CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I S¥ 2014-2015, ‘Atty. Rovyne Jumao-as = PARTI INTRODUCTION A. POLITICAL LAW People. Perfecto. 43 Phil 87 (1922) ‘Macariolav. Asuncion, 114 SCRA 77 (1982) BB. THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION 1 NATURE OF THE CONSTITUTION Defintio Basic Principles Classification Qualities and essential parts ofa good written Constitution Essential Parts of a Good Written Constitution Constitutional Construction 2, HISTORY OF THE PHIL. CONSTITUTION Pre-1935 Constitution Sehurman Commission; Taft Commission; Spooner Amendment; Philippine Bill of 11902; Jones Law of 1916; Tydings- MeDulie Act of 1934 1935 Constitution 1073 Constitution Javellana v. Exec Sec. 50 SCRA 33 (1973) Freadom Constitution ~ Proc. No. 3, March 25, 1986 1987 Constitution De eon v. Exguerra 153 SCRA 602 CONCEPT OF STATE ELEMENTS OFA STATE 1. People: 2. Terntory: ‘Reagan vs. Clk. 30:SCRA 968 (1962) 3. Government Consttuent vs: Minitrant ‘Bacan!v NACOCO 100 Phil 468 (1956) ‘ACCEA VS. CUGCO.30 SCRA 649 (1969) De acto vs De jure 4. Sovereignty SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY (SEC. 3, Art XVI. General Provisions) Classical or absolute theory vs. newer cor restrictive theory ‘China National Machinery vs Santamaria, ‘GRNo, 185572, Feb. 7.2012 ‘a. Suite Against Government Instrumentalities Professional Video vs. TESDA,591 SCRA #3. (2002) ‘Republicys. NLRC263 SCRA 290 (1996) DOHLw.Phll Pharmawealth 518 SCRA 240. 2007) , Suits against ofcers DOH». Phil Pharmawealth. supra ‘Calubv. CA 331 SCRA 55 (2000). Philippine Agila v. Trinidad 489 SCRA 160. (2006) & Bypress Consent ‘Meritt vs. Government. 24 Phil 311 (1916) 4. Implied Consent. ‘Republic. Sandiganbavan 404 SCRA 119. 200) EPG, Vigilar 354 SCRA 566 (2001) ‘Department of Education vs. Onate. 524. sca 200 (2007) Execution/Garnishment ‘Republic. Hidalgo 404 SCRA 389 (2003) ‘Department v. NLRC227 SCRA 693 (1993)‘MUA V. Heirs of Gutvelanda 404 SCRA 309. (aoa Heirs of Pidacan vs ATO, 629 SCRA 451. 2010) fSults against Local Government Units Jaime vs.Apastol 572 SCRA 41 (2008) ‘Municipality vs. Dumdum.626 SCRA 15. 2010} & where not avalable 2a.201L ART. NATIONAL TERRITORY Significance in Defining the National Territory ‘The National Territory Archipelago Doctrine 'UN Convention on the Law of the Sea RA No. 9522. The Baseline Law, March 12, 2009 Magallona vs. Ermita.GR No, 187167, Aug. 16,2011 ART. DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES. Uillavicencio-v.bukban 29 Phil77 ‘Talada v.Angara..272 SCRA16 (1997) 1B. Zamora, 438 SCRA 81 (2000) Lim v. Executive Secretary, 380 SCRA739 (2002) ART.IV cavizensie ‘A. WHO ARE CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES (See. 1) Philippine Bill of 1902 Section 1, Article Ill, 1935 Constitution Section 1, Article Il, 1973 Constitution Section 1, Article 1V, 1987 Constitution CITIZENS BY BIRTH ‘CHILDREN OF FILIPINO FATHERS OR MOTHERS, ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN ‘Bepublicy. Lim 419 SCRA 123 (2004) ‘Tesson v.COMELEG427 SCRA 420 (2004) ELECTION OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP CA. No. 625, An Act Providing for the Manner in which the Option to Elect Philippine Citizenship shall be Declared by a Person ‘Whose Mother is a Filipino Citizen. CITIZENS BY NATURALIZATION JUDICIAL NATURALIZATION CA.473. An ActTo Provide For The ‘Acqutsition OF Philippine Citizenship By Naturalization (Revised Naturalization Law). RA.No, 530, An Act Making Additional Provisions for Naturalization Republic vs Dela Rosa 232 SCRA 78S (1994) ‘Gov. Ciil Registrar 423 SCRA 420 (2008) ADMINISTRATIVE NATURALIZATION RA919. The Administrative ‘Naturalization Law of 2000 NATURAL-BORN CITIZENS (See. 2) Vilando v. HRET, GR 192189, Aug. 23.2011 LOSS AND REACQUISITION OF PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP (Sec. 3) Loss ‘GANo.63. An Act Providing for the Ways in Which Philippine Citizenship may be Lost or ReacquiredA473, Supra 705 Valles v. COMELEC. 237 SCRA 543 (2000) ‘Yew Santlago 169 SCRA.369 (1989) 2, REACQUISITION REACQUISITION BY NATURALIZATION (CANo. 63, supra REACQUISITION BY REPATRIATION CANo. 63, supra RA965 ‘RA2630: An Act Providing for Reacquistion ‘of Philippine Citizenship by Persons Who Lost Such Citizenship by Rendering Service To, or Accepting Commission In, the Armed Forces ofthe United States RAGI7I: An Act Providing for the Repatriation of Filipino Women Who Have Lost Such Citizenship by Marriage to Aliens and of Natural-Born Filipinos ‘Tabasav. CA 500 SCRA 9 (2006) ‘riealdo-, COMELEC 257 SCRA 727 (1996) Alterajosv.COMELEC 441 SCRA 665 (2004) ‘Bengzon v. HRET 357 SCRA 543 (2001) REAGQUISITION BY RA 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Reacqulsition Act ‘f 2003), Petition for Leave to Resume Practice. 540. ‘ScRA-424 (2007) EFFECT OF MARRIAGE (See. 4) ‘Labo v. COMELEC 176 SCRA 1 (1989) umantan v. Domingo. 240 SCRA 746 (1995) DUAL CITIZENSHIP /DUAL ALLEGIANCE (5ee.5) Mercado vs Manzano 307 SCRA 630 (1999) Valles v. COMELEC supra Dual Citizenship and RA 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Reacquistion Act of 2003): Jacobs. Dal 572 SCRA 295.(2008) ‘De Guzman v. COMELEC 590 SCRA 1492009) Jayson vs. COMELEC S76 SCRA 331 (2002) ‘Condarav COMELEC S80 SCRA 12 (2009) ART. SUFFRAGE SUFFRAGE AS A RIGHT AND DUTY ‘Akbayan v, COMELEG 355 SCRA 318 (2001) Palatino vs COMELEC: 608 SCRA 248 (2009) QUALIFICATIONS (Sec. 1) Romualdex vRTC226 SCRA 408 (1993) ‘Asti. Trinidad-Pe, 619 SCRA 518 (2010) Velasco vs, COMELEC 575 SCRA 590 (2008) ABSENTEE-VOTING (See. 2) [RA9189, The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003 ‘Macalintal v COMELEC 405 SCRA 614 (2003) ‘Micolas-Lew/s v, COMELEC 497 SCRA 649. aoa ‘FIRST EXAM ***ART.VL ‘THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT ‘A. LEGISLATIVE POWER (SEC 1) 1. PLENARY LEGISLATIVE POWER 2, PRINCIPLE OF NON-DELEGABILITY OF LEGISLATIVE POWER ‘Permitted Delegation/Power of Subordinate Legislation b, Tests for Permissible /Valid Delegation ‘Tata v, Secretary 21 SCRA 330 (1997) B. COMPOSITION, QUALIFICATIONS, TERM, ELECTION (Sec.2-9) ‘+ THESENATE (Sec. 2-4) ‘Pimentel vs. COMELEC 570 SCRA 410 (2008) Is the Senate/the House of Congress a continuing, ody? ‘Ammault ws. Nazarena, 87 Phil29 (1950) \Garcilano vs. House 575 SCRA 590 (2008) ‘THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE: "APPORTIONMENT OF LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS (Sec. 5[4),5(3)-5T4)) ‘Mariano v_COMELEC 242 SCRA 211 (1995) ‘ldaba vs. COMELEC. 615 SCRA 566 (2010) ‘Aquino vs. COMELEC. 617 SCRA 623 (2010) 2. THE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM (Se. 52) Republic Act No. (RA) 7941, "An Act Providing For The Election Of Party-List Representatives Through The Party-List System, And Appropriating Funds “Therefor” Ang Bagong Bayant v. COMELEC 404 SCRA 712 2003) ‘a. Whomay participate in the Party-list lection, 'b. Determination ofthe 20% allocation for Party-List Members ‘BAG. COMELEC 521 SCRA 254 (2007) ‘BANAT ws. COMELEC 506 SCRA211 (2008) ‘Ang Bagong Bayant v, COMELEC 404SCRA 719. (2003)QUALIFICATIONS (See. 6) a, District Representatives . Party Nominees |. TERM OF OFFICE (Sec. 7) FILLING OF VACANCIES (Se. 9) SALARIES, PRIVILEGES, INCOMPATIBLE OFFICE, PROHIBITIONS (Sec. 10-14) SALARIES. PHILCONSA w. Mathay 18 SCRA 300 (1966) Ligot. Mathay 56 SRA 823 (1978) PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITIES a. Privilege from Arrests Martinez v. Matfe 44 SCRA 22 (1972) People. Jalosjas 324 SCRA. 689 (2000) ‘Trillanes ws, Pimentel Sr. 556.SCRA 471 (2008) »b. Privilege of Speech and Debate Jimenez. Cabangbang 17SCRA.876 (1966) ‘Osmena vPendatun 109 SCRA 863 (1960) Pobre vs Defensor Santiago, 597 SCRA 1. (2002) INCOMPATIBLE AND FORBIDDEN OFFICE Puyat v.De Guzman 113 SCRA 31 (1982) ‘ban, etal. vs. Richard J. Gordon, 593 SCRA 68. zooay D. SESSIONS, OFFICERS, QUORUM, INTERNAL RULES, JOURNALS (sec. 15-16) ofncers, Quorum ‘velin v Cuenca &@ Phil17 (1969) ‘Santiago v. Guingona 298 SCRA 736 (1298) 2, Internal Rules of Proceedings ELECTORAL TRIBUNALS AND COMMISSION ‘ON APPOINTMENTS (Sec. 17-19) 4. ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL. a Jurisdiction b. Rules of Procedures ‘Lazatinv. HRET 168 SCRA 381 (1988) © Composition‘COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENTS @ Composttion ‘Daza.v.Singson 180 SCRA 496 (1969) ‘Gulngona v. Gonaaies 214 SCRA 789 (1922) ‘Gulngona v. Gonzales 219 SCRA.326 (1993) Pimentel v HRET 399 SCRA 231 (2002) Powers ofthe Congress LEGISLATIVE INQUIRIES AND QUESTION HOUR (Sec. 21-22) LEGISLATIVE INQUIRIES 8, Limitations », Bxocutive Privilege ‘Senate v, Ermita 489:SCRA 1 (2006) ‘Nerks. Senate 542 SCRA 77 (2008) ‘Gudant vs. Senga 498 SCRA 671 (2006) ‘QUESTION HOUR ‘Senate , Ermita 489 SCRA 1-(2006) ENACTMENT OF A LAW (Sec.24, 26,27), (Gee. 30-31) ORIGIN OF BILLS. ONE SUBJECT ONE TITLE RULE. ‘THREE READINGS Py. Prado, supra ‘Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance 235 SCRA 630 994) ‘Abakadav, Executive Secretary 469.SCRA 1 2005) HOW A BILL BECOMES ALAW Miller. Mardo2 SCRA 898 (1961) ‘Tanadav. Tavera 136 SCRA 27 (1985): 146. ‘Soka 446 (1986) vero ‘a, ems. Provision ‘Bengzon v Drilon 208 SCRA 133 (1992) Boling v. Valencia 11.SCRA 486(1964) ‘i. Doctrine on Inappropriate Provisions PCA we Enriquez 235 SCRA 506 (1994) & Lepislative Voto ‘Abakada vs, Pursima 562 SCRA 251 (2008) PROHIBITED MEASURES (SEC. 30,31) ‘rst Lepanto v.CA 237 SCRA 519 (1994) ‘Fablan v Desierto 29S SCRA 470 (1998) ‘ban v. Gordon, GR No, 175352.Jan, 18.2011 POWER OF APPROPRIATION (Sec.25,29)CCONSTITUTIONALITY OF PDAF eloiga et alvs Exes. Sec. Ochoa. etal. Git. No. 20s: 208493, 200251 (Nov. 19.2013) D. WAR POWERS (Sec. 23) avid v. Macapagal 489 SCRA 160 (2006) E, POWER OF TAXATION (Sec.28) 41. PUBLIC PURPOSE ‘Planters vs. Fertiphil 548 SCRA 485 (2008) 2, DELEGATION TO THE PRESIDENT ‘Southern Gross v, Cement 465 SCRA 532-(2005) ‘Executive v.Southwing 482 SCRA 673 (2006) 3. TAX EXEMPTION ung Genter v. Quezon City 423 SCRA 199. Zo04) ‘Chavez v. PCGG 299 SCRA 744 (1998) Initiative And Referendum (SEC. 32) \Garclav. COMELEC 237 SCRA 279 (1994) ‘SBMA v.COMELEC 202 SCRA 492 (1996) ‘Santiago v. COMELEC GR 12732, March 19,1997 ART. XVIL AMENDMENTS AND REVISIONS Santiago.vs. COMELEC.270 SCRA 106 (1997) ‘Lambino vs. COMELEG. 505 SCRA 160 (2006) Province of Cotabato vs. GRP. 568 SCRA 402 (2008)ART. VIL [EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT EXECUTIVE POWER (See. 1) POWER TO ADMINISTER AND ENFORCE Laws ‘Review Center vs Executive Secretary 583. ‘Sch 420 (2000) RESIDUAL POWERS ‘Marcos v.Manglapuz. 177 SCRA 668 (1989) ‘and 178 SCRA 760 (1989) Province of Cotabato vs. GRP. 56B.SCRA 402. 2008) IMMUNITY FROM SUITS QUALIFICATIONS, TERM OF OFFICE, ELECTION, PROCLAMATION OF PRES. AND VP, ASSUMPTION OF OFFICE (Sec. 2-7) SUCCESSION (See. 8-12) Estrada. Deslerto, 253 SCRA 492 (2001) >. PROHIBITIONS (Sec. 13) ‘tania. COs. 425 SCRA 437 (2008) ‘NAG. COA. 437 SCRA 655 (2008) Public Interest vs Elma, 517 SCRA $97 (2007) ‘Funa.vs. Ermita, 612 SCRA.308 (2010) Powers of the President APPOINTING POWER (Sec. 14-16) MIDNIGHT APPOINTMENTS ‘De Bama v.CA, 353 SCRA 94 (2001) [REGULAR APPOINTMENTS AD INTERIM APPOINTMENTS ‘Matibagv.Benipayo. 380 SCRA 49 (2002). Pimentel. Ermita, 472 SCRA S87 (2005) POWER OF CONTROL (Sec. 17) POWER OF CONTROL Doctrine of Qualified Polttical Agency ‘Supervision and Control ‘tacson v. Pana. 21 SCRA 895 (1967) ‘De Leon. Carpio. 178 SCBA 457 (1989) ‘Bermudez v. Torres. SLLSCRA 733 (1999) ‘MMA w. Vion, $30 SCRA 241 (2007) POWER TO REMOVE ‘Ang-Angcov. Castillo. 9 SCRA 619 (1963) Vilaluz.Zaldiva, 15 SCRA 710 (1965)3. POWER TO REORGANIZE D. POWER OF EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY (Sec. 19) E. BORROWING POWER (Sec. 20) (Constantino v, Quist 472 SCRA.50S (2005) F, DIPLOMATIC POWERS (Sec. 21) 1 FOREIGN AFFAIRS POWER ‘inwea vs. Romulo, 619 SCRA 533 (2010) 2, TREATY AND EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS ‘USAEFE vs. Treasurer. 10 Phil 1030 (1959) Commissioner v. Gotamco, 148 SCRA 36 (1987) ‘Bayan v.Brecutive. 42 SCRA 449 (2000) ‘Bayan Muna v. Romulo, GR No. 159618. Feb. 1. 20 DEPORTATION POWERS. ‘Qua Ghe Gan v. Deportation. 9 SCRA 27 (1963) Go Tek v Deportation. 79 SCRA 17 1976) ‘Domingo v.Sheer. 421 SCRA 470 (2004) ‘Sec ofusticev. Koruga, 586 SCRA 513 2009) ART. VIIL JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT JUDICIAL POWER (See. 1) | JUSTICIABLE QUESTIONS |. FISCAL AUTONOMY (Sec.3) (CSCv, Department. 464 SCRA 115 (2005) ‘Re:Glarifing. 491 SCRA 1 (2006) GS1S. Heirs af Caballero, GR No. 158090. Oct. 42012‘COMPOSITION (Sec. 4) ‘APPOINTMENT )._ JUDICIAL POWER (Sec. 5) JURISDICTION, 2. POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW REQUISITES OF AJUDICIAL INQUIRY a Actual Case/Controversy ‘Pormentero ws. Estrada 629 SCRA 530 (2010) De Castro vs JBC. 615 SCRA 666 (2010) . Proper Party Direct Injury: 10 Voter: ‘Quinta vs. COMELEC, 606 SCRA 258 (2009) Lou: ‘Province of Batangas v. Romulo 429 SCRA 736. 2004) Congress or its Members: ‘Transcendental Importance: “Tatad vs Secretary 281 SCRA 320 (1997) ‘Bavan_». Beecutive 242 SCRA 449 (2000) ‘Davidv. Macapagal 489 SCRA 160 (2000) NoStanding 4. Earliest opportunity ‘Sta. Rosa v. Amante 453 SCRA 432 (2005) ‘Extra. Ranada 492 SCRA 652 2006) «Constitutional Question (Lis Mota)Hacienda Lusita vs Presidential Agrarian ‘Reform Council, GRINo, 171101, Now. 22, 20 REVIEW OF DEATH PENALTY People x. Ramos 8 SCRA 486 (1979) People: Esparas 260 SCRA S39(1996) RULEMAKING POWER INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES Garcia ws. De Vera 418 SCRA 27 (2003) ‘Re: Undated Letter . 580 SCRA 106 (2009) ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION (Sec. 6) VACANCIES (See. 9) ‘Chavez v JBC.GR No. 202262, July 17.2012 ‘Ince: Villanueva 298 SCRA 408 (1998) ‘De Casto v. JBC, 615 SCRA 666 (2010) p. SALARY (See. 10) ‘Mitafan v. Commissioner. 152 SCRA 288 (1957) ‘TENURE (See. 11) Dela Llama v Alba, 112 SCRA 296 (1962) People v.GacottIr. 246 SCRA 52 (1996) |. CERTIFICATION; INHIBITION (Sec. 13) \Consing v.CA 177 SORA 14 (1989) Estrada Desierto_256SCRA 109 (2001) ‘Chavez v. PEA 394 SCRA 152 (2002) ‘Pedragoza y, COMELEC 496 SCRA 513 (2006) 1. DECISIONS (Sec. 14) 1. Must tate the facts and the law on which the decision is based ‘People v. Bugarin 273 SCRA 385 (1997) Hemandez. CA 228 SCRA 429 (1998) ‘Saballa v.NLRC260 SCRA 697 (1996) 1b, Memorandum Decisions ‘Brancico v.ermskul 173 SCRA324 (1288) ‘Olland natural Gas CA 293 SCRA 26 (1998) © Where rule is not applicable Dadubo w.CSC-223 SCRA 747 (1993) Padua v. Ranada.#90 SCRA 6632 (2002) 4, Denial of Due Course ‘German v.ndaya 444 SCRA 329 (2004) Protaco vs Lava 582 SCRA 417 (2009) |. PERIOD FOR DECISIONS (Sec. 15) ‘Be: Problems of Delays 370 SCRA 661 (2001) ‘Licaras Sandiganbayan 370.SCRA 394 (2001) ‘ez Judieal Audit 260 SCRA 333 (1996) ART.IX CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS arrenov. COA 523 SCRA 390 (2007) ‘Gaminde v. Commission 247 SCRA 665 (2000) ART.XI ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS ‘A. IMPEACHMENT