. So dapa
the ung isang issue but the second issue the SC said it is a violation of the Omnibus
Election Code to issue treasury warrants so what the SC practically said was Patay
kang bata kang Ting ka because of the ossuance of the Treasury Warrants during
the prohibited period. So the case is demanded to the RTC Branch 5 for trial.
The case was filed against Ting and Garcia. Fortunately for Ting, the case was
dismissed. It was decided by Judge Jet Aquino. Well according to some observers,
the prosecution failed to prove the issuance of the treasury warrants. What proof do
they need, when it is clear that the treasury warrant was issued during the election
period? Bakit na dismiss? It was because Atty. Raymond Guzman who was the
private prosecutor, presented his the brother Engr. Guzman as the witness.
Unfortunately he admitted to the defense that he has no connection to the issuance
of the Treasury Warrants, in other words he was not a witness who knows the
circumstances of the issuance of the treasury warrants. What Atty. Guzman should
have done is to present the treasurer or anybody in the Treasurers Office.

The case or matter referred to by the Constitution that may be brought to the
SC on certiorari under section 7 article 9c are those that relate to the exercise of
adjudicatory or quasi-judicial powers.
Section 8 Each Commission shall perform such other functions as may be
provided by law.
COMELEC has two powers. One would be the conduct and the
administration of the Elections, any matter, everything that has something to
do with the elections, COMELEC will handle it. Second is to adjudicate it as a
judge, as a quasi-judicial body, as the sole judge of election contest. When it
performs those functions, it is said to be performing adjudicatory functions.
Decisions of the COMELEC that was made during the exercise of adjudicatory
functions are cases that are brought to the SC. The decisions of the COMELEC about
election issues are not brought to SC. For example, if COMELEC decides to
postpone the elections in one locality that is not adjudicatory, that is
administrative.
B. The Civil Service Commission
What is Civil Service? If you read the constitution and its provisions, it only
says that the CSC is like this.. The CSC has this powers.. It is composed of.. but it
does say or define what is civil service. It is defined in the constitutional provisions
the definition of civil service.
The term Civil Service came from India, it was introduced in India during the
British regime. Then it was copied by the British then adapted it on Great Britain
and it was copied in the US and was brought to the Philippines.
Civil Service refers to the professional body of officials employed by
the state in non-military and non-judicial state.
Section 1 (1) The civil service shall be administered by the Civil Service
Commission composed of a Chairman and two Commissioners who shall be
natural-born citizens of the Philippines and, at the time of their
appointment, at least thirty-five years of age, with proven capacity for
public administration, and must not have been candidates for any elective
position in the elections immediately preceding their appointment.
Notice that if you compare the qualifications of commissioners of the CSC,
the COMELEC and COA, CSC Commissioners dont need to be a college graduate.
The provision does not provide college degree among the commissioners. COMELEC
Commissioners are specified, majority are Lawyers. COA, CPAs and Lawyers.

(2) The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be appointed by the

President with the consent of the Commission on Appointments for a term
of seven years without reappointment. Of those first appointed, the
Chairman shall hold office for seven years, a Commissioner for five years,
and another Commissioner for three years, without reappointment.
Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the unexpired term of the
predecessor. In no case shall any Member be appointed or designated in a
temporary or acting capacity.

Many of these commissions (CSC, COMELEC, COA) and some other offices
and Commissions have multiple members. The length of their appointments are 7
years, 5 years and 3 years, because every after 2 years, may na-appoint na isa or
dalawa. One thing that you should remember is that no case shall any Member
be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting capacity. Take note of
the qualifications.
Section 2 (1) The civil service embraces all branches, subdivisions,
instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government, including governmentowned or controlled corporations with original charters.
What is the significance of the Original Charters, lahat ng Govt owned or
controlled corporation (GOCC) is subject to CSC Law provided they have original
charters, meaning to say that these corporations are created by a special
charter and not under the Corporation Code. There are corporations;
especially the GOCCs that were created under the Corporation Code but the recent
ones are created by a special law, nung panahon ni Marcos may Presidential
Decree. Even under the 1987 Constitution, the PDs are considered laws.
So the test to determine whether a GOCC is subject to Civil Service
Law Rules and Regulations is whether it has original charters. If it has
charters then it is covered by Civil Service Law Rules and Regulations, otherwise it is
not. Therefore water districts incorporated under PD 198 are GOCC with
original charters because PD 198 is a special law. (Davao City Water
District vs. CSC)
PAGCOR is under CSC since it was created under PD 1869, a special law.
So what is the scope of Civil Service? The scope of the Civil Service covers all
branches, instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government, including
government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters.
(2) Appointments in the civil service shall be made only according to merit
and fitness to be determined, as far as practicable, and, except to

positions which are policy-determining, primarily confidential, or highly

technical, by competitive examination.
Draw your attention to number 2, section 2. This particular provision
provides the classification of positions in the Civil Service. It is classified
in the competitive or non-competitive.
We state a general rule that appointments on the Civil Service shall be made
only according to merit and fitness, therefore all appointments in the Civil
Service is according to merit and fitness. Do not be confused with other
phrases because what is written is to be determined, as far as practicable, and,
except to positions which are policy-determining, primarily confidential, or highly
technical, by competitive examination. Magulo. Kaya ang pagbasa dapat neto
Appointments in the Civil Service shall be made only according to merit
and fitness and as far as practicable by competitive examination, except
policy determining, primarily confidential, or highly technical.

So what are 2 classifications of positions in the Civil Service?

Competitive and Non-Competitive Positions, appointments to both of these
positions are made according to merit and fitness. That is the general rule.
Appointments to the competitive positions shall be determined by
competitive examinations it corresponds to the Career Service. Noncompetitive positions are those by which by their nature are policy determining,
primarily confidential or highly technical. No competitive examination is
required, it corresponds to non-career service.
Then we go to the role of the civil service. The role of the civil service in
the appointing process is limited to the determination of the qualifications
of the candidates for the appointment. They place no role in the choice of a
person to be appointed, that role is given to the appointing authority. Civil service is
to provide qualifications; sometimes they give 3 to 5 qualifications then submitted
to the appointing authority, and the appointing authority can appoint any of the
candidates.
NOTE: The numbering of the candidates names on the list by the Civil
Service for appointments or for promotion is not the basis of a candidate if he/she is
qualified or not. So if a name is placed on the number 1 list, he/she cannot assume
that he/ she is the most qualified because he/she is on number 1. That is wrong. All
the names on the list that is provided are qualified. The appointing officer has all
the prerogatives to appoint anyone among those names who was listed. That is the
case of Lapinid vs. CSC, sited by Bernas.

In the case of Aquino vs. CSC, after an extending an appointment, the

appointing authority withdraws his appointment and extends it to somebody else
that is when the Civil Service comes in, why? Because once an appointment has
been made, that is considered permanent and the appointing authority has no
authority to remove that appointed person except for cause.
Notice the difference between the two cases, on Lapinid vs, CSC, CSC has
limited authority (walang pakialam). While on the second case, Aquino vs. CSC, CSC
has the authority (may pakialam).

(3) No officer or employee of the civil service shall be removed or

suspended except for cause provided by law.
The phrase except for cause provided by law is different on as maybe
provided by law If the provision says provided by law, it means to say that the
law is already in existence at the time that it is used. For example, it is the basis of
the removal of an employee; it must already be in existence at the time of the
removal.
There are 2 cases here which were cited by Bernas, first Delos Santos vs.
Mallare is a 1950 case, it is about security of tenure. All employees have security
of tenure, because they are only removed for cause provided by law. In this case,
security of tenure did not extend to positions that are policy determining, primarily
confidential or highly technical. These are the confidential secretaries, they are
appointed without competitive examinations, and therefore the position has no
security of tenure. These positions can be removed anytime.
However in Corpuz vs Cuaderno 1965, it corrected the Mallari case. It is
now jurisprudence that even those primarily confidential, policy
determining or highly technical positions are secured, they have security of
tenure. They can only be removed for cause. Papaano naman ung cause?
Ang diperensya lang, the constitutional enumeration of policy determining etc
etc merely exempted such positions from the requirement appointments through
competitive examination but not from the operation on the principle that no officer
or employee shall not be removed or suspended except for cause provided by our
law. They have security of tenure as I have said.
Officers and employees occupying policy determining, primarily confidential,
or highly technical positions enjoy security of tenure, they are removable only by
cause provided by law. The term of officials policy determining, primarily

confidential, or highly technical positions are coterminous with confidence.

They continue in office only for so long as the confidence as the confidence in them
endures.
The appointments are made by the general rule, so lahat even the
confidential positions are based from merit and fitness. Meron silang sinasabing QS,
Qualification Standards. So kapag ung position medyo mataas na ng konti,
meron ng QS but still a confidential position. Sometimes QS involves educational
attainment. They are being appointed without competitive examination because the
position is policy determining, highly confidential, or highly technical and it is
merely the confidence of the appointing authority that is taken into
consideration, so the term that the appointing authority gave to the employees is
confidence, so as long as the appointing officer has confidence in you, you
will stay in office.
Ung sinasabi naten na primarily confidential positions may be removed only
for cause provided by law, the cause is loss of confidence. When confidence is
lost, then the removal is for cause, because the term of these employees is the
confidence, when the confidence is lost then they are already been
terminated so therefore the legal basis of their termination is loss of
confidence.
When a highly if a confidential employee is being removed from office, he is
not said to be removed from office instead his term expired because there is loss
of confidence.
In Larin vs. Executive Secretary, the fact that the petitioner is a
presidential appointee does not give the appointing authority the license to remove
him at his pleasure. There are many appointments that are appointed by the
President, but remember that before the President appoints them, they are
qualified, hindi porket ina-ppoint siya ng Presidente eh pwede mo na ring tanggalin
anytime pag nagpalit ng presidente. It has to be for cause.

(4) No officer or employee in the civil service shall engage, directly or

indirectly, in any electioneering or partisan political campaign.
Partisan political activity is campaigning for a candidate or for a political
party. The provision does not prohibit a person from expressing his preferences as to
who candidate or as to policy but it prohibits him for campaigning for a specific
candidate. If you come to a stage and say Kay Grace Poe ako that is considered
campaigning which is prohibited, but when you are in a discussion and say Gusto
ko ung ugali ni Grace Poe at ayaw ko ung ugali ni Binay it is not the same if you

say Huwag mong iboto si Binay, iboto mo si Grace Poe. Partisan political
activity does not include expressing your preference.
(5) The right to self-organization shall not be denied to government
employees.
(6) Temporary employees of the Government
protection as may be provided by law.

shall

be

given

such

Section 3 The Civil Service Commission, as the central personnel agency of

the Government, shall establish a career service and adopt measures to
promote morale, efficiency, integrity, responsiveness, progressiveness,
and courtesy in the civil service. It shall strengthen the merit and rewards
system, integrate all human resources development programs for all
levels and ranks, and institutionalize a management climate conducive to
public accountability. It shall submit to the President and the Congress an
annual report on its personnel programs.
Section 4 All public officers and employees shall take an oath or
affirmation to uphold and defend this Constitution.
Section 5 The Congress shall provide for the standardization of
compensation of government officials and employees, including those in
government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters,
taking into account the nature of the responsibilities pertaining to, and
the qualifications required for, their positions.
Section 6 No candidate who has lost in any election shall, within one year
after such election, be appointed to any office in the Government or any
Government-owned or controlled corporations or in any of their
subsidiaries.
They need to wait for a year, for them to be appointed in Government Offices
that is in import of Section 6.

Section 7 No elective official shall be eligible for appointment or

designation in any capacity to any public office or position during his
tenure.

Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of his

position, no appointive official shall hold any other office or employment in
the Government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof,
including Government-owned or controlled corporations or their
subsidiaries.
Section 7 consists of 2 paragraphs, the first paragraph refers to elective
officials and the second paragraph refers to appointive paragraphs. In the
first paragraph, it prohibits an elective official to be appointed in a capacity during
his tenure.
We go back to a similar provision, for Members of Congress which states that
If a Member of a Congress is appointed, and he accepts the position he is deemed
to have resigned his Membership on Congress, while in Section 7 is when an
elective official who was given an appointment, the appointment made is
unlawful, it is invalid if the elective official do not resign upon accepting
the appointment. So the Elective Official needs to resign first, so before
appointing an Elective Official not member of the Congress they first have to resign.
Then we go to second paragraph, we already took up the exception to the
rule that is Section 7. The Vice President may be appointed to the Cabinet. Members
of the Congress may be designated to Judicial and Bar Council. Two exemptions.
In the second paragraph, if it is allowed by law then ok lang. The difference
between the two paragraphs is that in the 2 nd paragraph, Congress may
enact an exemption while in the 1 st paragraph; Congress cannot because
the prohibition is absolute. The prohibition on the 2 nd paragraph, comes with an
exemption, unless otherwise allowed by law.
Section 8 No elective or appointive public officer or employee shall receive
additional, double, or indirect compensation, unless specifically
authorized by law, nor accept without the consent of the Congress, any
present, emolument, office, or title of any kind from any foreign
government.
Pensions or gratuities shall not be considered as additional, double, or
indirect compensation.
There is additional compensation, when one in the same office for which
compensation is fixed there is added to such fixed compensation an extra reward in
the form of Bonus. Generally this is not allowed by the constitution, in the absence
of a law specifically authorizing such extra reward.

Those who are working for the Government, Bonus are prohibited that is why
every year employees in the Government look at Malacaang if they come up with
an executive order authorizing their bonuses. That is the signal when a bonus to be
rewarded. As a general rule, hindi pwede yun. The 13 th month pay is by virtue of the
law.
What is double compensation? That is an additional compensation; it refers
to 2 sets of compensation for 2 different offices held by one officer. This is
allowed only if authorized by law.
Read the case of Santos vs. COA. Santos got an optional retirement from
the Judiciary; he received full payment of his gratuities and has been receiving
pensions for 5 years. He was then appointed as Director of Metro Manila
Commission now known as MMDA, is that considered as double compensation? The
SC ruled that it is not; Santos can continue receiving his pension and at
the same time his salary because they are for 2 different offices and 2
different services.

C. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

Section 1 (1) There shall be a Commission on Elections composed of a

Chairman and six Commissioners who shall be natural-born citizens of the
Philippines and, at the time of their appointment, at least thirty-five years
of age, holders of a college degree, and must not have been candidates
for any elective positions in the immediately preceding elections.
However, a majority thereof, including the Chairman, shall be members of
the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at
least ten years.
(2) The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be appointed by the
President with the consent of the Commission on Appointments for a term
of seven years without reappointment. Of those first appointed, three
Members shall hold office for seven years, two Members for five years, and
the last Members for three years, without reappointment. Appointment to
any vacancy shall be only for the unexpired term of the predecessor. In no
case shall any Member be appointed or designated in a temporary or
acting capacity.

What is meant by engaged in the practice of law? In the case of Cayetano

vs. Monsod, Christian Monsod, the husband of Solita Monsod was appointed as
COMELEC Chairman;
Cayetano questioned the qualifications of Monsod. He said
that Monsod never practiced law and never went to Court. The SC said, Monsod is
qualified because when you say engaged in the practice of law under the
Constitution means to engage in any activity in or out of court which requires the
application of law, legal procedures, knowledge trainings, and experience. So
therefore, Monsod is qualified.
Under Article 7 which we already taken up, The President shall have the
power to make appointments during the recess of the Congress, whether
voluntary or compulsory, but such appointments shall be effective only
until disapproved by the Commission on Appointments or until the next
adjournment of the Congress. the case Matibag vs. Benipayo is linked in
this provision. Benipayo, Bora and Tuazon 2002 case, they were granted Ad Interim
appointments as Commissioners of the COMELEC, they were bypassed by the
Commission of Appointments. They were subsequently re-appointed. Question, is an
ad interim appointment of a Commissioner a prohibited temporary appointment?
The SC said NO; because ad interim appointments are not temporary they
are permanent appointments in character. Once an appointment has been
made, and the appointment papers was received and accepted by the appointed
person then that is already permanent and he can now enter into the functions of
his office.
When Benipayo, Bora and Tuazon, they were re-appointed,the question is a
nd
2 ad interim appointment of Benipayo et al a prohibited re-appointment? We just
studied earlier that Members of the Constitutional Commission cannot be reappointed. Eto ba ung sinasabi ng batas na re-appointment? No, it is not. The reappointment is not prohibited, because there were no previous
appointments that were confirmed by the Commission on Appointments.
The prohibition of the re-appointment is only one who has been confirmed
by the Commission on Appointments.
We mentioned earlier that if an ad interim appointment was presented to an
appointee that is permanent, but it is also said that unless it is confirmed by the
Commission on Appointments that is not permanent. Wala daw tayong magagawa
kasi yun daw ang sinabi ng batas. That is the case of Matibag vs Benipayo et
al.
Dean Yorac, the Dean of School of Law in the University of the Philippines.
She was appointed to be a COMELEC Commissioner. Noong nawala ung Chairman,
nag expire na ung term ng Chairman the President appointed Yorac to be the
COMELEC Chairman. Brillantes, questioned her appointment, this is now the case of
Brillantes vs. Yorac cited by Bernas in his book. The SC said the designation

by the President of Yorac to be the temporary chairman of the COMELEC is

not allowed. The choice of temporary Chairman is an internal matter which cannot
be exercised of the Commission by anybody else.
Section 2 The Commission on Elections shall exercise the following powers
and functions:
(1) Enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct
of an election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, and recall.
(2) Exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the
elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective regional, provincial,
and city officials, and appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving
elective municipal officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction,
or involving elective barangay officials decided by trial courts of limited
jurisdiction.
Decisions, final orders, or rulings of the Commission on election contests
involving elective municipal and barangay offices shall be final, executory,
and not appealable.
(3) Decide, except those involving the right to vote, all questions affecting
elections, including determination of the number and location of polling
places, appointment of election officials and inspectors, and registration
of voters.
(4) Deputize, with the concurrence of the President, law enforcement
agencies and instrumentalities of the Government, including the Armed
Forces of the Philippines, for the exclusive purpose of ensuring free,
orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.
(5) Register, after sufficient publication, political parties, organizations, or
coalitions which, in addition to other requirements, must present their
platform or program of government; and accredit citizens' arms of the
Commission on Elections. Religious denominations and sects shall not be
registered. Those which seek to achieve their goals through violence or
unlawful means, or refuse to uphold and adhere to this Constitution, or
which are supported by any foreign government shall likewise be refused
registration.
Financial contributions from foreign governments and their agencies to
political parties, organizations, coalitions, or candidates related to
elections, constitute interference in national affairs, and, when accepted,

shall be an additional ground for the cancellation of their registration with

the Commission, in addition to other penalties that may be prescribed by
law.
(6) File, upon a verified complaint, or on its own initiative, petitions in
court for inclusion or exclusion of voters; investigate and, where
appropriate, prosecute cases of violations of election laws, including acts
or omissions constituting election frauds, offenses, and malpractices.
(7) Recommend to the Congress effective measures to minimize election
spending, including limitation of places where propaganda materials shall
be posted, and to prevent and penalize all forms of election frauds,
offenses, malpractices, and nuisance candidacies.
(8) Recommend to the President the removal of any officer or employee it
has deputized, or the imposition of any other disciplinary action, for
violation or disregard of, or disobedience to, its directive, order, or
decision.
(9) Submit to the President and the Congress, a comprehensive report on
the conduct of each election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or recall.
Classify all of the 9 functions into 2. First is to conduct, management and
administer the election, second is to adjudicate cases that are brought
before it.
What is the similarity between the Powers of the Commissioner of COMELEC
with the powers of the Commissioner of CSC and the Commissioner of COA?
The nature and power of COMELEC is like that on the CSC, an
administrative agency as such the power that it exercises, the power that
it possess is executive-quasi judicial and quasi-legislative but unlike the
other Commissions it has been given judicial power as Judge with exclusive original
jurisdiction, over all contest etc..
The COMELEC has jurisdiction to issue writ of certiorari, mandamus, and
habeas corpus. It is shown on the enumeration of the powers of COMELEC however
in so far as the COMELEC is concerned that is only in aid of its appellate jurisdiction
over on election protest cases involving municipal officials decided by courts of
general jurisdiction. Courts of general jurisdiction are the MTC, RTC etc..

In LDP vs. COMELEC 2004, the COMELEC has jurisdiction between intraparty disputes. LDP argued about who are their Party Officials, they questioned the
authority of COMELEC to adjudicate. The SC said that COMELEC has the authority to
ascertain the identity of a Political Party and its legitimate officers.
Before proclamation, all questions in so far as the Election is concerned must
be decided by the Commission. Once a winning candidate has been proclaimed and
has taken his oath, assumed
office as the Member of the House of
Representatives, COMELECS jurisdiction over election issues relating to his election
returns and qualifications ends and House of Representatives Electoral
Tribunal jurisdiction begins.this is the case of Aggabbao vs. COMELEC.
In the case of Alunan vs. Mercado, cited by Bernas the elections of
SK Officers are not subjected to the provisions of COMELEC, DILG has the
authority on it.
The power of Commission to investigate and prosecute violations on Election
Laws is exclusive. Batas Pambansa 881, deputizing Fiscals to conduct preliminary
investigations for violations, it does not grant an authority to file criminal
information the same must be approved first by the Commission. So even if the
preliminary investigation is conducted by the Provincial Fiscal, when it comes to
deciding whether or not the case shall be filed it must be by the Provincial Election
Officer.
Under the provisions of the COMELEC, the COMELEC has the power to register
Political Parties and it is prohibited to register religious denominations and sectors,
such as the Catholic Church etc. It does not include laying organizations with
religious affiliations or political parties which derives their principles from religious
beliefs. They are not religious organizations, they only believe on the principles on
those religious organizations. They can be registered.
What are the powers that are not given to the COMELEC? COMELEC is not
empowered to decide questions involving on the right to vote, this being a judicial
question and also cases involving inclusion and exclusion of voters neither does the
commission have the power to transfer the municipalities from on province to
another.
Section 3 The Commission on Elections may sit en banc or in two divisions,
and shall promulgate its rules of procedure in order to expedite
disposition of election cases, including pre- proclamation controversies.
All such election cases shall be heard and decided in division, provided
that motions for reconsideration of decisions shall be decided by the
Commission en banc.

Each division has 3 members. All such election cases shall be decided in
divisions, provided that motions for reconsideration shall be decide by the
Commission en banc. Election cases are decided in a in a division.

Section 4 The Commission may, during the election period, supervise or

regulate the enjoyment or utilization of all franchises or permits for the
operation of transportation and other public utilities, media of
communication or information, all grants, special privileges, or
concessions granted by the Government or any subdivision, agency, or
instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlled
corporation or its subsidiary. Such supervision or regulation shall aim to
ensure equal opportunity and equal rates therefor, for public information
campaigns and forums among candidates in connection with the objective
of holding free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.
During Election Time, COMELEC is the boss. The constitution has given that
authority to the COMELEC. The Armed Forces and the Police may even be at
COMELECs control during election.
Section 5 No pardon, amnesty, parole, or suspension of sentence for
violation of election laws, rules, and regulations shall be granted by the
President without the favorable recommendation of the Commission.
Section 6 A free and open party systems shall be allowed to evolve
according to the free choice of the people, subject to the provisions of this
Article.
In the 1987 Constitution, the 2 Party systems were abolished and a multiparty system was incurrence. This was the basis for Section 6. The multi-party
system is a characteristic of a parliamentary system of a government. In our
Presidential type of Government, a two party system is more bagay, just like in the
United States. The section 6 was an attempt to introduce the characteristics of
parliamentary type of system into the Constitution.
Section 7 No votes cast in favor of a political party, organization, or
coalition shall be valid, except for those registered under the party-list
system as provided in this Constitution.
On the election of 1980, during the height of the KBL also known as Kasal,
Binyag, Lamay. Marcos tried to come up with a unitary political party, like a

communist party of China. In the 1980 election, they have Block Voting. If you write
on your ballot KBL, all of the official candidates of KBL will be counted. That is
prohibited under Section 7. It is not against the Iglesia ni Cristo type of voting, it is
more on the reaction to the old KBL of Marcos.
Section 8 Political parties, or organizations or coalitions registered under
the party-list system, shall not be represented in the voters' registration
boards, boards of election inspectors, boards of canvassers, or other
similar bodies. However, they shall be entitled to appoint poll watchers in
accordance with law.
Section 9 Unless otherwise fixed by the Commission in special cases, the
election period shall commence ninety days before the day of election and
shall end thirty days thereafter.
Election Period is 90 days before the Election and 30 days after, Campaign
Period is 60 days before the Election for the National Candidates and 45 days for the
Provincial and Local Candidates.
Section 10 Bona fide candidates for any public office shall be free from any
form of harassment and discrimination.
Section 11 Funds certified by the Commission as necessary to defray the
expenses for holding regular and special elections, plebiscites, initiatives,
referenda, and recalls, shall be provided in the regular or special
appropriations and, once approved, shall be released automatically upon
certification by the Chairman of the Commission.
Every year, our government in case there would be a Special Elections.

D. THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT

Section 1 (1) There shall be a Commission on Audit composed of a

Chairman and two Commissioners, who shall be natural-born citizens of
the Philippines and, at the time of their appointment, at least thirty-five
years of age, Certified Public Accountants with not less than ten years of
auditing experience, or members of the Philippine Bar who have been
engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years, and must not have
been candidates for any elective position in the elections immediately
preceding their appointment. At no time shall all Members of the
Commission belong to the same profession.

When Grace Padaca was appointed as a Commissioner of COMELEC, there

was a question whether the prohibition that she must not have been a candidate for
the last preceding election would disqualify her but since there was a barangay
election previous to her appointment in the COMELEC. Well legal minds were one in
saying that she was qualified. The disqualification of having been a candidate on
the last preceding election did not apply to her because she was not a candidate in
the Barangay Elections.
(2) The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be appointed by the
President with the consent of the Commission on Appointments for a term
of seven years without reappointment. Of those first appointed, the
Chairman shall hold office for seven years, one Commissioner for five
years, and the other Commissioner for three years, without
reappointment. Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the
unexpired portion of the term of the predecessor. In no case shall any
Member be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting capacity.

In section 2 Number 1 and The Succeeding number provisions would refer to

the Powers of COA.

Section 2 (1) The Commission on Audit shall have the power, authority,
and duty to examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to the
revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and property,
owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the Government, or any of its
subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including government-owned
or controlled corporations with original charters, and on a post- audit
basis:

(a) Constitutional bodies, commissions and offices that have been granted
fiscal autonomy under this Constitution;
(b) Autonomous state colleges and universities;
(c) Other government-owned
subsidiaries; and

or

controlled

corporations

and

their

(d) such non-governmental entities receiving subsidy or equity, directly or

indirectly, from or through the Government, which are required by law or
the granting institution to submit to such audit as a condition of subsidy
or equity. However, where the internal control system of the audited
agencies is inadequate, the Commission may adopt such measures,
including temporary or special pre-audit, as are necessary and appropriate
to correct the deficiencies. It shall keep the general accounts of the
Government and, for such period as may be provided by law, preserve the
vouchers and other supporting papers pertaining thereto.

In Section 2 number 1, it enumerates the powers of COA provides for a preaudit and post-audit. The first portion of the paragraphs provides for the pre-audit
and on a post-audit basis A B C. Read section 2 paragraph 1.

On a post-audit basis, what are the powers of COA? Section 2 paragraph 1

provides the answer.

Ung with original charters bumalik na naman, the COA has the authority to
audit including GOCCs with original charters.

In Ramos vs. Aquino, case cited by Bernas is the constitutional Competence

of the COA refers only to the Administrative Aspect of the expenditure of
the Public Funds. The Commission has no competence relative to the
Criminal Aspect of irregular expenditure of public funds. Hence the
Commissions approval of vouchers does not preclude an inquiry by the Provincial
Fiscal to determine whether criminal liability has been incurred.

In the case of DBP vs. COA, public corporations under the jurisdiction of COA
may hire private auditors but COAs power to examine and audit is exclusive
however a constitutionally mandated auditor among government agencies the
COAs findings and conclusions prevails over those of the private auditors.

(2) The Commission shall have exclusive authority, subject to the

limitations in this Article, to define the scope of its audit and examination,
establish the techniques and methods required therefor, and promulgate
accounting and auditing rules and regulations, including those for the
prevention and disallowance of irregular, unnecessary, excessive,
extravagant, or unconscionable expenditures or uses of government funds
and properties.

Section 3 No law shall be passed exempting any entity of the Government

or its subsidiaries in any guise whatever, or any investment of public
funds, from the jurisdiction of the Commission on Audit.

Section 4 The Commission shall submit to the President and the Congress,
within the time fixed by law, an annual report covering the financial
condition and operation of the Government, its subdivisions, agencies,
and instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled
corporations, and non-governmental entities subject to its audit, and
recommend measures necessary to improve their effectiveness and
efficiency. It shall submit such other reports as may be required by law.
There will be cases that will be filed against the members of the COA relating
to PDAF. Atty. Baligod is about to file a case to Non Napoles NGOs, there more than
40 NGOs that are not controlled by NAPOLES which are involved in the PDAF.

ARTICLE X
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 1 The territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the
Philippines are the provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays. There
shall be autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras as
hereinafter provided.
The Constitution enumerated the Political Subdivisions of the country. Puroks
in a barangay are considered in a management of a Barangay but it is not a
political subdivision because it is not stated on the Constitution.
The Bangsamoro Basic Law comes in section 1 because of the phrase There
shall be autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao because the BBL will
change the ARMM under the same constitutional authority. The constitution
authorize the formations of the autonomous regions, one of them is the Muslim
Mindanao.
After the BBL will be enacted, probably one if its provision would say the
creation of the ARMM.
Local Government can only mean a measure of autonomy and
decentralization functions of the National Government. There are also subprovinces, this are allowed to exist until they are converted into a regular provinces

or reverted to their mother province. This is provided in the General Provisions or

Transitory Provisions Article 18.
Section 2 The territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy local
autonomy.
What is the significance of section 2? Providing for local autonomy for
the territorial and political subdivisions meaning provinces, municipalities, cities and
barangays, the significance is that Section 2 is an assurance that local autonomy
shall not only be for Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras but for all local
government units, although autonomy for local governments in general will be less
than the autonomous regions.
Bernas is saying that there will be more autonomy given to the autonomous
regions than the autonomy that given to the political subdivisions.
Section 3 The Congress shall enact a local government code which shall
provide for a more responsive and accountable local government structure
instituted through a system of decentralization with effective mechanisms
of recall, initiative, and referendum, allocate among the different local
government units their powers, responsibilities, and resources, and
provide for the qualifications, election, appointment and removal, term,
salaries, powers and functions and duties of local officials, and all other
matters relating to the organization and operation of the local units.

Bernas says that there is still a gray area on the meaning of a local autonomy
for local governments in spite of the mandate of the 1987 constitution.
The case of San Juan vs. CSC 1991, thus according to Bernas more
cognizant of local autonomy because the issue here was the authority to appoint
provincial budget officer. The court ruled that the provincial budget officer
must be appointed upon the recommendation of the Provincial Governor. It
would seem that the national government went ahead in appointing the provincial
budget officer without the recommendation of the Provincial Governor. The court
concluded that our national officials should not only comply with the constitutional
provisions of local autonomy but should also appreciate the spirit and the liberty
upon which these provisions are based.
On the other side of the fence with the case of Magtajas vs. Pryce
Properties, the meaning of local autonomy for Local Government under the 1987
constitution was thrown down to the level of 1935 constitution. The issue was the
authority of Government of Cagayan de Oro to prohibit gambling, it contented that
it has the authority to prevent PAGCOR from operating a casino to the City. The SC
ruled that the city could not prevent PAGCARs authority; the court said
that ordinances like that of the city ordinance of Cagayan de Oro City
should not contravene a statute that is the one that created PAGCOR.

Municipal Governments are only agents of the National Government.

The same is true with LLBA vs. CA, cited by Bernas likewise with the case of
Tan vs. Parea.
Congress can enact a Local Government Code, it already did. The LGC was
enacted on 1991 under RA 7161. In LGC, a new organization structure was
introduced. A structure where the executive and the legislative are
separate and distinct and independent with each other, under the LGC the
Mayor is the Executive and the Vice Mayor together with the Sanggunian ng Bayan
Members will be the legislative same is true with the Governor and the Vice
Governors with the Provincial Board Members.
Ngayon palang isaulo na naten na duon sa BBL, sinasabi nila na mag
introduce siya ng parliamentary system of government. The parliamentary system
of government consists of Executive and Legislative where in Legislative is more
powerful.
Hindi daw maintindihan ni Atty. Lara yung mga opposition to BBL which says
that it cannot provide for a parliamentary sytem of government. Kasalanan din kasi
ng mga nag draft ng BBL dahil sa term nilang parliamentary sytem of government
they could just have said similar to the government that we have now that the
Governor is the Executive and the Vice Gov and the Board Members will be the
Legislative. There you are, you have a parliamentary sytem of government.
The LGC provided for a system of recall and initiative of referendum.
Recall is an instrument effective immediate accountability of tenure of an
elective official maybe terminated by popular vote bago ito under the LGC. This is
not effective because it is good for only 3 years. The terms of Local Government
Officials are only for 3 years. The system of recall would be much better if the terms
of the officials are 4 to 5 years. The system of recall is introduced for the
public to recall the officials that are not performing before the regular
election. As of now there is only a year window so that recall can be done. One
year after the election and one year before the election. So it is only on the second
year that you can initiate a recall.
There is no recall for Senate and Members of the Congress because they are
the ones who did the law.
Initiative and Referendum is process whereby the registered voters of the
Local Government Unit may directly propose, enact or amend any Ordinance.
In Garcia vs. COMELEC, the SC ruled that the process of Initiative and
Referendum includes not just only ordinances but also resolutions.
Section 4 The President of the Philippines shall exercise general
supervision over local governments. Provinces with respect to component
cities and municipalities, and cities and municipalities with respect to

component barangays, shall ensure that the acts of their component units
are within the scope of their prescribed powers and functions.
General supervisions are no more than ensuring that the laws are faithfully
executed and that the subordinate officers act within the law. It does not include the
power to substitute once judgments of that of a lower officer.
Section 5 Each local government unit shall have the power to create its
own sources of revenues and to levy taxes, fees and charges subject to
such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent
with the basic policy of local autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges
shall accrue exclusively to the local governments.
Section 5 does not change the Doctrine that Municipal Corporations do not
possess inherent powers of taxation. It merely states General Power to levy taxes
and otherwise create sources of revenue. Giving the power of local government
units to create their own sources and levy taxes this must not conflict with taxes
that are imposed by statutes. If there no taxes imposed by the Local Government,
the LGU are free to impose taxes.
Section 6 Local government units shall have a just share, as determined
by law, in the national taxes which shall be automatically released to
them.
This is the IRA, Internal Revenue Allotment. Every year since the
effectively of the 1987 Constitution likewise of the LGC which provided the IRA. The
share of the LGU from national taxes increase, in Atty. Laras time the provincial
governments budget was 65 Million now it is 1.5 Billion.
In Pimentel vs. Aguirre 2000, President Ramos withheld 10 percent of the
IRA of LGU. The SC said that this move of Ramos contravenes the LGC and section 6
article 10.
Section 7 Local governments shall be entitled to an equitable share in the
proceeds of the utilization and development of the national wealth within
their respective areas, in the manner provided by law, including sharing
the same with the inhabitants by way of direct benefits.
In Isabela where the Magat Dam is located, the Government of Isabela is
entitled to a share in what the operators of Magat Dam pays in the National
Government, percentage of that goes to the Provincial Government and Ifugao. Also
in Casecnan Dam, payment goes to Vizcaya, Quirino and Ecija.
Section 8 The term of office of elective local officials, except barangay
officials, which shall be determined by law, shall be three years and no
such official shall serve for more than three 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 for which
he was elected.

In Boro JR. vs. COMELEC, this is the interpretation of the 3 terms of a Local
Government Officer. For service to be counted as 1 term for the purpose of the 3
term service limit. 2 essential elements are required.
First, the official must have been elected to the position 3 times
consecutively.
Second, the official must have served 3 full terms consecutively.
The case of Nick De Leon of Amulung 1995, Malamug who was then the
elected Mayor died. Nick de Leon ran for vice mayor, before taking the oath the
Mayor died. De Leon now became the Mayor, nung patapos na ung 9 th year nya he
filed for a Certificate of Candidacy. The court said that the De Leon can still file for
candidacy because he was not elected for 9 years he only served for 9 years.
Another case was of Congresswoman Vargas; in 2011 special election she ran
and won. 2013 she again ran and won and on 2016 she can still file for candidacy
because the elections held on 2011 was special elections, that was not counted as
her 1st term.
Section 9 Legislative bodies of local governments shall have sectoral
representation as may be prescribed by law.
Section 10 No province, city, municipality, or barangay may be created,
divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary substantially altered, except
in accordance with the criteria established in the local government code
and subject to approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in
the political units directly affected.
Tan vs. COMELEC, the scope of the plebiscite shall mean that if what is
involved as a barangay the plebiscite should be municipality wide or city wide. If a
municipality is involved this would be Province wide. If a portion of a province is to
form another province the place plebiscite should be the mother province.
Section 11 The Congress may, by law, create special metropolitan political
subdivisions, subject to a plebiscite as set forth in Section 10 hereof. The
component cities and municipalities shall retain their basic autonomy and
shall be entitled to their own local executive and legislative assemblies.
The jurisdiction of the metropolitan authority that will thereby be created
shall be limited to basic services requiring coordination.
MMDA, falls under section 11.
Section 12 Cities that are highly urbanized, as determined by law, and
component cities whose charters prohibit their voters from voting for
provincial elective officials, shall be independent of the province. The
voters of component cities within a province, whose charters contain no
such prohibition, shall not be deprived of their right to vote for elective
provincial officials.
The 3 kinds of cities that are provided in Section 12 are:

1. Highly Urbanized Cities

2. Cities not highly urbanized
3. Component Cities
The first 2 types of cities are independent from the province.
Section 13 Local government units may group themselves, consolidate or
coordinate their efforts, services, and resources for purposes commonly
beneficial to them in accordance with law.
Section 14 The President shall provide for regional development councils
or other similar bodies composed of local government officials, regional
heads of departments and other government offices, and representatives
from non-governmental organizations within the regions for purposes of
administrative decentralization to strengthen the autonomy of the units
therein and to accelerate the economic and social growth and
development of the units in the region.

AUTONOMOUS REGIONS

Section 15
There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim
Mindanao and in the Cordilleras consisting of provinces, cities,
municipalities, and geographical areas sharing common and distinctive
historical and cultural heritage, economic and social structures, and other
relevant characteristics within the framework of this Constitution and the
national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the
Philippines.
Take note in section 15, it mentions within the framework of this constitution,
national sovereignty, territorial integrity these are the 3 principles that Sen. Miriam
Santiago is saying that the BBL is violating. In so far as sovereignty is concerned its
very clear that there is a violation because the BBL provides for not only the powers
that are shared by the National and Local Government, but as an exclusive power of
the BBL. If the BBL is given exclusive powers than it is begin exclusive sovereignty
and therefore the Philippines shall have given away part of its sovereignty.
Section 16 The President shall exercise general supervision
autonomous regions to ensure that laws are faithfully executed.

over

Section 17 All powers, functions, and responsibilities not granted by this

Constitution or by law to the autonomous regions shall be vested in the
National Government.

Bernas, enumerates some of the powers not given to the autonomous

regions.
It includes: No jurisdiction over national defense, foreign relations,
customs and tariffs, foreign exchange, banking and quasi-banking,
external borrowings, communications, immigrations and deportations,
citizenship, naturalization and auditing.

Section 18 The Congress shall enact an organic act for each autonomous
region with the assistance and participation of the regional consultative
commission composed of representatives appointed by the President from
a list of nominees from multi-sectoral bodies. The organic act shall define
the basic structure of government for the region consisting of the
executive department and legislative assembly, both of which shall be
elective and representative of the constituent political units. The organic
acts shall likewise provide for special courts with personal, family, and
property law jurisdiction consistent with the provisions of this
Constitution and national laws.

Atty. Lara cannot understand why they are opposing the BBL, the constitution
is explicit. It says that the basic structure of the government consisting of the
executive department and legislative assembly both of which are elective and
representative of political units.

RA 6734 was enacted for Muslim Mindanao, out of the 13 provinces only
5 was approved as member of ARMM. In the Cordilleras RA 6776, out of the
mountain provinces it was only Ifugao that was approves for CAR. since a province
cannot be a region the plebiscite failed so the CAR did not push thru.

The creation of the autonomous region shall be effective when approved

by majority of the votes cast by the constituent units in a plebiscite called
for the purpose, provided that only provinces, cities, and geographic areas
voting favorably in such plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous
region.

Section 19 The first Congress elected under this Constitution shall, within
eighteen months from the time of organization of both Houses, pass the
organic acts for the autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and the
Cordilleras.

Section 20 Within its territorial jurisdiction and subject to the provisions

of this Constitution and national laws, the organic act of autonomous
regions shall provide for legislative powers over:

(1) Administrative organization;

(2) Creation of sources of revenues;
(3) Ancestral domain and natural resources;
(4) Personal, family, and property relations;
(5) Regional urban and rural planning development;
(6) Economic, social, and tourism development;
(7) Educational policies;
(8) Preservation and development of the cultural heritage; and
(9) Such other matters as may be authorized by law for the promotion of
the general welfare of the people of the region.
Section 21 The preservation of peace and order within the regions shall be
the responsibility of the local police agencies which shall be organized,
maintained, supervised, and utilized in accordance with applicable laws.
The defense and security of the regions shall be the responsibility of the
National Government.
BBL has their own formula on how the peace and order situations may be
shared between the PNP and BBL.