Constitution body of rules and maxims

(Malcolm a written instrument enacted by direct action by people

To provide framework for govt

To establish their duties

Written Constitution provisions integrated in a single document

Unwritten constitution provisions are scattered in various sources e.g. statutes,
decisions of Supreme Court and opinions of legal analysts
(common law countries UK NZ )

Enacted constitution adapted at a specific place followed by a conscious ruling

Evolved constitution not consciously or formally adapted, result of political
revolution.

Rigid constitution difficult to be amended (osmena v comelec Sec 2 art 18, Sec
9 art 11), CANT BE AMENDED BY A SIMPLE LAW, AND HAS THE CAPACITY TO
RESIST CAPRICIOUS CHANGES
Flexible can be amended easily
are there disadvantages of rigid? YES, when there is a need to amend some
provisions, it is difficult to amend it even if the new law is to help benefit people
Qualities of rigid
1. Broad enough to cover the whole and prove for some contingency
2. Short or brief should just be basic policies and the rest should be left up to
congress
3. Definite easily understood by the people.

Constitution of

Liberty (art. 3)
Government outlines the organization of govt (art 6, 7, 8, 10 and 4)
Sovereignty

Interpretation of the Provisions of the consti

Discover the intent of the framers of the 1987 consti

(Francisco case argued if the initiation of an impeachment complaint

starts at the filing of the said complaint? YES
Bayan v Zamora VFA which article is used when 2 articles conflict? SC
harmonized art 21 and 25
o Except when the provisions provide, all provisions are self sufficient

How can we change consti?

Amendment a change in a amendment or peacemeal change of the

consti / ISOLATED CHANGE
Revision a complete re-writing of the amendment
o E.g. lambino v comelec, even a change of one provision, if that one
provision changes the constitution as a whole it is a revision, since
it alters the underlying principles of our consti.

Who can propose amendment or revisions?

Congress has to transform itself into a constituent assembly, and has to

have the vote of congress and senate voted separately
Constitutional Convention a body distinct and separate from congress.
Sec 3 art 17 can be made by a vote of 2/3 of House of Reps and 2/3 of
senate
o If congress isnt decided, by majority vote we can ask the people to
decide if we call for ConCon by referendum. But it is a waste of
money. It is their jobs to decide to call concon.

When what is envisioned is amendment task is better performed by

congress
When it is revision task is better performed by Con Con
Whether what is needed is a revision or amendment is up to the
wisdom of the congress, it is a political question.

Assuming the congress decides to propose amendments to consti and

at the same time to call ConCon is that allowed? YES Gonzalez v
Comelec
While it is desirable to one, there is nothing in the law that says they
cant do both at the same time. Wisdom of the congress is in question.

Congress can call ConCon by vote of 2/3 of members. But what if

congress makes law that defines salaries, manner of selection
approved by majority vote of congress, is it invalid? NO (Ymbong v
comelec) because 2/3 vote is only for calling concon, the 2 nd law is only
a suppletory law and only needs majority.
Is ConCon a superior to congress and office of president? Inferior
because it is only a creation of congress? Or co-equal? SUPERIOR, since
its power is to draft the fundamental law of the land.

Mabanag vs Lopez Vito concon is a co-equal body

People through intiative art2 sec 17 of 1987 consti

o Thru a petition supported by 12% of total voters, with each district
having at least 3% of voters.
o Can only happen 5years after 1987 consti and only 1 time every 5
years
o Needs an enabling law (Santiago v Comelec) SC rules ra 6735
was not sufficient to govern the peoples initiative to the amend the
consti since it didnt have any enabling law
o The petition itself must be signed by the people. (Lambino v
comelec signed in signature sheets with none of the amended
provisions were stated and the petition wasnt attached at all)This
is to prevent fraud and logrolling
o Petition cant also be used to gather signatures
o May only be for amendments

Why in Sanidad v Comelec was Marcos allowed to propose amendments to the

consti?
SC said, it wasnt a period of normalcy. In times of need, legislative powers
can be delegated to the President of the Phil (power to convene ConCon and to
propose amendments)
2 stages of amending consti

Proposal Stage formulation of the changes

Ratification stage the level where the proposed changes would be
submitted to the people
Sec 4 art 17 amendments to the consti will be effective if approved by a
majority of people through plebiscite called for by congress (not earlier
than 60 days from the approval and not later than 90 days) to prevent
questioning the timing of the proposal

In sanidad v comelec sec 2 art 17 of 1970 consti 21 days was enough

Almario v alba questioned same since 67 and 42 days werent enough, which is
why in the 1987 consti a time frame was established.

Can it be held in general elections or is special election is needed?

Gonzalez v Comelec no specification of special
WHEN THE LAW DOES NOT DISTINGUISH, YOU SHOULDNT DISTINGUISH
ALSO
Tolentino v comelec ConCon submitted amendments to the people, (1 proposal to
lower voting age) and then were supposed to submit more amendments at a future
time. He was sustained since all amendments were supposed to be submitted in
one election.

Mabanag v Lopez Vito some congressmen werent allowed to vote, since if they
did the congress wouldnt be able to reach the votes needed
The process of amending the constitution is subject to judicial review.

JUDICIAL REVIEW
-refers to the power of the courts of law to test the validity of executive and
legislative acts if only to determine if they are in conformity to the constitution
Sec 1 par 2 art 8 1987 consti course of law, particularly the SC, may now
review acts to see if there is grave abuse of discretion. (Acts of president, congress
and even laws enacted by both)
Sec4 par2 art 8 1987 consti power of SC to declare any treaty or law invalid for
being unconstitutional. Scope has been broadened
Does it mean therefore that the idea of Political Question is obliterated? May the
course of law now be used to question past political questions? IT DEPENDS. We
need to distinguish a purely political question and one that isnt pure.

If the issue concerns the wisdom of the amendment, it remains as a political

question. But if the issue concerns the legality of an act, and not just the wisdom,
NOT PURELY A POLITICAL QUESTION.
If course of Law has power called judicial review, which of the courts can exercise
judicial review? Ynot v IAC, when carabeef issue was reviewed by RTC they said they
didnt have power and only SC has. When elevated to SC, they said even lower
courts have the power to judicial review. Only that the judgement of the lower
courts are still subject to review of the SC.

If RTC passes judgment on a case saying that this law is null and void and is
declared final, is the law null and void? NO because it only applies to the parties at
hand. Only SC ruling will bind the people.

Filed with CA was certiorari, error to issue injunctive relief since all they filed was an
appeal. This is why SC ruled that the CA had no power to do so. (Tuazon vs Court of
appeals) But this was amended in 1987 consti.

SC ruled that administrative bodies,even those performing quasi judicial functions

(NLRC or Labor arbiter) , cant declare a law invalid as it is unconstitutional. Only the
judicial branch has this power.

Functions of Judicial Review

Checking function validity of an act/law as with regards to the

constitution
Legitimating function (Estrada v arroyo legitimacy of the arroyo
administration)
Bermudez case legitimacy of Aquino admin vs Marcos admin was a
political question. Why is this different from the arroyo case? Because
Aquino became president by virtue of revolution. Arroyo became president
by virtue of a constitutional procedure
Salonga questioned his