D.

Statutes, executive orders and decrees, and judicial

decisions

GENERAL PRINCIPLES

E. US Constitution

Political Law
I. Political Law
Political law is the branch of public law which deals with
the organization and operations of the governmental organs
of the State and defines the relations of the State with the
inhabitants of its territory.
II. Scope / Divisions of Political Law:
A. Constitutional Law. the study of the maintenance of
the proper balance between authority as represented
by the 3 inherent powers of the state and liberty as
guaranteed by the bill of rights.
B. Administrative Law. the branch of public law which
fixes the organization of government, determines the
competence of the administrative authorities that
execute the law, and indicates to the individual
remedies for the violation of his rights.

The Philippine Constitution

I. Constitution
A constitution is the written instrument enacted by direct
action of the people by which the fundamental powers of the
government are established, limited and defined, and by
which those powers are distributed among the several
departments for their safe and useful exercise for the benefit
of the body politic.
II. Purpose
To prescribe the permanent framework of a system of
government, to assign to the several departments their
respective powers and duties, and to establish certain first
principles on which the government is founded.

C. Law on Municipal Corporations

D. Law of Public Officers

III.
A.
B.
C.
D.

E. Election Laws
III.

Basis of the Study

A. 1987 Constitution

Classification
Written or Unwritten
Enacted (Conventional)
Evolved (Cumulative)
Rigid or Flexible

IV. Qualities of a good written Constitution

B. 1973 and 1935 Constitutions

A. Broad
B. Brief
C. Definite

C. Other organic laws made to apply to the Philippines

IV.

Essential parts of a good written Constitution

A. Constitution of Liberty. The series of prescriptions

setting forth the fundamental civil and political rights
of the citizens and imposing limitations on the powers
of government as a means of securing the enjoyment
of those rights. (Art. III)

II. Elements of a State

A.

People.
The people in a State must be
sufficient in number capable of maintaining its
existence permanently.
While there is no fixed
number required, the people as an element requires
the presence of both sexes for purposes of
procreation, it must be sufficient for self-governance
and capable of defending itself in order to maintain its
permanent existence under the principle of State
continuity.

B.

Territory. No specific area is required but the

territory must be sufficiently adequate to provide for
its maintenance, development and growth.

C.

Government. The agency or instrumentality,

through which the will of the State is formulated,
expressed and realized.

B. Constitution of Government.
The series of
provisions
outlining the organization of the
government, enumerating its powers, laying down
certain rules relative to its administration, and
defining the electorate. (Arts. VI, VII, VIII, IX)
C. Constitution of Sovereignty.
The provisions
pointing out the mode or procedure in accordance
with which formal changes in the fundamental law
may be brought about. (XVII)
V. Construction of the Constitution
The Constitution must be interpreted to give effect to the
intention of the framers. The Court should bear in mind the
object sought to be accomplished and the evils sought to be
prevented. A doubtful provision shall be examined in light
of the history of the times and the conditions and
circumstances under which the Constitution was framed.
(Civil Liberties Union vs. Executive Secretary, 194 SCRA
317) In case of doubt, the provisions should be considered
self-executing; mandatory rather than directory; and
prospective rather than retroactive.

The Philippines as a State

I. State
A state is a community of persons, more or less
numerous, permanently occupying a definite portion of
territory, independent of external control, and possessing a
government to which a great body of inhabitants render
habitual obedience.

1. Section 2 (1), Administrative Code of

1987
Government of the Philippines is the corporate
governmental entity through which the functions of
government are exercised throughout the Philippines,
including, save as the contrary appears from the
context, the various arms through which political
authority is made effective in the Philippines, whether
pertaining to the autonomous regions, the provincial,
city, municipal or barangay subdivisions or other
forms of local government.
2. Functions of Government

Constituent. Functions that constitute the

very bonds of society like maintenance of peace
and order, fixing of legal relations between

husband and wife and parents and children, and

therefore, mandatory.

Ministrant. Those undertaken to advance the

general interests of society like public works,
regulation of trade, and are, therefore, optional.

The distinction between the 2 functions of the

government had been rendered irrelevant in view of
the repudiation of the laissez faire policy.
The
growing complexities of modern society have
rendered the traditional classification of the functions
of government quite unrealistic, not to say obsolete.
The areas which used to be left to private individuals
continue to lose their well-defined boundaries and to
be absorbed within the activities that the government
must undertake in its sovereign capacity if it is to
meet the increasing social challenge of the times.
(PVTA vs. CIR, 65 SCRA 416, July 25, 1975)
3.

established
sovereign.
established
sovereign.

The Aquino government was not merely a de

facto government but is in fact and in law a de
jure government. The people have made the
judgment and have accepted the Aquino
government which effectively controlled the
entire country. The community of nations had
recognized its legitimacy.
(PBA vs. Aquino,
Minute Resolution, May 22, 1986)
4.

Doctrine of Parens Patriae

De
Jure.
by authority

A
government
of the legitimate

Parens patriae is a prerogative inherent in the

State where it is called upon to protect the people
with less than full capacity to take adequate care
of their interests. This prerogative is addressed to
the less privileged or those in an unfavorable
positions like minors, the handicapped, the elderly
and the sick. Literally, it means parent of the
people.

De
Facto.
in defiance

A
government
the legitimate

D. Sovereignty. The supreme and uncontrollable power

inherent in a State by which that State is governed.

Classification
of
according to their legitimacy

war, and which is denominated a government of

paramount force.
Third, is that established as an independent
government by the inhabitants of a country who
rise in insurrection against the parent State.

of

governments

Kinds of De Facto Government

First, is the government that gets possession and
control of, or usurps, by force or by the voice of
the majority, the rightful legal government and
maintains itself against the will of the latter.\\
Second, is that which is established and
maintained by military forces who invade and
occupy a territory of the enemy in the course of

1. Kinds: Legal and Political; Internal and External

2. Characteristics:
permanence,
exclusiveness,
comprehensiveness, absoluteness, indivisibility,
inalienability, imprescriptibility
3. Effects of change in sovereignty: Political laws
are abrogated. Municipal laws remain in force.
4. Effects of belligerent occupation: No change in
sovereignty.
Political laws, except the law on

treason, are suspended. Municipal laws remain in

force unless repealed by the belligerent occupant.
However, at the end of the belligerent occupation,
when the occupant is ousted from the territory, the
political laws which had been suspended during
the occupation shall automatically become
effective again, under the doctrine of jus
postliminium.
THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
PREAMBLE
We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of
Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane
society and establish a Government that shall embody
our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good,
conserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to
ourselves and our posterity the blessings of
independence and democracy under the rule of law
and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality,
and
peace,
do
ordain
and
promulgate
this
Constitution.
The Preamble is not a source of rights or of
obligations. But since it sets down the origin, scope and
purpose of the Constitution, it is useful as an aid in
ascertaining the meaning of ambiguous provisions in the
body of the Constitution. It is thus a source of light.

ARTICLE 1
NATIONAL TERRITORY
The national territory comprises the Philippine
archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced
therein, and all other territories over which the
Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting
of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains, including
its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular

shelves, and other submarine areas.

The waters
around, between, and connecting the islands of the
archipelago,
regardless
of
their
breadth
and
dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the
Philippines.
I.

Scope of the National Territory

A. The Philippine archipelago
B. All other territories over which the Philippines has
sovereignty or jurisdiction;
C. The territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular
shelves and other submarine areas.
II. Components
Terrestrial, Fluvial, Aerial Domains
III.

Archipelago Doctrine

The waters around, between and connecting the islands

of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and
dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the
Philippines. (2nd sentence, Art. I, Sec.1)
IV. Straight Baseline Method
Imaginary straight lines are drawn joining the outermost
points of outermost islands of the archipelago, enclosing an
area the ratio of which should not be more than 9:1 (water
to land); provided that the drawing of baselines shall not
depart, to any appreciable extent, from the general
configuration of the archipelago.
The breadth of the
territorial sea shall then be measured from the baselines.
ARTICLE II
DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES
AND STATE POLICIES

Principles
Section 1.
The Philippines is a democratic and
republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people
and all government authority emanates from them.
I. Republican State
It is a state wherein all government authority emanates
from the people and is exercised by representatives chosen
by the people.
Manifestations of a Republican State
A. Ours is a government of laws and not of men. Its
essence is that all persons, from the highest official of
the land down to the lowest level of the citizenry, must
respect the laws, and nobody, how great and painful
might he have suffered in the hands of his persecutors
or oppressors, must resort to the rule of law rather
than taking the law into his hands. It is a weapon of
reason and civility.
The SC castigated a Mayor for expelling alleged
prostitutes from Manila and dumped them against
their will in Davao. The Court said that such act
constitutes a wanton violation of the principle that
ours is a government of laws and not of men.
(Villavicencio vs. Lukban, 39 Phil. 778, March 25,
1919)
B. Rule of the majority.

(Plurality in elections)

C. Accountability of public officials

D. Bill of rights
E. Legislature cannot pass irrepealable laws
F. Separation of powers

II. Principle of Separation of Powers

Legislative power is given to the Legislature whose
members hold office for a fixed term; executive power is
given to a separate Executive who holds office for a fixed
term; and judicial power is held by an independent Judiciary.
The principle of separation of powers is based on the
conception that if the totality of governmental powers were
concentrated in one person or group of persons, the
possibility of establishing a despotic and tyrannical regime
capable of suppressing and suffocating the rights of the
people becomes a tempting reality.
The SC nullified the veto exercised by the President
adjusting the pension of Justices of the SC and the CA
asserting in very strong terms that such an act palpably
violates the doctrine of separation of powers.
The
challenged veto has far-reaching implications which the
Court cannot countenance as they undermine the principle
of separation of powers. The Executive has no authority to
set aside and overrule a decision of the SC. (Bengzon vs.
Drilon, 208 SCRA 133, April 15, 1992)
III.

Principle of Checks and Balances

This allows one department to resist encroachments

upon its prerogatives or to rectify mistakes or excesses
committed by the other departments, e.g. veto power of the
President as check on improvident legislation.
IV. Principle of Blending of Powers
This principle pertains to instances when powers are not
confined exclusively within one department but are assigned
to or shared by several departments, e.g. enactment of
general appropriations law.
NOTE: The first and safest criterion to determine
whether a given power has been validly exercised by a

particular department is whether or not the power has been

constitutionally conferred upon the department claiming its
exercisesince the conferment is usually done expressly.
However, even in the absence of express conferment, the
exercise of the power may be justified under the doctrine of
necessary implicationthat the grant of an express power
carries with it all other powers that may be reasonably
inferred from it. There are also powers which although not
expressly conferred nor implied therefrom, are inherent or
incidental, e.g. the Presidents power to deport undesirable
aliens which may be exercised independently of
constitutional or statutory authority, because it is an act of
State. In the case of Marcos v. Manglapus, 178 SCRA 760,
the SC justified the action of President Aquino in banning
the return of the Marcoses to the Philippines on the basis of
the Presidents residual power.
V. Political and Justiciable Questions
A. Justiciable question. It implies a given right, legally
demandable and enforceable, an act or omission
violative of such right, and a remedy granted and
sanctioned by law for said breach of right.
The petition seeking the nullification of the Senate
concurrence of the Presidents ratification of the
Agreement establishing the WTO was held to present
a justiciable controversy because where an action is
alleged to infringe the Constitution, it becomes not
only the right but also the duty of the Judiciary to
settle the dispute. (Tanada vs. Angara, 272 SCRA 18)
B. Political Question. It refers to questions which,
under the Constitution, are to be decided by the
people in their sovereign capacity; or in regard to
which full discretionary authority has been delegated
to the legislature or executive branch of government.
But the scope of the political question doctrine has
been limited by the 2nd par., Sec. 1, Art. VIII of the
Constitution, particularly the portion which vests in
the judiciary the power to determine whether or not

there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting

to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
V. Non-delegation of legislative power
It is based on the ethical principle that delegated power
constitutes not only a right but also a duty to be performed
by the delegate through the instrumentality of his own
judgment and not through the intervening mind of another.
VII.

Permissible Delegation

A. Delegation of tariff powers to the President

28(2), Art. VI)

(Sec.

B. Delegation of emergency powers to the President

(Sec. 23(2), Art. VI)
C. Delegation to the people (Sec. 32, Art. VI; Sec. 10,
Art. X; Sec. 2, Art. XVII; RA 6735, the Initiative and
Referendum Law)
D. Delegation to LGUs (RA 7160)
E. Delegation to administrative bodies
VIII. Tests for valid delegation
A. Completeness Test. The law must be complete in all
its essential terms and
conditions when it leaves
the legislature so that there will be nothing left for the
delegate to do when it reaches him except to enforce
it.
B. Sufficient Standard Test. It is intended to map out
the boundaries of the delegates authority by defining
the legislative policy and indicating the circumstances
under which it is to be pursued and effected; it is
intended to prevent a total transference of legislative
power from the legislature to the delegate. The
standard is usually indicated in the law delegating
legislative power.

Section 2.
The Philippines renounces war as an
instrument of national policy, adopts the generally
accepted principles of international law as part of the
law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace,
equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with
all nations.

is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is

to secure the sovereignty of the State and the integrity
of the national territory.

I. Doctrine of Incorporation

Section 4. The prime duty of the Government is to

serve and protect the people. The Government may
call upon the people to defend the State and, in the
fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under
conditions provided by law, to render personal,
military or civil service.

The courts have applied the rules of international law in

a number of cases even if such rules had not previously been
subject of statutory enactments, because these generally
accepted principles of international law are automatically
part of our own laws.

Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the

protection of life, liberty, and property, and the
promotion of the general welfare are essential for the
enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of
democracy.

The doctrine is applied whenever municipal tribunals or

local courts are confronted with situations in which there
appears to be a conflict between a rule of international law
and the provisions of the constitution or statute of the local
state. Efforts should first be exerted to harmonize them, so
as to give effect to both. In a situation, however, where the
conflict is irreconcilable and a choice has to be made
between a rule of international law and municipal law,
jurisprudence dictates that municipal law should be upheld
by the municipal courts for the reason that such courts are
organs of municipal law and are accordingly bound by it in
all circumstances. (Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil. 115)

Section 6. The separation of Church and State shall be

inviolable.

The doctrine of incorporation, as applied in most

countries, decrees that rules of international law are given
equal standing with, but are not subject to, national
legislative enactments. Accordingly, the principle of lex
posterior derogat priori takes effect. In states where the
constitution is the highest law of the land, such as the
Philippines, both statutes and treaties may be invalidated if
they are in conflict with the constitution. (Secretary of
Justice v. Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, January 18, 2000)
Section 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme
over the military. The Armed Forces of the Philippines

State Policies
Section 7.
The Sate shall pursue an independent
foreign policy, in its relations with other states the
paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty,
territorial integrity, national interest, and the right to
self-determination.
Section 8.
The Philippines, consistent with the
national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of
freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.
I. Policy of freedom from nuclear weapons
The Constitution prescribes a policy of freedom from
nuclear weapons. The policy includes the prohibition not
only of the possession, control, and manufacture of nuclear
weapons but also nuclear arm tests. Exception to this policy
may be made by the political department; but it must be
justified by the demands of the national interest. But the
policy does not prohibit the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

Section 9. The State shall promote a just and dynamic

social order that will ensure the prosperity and
independence of the nation and free the people from
poverty through policies that provide adequate social
services, promote full employment, a rising standard
of living, and an improved quality of life for all.
Section 10. The State shall promote social justice in
all phases of national development.
I. Social Justice
It simply means the equalization of economic, political
and social opportunities with special emphasis on the duty of
the State to tilt the balance of social forces by favoring the
disadvantaged in life.
Section 11. The State values the dignity of every
human person and guarantees full respect for human
rights.
Section 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family
life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a
basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally
protect the life of the mother and the life of the
unborn from conception. The natural and primary
right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth
for civic efficiency and the development of moral
character shall receive the support of the Government.
Section 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the
youth in nation-building and shall promote and protect
their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social
well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism
and nationalism, and encourage their involvement in
public and civic affairs.
R.A. 7610, which penalizes child prostitution and
other sexual abuses, was enacted in consonance with the
policy of the State to provide special protection to children

from all forms of abuse; thus, the Court grants the victim full
vindication and protection granted under the law. (People v.
Larin, G.R. No. 128777, October 7, 1998)
Section 14. The State recognizes the role of women in
nation-building, and shall ensure the fundamental
equality before the law of women and men.
The petitioners policy of not accepting or considering
as disqualified from work any woman worker who contracts
marriage, runs afoul of the test of, and the right against,
discrimination, which is guaranteed all women workers
under the Constitution. While a requirement that a woman
employee must remain unmarried may be justified as a
bona fide occupational qualification where the particular
requirements of the job would demand the same,
discrimination against married women cannot be adopted by
the employer as a general principle. (Philippine Telegraph
and Telephone Co. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 118978, May 23, 1997)
Section 15. The State shall protect and promote the
right to health of the people and instill health
consciousness among them.
Section 16. The State shall protect and advance the
right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology
in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
NOTE: This provision recognizes an enforceable
right. In the case of Oposa v. Factoran, 224 SCRA 792, it
was held that minors had a valid cause of action in
questioning the continued grant of Timber License
Agreements for commercial logging purposes because the
cause focuses on a fundamental legal right: the right to a
balanced and healthful ecology.
On this basis, too, the SC upheld the authority of
Laguna Lake Development Authority to protect the
inhabitants of the Laguna Lake area from the deleterious
effects of pollutants coming from garbage dumping and the
discharge of wastes in the area as against the local
autonomy claim of local governments in the area. (Laguna

Lake Development Authority v. CA, G.R. No. 120865-71,

December 7, 1995)
Section 17. The State shall give priority to education,
science and technology, arts, culture, and sports to
foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social
progress, and promote total human liberation and
development.
The requirement that a school must first obtain
governmental authorization before operating is based on the
State policy that educational programs and/or operations
shall be of good quality and, therefore, shall at least satisfy
minimum standards with respect to curricula, teaching staff,
physical plant and facilities and administrative and
management viability. (Philippine Merchant Marine School,
Inc. v. CA, 244 SCRA 770)
Section 18. The State affirms labor as a primary social
economic force. It shall protect the rights of workers
and promote their welfare.
Protection to labor does not indicate promotion of
employment alone. Under the welfare and social justice
provisions of the Constitution, the promotion of full
employment, while desirable, cannot take a backseat to the
governments constitutional duty to provide mechanisms for
the protection of our workforce, local or overseas. (JMM
Promotion and Management v. CA, 260 SCRA 319)
As explained in Philippine Association of Service
Exporters v. Drilon, in reference to the recurring problems
faced by the overseas workers, what concerns the
Constitution more paramountly is that such an employment
be above all, decent, just and humane. It is bad enough that
the country has to send its sons and daughters to strange
lands, because it cannot satisfy their employment needs at
home. Under these circumstances, the government is duty
bound to provide them adequate protection, personally and
economically, while away from home.
(Philippine
Association of Service Exporters vs. Drilon, 163 SCRA 386)

I. The Magna Carta for Disabled Persons

It mandates that qualified disabled persons be
granted the same terms and conditions of employment as
qualified able-bodied employees; thus, once they have
attained the status of regular workers, they should be
accorded all the benefits granted by law, notwithstanding
written or verbal contracts to the contrary. This treatment is
rooted not merely in charity or accommodation, but in
justice for all.
Section 19. The State shall develop a self-reliant and
independent national economy effectively controlled
by Filipinos.
Section 20. The State recognizes the indispensable
role of the private sector, encourages private
enterprise, and provides incentives to needed
investments.
Section 21. The State shall promote comprehensive
rural development and agrarian reform.
Section 22. The State recognizes and promotes the
rights of indigenous cultural communities within the
framework of national unity and development.
Section 23.
The State shall encourage nongovernmental,
community-based,
or
sectoral
organizations that promote the welfare of the nation.
Section 24. The State recognizes the vital role of
communication and information in nation-building.
Section 25. The State shall ensure the autonomy of
local governments.
Section 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to
opportunities for public service, and prohibit political
dynasties as may be defined by law.

The purpose of this provision is to give substance to

the desire for the equalization of political opportunities

laws. For example, a bill must generally be approved by the

President before it becomes a law.

Section 27. The State shall maintain honesty and

integrity in the public service and take positive and
effective measures against graft and corruption.

Section 2. The State 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 28.
Subject to reasonable conditions
prescribed by law, the State adopts and implements a
policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions
involving public interest.

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.

ARTICLE VI
THE 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.
I. Legislative Power
It is the power to propose, enact, amend and repeal laws.
It is vested in the Congress, except to the extent reserved to
the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.
II. Extent of the power of Congress to legislate
The power of the Congress to legislate is complete, full
and plenary embracing all subjects and extends to all
matters of general concern except as limited by the
Constitution, either explicitly or impliedly, or, substantively
or procedurally.
Substantive limits curtail the contents of a law. For
example, no law may be passed which impairs freedom of
speech. Procedural limits curtail the manner of passing

NOTE: The qualifications of a Senator may neither be

added to nor subtracted from by the Congress.
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 for 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.

I. Classifications of the Members of the House of

Representatives
A. District Representatives,
congressional district;

each

representing

one

B. Party-list Representatives, elected through the partylist system;

C. Sectoral Representatives, existed only for three
consecutive terms after the ratification of the
Constitution; they disappeared in 1998; the purpose
of this three-term interim period was to allow the
disadvantaged sectors time to organize themselves for
participation in party-list elections
(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
the 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.
I. R.A. 7941: The Party-List System Act
The party-list system is a mechanism of proportional
representation in the election of representatives to the
House of Representatives from national, regional and
sectoral parties or organizations or coalitions thereof
registered with the COMELEC.
The Court held that the intent of the Constitutional
Commission and the implementing statute, RA 7941, was not
to allow all associations to participate indiscriminately in the
party-list system but to limit participation to parties or
organizations
representing
the
marginalized
and
underprivileged. For this purpose, the Court laid down
guidelines for the COMELEC to apply:

A. The parties or organizations must represent the

marginalized and underrepresented in Sec. 5 of RA
7941;
B. Political parties who wish to participate must comply
with this policy;
C. The religious sector may not be represented;
D. The party or organization must not be disqualified
under Sec. 6 of RA
7941;
E. The party or organization must not be an adjunct of or
a project organized;
F. or an entity funded or assisted by the government;
G. Its nominees must likewise
requirements of the law;

comply

with

the

H. The nominee must likewise be able to contribute to

the formulation and enactment of legislation that will
benefit the nation. (Ang Bagong Bayani, et. al. vs.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 147589, June 26, 2001)
The SC reversed the COMELEC ruling that the 38
respondent parties, coalitions and organizations were each
entitled to a party-list seat despite their failure to obtain at
least 2% each of the national vote in the 1998 party-list
election. The Court said that the Constitution and RA 7941
mandate at least 4 inviolable parameters: (a) the 20%
allocation:
the combined number of all party-list
Congressmen shall not exceed 20% of the total membership
of the House of Representatives; (b) the 2% threshold: only
those parties garnering a minimum of 2% of the total valid
votes cast for the party-list system are qualified to have a
seat in the House; (c) the three-seat limit: each qualified
party, regardless of the number of votes it actually obtained,
is entitled to a maximum of 3 seats, i.e., 1 qualifying and 2
additional; and (d)
proportional representation:
the
additional seats which a qualified party is entitled to shall be

computed in proportion to their total number of votes

(Veterans Federation Party vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 136781,
October 6, 2000)
(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.
NOTES: Representative districts are apportioned
among provinces, cities and municipalities in accordance
with the number of their respective inhabitants, and on the
basis of a uniform and progressive ratio. The underlying
principle behind this rule for apportionment is the concept
of equality of representation which is a basic principle of
republicanism. One mans vote should carry as much weight
as the vote of every other man.
Each province, irrespective of population, is entitled
to one representation; each city with a population of at least
250,000 is entitled to at least one representative.
Gerrymandering. This is not allowed under the
Constitution. Gerrymandering is the alteration of the voting
districts in such a way that the geographical units are
unfairly arranged for the benefit and self-interest or political
aggrandizement of a particular candidate. The Constitution
says that each district shall comprise, as far as practicable,
contiguous, compact and adjacent territory.
The Constitution does not preclude Congress from
increasing its membership by passing a law other than a
general apportionment law. (Mariano vs. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 118577, March 7, 1995)

The reapportionment of legislative districts may be

made through a special law. To hold that reapportionment
can be made only through a general law would create an
inequitable situation where a new city or province created
by Congress will be denied legislative representation for an
indeterminate period of time. That intolerable situation
would deprive the people in the new city or province a
particle of their sovereignty. Sovereignty cannot admit of
subtraction; it is indivisible. It must be forever whole or it is
not sovereignty. (Tobias vs. Abalos, 239 SCRA 106)
While the conversion of Biliran into a regular province
brought about an imbalance in the distribution of voters and
inhabitants in the 5 districts of Leyte, the issue involves
reapportionment of legislative districts, and petitioners
remedy lies with Congress. (Montejo vs. COMELEC, G.R.
No. 118702, March 16, 1995)
Section 6. No person shall be a Member of the House
of Representatives unless he is a natural-born citizen
of the Philippines and, on the day of the election, is at
least twenty-five years of age, able to read and write,
and, except the party-list representatives, a registered
voter in the district in which he shall be elected, and a
resident thereof for a period of not less than one year
immediately preceding the day of the election.
For
election
purposes,
residence
is
used
synonymously with domicile.
The Court upheld the
qualification of petitioner Imelda Romualdez-Marcos,
despite her own declaration in her certificate of candidacy
that she had resided in the First District of Leyte for only 7
months, because of the following: (a) a minor follows the
domicile of her parents; Tacloban became petitioners
domicile of origin by operation of law when her father
brought the family to Leyte; (b) domicile of origin is lost only
when there is actual removal or change of domicile, a bona
fide intention of abandoning the former residence and
establishing a new one, and acts which correspond with the
purpose; in the absence of clear and positive proof of the
concurrence of all these, the domicile of origin should be
deemed to continue; (c) the wife does not automatically

gain the husbands domicile because the term residence in

Civil Law does not mean the same thing in Political Law;
when petitioner married President Marcos in 1954, she kept
her domicile of origin and merely gained a new home, not a
domicilium necessarium; (d) even assuming that she gained
a new domicile after her marriage and acquired the right to
choose a new one only after her husband died, her acts
following her return to the country clearly indicate that she
chose Tacloban, her domicile of origin, as her domicile of
choice.
(Marcos vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 119976,
September 18, 1995)
Petitioner Agapito Aquino failed to prove that he had
established not just residence but domicile of choice in
Makati.
In his certificate of candidacy for the 1992
elections, he indicated that he was a resident of San Jose,
Concepcion, Tarlac, for 52 years; he was a registered voter
of the same district; his birth certificate places Concepcion,
Tarlac as birthplace.
Thus, his domicile of origin was
Concepcion, Tarlac; and his bare assertion of transfer of
domicile from Tarlac to Makati is hardly supported by the
facts of the case. (Aquino vs. COMELEC, 248 SCRA 400)
Section 7.
The Members of the House of
Representatives shall be elected for a term of three
years which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by
law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following
their election.
No Member of the House of Representatives 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.
NOTE: A member of the House of Representatives
may serve for more than three terms provided the terms are
not successive.
Section 8.
Unless otherwise provided by law, the
regular election of the Senators and the Members of

the House of Representatives shall be held on the

second Monday of May.
Section 9. In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the
House of Representatives, a special election may be
called to fill such vacancy in the manner prescribed by
law, but the Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives thus elected shall serve only for the
unexpired term.
NOTE: In case there is a vacancy in the Senate or
House of Representatives, a special election to fill the
vacancy is not mandatory.
The matter is left to the
discretion of Congress in the manner prescribed by law.
Section 10. The salaries of Senators and Members of
the House of Representatives shall be determined by
law.
No increase in said compensation shall take
effect until after the expiration of the full term of all
the Members of the Senate and the House of
Representatives approving such increase.
The purpose of the provision is to place a legal bar to
the legislature yielding to the natural temptation to increase
their salaries. Not that the power to provide for higher
compensation is lacking, but with the length of time that has
to elapse before an increase becomes effective, there is a
deterrent factor to any such measure unless the need for it
is clearly felt. (Philconsa vs. Mathay, 18 SCRA 300)
NOTE: A member of the Congress may receive office
and necessary travel allowances. Since such allowances do
not form part of the salary or compensation, allowances take
effect immediately. Nor is there a legal limit on the amount
that may be appropriated.
Section 11. A Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not
more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from
arrest while the Congress is in session. No Member
shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other

place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in

any committee thereof.
I. Privilege from arrest
The privilege from arrest is available while the Congress
is in session, whether regular or special and whether or not
the legislator is actually attending a session. Hence, it is not
available while the Congress is in recess. Since the purpose
of the privilege is to protect the legislator against
harassment which will keep him away from legislative
sessions, there is no point in extending the privilege to the
period when the Congress is not in session.
In the case, Representative Jalosjos, convicted for rape
and detained in prison, asks that he be allowed to attend the
sessions of the House on the basis of popular sovereignty
and the need for his constituents to be represented. But the
Court held that Jalosjos has not given any reason why he
should be exempted from the operation of Sec. 11, Art. VI of
the Constitution.
The confinement of a Congressman
charged with a crime punishable by imprisonment of more
than six years is not merely authorized by law, it has
constitutional foundations.
To allow Jalosjos to attend
congressional sessions and committee meetings for 5 days
or more in a week will virtually make him a free man with all
the privileges appurtenant to his position. Such an aberrant
situation not only elevates accused-appellants status to that
of a special class, it also would be a mockery of the purposes
of the correction system. (People vs. Jalosjos, G.R. No.
132875-76, February 3, 2000)
II. Parliamentary Privilege of Speech
No member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any
other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in
any committee thereof.

The Constitution enshrines parliamentary immunity

which is a fundamental privilege cherished in every
legislative assembly of the democratic world. It guarantees
the legislator complete freedom of expression without fear
of being made responsible in criminal or civil actions before
the courts or any other forum outside of the Congressional
Hall. But it does not protect him from responsibility before
the legislative body itself whenever his words and conduct
are considered by the latter disorderly or unbecoming a
member thereof.
On the question whether delivery of
speeches attacking the President constitutes disorderly
conduct for which Osmena may be disciplined, the Court
believes that the House of Representatives is the judge of
what constitutes disorderly behavior, not only because the
Constitution has conferred jurisdiction upon it, but also
because
the
matter
depends
mainly
on
factual
circumstances of which the House knows best but which can
not be depicted in black and white for presentation to, and
adjudication by the Courts. (Osmena vs. Pendatun, 109 Phil.
863)
Speech or debate includes utterances made in the
performance of official functions, such as speeches
delivered, statements made, votes cast, as well as bills
introduced and other acts done in the performance of official
duties. (Jimenez vs. Cabangbang, 17 SCRA 876) To come
under the privilege, it is not essential that the Congress be
in session when the utterance is made. What is essential is
that the utterance must constitute legislative action, that
is, it must be part of the deliberative and communicative
process by which legislators participate in committee or
congressional proceedings in the consideration of proposed
legislation or of other matters which the Constitution has
placed within the jurisdiction of the Congress.
Section 12. All Members of the Senate and the House
of Representatives shall, upon assumption of office,
make a full disclosure of their financial and business
interests. They shall notify the House concerned of a
potential conflict of interest that may arise from the

filing of a proposed legislation of which they are

authors.
Section 13. No Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives may hold any other office or
employment in the Government, or any subdivision,
agency,
or
instrumentality
thereof,
including
government-owned or controlled corporations or their
subsidiaries, during his term without forfeiting his
seat. Neither shall he be appointed to any office which
may have been created or the emoluments thereof
increased during the term for which he was elected.
I. Disqualifications
A. Incompatible Office. May not hold any other office
or employment in the government during his term
without forfeiting his seat.

session, unless a different date is fixed by law, and

shall continue to be in session for such number of days
as it may determine until thirty days before the
opening of its next regular session, exclusive of
Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. The President
may call a special session at any time.
I. Sessions:
A. Regular
B. Special. A special session may be called by the
President at any time, usually to consider legislative
measures which the President may designate in his
call.
C. Joint Sessions
1. Voting separately

B. Forbidden Office. Shall not be appointed to any

office which may have been created or the
emoluments thereof increased during the term for
which he was elected; but the ban against
appointment to the office shall last only for the
duration of the term for which the member of the
Congress was elected.
Section 14. No Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives may personally appear as counsel
before any court of justice or before the Electoral
Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative
bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be
interested financially in any contract with, or in any
franchise or special privilege corporation, or its
subsidiary, during his term of office. He shall not
intervene in any matter before any officer of the
Government for his pecuniary benefit or where he may
be called upon to act on account of his office.
Section 15. The Congress shall convene once every
year on the fourth Monday of July for its regular

2.

Choosing the President (Sec. 4, Art. VII)

Determine Presidents disability (Sec. 11, Art.

VII)

Confirming nomination of the Vice President

(Sec. 9, Art. VII)

Declaring the existence of a state of war (Sec.

23, Art. VI)

Proposing constitutional amendments (Sec. 1,

Art. XVII)

Voting jointly. To revoke or extend proclamation

suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus or placing the Philippines under martial
law. (Sec. 18, Art. VII)

Section 16. (1) The Senate shall elect its President and
the House of Representatives its Speaker, by a majority

vote of all its respective Members. Each House shall

choose such other officers as it may deem necessary.
The provision is explicit on the manner of electing a
Senate President and a House Speaker, but silent on the
manner of selecting the other officers in both chambers of
Congress. The method of choosing who will be the other
officers must be prescribed by the Senate itself. The Rules
of the Senate neither provide for the positions of majority
and minority leaders nor prescribe the manner of creating
such offices or of choosing the holders thereof. Such offices
exist by tradition and long practice. In the absence of
constitutional or statutory guidelines or specific rules, the
Court is devoid of any basis upon which to determine the
legality of the acts of the Senate relative thereto. On
grounds of respect for the basic concept of separation of
powers, courts may not intervene in the internal affairs of
the legislature; it is not within the province of courts to
direct Congress how to do its work. (Santiago vs. Guingona,
G.R. No. 134577, November 18, 1998)
(2) A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum
to do business, but a smaller number may adjourn
from day to day and may compel the attendance of
absent Members in such manner, and under such
penalties, as such House may provide.
The basis in determining the existence of a quorum in
the Senate shall be the total number of Senators who are in
the country and within the coercive jurisdiction of the
Senate. (Avelino v. Cuenco, 83 Phil. 17)
The question of quorum cannot be raised repeatedly,
especially when a quorum is obviously present, for the
purpose of delaying the business of the House. (Arroyo v. De
Venecia, G.R. No. 127255, June 26, 1998)
(3) Each House may determine the rules of its
proceedings, punish its members for disorderly
behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all
its Members, suspend or expel a Member. A penalty of
suspension, when imposed, shall not exceed sixty days.

The determination of the acts which constitute

disorderly behavior is within the full discretionary authority
of the House concerned, and the Court will not review such
determination, the same being a political question. (Osmena
vs. Pendatun, 109 Phil. 863)
(4) Each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings,
and from time to time publish the same, excepting
such parts as may, in its judgment, affect national
security; and the yeas and nays on any question shall,
at the request of one-fifth of the Members present, be
entered in the Journal. Each House shall also keep a
Record of its proceedings.
II. Matters which, under the Constitution, are to be
entered in the Journal
A. Yeas and nays on third and final reading of a bill
B. Veto message of the President
C. Yeas and nays on the repassing of a bill vetoed by the
President
D. Yeas and nays on any question at the request of 1/5 of
members present
III. Enrolled Bill
An enrolled bill is one duly introduced and finally
passed by both Houses, authenticated by the proper officers
of each, and approved by the President. The enrolled bill is
conclusive upon the courts as regards the tenor of the
measure passed by Congress and approved by the President.
Court is bound under the doctrine of separation of powers
by the contents of a duly authenticated measure of the
legislature. (Arroyo v. De Venecia, G.R. No. 127255, August
14, 1997)
due

The enrolled bill theory is based mainly on the respect

to coequal and independent departments, which

requires the judicial department to accept, as having passed

Congress, all bills authenticated in the right manner.
Petitioners argument that the attestation of the presiding
officers of Congress is conclusive proof of a bills due
enactment, required, it is said, by the respect due to a coequal department of the government, is neutralized by the
fact that the Senate President declared his signature on the
bill to be invalid and issued a subsequent clarification that
the invalidation of his signature meant that the bill he had
signed had never been approved by the Senate. Absent such
attestation as a result of the disclaimer, and consequently
there being no enrolled bill to speak of, the entries in the
journal should be consulted. The journal discloses that
substantial and lengthy amendments were introduced on the
floor and approved by the Senate but were not incorporated
in the printed text sent to the President and signed by him.
The Court declares that the bill was not duly enacted and
therefore did not become a law. (Astorga vs. Villegas, G.R.
No. L-23475, April 30, 1974)
If a mistake was made in the printing of the bill before
it was certified by Congress and approved by the President,
the remedy is amendment or corrective legislation, not a
judicial decree. (Casco Phil. Chemical Co. v. Gimenez, 7
SCRA 347)
(5) Neither House during the sessions of the Congress
shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for
more than three days, nor to any other place than that
in which the two houses shall be sitting.
Section 17.
The Senate and the House of
Representatives shall each have an Electoral Tribunal
which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to
the election, returns and qualifications of their
respective Members. Each Electoral Tribunal shall be
composed of nine Members, three of whom shall be
Justices of the Supreme Court to be designated by the
Chief Justice and the remaining six shall be Members
of the Senate or the House of Representatives, as the
case may be, who shall be chosen on the basis of
proportional representation from the political parties

and the parties or organizations registered under the

party-list system represented therein.
The senior
Justice in the Electoral Tribunal shall be its Chairman.
There is no grave abuse of discretion on the part of
the COMELEC when it held that its jurisdiction over the
case had ceased with the assumption of office of respondent
Farinas as Representative for the first district of Ilocos
Norte. While COMELEC is vested with the power to declare
valid or invalid a certificate of candidacy, its refusal to
exercise that power following the proclamation and
assumption of the position by Farinas is a recognition of the
jurisdictional boundaries separating the COMELEC and the
HRET. Under Art. VI, Sec. 17 of the Constitution, the HRET
has sole and exclusive jurisdiction over all contests relative
to the election, returns and qualifications of members of the
House of Representatives. Thus, once a winning candidate
has been proclaimed, taken his oath, and assumed office as
a member of the House of Representatives, COMELECs
jurisdiction over election contests relating to his election,
returns and qualifications ends, and the HRETs own
jurisdiction begins.
(Guerrero vs. COMELEC, G.R. No.
137004, July 26, 2000)
As judges, the members of the tribunal must be nonpartisan. They must discharge their functions with complete
detachment,
impartiality
and
independence
even
independence from the political party to which they belong.
Hence, disloyalty to party and breach of party discipline are
not valid grounds for the expulsion of a member of the
tribunal. Also, Members of the HRET, as sole judge of
congressional election contests, are entitled to security of
tenure just as members of the Judiciary enjoy security of
tenure under the Constitution. Therefore, membership in
the HRET may not be terminated except for a just cause,
such as, the expiration of the members congressional term
of office, his death, permanent disability, resignation from
the political party he represents in the tribunal, formal
affiliation with another political party or removal for other
valid cause. A member may not be expelled by the House of
Representatives for party disloyalty, short of proof that he

has formally affiliated with another.

G.R.No. 97710, September 26, 1991)

(Bondoc vs. Pineda,

The Electoral Tribunal is independent of the Houses

of Congress, and its decision may be reviewed by the SC
only upon showing of grave abuse of discretion in a petition
for certiorari filed under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.
(Pena vs. HRET, G.R. No. 123037, March 21, 1997)
On the disqualification of the Senators-members of
the Senate Electoral Tribunal because an election contest is
filed against them, the Court held that it cannot order the
disqualification of the senators-members of the Electoral
Tribunal simply because they were themselves respondents
in the electoral protest, considering the specific mandate of
the Constitution and inasmuch as all the elected Senators
were actually named as respondents. (Abbas vs. Senate
Electoral Tribunal, 166 SCRA 651)
Section 18.
There shall be a Commission on
Appointments consisting of the President of the
Senate, as ex officio Chairman, twelve Senators, and
twelve Members of the House of Representatives,
elected by each House on the basis of proportional
representation from the political parties and parties or
organizations registered under the party-list system
represented therein. The Chairman of the Commission
shall not vote, except in case of a tie. The Commission
shall act on all appointments submitted to it within
thirty session days of the Congress from their
submission. The Commission shall rule by a majority
vote of all the Members.
I. Commission on Appointments
It acts as a legislative check on the appointing
authority of the President.
For the effectivity of the
appointment of certain key officials enumerated in the
Constitution, the consent of the Commission on
Appointments is needed.

The membership of the CA can be changed as a

consequence of political realignment. The Constitutional
provision to the effect that there shall be a CA consisting of
12 Senators and 12 members of the House of
Representatives elected by each House on the basis of
proportional representation of the political parties therein
necessarily connotes the authority of each House to effect
changes
in
the
membership
of
their
respective
representations in the CA as long as the change in the
political realignment is permanent and not based on
temporary alliances or factional loyalties from political party
to another. (Daza vs. Singson, 180 SCRA 496, December 21,
1989)
Coseteng was elected a member of the House of
Representatives under KAIBA party. She claims that she is
entitled to a seat in the CA as 9 other Congressmen not
belonging to her party endorsed and supported her. But the
Court held that Coseteng is not entitled to a seat in the CA.
As a lone member of KAIBA, she represents only 0.4% of the
House membership. Under the total membership of the
House, to be entitled to a seat, the party should comprise
8.4% of the House membership. The endorsement of the 9
members cannot be counted in Cosetengs favor because
they are not members of her party. (Coseteng vs. Mitra, Jr.,
G.R. No. 86649, July 12, 1990)
The
provision
of
Sec.
18
on
proportional
representation is mandatory in character and does not leave
any discretion to the majority party in the Senate to disobey
or disregard the rule on proportional representation.
The Constitution does not require that the full
complement of 12 senators be elected to the membership in
the CA before it can discharge its functions and that it is not
mandatory to elect 12 senators to the CA. The overriding
directive of Art. VI, Sec. 18 is that there must be a
proportional representation of the political parties in the
membership of the CA and that the specification of 12
members to constitute its membership is merely an
indication of the maximum complement allowable under the
Constitution.

The act of filling up the membership thereof cannot

disregard the mandate of proportional representation of the
parties even if it results in fractional membership in unusual
situations. Even if the composition of the CA is fixed by the
Constitution, it can perform its functions even if not fully
constituted, so long as it has the required quorum.
(Guingona, Jr. vs. Gonzales, 214 SCRA 789)
Section 19.
The Electoral Tribunals and the
Commission on Appointments shall be constituted
within thirty days after the Senate and the House of
Representatives shall have been organized with the
election of the President and the Speaker.
The
Commission on Appointments shall meet only while
the Congress is in session, at the call of its Chairman
or a majority of all its Members, to discharge such
powers and functions as are herein conferred upon it.
I. The Commission on Appointments arrives at its
decisions
First, the Commission must act on all appointments
submitted to it within thirty session days from submission.
This rule is intended to prevent the Commission from
freezing appointments.
Second, the Commission shall
decide by majority vote. Thus, the dissent of one member
should not block action by the Commission. Finally, the
Commission can meet and act only when Congress is in
session.
Section 20. The records and books of accounts of the
Congress shall be preserved and be open to the public
in accordance with law, and such books shall be
audited by the Commission on Audit which shall
publish annually an itemized list of amounts paid to
and expenses incurred for each Member.
Section 21.
The Senate or the House of
Representatives or any of its respective committees

may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in

accordance with its duly published rules of procedure.
The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such
inquiries shall be respected.
I.

The power of Congress to conduct legislative

inquiries

It is an indispensable requirement for an effective

discharge of legislative authority designed to gather data or
information vital in the formulation of laws without which
legislative power becomes an empty term. However, the
exercise of such duty is not illimitable.
It has to be
exercised in accordance with the limitations imposed by the
Constitution: (a) in aid of legislation; (b) in accordance
with duly published rules of procedure; (c) rights of persons
appearing in, or affected by such, inquiry shall be respected.
No person can be punished for contumacy as a
witness unless his testimony is required in a matter into
which the legislature or any of its committees has
jurisdiction to inquire.
The requirement that the
investigation be in aid of legislation is an essential element
for establishing the jurisdiction of the legislative body.
Moreover, it is not necessary that every question
propounded to a witness must be material to a proposed
legislation. In other words, the materiality of the question
must be determined by its direct relation to the subject of
the inquiry and not by its indirect relation to any proposed
or possible legislation. The reason is that the necessity or
lack of necessity for legislative action and the form and
character of the action itself are determined by the sum
total of the information to be gathered as a result of the
investigation, and not by a fraction of such information
elicited from a single question. (Arnault vs. Nazareno, 87
Phil. 29)
The speech of Senator Enrile contained no suggestion
of contemplated legislation; he merely called upon the
Senate to look into a possible violation of the Anti-Graft and
Corrupt Practices Act. The purpose of the inquiry was to

find out whether or not the relatives of President Aquino,

particularly Lopa, had violated the law in connection with
the alleged sale of 36 or 39 corporations belonging to
Romualdez to the Lopa group.
There appears to be,
therefore, no intended legislation involved. Further, the
issue to be investigated is one over which jurisdiction has
been acquired by the Sandiganbayan; the issue had thus
been preempted by that Court. (Bengzon vs. Senate Blue
Ribbon Committee, 203 SCRA 767)
Section 22. The heads of departments may upon their
own initiative, with the consent of the President, or
upon the request of either House, as the rules of each
House shall provide, appear before and be heard by
such House on any matter pertaining to their
departments. Written questions shall be submitted to
the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the
House of Representatives at least three days before
their scheduled appearance. Interpellations shall not
be limited to written questions, but may cover matters
related thereto. When the security of the State or the
public interest so requires and the President so states
in writing, the appearance shall be conducted in
executive session.
Section 23. (1) The Congress, by a vote of two-thirds
of both Houses in joint session assembled, voting
separately, shall have the sole power to declare the
existence of a state of war.
(2) In times of war or other national emergency, the
Congress may, by law, authorize the President, for a
limited period and subject to such restrictions as it
may prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and
proper to carry out a declared national policy. Unless
sooner withdrawn by resolution of the Congress, such
powers shall cease upon the next adjournment thereof.
NOTES: Upon adjournment of Congress, the
emergency power granted to the President is ipso facto
terminated unless sooner withdrawn. The clear import of

this Constitutional provision is that Congress can abbreviate

the authority given but cannot extend the same because it
ceases automatically upon adjournment of Congress, unless
a new emergency power supervenes that will warrant the
granting of another emergency power. Moreover, the grant
of delegated authority to the President must be occasioned
by either of two concrete circumstances, namely: (a) in
times of war; or, (b) other national emergency. Absent any
of these occasions, any grant of authority to the President to
exercise emergency power is unconstitutional and void as
the existence of war or other national emergency is a
condition sine qua non for the grant of such power.
Section 24. All appropriation, revenue or tariff bills,
bills authorizing increase of the public debt, bills of
local application, and private bills shall originate
exclusively in the House of Representatives, but the
Senate may propose or concur with amendments.
I. Appropriation Bill
It is one the principal and specific aim of which is to
appropriate a certain sum of money from the public treasury.
III.

Revenue Bill

It is one that is specifically designed to raise money or

revenue through imposition or levy.
IV. Private Bill
It is one that is addressed to a specific private interest.
V. Bill of Local Application
It is one that is addressed to a particular place or locality or
where the interest of a designated community is the thrust
of the bill.
RA 7716 (Expanded VAT Law) did not violate Art. VI,
Sec. 24. It is not the law, but the bill, which is required to
originate exclusively in the House of Representatives

because the bill may undergo such extensive changes in the

Senate that the result may be a rewriting of the whole. As a
result of the Senate action, a distinct bill may be produced.
To insist that a revenue statute, not just the bill, must be
substantially the same as the House bill would be to deny
the Senates power not only to concur with amendments
but also to propose amendments. It would violate the
coequality of legislative power of the Senate.
The
Constitution does not prohibit the filing in the Senate of a
substitute bill in anticipation of its receipt of the bill from
the House, so long as the action by the Senate as a body is
withheld pending receipt of the House bill. (Tolentino vs.
Secretary of Finance, 235 SCRA 630)
A bill of local application, such as one asking for the
conversion of a municipality into a city, is deemed to have
originated from the House provided that the bill of the
House was filed prior to the filing of the bill in the Senate
even if, in the end, the Senate approved its own version.
(Alvarez v. Guingona, G.R. No. 118303, January 31, 1996)
The
Comprehensive
Agrarian
Reform
Law
appropriated P50-billion for the purpose of funding the
expropriation of private lands to be distributed to the
farmers. This specific provision of the law is challenged as
unconstitutional as the appropriation law did not originate in
the House of Representatives, thus, violating Sec. 24, Art. VI
of the Constitution.
But the Court held that the law is constitutional.
While the law appropriated said amount, it is not an
appropriation measure in contemplation of law which should
originate exclusively in the House of Representatives. The
creation of fund is merely incidental and not the principal
purpose of the law. An appropriation law is defined as one,
the capital purpose of which, is to authorize, allocate or
earmark a specific amount of public funds from the national
treasury. The principal purpose of the Agrarian Code is to
comply with the constitutional command to promote a
comprehensive agrarian rural development program while
the amount appropriated is only incidental. (Association of

Small Landowners in the Philippines vs. Secretary of

Agrarian Reform)
Section 25. (1) The Congress may not increase the
appropriations recommended by the President for the
operation of the Government as specified in the
budget. The form, content, and manner of preparation
of the budget shall be prescribed by law.
(2) No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the
general appropriations bill unless it relates specifically to
some particular appropriation therein. Any such provision
or enactment shall be limited in its operation to the
appropriation to which it relates.
(3) The procedure in approving appropriations for the
Congress shall strictly follow the procedure for
approving appropriations for other departments and
agencies.
(4) A special appropriations bill shall specify the
purpose for which it is intended, and shall be
supported by funds actually available as certified by
the National Treasurer, or to be raised by a
corresponding revenue proposal therein.
(5) No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of
appropriations; however, the President, the President
of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions
may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the
general appropriations law for their respective offices
from savings in other items of their respective
appropriations.
(6) Discretionary funds appropriated for particular
officials shall be disbursed only for public purposes to
be supported by appropriate vouchers and subject to
such guidelines as may be prescribed by law.

(7) If, by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall
have failed to pass the general appropriations bill for
the ensuing fiscal year, the general appropriations law
for the preceding fiscal year shall be deemed
reenacted and shall remain in force and effect until
the general appropriations bill is passed by the
Congress.
I. Power of Appropriation
On the issue of whether the power given to members
of Congress (under the 1994 GAA) to propose and identify
the projects to be funded by the Countrywide Development
Fund was an encroachment by the legislature on executive
power, the SC stated that the spending power, called the
power of the purse, belongs to Congress, subject only to
the veto power of the President. While it is the President
who proposes the budget, still, the final say on the matter of
appropriation is lodged in Congress.
The power of
appropriation carries with it the power to specify the project
or activity to be funded under the appropriation law. It can
be as detailed and as broad as the Congress wants it to be.
(Philconsa vs. Enriquez, 235 SCRA 506)
II. Appropriation Law
A statute the primary and specific purpose of which is to
authorize the release of public funds from the treasury.
III. Classification
A. General appropriation law: passed annually, intended
to provide for the financial operations of the entire
government during one fiscal period
B. Special appropriation law:
purpose

designed for a specific

IV. Constitutional rules on general appropriations law

A. Congress may not increase the appropriations

recommended by the President for the operation of
the government as specified in the budget.
B. The form, content and manner of preparation of the
budget shall be prescribed by law.
C. No provision or enactment shall be embraced unless it
relates specifically to some particular appropriation
therein.
This is intended to prevent riders, or
irrelevant provisions included in the bill to ensure its
approval.
D. Procedure for approving appropriations for Congress
shall be the same as that for other departments.
E. Prohibition against transfer of appropriations, but the
President, Senate President, Speaker, Chief Justice
and heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law,
be authorized to augment any item in the general
appropriations law for their respective offices from
savings in other items of their respective
appropriations.
Sec. 44 of PD 1177 (Budget Reform Decree of 1997) is
an affront to the prohibition against transfer of funds.
While the Constitution allows transfer of funds, the
same is limited as to purpose and condition of the
transfer, i.e., transfer for the purpose of augmenting
an item and such transfer may be made only if there
are savings within the department concerned. The
provision of law in question empowers the President
to absolutely and indiscriminately transfer funds from
one department, bureau, office or agency of the
executive department without regard as to whether or
not the funds to be transferred are actually savings or
not and whether or not the transfer of the funds is to
augment the item to which it was transferred. Such
infirmities render the provision of law in question null
and void.
(Demetria vs. Alba, 148 SCRA 208,
February 27, 1987)

On the constitutionality of a special provision in the

1994 GAA which allows a member of Congress to
realign his allocation for operation expenses to any
other expense category, the SC said that the members
of Congress only determine the necessity of the
realignment of savings in the allotments for their
operational expenses because they are in the best
position to do so, being knowledgeable of the savings
available in some items of the operational expenses,
and which items need augmentation. However, it is
the Senate President or the Speaker of the House of
Representatives, as the case may be, who shall
approve the realignment.

test is the determination of the expenditure at the

time of the approval of the appropriation and not by
the occurrence of subsequent events. (Pascual vs.
Secretary of Public Works, 110 Phil. 331)
B. The sum authorized to be released
determinate, or at least determinable.

for

sectarian

G. Automatic reappropriation. When Congress fails to

enact a general appropriation law for a current fiscal
year, the GAA of the preceding year will be
implemented, until Congress passes the GAA for the
current fiscal year
V. Implied limitations on appropriation measures
A. Appropriation must be devoted to a public purpose.
The Congress appropriated P100, 000.00 to construct
a feeder road in a private subdivision which road was
later turned over to the government. But the Court
held that the appropriation earmarked by Congress is
not valid. It is not for a public purpose since the
appropriation was used to construct a private feeder
road. The subsequent turn-over of the road to the
government will not validate the expenditure. The

be

The SC upheld the constitutionality of the automatic

appropriation for debt service under the 1990 GAA.
The Court said that the legislative intent in RA 4860,
Sec. 31, PD 1177 and PD 1967 is that the amount
needed should be automatically set aside in order to
enable the Republic of the Philippines to pay the
principal, interest, taxes and other normal banking
charges on the loans, credit, indebtedness when they
become due without the need to enact a separate law
appropriating funds therefor as the need arises.
Although the decrees do not state the specific
amounts to be paid, the amounts nevertheless are
made certain by the legislative parameters provided
in the decrees. The mandate is to pay only the
principal, interest, taxes and other normal banking
charges when they shall become due. No uncertainty
arises in executive implementation as the limit will be
the exact amounts as shown by the books in the
Treasury. (Guingona vs. Carague, 196 SCRA 221)

In the same case, the SC upheld the Presidential veto

of a provision which authorized the Chief of Staff to
use savings to augment the pension fund, on the
ground that under Sec. 25 (5), Art. VI, such right must
and can be exercised only by the President.
(Philconsa vs. Enriquez, 235 SCRA 506)
F. Prohibition against appropriations
benefits (Sec. 29 (2), Art. VI)

must

V.

Constitutional limitations on special appropriation

measures
A. Must specify the public purpose for which the sum is
intended
B. Must be supported by funds actually available as
certified to by the National Treasurer, or to be raised
by a corresponding revenue proposal included therein
Section 26. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall
embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in
the title thereof.

(2) No bill passed by either House shall become a law

unless it has passed three readings on separate days,
and printed copies thereof in its final form have been
distributed to its Members three days before its
passage, except when the President certifies to the
necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a public
calamity or emergency. Upon the last reading of a bill,
no amendment thereto shall be allowed, and the vote
thereon shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the
yeas and nays entered in the Journal.

germane to the subject of the bills before the Committee.

(Tolentino vs. Secretary of Finance, 235 SCRA 630)
The SC declared that the Presidential certification
dispensed with the requirement not only of printing and
distribution but also that of reading the bill on separate
days. (Tolentino vs. Secretary of Finance, 235 SCRA 630)

R.A.8249 which defines the jurisdiction of the

Sandiganbayan but allegedly expands said jurisdiction, does
not violate the one-title-one-subject requirement.
The
expansion in the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, if it can
be considered as such, does not have to be expressly stated
in the title of the law because such is the necessary
consequence of the amendments. The requirement that
every bill must have one subject expressed in the title is
satisfied if the title is comprehensive enough, as in this case,
to include subjects related to the general purpose which the
statute seeks to achieve. (Lacson vs. Executive Secretary,
G.R. No. 128096, January 20, 1999)

Section 27. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress

shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the
President. If he approves the same, he shall sign it;
otherwise, he shall veto it and return the same with his
objections to the House where it originated, which
shall enter the objections at large in its Journal and
proceed
to
reconsider
it.
If,
after
such
reconsideration, two-thirds of all the Members of such
House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent,
together with the objections, to the other House by
which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if
approved by two-thirds of all the Members of that
House, it shall become a law. In all such cases, the
votes of each House shall be determined by yeas or
nays, and the names of the Members voting for or
against shall be entered in its Journal. The President
shall communicate his veto of any bill to the House
where it originated within thirty days after the date of
receipt thereof; otherwise, it shall become a law as if
he had signed it.

The title is not required to be an index of the contents

of the bill. It is sufficient compliance if the title expresses
the general subject, and all the provisions of the statute are
germane to that subject. (Chiongbian vs. Orbos)

(2) The President shall have the power to veto any

particular item or items in an appropriation, revenue,
or tariff bill, but the veto shall not affect the item or
items to which he does not object.

The jurisdiction of the Bicameral Conference

Committee is not limited to resolving differences between
the Senate and the House versions of the bill. It may
propose an entirely new provision. And if the Committee
can propose an amendment consisting of one or two
provisions, there is no reason why it cannot propose several
provisions, collectively considered as an amendment in the
nature of a substitute, so long as the amendment is

I. Approval of Bills

NOTE: The requirement that Every bill shall

embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in the
title thereof is mandatory and not directory and compliance
with it is essential to the validity of legislation.

The bill becomes a law in any of the following cases

A. When the President approves the bill presented to him
and signs the same

B. When the presidential veto is reconsidered by 2/3 of

all the members of both Houses voting separately, the
bill becomes a law
C. When the President fails to communicate his veto of
any bill to the House where it originated within 30
days after receipt, the bill becomes a law by inaction
as if the President had signed it
II. Veto Power of the President
The exercise of the veto power of the President is purely
discretionary. He may veto a bill on any ground, whether on
constitutional grounds or even on the wisdom and
practicability of the bill which cannot be interfered with on
the theory that the exercise of such power is a political act.
III.
Rules governing the exercise of the veto
power of the President
As a general rule, when the President vetoes a bill, he
must veto the bill in its entirety. However, the President is
allowed to veto any item or items in an appropriation, tariff
or revenue bill, but the veto shall not affect the item or items
to which he does not object.
IV. Pocket Veto
One by which the President secures the disapproval of a
bill by mere inaction after the adjournment of Congress.
Pocket veto is not allowed because under the Constitution,
where the President fails to communicate his veto on any bill
to the House where it originated within 30 days after receipt
thereof, the bill becomes a law as if he had signed it. The
inability of the President to return the bill within the
reglementary period prescribed by the Constitution converts
the bill, by inaction, into law.
V. Item Veto
The 1992 GAA appropriated P500, 000,000.00 for
general fund adjustment for operational and special

requirements. Among the several authorized uses of the

fund was the adjustment of pension of justices as authorized
by an earlier law. The President vetoed the use of the fund
for the adjustment of the pension of justices. But the Court
declared the veto invalid. The Court said that it was not the
veto of an item. The item was the entire P500, 000,000.00
allocation out of which unavoidable obligations not
adequately funded in separate items could be met. What the
President had vetoed was the method of meeting
unavoidable obligations or the manner of using the P500,
000,000.00. The essence of the item veto rule is that the
President may veto distinct and severable parts. (Bengzon
vs. Drilon, 208 SCRA 133)
VI.Doctrine of inappropriate provisions
The doctrine says that a provision that is constitutionally
inappropriate for an appropriation bill may be singled out
for veto even if it is not an appropriation or revenue item.
This means that the President may veto riders in an
appropriation bill. The President was allowed to veto an
attempt to amend indirectly the PD authorizing automatic
appropriation of funds for the servicing of foreign debts.
The provision embodying the attempt is considered a rider.
The President possesses the power to veto a provision in
an appropriation bill even if it is not an item but is
inappropriate, that is, a rider. (Gonzales vs. Macaraig, Jr.,
191 SCRA 452)
VII.

Impoundment

Another way of exercising executive veto is through what

is called impoundment. Impoundment simply means refusal
of the President to spend funds already allocated by
Congress for a specific purpose.
Section 28. (1) The rule of taxation shall be uniform
and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive
system of taxation.

(2) The Congress may, by law, authorize the President

to fix within specified limits, and subject to such
limitations and restrictions as it may impose, tariff
rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage
dues, and other duties or imposts within the
framework of the national development program of the
government.
(3) Charitable institutions, churches and parsonages
or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit
cemeteries,
and
all
lands,
buildings,
and
improvements, actually, directly, and exclusively used
for religious, charitable, or educational purposes shall
be exempt from taxation.
(4) No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed
without the concurrence of a majority of all the
Members of the Congress.
YMCA, established as a welfare, educational and
charitable nonprofit organization, derived income from
rentals of its real property. It claims tax exemption. The
Court held that YMCA is exempt from the payment of
property tax, but not income tax on the rentals from its
property. YMCA also invokes Art. XIV, Sec. 4(3) of the
Constitution claiming that YMCA is a non-stock, non-profit
educational institution whose revenues and assets are used
actually, directly and exclusively for educational purposes so
it is exempt from taxes on its properties and income. But
the Court said that the bare allegation alone that it is a nonstock, non-profit educational institution is insufficient to
justify its exemption from the payment of income tax. Laws
allowing tax exemption are construed strictissimi juris.
Hence, for the YMCA to be granted the exemption it claims
under the aforecited provision, it must prove with
substantial evidence that: 1. It falls under the classification
non-stock, non-profit educational institution; and 2. The
income it seeks to be exempted from taxation is used
actually, directly and exclusively for educational purposes.
However, the Court notes that not a scintilla of evidence was
submitted by YMCA to prove that it met the said requisites.

(Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. CA, G.R. No. 124043,

October 14, 1998)
Section 29. (1) No money shall be paid out of the
Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation
made by law.
(2) No public money or property shall be appropriated,
applied, paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for
the use, benefit, or support of any set, church,
denomination, sectarian institution, or system of
religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, or other
religious teacher, or dignitary as such, except when
such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is
assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal
institution, or government orphanage or leprosarium.
(3) All money collected on any tax levied for a special
purpose shall be treated as a special fund and paid out
for such purpose only. If the purpose for which a
special fund was created has been fulfilled or
abandoned, the balance, if any, shall be transferred to
the general funds of the Government.
Congress appropriated a certain sum of money for the
printing of postage stamps commemorating the celebration
in Manila of the 33rd Eucharistic Congress held by the
Roman Catholic Church.
The Court held that the
appropriation for the purpose of printing the postage stamps
did not violate the prohibition that government funds should
not be appropriated or used to support any religion. The
stamps were not issued and sold for the benefit of the
Roman Catholic Church. Nor was the money derived from
the sale of the stamps given to the church. The only purpose
in issuing and selling the stamps was to advertise the
Philippines to attract more tourists to the country. While the
issuance and sale of the stamps may be said to be
inseparably linked to an event of a religious character, the
resulting propaganda, if any, received by the Roman
Catholic Church, was not the aim and purpose of the

government.
1937)

(Aglipay vs. Ruiz, 64 Phil. 201, March 13,

Section 30. No law shall be passed increasing the

appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as
provided in this Constitution without its advice and
concurrence.
The Court held that Sec. 27 of RA 6770, which
provides for appeals in administrative disciplinary cases
from the Office of the Ombudsman to the SC in accordance
with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, is not valid. The revised
Rules of Civil Procedure preclude appeals from quasi-judicial
agencies to the SC via a petition for review on certiorari
under Rule 45. Appeals from judgments and final orders of
quasi-judicial agencies are now required to be brought to
the CA on a verified petition for review, under the
requirements and conditions in Rule 43 which was precisely
formulated and adopted to provide for a uniform rule of
appellate procedure for quasi-judicial agencies. Section 27
of RA 6770 cannot validly authorize an appeal to the SC
from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in
administrative disciplinary cases. It consequently violates
the proscription in Sec. 30, Art. VI of the Constitution
against a law which increases the appellate jurisdiction of
the SC. (Fabian vs. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742, September
16, 1998)
Section 31.
No law granting a title of royalty or
nobility shall be enacted.
Section 32. The Congress shall, as early as possible,
provide for a system of initiative and referendum, and
the exceptions therefrom, whereby the people can
directly propose and enact laws or approve or reject
any at or law or part thereof passed by the Congress or
local legislative body after the registration of a
petition therefore signed by at least ten per centum of
the total number of registered voters of which every
legislative district must be represented by at least
three per centum of the registered voters thereof.

I. RA 6735
In compliance with the constitutional mandate, Congress
passed RA 6735 known as an Act Providing for a System of
Initiative and Referendum.
A. Initiative
It is the power of the people to propose amendments
to the Constitution or to propose and enact legislation
through an election called for the purpose.
B. Three systems of initiative
1. Initiative on the Constitution. This refers to a
petition
proposing
amendments
to
the
Constitution.
2. Initiative on statutes. This refers to a petition
proposing to enact a national legislation.
3. Initiative on local legislation. This refers to a
petition proposing to enact a regional, provincial,
city, municipal or barangay law, resolution or
ordinance.
C. Referendum
This is the power of the electorate to approve or
reject legislation through an election called for the
purpose.
D. Two classes of referendum
1. Referendum on Statutes. This refers to a
petition to approve or reject an act or law, or
part thereof, passed by Congress.
2. Referendum on Local Laws. This refers to a
petition to approve or reject a law, resolution or

ordinance enacted by regional assemblies and

local legislative bodies.
A. Prohibited Measures
The following cannot be the subject of an initiative
or referendum: No petition embracing more than
one subject shall be submitted to the electorate;
and statutes involving emergency measures, the
enactment of which is specifically vested in
Congress by the Constitution, cannot be subject to
referendum until 90 days after their effectivity.
B. Local Initiative
Not less than 2,000 registered voters in case of
autonomous regions, 1,000 in case of provinces
and cities, 100 in case of municipalities and 50 in
case of barangays, may file a petition with the
Regional Assembly or local legislative body,
respectively, proposing the adoption, enactment,
repeal, or amendment, of any law, ordinance or
resolution.
C. Limitations on Local Initiative
1. The power of local initiative shall not be
exercised more than once a year.
2. Initiative shall extend only to subjects or
matters which are within the legal powers of
the local legislative bodies to enact.
3. If at any time before the initiative is held, the
local legislative body shall adopt in toto the
proposition presented, the initiative shall be
cancelled.