2012 Political Law Summer Reviewer - FINAL - Printversion

POLITICAL LAW
BAR REVIEWER
FACULTY ADVISERS
DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA

ATTY. JACK JIMENEZ
ATTY. SARAH ARIOLA
ACADEMICS HEAD
SUBJECT HEADS
PIERRE MARTIN REYES

JONATHAN JO
JAKE RUPERT TABORA
ATENEO CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2012

ACADEMICS COMMITTEE
Academics Head: Pierre Martin Reyes;
Understudy: Clariesse Jami Mari Chan
REVIEW COMMITTEE
Head: Yla Gloria Marie Paras;
Understudy: Ken Koga;
Members: Catherine Dela Rosa, Eric Lavadia, Iris Lucido,
Pearl Charisse Bautista, Mina Reyes
POLITICAL LAW COMMITTEE
Heads: Jonathan Jo; Jake Rupert Tabora
Understudies: Christian Drilon; Athena Erandio
Volunteers: Junsi Agas, Vincent Aureus, Charlemagne Chavez, Jocelyn
Co, Nathaniel Oducado, Daneia Palad, Patricia Pea, Jose Roco, Ronaldo
Sioco, Ricca Pearl Sulit, Andrew Uy, Star Weigand
POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER
Page 2 of 214
POLITICAL LAW
Table of Contents
I. The Constitution8
A. Definition, nature and concepts
B. Parts
C. Amendments and revisions
D. Self-executing and non-self-executing
provisions
E. General provisions
G. Electoral tribunals and the commission on

appointments
1. Nature
2. Powers
H. Powers of Congress
1. Legislative
2. Non-legislative
IV. Executive Department39
II. General Considerations11

A. National territory
B. Archipelagic doctrine
C. State immunity
D. Principles and policies
E. Separation of powers
F. Checks and balances
G. Delegation of powers
H. Forms of government
III. Legislative Department..19
A. Who may exercise legislative power
1. Congress
2. Regional/Local legislative power
3. Peoples initiative on statutes
a) Initiative and referendum
B. Houses of Congress
1. Senate
2. House of Representatives
a)
District
representatives
questions of apportionment
b) Party-list system
C. Legislative privileges, inhibitions
disqualifications
D. Quorum and voting majorities
E. Discipline of members
F. Congressional Journals and Records
and
and
A. Privileges, inhibitions and disqualifications.38

1. Presidential immunity
2. Presidential privilege
B. Powers
1. Executive and administrative powers in
general
2. Power of appointment
a) In general
b) Commission on appointments
confirmation
c) Midnight appointments
d) Power of removal
3. Power of control and supervision
a) Doctrine of qualified political agency
b) Executive departments and offices
c) Local government units
4. Military powers
5. Pardoning power
a) Nature and limitations
b) Forms of executive clemency
6. Diplomatic power
7. Powers relative to appropriation
measures
8. Delegated powers
9. Veto powers
10. Residual powers
C. Rules on Succession
Page 3 of 214
V. Judicial Department..48
A. Concepts
1. Judicial power
2. Judicial review
a) Operative fact doctrine
b) Moot questions
c) Political question doctrine
B. Safeguards of Judicial independence
C. Judicial restraint
D. Appointments to the Judiciary
E. Supreme Court
1. En banc and division cases
2. Procedural rule-making
3. Administrative supervision over lower
courts
VI. Constitutional Commissions..55
A. Constitutional safeguards to ensure
independence of commissions
B. Powers and functions of each commission.
C. Prohibited offices and interests
D. Jurisdiction of each constitutional
commission
E. Review of final orders, resolutions and
decisions
1. Rendered in the exercise of quasi-judicial
functions
2. Rendered in the exercise of
administrative functions
VII. Bill of Rights.60
A. Fundamental powers of the state (police
power, eminent domain, taxation)
1. Concept and application
2. Requisites for valid exercise
3. Similarities and differences
4. Delegation
B. Private acts and the bill of rights
C. Due process
1. Relativity of due process
2. Procedural and substantive due process
3. Constitutional and statutory due process
4. Hierarchy of rights
5. Judicial standards of review
6. Void-for-vagueness doctrine
D. Equal protection
1. Concept
2. Requisites for valid classification
3. Standards of judicial review
a) Rational Basis Test
b) Strict Scrutiny Test
c) Intermediate Scrutiny Test
E. Searches and seizures
1. Concept
2. Warrant requirement
a) Requisites
3. Warrantless searches
4. Warrantless arrests
5. Administrative arrests
6. Drug, alcohol and blood tests
F.
Privacy
of
communications
and
correspondence
1. Private and public communications
2. Intrusion, when allowed
3. Writ of habeas data
G. Freedom of expression
1. Concept and scope
a) Prior restraint (censorship)
b) Subsequent punishment
2. Content-based and content-neutral
regulations
a) Tests
b) Applications
3. Facial challenges and the overbreadth
doctrine
4. Tests
5. State regulation of different types of
mass media
6. Commercial speech
7. Private vs. Government speech
8. Hecklers veto
H. Freedom of religion
1. Non-establishment clause
a) Concept and basis
b) Acts permitted and not permitted by the
clause
c) Test
1. Free exercise clause
2. Tests
a) Clear and Present Danger Test
b) Compelling State Interest Test
c) Conscientious Objector Test
I. Liberty of abode and freedom of movement
Page 4 of 214
1. Limitations
2. Right to travel
3. Return to return to ones county
J. Right to information
1. Limitations
2. Publication of laws and regulations
3. Access to court records
4. Right to information relative to
a) Government contract negotiations
b) Diplomatic negotiations
K. Right of association
L. Eminent domain
1. Concept
2. Expansive concept of public use
3. Just compensation
a) Determination
b) Effect of delay
4. Abandonment of intended use and right
of repurchase
5. Miscellaneous application
M. Contract clause
1. Contemporary application of the contract
clause
N. Legal assistance and free access to courts
O. Rights of suspects
1. Availability
2. Requisites
3. Waiver
P. Rights of the accused
1. Criminal due process
2. Bail
3. Presumption of innocence
4. Right to be heard
5. Right to be informed
6. Right to speedy, impartial and public trial
7. Right of confrontation
8. Compulsory process
9. Trials in absentia
10. Assistance of counsel
Q. Writ of habeas corpus
R. Writ of amparo
S. Speedy Disposition of Cases
T. Self-incrimination clause
1. Scope and coverage
2. Application
3. Immunity statutes
U. Involuntary servitude and political prisoners
V. Excessive fines and cruel and inhuman

punishments
W. Non-imprisonment for debts
X. Double jeopardy
1. Requisites
2. Motions for reconsideration and appeals
3. Dismissal with consent of accused
Y. Ex post facto laws and bills of attainder
VIII. Citizenship.100
A. Who are Filipino citizens
B. Modes of acquiring citizenship
C. Naturalization and denaturalization
D. Dual citizenship and dual allegiance
E. Loss and re-acquisition of Philippine
citizenship
F. Natural-born citizens and public office
IX. Law on Public Officers.102
A. General principles
B. Modes of acquiring title to public office
C. Modes and kinds of appointment
D. Eligibility and qualification requirements
E. Disabilities and inhibitions of public officers
F. Powers and duties of public officers
G. Rights of public officers
H. Liabilities of public officers
1. Preventive suspension and back
salaries116
2. Illegal dismissal, reinstatement and back
salaries
I. Immunity of public officers
J. De facto officers
K. Termination of official relation
L. The civil service
1. Scope
2. Appointments to the civil service
3. Personnel actions
M. Accountability of public officers
1. Impeachment
2. Ombudsman
a) Functions
b) Judicial review in administrative
proceedings
c) Judicial review in penal proceedings
3. Sandiganbayan
Page 5 of 214
4. Ill-gotten wealth
N. Term limits
X. Administrative Law133
B. Administrative agencies
1. Definition
2. Manner of creation
3. Kinds
C. Powers of administrative agencies
1. Quasi-legislative (rule making) power
a) Kinds of administrative rules and
regulations
b) Requisites for validity
2. Quasi-judicial (adjudicatory) power
a) Administrative due process
b) Administrative appeal and review
c) Administrative res judicata
3. Fact-finding, investigative, licensing and
rate-fixing powers
D. Judicial recourse and review
1. Doctrine of primary administrative
jurisdiction
2. Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative
remedies
3. Doctrine of finality of administrative
action
XI. Election Law...148
A. Suffrage
B. Qualification and disqualification of voters
C. Registration of voters
D. Inclusion and exclusion proceedings
E. Political parties
1. Jurisdiction of the COMELEC over political
parties
2. Registration
F. Candidacy
1. Qualifications of candidates
2. Filing of certificates of candidacy
a) Effect of filing
b) Substitution of candidates
c) Ministerial duty of COMELEC to
receive certificate
d) Nuisance candidates
e) Petition to deny or cancel certificates
of candidacy
f) Effect of disqualification
g) Withdrawal of candidates
G. Campaign
1. Premature campaigning
2. Prohibited contributions
3. Lawful and prohibited election
propaganda
4. Limitations on expenses
5. Statement of contributions and expenses
H. Board of Election Inspectors and Board of
Canvassers
1. Composition
2. Powers
I. Remedies and jurisdiction in election law163
1. Petition not to give due course to
certificate of candidacy
2. Petition to declare failure of elections3.
Pre-proclamation controversy
4. Election protest
5. Quo warranto
J. Prosecution of election offenses
XII. Local Governments..169
A. Public corporations
1. Concept
a) Distinguished from government-owned or
controlled corporations
2. Classifications
a) Quasi-corporations
b) Municipal corporations
B. Municipal corporations
1. Elements
2. Nature and functions
3. Requisites for creation, conversion,
division, merger or dissolution
C. Principles of local autonomy
D. Powers of local government units (LGUs)
1. Police power (general welfare clause)
2. Eminent domain
3. Taxing power
4. Closure and opening of roads
5. Legislative power
a) Requisites for valid ordinance
b) Local initiative and referendum
6. Corporate powers
a) To sue and be sued
b) To acquire and sell property
Page 6 of 214
c) To enter into contracts

7. Liability of LGUs
8. Settlement of boundary disputes
9. Succession of elective officials
10. Discipline of local officials
a) Elective officials
b) Appointive officials
11. Recall
12. Term limits
XIII. National Economy and Patrimony185
A. Regalian doctrine
B. Nationalist and citizenship requirement
provisions
C. Exploration, development and utilization of
natural resources
D. Franchises, authority and certificates for
public utilities
E. Acquisition, ownership and transfer of public
and private lands
F. Practice of professions
G. Organization and regulation of corporations,
private and public
H. Monopolies, restraint of trade and unfair
competition
XIV. Social Justice and Human Rights192
A. Concept of social justice
B. Commission on human rights
XV. Education, Science, Technology, Arts,
Culture and Sports.194
A. Academic freedom
XVI. Public International Law.196
A. Concepts
1. Obligations erga omnes
2. Jus cogens
3. Concept of aequo et bono
B. International and national law
C. Sources
D. Subjects
1. States
2. International organizations
3. Individuals
E. Diplomatic and consular law
F. Treaties
G. Nationality and statelessness
H. Treatment of aliens
1. Extradition
a) Fundamental principles
b) Procedure
c) Distinguished from deportation
I. International Human Rights Law
1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights
2. International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights
3. International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights
J. International Humanitarian Law and
neutrality
1. Categories of armed conflicts
a) International armed conflicts
b) Internal or non-international armed
conflict
c) War of national liberation
2. Core international obligations of states in
International Humanitarian Law
3. Principles of International Humanitarian
Law
a) Treatment of civilians
b) Prisoners of war
4. Law on neutrality
K. Law of the sea
1. Baselines
2. Archipelagic states
a) Straight archipelagic baselines
b) Archipelagic waters
c) Archipelagic sea lanes passage
3. Internal waters
4. Territorial sea
5. Exclusive economic zone
6. Continental shelf
a) Extended continental shelf
7. International Tribunal for the Law of the
Sea
L. International environment law
1. Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration
Page 7 of 214
POLITICAL LAW
I. The Constitution
==============================
TOPICS UNDER THE SYLLABUS:
I. The Constitution
B. Parts
C. Amendments and revisions
D. Self-executing and non-self-executing
provisions
E. General provisions
======================================
TOPIC UNDER THE SYLLABUS:

I. THE CONSTITUTION
======================================
======================================

I. THE CONSTITUTION
B. Parts of a Constitution
======================================
B. PARTS OF A CONSTITUTION
a. Preamble
An introduction that identifies: (1) the framers of the
Constitution, (2) their intentions, and (3) the purpose(s)
of the document.
b. Articles (I XVIII)
Establishes how the government is structured, and how
the Constitution can be changed.
A. DEFINITION, NATURE AND SCOPE

CONSTITUTION - A written instrument by which the
fundamental powers of government are established,
limited, and defined, and by which these powers are
distributed among several departments, for their more
safe and useful exercise, for the benefit of the body
politic.
The written instrument agreed upon by the people as
the absolute rule of action and decision for all
departments and officers of the government and in
opposition to which any act or rule of any department
or officer of the government, or even of the people
themselves, will be altogether void.
1.
2.
3.
4.
i. Philippine Constitution and Effectivity Dates

1935 Constitution (May 14, 1935)
1973 Constitution (Jan. 17, 1973)
1986 Freedom Constitution (Mar. 25, 1986)
1987 Constitution (Feb. 2, 1987)
1.
2.
3.
ii. Other Constitution and Effectivity Dates

1897 Biak na Bato Constitution (Nov.1, 1897)
1899 Malolos Constitution (Jan. 21, 1899)
1943 Constitution (Sep. 7, 1943)
NOTE: Constitutionalists recognize only the first group

(1935, 1973, 1986, and 1987) of Constitutions. The
1897 and 1899 Constitutions were by revolutionary
governments while the 1943 Constitution existed
during the Japanese occupation.
The 1987 Constitution is composed of the following

articles:
I. National Territory
II. Declaration of Principles and State Policies
III. Bill of Rights
IV. Citizenship
V. Suffrage
VI. Legislative Department
VII. Executive Department
VIII. Judicial Department
IX. Constitutional Commissions
X. Local Government
XI. Accountability of Public Officers
XII. National Economy and Patrimony
XIII. Social Justice and Human Rights
XIV. Education, Science and Technology, Arts,
Culture and Sports
XV. The Family
XVI. General Provisions
XVII. Amendments or Revisions
XVIII. Transitory Provisions
c. Amendments
Changes to the Constitution from the time of
promulgation.
======================================

I. THE CONSTITUTION
C. Amendments and Revisions
======================================
Page 8 of 214
C. AMENDMENTS AND REVISIONS (Art. XVII)

b. Necessary Steps to Give Effect to
Amendments and Revisions (PSR)
a. Amendment versus Revision

i.
Amendment
An alteration of one or a few specific provisions of the

Constitution. Its main purpose is to improve specific
provisions of the Constitution. The changes brought
about by amendments will not affect the other
provisions of the Constitution.
Examples: (i) a change reducing the voting age from 18
years to 15 years; (ii) a change reducing Filipino
ownership of mass media companies from 100 percent
to 60 percent; (iii) change requiring a college degree as
an additional qualification for election to the
Presidency Lambino v. COMELEC, [GR No. 174153,
October 25, 2006].
1.
2.
3.
Proposal of amendments or revisions by the

proper constituent assembly
Submission of the proposed amendments or
revisions
Ratification
c.
Proposal of Amendments
i.
Constituent Assembly (CAss)
Congress, acting as a CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY, by a

3/4 vote of all its members
NOTES:
ii. Revision
An examination of the entire Constitution to determine
how and to what extent it should be altered. A revision
implies substantive change, affecting the Constitution
as a whole.
Examples: (i) altering the principle of separation of
powers or the system of checks-and-balances; (ii) a
switch from the presidential system to a parliamentary
system (iii) a switch from a bicameral system to a
unicameral system Lambino v. COMELEC, [GR No.
174153, October 25, 2006].
The power of Congress to propose amendments is NOT

part of its ordinary legislative power.
The only reason Congress can exercise such power is
that the Constitution has granted it such power.
Each House may separately formulate amendments by
a vote of of all its members, and then pass it on to
the other house for similar process. Nothing is said
about joint sessions.
Even in a joint session, they must still vote separately
because Congress is bicameral (Supra).
Two-part test in determining whether a proposal

involves an amendment or revision.
1.
2.
QUANTITATIVE TEST- WON the proposed

change is so extensive in its provision as to
change directly the substance entirety of
the Constitution by the deletion or alteration
of numerous provisions. The court examines
only the number of provisions affected and
does not consider the degree of the change.
QUALITATIVE TESTinquires into the
qualitative effects of the proposed change in
the Constitution. The main inquiry is whether
the change will accomplish such far-reaching
changes in the nature of our basic
governmental plan as to amount to a
revision. Lambino v. COMELEC, [GR No.
174153, October 25, 2006].
ii. Constitutional Convention (ConCon)

Congress may call a ConCon by a 2/3 vote of all its
members OR
By a majority vote of all its members, Congress may
submit to the electorate the question of whether to call
a ConCon or not
NOTES:
Choice of which constituent assembly or constitutional
convention should initiate amendments and revisions is
left to the discretion of Congress. In other words, it is a
POLITICAL QUESTION.
The MANNER OF CALLING a ConCon is subject to
judicial review, because the Constitution has provided
for voting requirements.
Page 9 of 214
If Congress, acting as a CAss, calls for a ConCon but

does not provide the details for the calling of such
ConCon, Congress - exercising its ordinary legislative
power - may supply such details. But in so doing,
Congress (as legislature) should not transgress the
resolution of Congress acting as a constituent assembly.
Congress, as a CAss and the ConCon has no power to
appropriate money for their expenses. Money may be
spent from the treasury only pursuant to an
appropriation made by law.
iii. Peoples Initiative
f. Ratification of Proposal if made through

Peoples Initiative
Valid when ratified by a MAJORITY of votes cast in a
plebiscite.
Plebiscite is held not earlier than 60 days nor later than
90 days after the certification by COMELEC of the
petition's sufficiency.
g. Requisites for Valid Ratification:

1.
Held in a plebiscite conducted under the election

law
Supervised by the COMELEC
Where only franchised voters (registered) voters
take part
For a valid Peoples Initiative, there must be:

1. Petition to propose such amendments must be
signed be at least 12% of ALL REGISTERED VOTERS
2. Every legislative district must be represented by at
least 3% of the registered voters therein.
2.
3.
NOTES:
The Constitution does not require that amendments

and revisions be submitted to the people in a special
election. Thus, they may be submitted for ratification
simultaneously with a general election.
While the substance of the proposals made by each

type of CAss is not subject to judicial review, the
manner the proposals are made is subject to judicial
review.
Since a CAss owes their existence to the Constitution,
the courts may determine whether the assembly has
acted in accordance with the Constitution.
e.g.
1. Whether a proposal was approved by the required
number of votes in Congress (acting as a constituent
assembly).
2. Whether the approved proposals were properly
submitted to the people for ratification.
NOTE:
The determination of the conditions under which

proposed amendments/ revisions are submitted to the
people falls within the legislative sphere. That Congress
could have done better does not make the steps taken
as invalid.
All the proposed amendments/revisions made by the
constituent assemblies must be submitted for
ratification in ONE SINGLE PLEBISCITE. There cannot be
a piece-meal ratification of amendments/revisions.
Presidential proclamation is NOT
effectivity of amendments/revisions.
required
for
d. Proposal of Revisions
1.
2.
By Congress, upon a vote of 3/4 of its members OR

By a Constitutional Convention
EXCEPTION: The proposed amendments/ revisions so

provide.
======================================
e. Ratification of Proposal if made through

CASS or CONCON
Amendments and revisions valid when ratified by a
MAJORITY of votes cast in a plebiscite.
Plebiscite is held not earlier than 60 days nor later than
90 days from the approval of such amendments or
revisions.

I. THE CONSTITUTION
D. Self-executing and Non-self-executing
Provisions
======================================
D. SELF-EXECUTING PROVISIONS
Page 10 of 214
General Rule - The provisions of the Constitution are

considered self-executing, and do not require future
legislation for their enforcement.
Exception - Principles in Article II are not intended to be
self-executing principles ready for enforcement
through the courts. They are used by the judiciary as
aids or as guides in the exercise of its power of judicial
review, and by the legislature in its enactment of laws.
Tondo Medical v. Court of Appeals, [G.R. No. 167324,
July 17, 2000]).
Exception to the Exception
1. The right to a balanced and healthful ecology
is self-executory and does not need an
implementing legislation. Oposa v. Factoran,
[G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993].
2. Section 28 or the duty of full public disclosure
is a SELF EXECUTING provision. Province of
North Cotabato v. GRP, [GR No. 183591, Oct.
14, 2008].
======================================

I.
THE CONSTITUTION
E. General Provisions
======================================
PROHIBITIONS AND DISQUALIFICATIONS: Military men

cannot engage, directly or indirectly, in any PARTISAN
POLITICAL ACTIVITY, except to vote.
Members of the AFP in active service cannot be
appointed to a civilian position in the government,
including GOCCs or their subsidiaries.
END OF DISCUSSION ON TOPIC

I. THE CONSTITUTION
==============================
II. General Considerations

==============================
A. National territory
B. Archipelagic doctrine
C. State immunity
D. Principles and policies
E. Separation of powers
F. Checks and balances
G. Delegation of powers
H. Forms of government
E. GENERAL PROVISIONS
======================================
a. Symbols of Nationality
i.
The Philippine Flag
Red, white, and blue with a sun and 3 stars

The design may be changed by constitutional
amendment
i.
Congress may, by law, adopt a new:
1. Name for the country

2. National anthem
3. National seal
NOTE:
Law will take effect upon ratification by the people in a
NATIONAL REFERENDUM.
b. The Armed Forces of the Philippines

(AFP)

A. National Territory
======================================
A. THE NATIONAL TERRITORY (ARTICLE I)

The Philippine ARCHIPELAGO, with all islands and
waters embraced therein
a.
Philippine Archipelago
1. That body of water studded with islands which is

delineated in the Treaty of Paris, as amended by the
Treaty of Washington and the Treaty with Great Britain.
2. All OTHER TERRITORIES over which the Philippines
has sovereignty or jurisdiction
3. Includes any territory:
b. presently belonging, or
Page 11 of 214
c.
those that might in the future belong to the

Philippines through any of the accepted
international modes of acquiring territory
b. Territorial Sea
TERRITORIAL SEA, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular
shelves, and other submarine areas in the Philippine
archipelago and all other territories, corresponding to
(1) and (2) above.
EXCLUSIVE
ECONOMIC
ZONE
EXTENDED
CONTINENTAL
SHELF
200 nautical miles from the baseline

(includes the territorial sea and the
contiguous zone)
Beyond the 200 nautical miles
======================================

B. Archipelagic Doctrine
======================================
c. Internal Waters
Waters around, between, and connecting the islands of
the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and
dimensions.
d. Contiguous Zone
Extends up to 12 nautical miles from the Territorial Sea.
Although not part of the territory, the coastal State
may exercise jurisdiction to prevent infringement of
customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws.
B. ARCHIPELAGIC PRINCIPLE
a.
Straight Baseline Method
Method of delineating the territorial sea. It consists of

drawing straight lines connecting the outermost points
on the coast without departing to any appreciable
extent from the general direction of the coast.
i.
The Baseline Law (R.A. 9522, March 10,

2009)
e. Exclusive Economic Zone

Body of water extending up to 200 nautical miles
beyond the baseline, within which the state may
exercise sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve
and manage the natural resources.
f. Extended Continental Shelf

Portion of the continental shelf that lies beyond the
200 nautical mile limit. A coastal state may establish a
continental shelf beyond the 200 nautical miles from its
coastline.
NOTES:
The Philippine archipelago and all other territories
consist of the following domains:
1. Terrestrial
2. Fluvial
3. Aerial
4. All Other territories outside archipelago
TERRITORIAL
SEA
CONTIGUOUS
ZONE
The law establishes 101 basepoints around the

Philippine archipelago which are connected by straight
lines to form the Philippine baselines. The Kalayaan
Island Group as constituted under Presidential Decree
No. 1596 and the Bajo de Masinloc, also known as
Scarborough Shoal, are not included in the islands
enclosed by the Philippine archipelagic baselines, and
are instead treated as "regime of islands" under
Philippine control.
Regime of Islands- Under Article 121 of the UNCLOS III,
any naturally formed area of land, surrounded by
water, which is above water at high tides qualifies
under the category of regime of islands whose islands
generate their own applicable maritime zones (e.g.,
Kalayaan Islands and Scarborough Shoal).
Archipelagic DoctrineThe 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. (Art I, Sec. 1).
12 nautical miles from baseline
NOTES:
24 nautical miles from baseline, or

12 nautical miles from the edge of
the territorial sea
Kalayaan Islands has its own Territorial Sea, Contiguous

Zone and Exclusive Economic Zone.
Page 12 of 214
BUT Scarborough Shoal ONLY has a Territorial Sea and

Contiguous Zone.
There can be a Continental Shelf without an EEZ, but
not an EEZ without a Continental Shelf.
RA 9522 (BASELINES LAW) is CONSTITUTIONAL.
Baselines laws are nothing but statutory mechanisms
for UNCLOS III state parties to delimit with precision
the extent of their maritime zones and continental
shelves. In turn, this gives notice to the rest of the
community of the scope of their maritime space and
submarine areas within which states parties exercise.
The law has nothing to do with acquisition,
enlargement, or diminution of territory, as States may
only acquire (or lose) territory through occupation,
accretion, cession, and prescription. Magallona v.
Ermita, [G.R. No. 187167, August 16, 2011].
The law also does not convert previously considered
internal waters into archipelagic waters, the latter
allowing the right of innocent passage. Whether
referred to as Philippine internal waters under Article
I of the Constitution or as archipelagic waters under
UNCLOS III (Article 49 [1]), the Philippines exercises
sovereignty over the body of water lying landward of
the baselines, including the air space over it and the
submarine areas underneath. The fact of sovereignty,
however, does not preclude the operation of municipal
and international law norms subjecting the territorial
sea or archipelagic waters to necessary, if not marginal,
burdens in the interest of maintaining unimpeded,
expeditious international navigation, consistent with
the international law principle of freedom of
navigation. Thus, domestically, the political branches of
the Philippine government, in the competent discharge
of their constitutional powers, may pass legislation
designating routes within the archipelagic waters to
regulate innocent and sea lanes passage. Magallona v.
Ermita, [G.R. No. 187167, August 16, 2011].
A States commercial activity is a descent to the level of

individuals and there is a form of tacit consent to be
sued when it enters into business contracts with others.
However, not every contract entered into is a form of
tacit consent to be sued. It depends upon whether the
foreign state is engaged in the activity in the regular
course of business. If not, or it is in pursuit of a
sovereign activity, it falls within the exemption of acts
jure imperii especially when not intended for gain or
profit.
A party who feels transgressed by anyone claiming
immunity may ask his own government to espouse his
cause through diplomatic channels.
DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY - Immunity from
jurisdiction is enjoyed by both the head of state and by
the state itself.
a.
Scope of State Immunity
JURE IMPERII - Immunity is granted to foreign States

only with respect to their governmental acts
JURE GESTIONIS - Immunity is not granted with respect
to their commercial act
JURE GESTIONIS
By right of economic or
business relation
May be sued
JURE IMPERII
By right of sovereign
power, in the exercise of
sovereign functions
May not be sued
The rule is to adopt a doctrine of QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.
b.
General Rule
The State cannot be sued WITHOUT ITS CONSENT.

NOTE:
======================================

C. State Immunity
The rule likewise prohibits a person from filing for

interpleader, with the State as one of the defendants
being compelled to interplead.
======================================
C.
i.
STATE IMMUNITY (ARTICLE XVI)
The state may not be sued without its consent.

(Based on the principle of equality of statespar in
parem non habet imperium).
1.
2.
3.
When considered a suit against the

State
The Republic is sued by NAME

Suits against an unincorporated government
AGENCY
Suit is against a government OFFICIAL, but is such
that ultimate liability shall DEVOLVE on the
Page 13 of 214
government
NOTE:
When a public officer acts in bad faith, or beyond the
scope of his authority, he can be held personally liable
for damages.
If a public officer acted pursuant to his official duties,
without malice, negligence, or bad faith, he is not
personally liable, and the suit is really one against the
State.
Where a public officer has committed an ultra vires act,
or where there is a showing of bad faith, malice, or
gross negligence, the officer can be held personally
accountable even if such acts are claimed to have been
performed in connection with official duties. Wylie v.
Rarang, [209 SCRA 357].
1.
2.
c.
Exceptions
i.
Consent to be Sued
EXPRESS - The law expressly grants the authority

to sue the State or any of its agencies.
e.g.
a. A law creating a government body expressly
providing that such body may sue or be
sued.
b. Art. 2180 of the Civil Code - creates liability
against the State when it acts through a
special agent.
IMPLIED
a. The State, through the proper officer and
within the scope of his authority, enters into a
PRIVATE contract.
EXCEPTION: The contract is merely incidental
to the performance of a governmental
function.
b. The State enters into an operation that is
essentially a business operation.
EXCEPTION: The operation is incidental to the
performance of a governmental function.
e.g. arrastre services
NOTE:
When the State conducts business operations through
a Government-Owned and Controlled Corporation
(GOCC), the GOCC can generally be sued, even if its
charter contains no express sue or be sued clause.
The Court has no basis to conclude or presume that a

German corporation enjoys immunity from suit in the
absence of a certification from the Department of
Foreign Affairs. The Court held that while a certification
may not necessarily be imperative for a foreign party to
enjoy such diplomatic privileges, an endorsement from
the DFA supporting GTZs claim of diplomatic status
would have provided factual basis in establishing the
companys entitlement to immunity from suit. GTZ is
akin to a governmental owned or controlled
corporation without original charter which, by virtue of
the Corporation Code, has expressly consented to be
sued. GTZ v. CA, [GR No. 152318, April 16, 2009].
ii. A suit against an incorporated
agency
NOTE:
This is because they generally conduct proprietary
business operations and have charters, which grant
them a separate juridical personality.
If the charter provides that the agency can sue and be
sued, then the suit will lie, including one for tort. PNB v.
CIR, [81 SCRA 314].
If the suit is against an unincorporated government
agency, there is a need to inquire into the principal
functions of the agency. If governmental cannot be
sued without consent
1. If proprietary suit will lie because the State
engages in principally proprietary functions, then
it descends to the level of a private individual,
vulnerable to suit. NAC v. Teodoro, [91 Phil. 207].
iii. The State files suit against a
private party
d. Garnishment of Government Funds
i.
General Rule:
Not allowed. Whether the money is deposited by way

of general or special deposit, they remain government
funds and are not subject to garnishment.
ii. Exceptions
Where a law or ordinance has been enacted
appropriating a specific amount to pay a valid
government obligation, then the money can be
garnished.
Page 14 of 214
If the funds belong to a public corporation or a GOCC

which is clothed with a personality of its own, then the
funds are not exempt from garnishment. NHA v.
Guivelando, [404 SCRA 389, June 19, 2003].
e. Consent to be sued is not

equivalent to consent to liability
international law or foreign relations mean that an act

of state is an essential element of a claim. It cannot be
thought that every case touching foreign relations lies
beyond judicial cognizance. Provincial Government of
Marinduque v. Placer Dome, Inc., [No. 07-1630, March
10, 2009].
======================================
The fact that the State consented to being sued does

not mean that the State will ultimately be held liable.
Even if the case is decided against the State, an award
cannot be satisfied by writs of execution or
garnishment against public funds. No money shall be
paid out of the public treasury unless pursuant to an
appropriation made by law.
f. Payment of interest by the

government in money judgment
against it
i.
General Rule
Government cannot be made to pay interests

ii. Exceptions
1. Eminent domain
2. Erroneous collection of tax
3. Government agrees to pay interest pursuant to law
g. Immunity from Jurisdiction

General rule: The jurisdiction of a state within its
territory is complete and absolute
Exceptions:
immunity
Sovereign
immunity
and
diplomatic
h. Acts of State Immunity

Every sovereign state is bound to RESPECT THE
INDEPENDENCE of every other sovereign state, and the
courts of one country will not sit in judgment on the
acts of the government of another, done within its own
territory. Redress of grievances by reason of such acts
must be obtained through the means open to be
availed of by sovereign powers as between themselves.
Nothing in the complaint would require a court to pass
judgment on any official act of the Philippine
government. Just as raising the specter of political
issues cannot sustain dismissal under the political
question doctrine, neither does a general invocation of

D. Policies and Principles
======================================
D. POLICIES AND PRINCIPLES (Article II)

a.
Elements of a State
CODE: GSPoT
1. GOVERNMENT - Institution organized and run in
order to manage the affairs of the State.
2. SOVEREIGNTY - Power of the State to regulate
matters within its own territory.
3. POPULATION - A group of persons sufficiently
numerous held together by a common bond.
4. TERRITORY - A definite area over which the State
exercises sovereign jurisdiction.
b. General Principles of International Law

Principles based on natural justice common to most
national systems of law.
EXAMPLES:
1. The right of an alien to be released on bail while
awaiting deportation when his failure to leave the
country is due to the fact that no country will
accept him. Mejoff v. Director of Prisons, [90 Phil.
70)(September 26, 1951].
2. The right of a country to establish military
commissions to try war criminals. Kuroda v.
Jalandoni, [83 Phil. 171, March 26, 1949].
3. The Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals.
Agustin v. Edu, [G.R. No. L-49112, February 2,
1979].
4. Duty to protect the premises of embassies and
legations. Reyes v. Bagatsing, [G.R. No. L-65366,
November 9, 1983].
5. Good faith, estoppel, exhaustion of local remedies,
unjust enrichment.
Page 15 of 214
NOTE: The Philippines RENOUNCES AGGRESSIVE war as

an instrument of national policy, but ALLOWS for a
defensive war.
c.

E. Separation of Powers
======================================
Civilian Authority
CIVILIAN AUTHORITY - The head of the armed forces is

a civilian president and the primary purpose of AFP is to
serve and protect the people.
MARK OF SOVEREIGNTY - Positively, the military is the
guardian of the people and of the integrity of the
national territory and therefore ultimately of the
majesty of the law. Negatively, it is an expression
against military abuses.
E. SEPARATION OF POWERS
An allocation of the three great powers of government
in the following manner: legislation to Congress,
execution of laws to the Executive, and settlement of
legal controversies to the Judiciary. It is also an implicit
limitation on their powers, preventing one from
invading the domain of the others, but the separation is
not total.
======================================
d. Freedom from Nuclear Weapons

PROHIBITS
Possession, control and
manufacture of nuclear
weapons
Nuclear arms tests
DOES NOT PROHIBIT

Peaceful use of nuclear
energy
NOTE: Exception to policy against nuclear weapons

may be made by political departments; but must be
justified by demands of national interest.
e.
Protection of the Life of the Unborn
It is not an assertion that the unborn is a legal person.

It is not an assertion that the life of the unborn is
placed exactly on the level of the life of the mother.
Hence, when it is necessary to save the life of the
mother, the life of the unborn may be sacrificed.
The Roe v. Wade doctrine allowing abortion up to the
6th month of pregnancy cannot be adopted in the
Philippines because the life of the unborn is protected
from the time of conception.
f.
Right to a Balance and Healthful Ecology
The right to a balanced and healthful ecology is not less

important than any of the civil and political rights
enumerated in the Bill of Rights. The right to a balanced
and healthful ecology carries with it an
intergenerational responsibility to care for and protect
the environment. Oposa v. Factoran, [G.R. No. 101083,
July 30, 1993].
======================================

F. Checks and Balances
======================================
F. CHECKS AND BALANCES

A system operating between and among the three
branches of government the net effect of which is, that
no one department is able to act without the
cooperation of at least one of the other departments.
E.g.
Legislation needs final approval from the

President;
President must obtain the concurrence of
Congress to complete certain acts;
Money can be released from the Treasury only
by authority of Congress;
SC can declare acts of Congress or the Executive
unconstitutional.
======================================

G. Delegation of Powers
======================================
G. DELEGATION OF POWERS
a.
General Rule
Legislative power is vested in Congress (Senate + House

of Representatives) by the sovereign Filipino people.
Congress cannot delegate its legislative power under
the maxim delegata potestas non potest delegari
(delegated power may not be delegated).
Page 16 of 214
b. Exceptions
A law allowing a judge to inflict punishment of

imprisonment in its discretion without any
designated limits is invalid People vs Dacuycoy,
[G.R. No. L-45127, May 5 1989].
i. Delegation to the people

TO the extent reserved to the PEOPLE by the provision
on initiative and referendum.
Administrative rules and regulations may be penal

in nature provided that: (1) such a violation is
made a crime by the delegating law; (2) penalty of
such is provided in the statutes, (3) the regulation
is published.
ii. Delegation to local government units

Local legislative bodies are allowed by our Constitution
to legislate on purely public matters. Since what was
given to local legislative bodies are not power to make
rules and regulations but legislative power, the rules on
valid delegation does not apply. However, when what is
given to local legislative body is executive power, the
rules applicable to the empowerment of administrative
agencies also becomes applicable Rubi v. Provincial
Board, [G.R. No. L-14078. March 7, 1901].
Powers of Congress which are not to be delegated

are those that are strictly or inherently legislative.
Purely legislative power is the authority to make a
complete law - complete as to the time it shall take
effect or to whom it shall be applicable and to
determine the expediency of the enactment.
iii. Delegation to Administrative Bodies

Rationale:
1. Increasing complexity of the task of
government
2. Lack of technical competence on the part of
Congress to provide for specific details of
implementation
3. Administrative agencies may fill up details of
the statute for implementation
4. Legislative may pass contingent legislation
which leaves to another body the business of
ascertaining facts necessary to bring the law
into action ABAKADA v. Ermita, [G.R. No.
168056, 1 September 2005].
NOTE:
Standards may be expressed or implied from the
law taken as a whole Edu v. Ericta [G.R. No. L32096, October 24, 1970].
They can even be gathered in other statute of the
same subject matter Chongbian v. Orbos, [G.R.
No. 96754, June 22, 1995].
If there was a valid delegation, administrative rules
and regulations are just binding as if it was written
in the law.
Administrative agencies may not issue regulations
that contravene the law Solicitor General v. Metro
Manila Authority, [G.R. No. 102782, December
11, 1991] nor may they add to the standards set by
law Tatad v. Secretary of Energy, [G.R. No.
124360, November 5, 1997].
iv. Delegation to the President

1.
Congress may delegate TARIFF POWERS to the

President
Art. VI, Section 23 (2) authorizes Congress to give
the President power necessary and proper to carry
out a declared national policy; Section 28(2)
authorizes Congress to delegate the power to fix
tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage,
wharfage dues and other duties and impost.
2.
EMERGENCY POWERS delegated by Congress to

the President.
C.
Test of Valid Delegation

i.
Completeness Test
The law must state the policy that must be carried out
or implemented and leave no room for the delegate to
legislate; nor allow discretion on their part to say what
the law is; there must be nothing left for the delegated
but to enforce the law.
ii.
Sufficiency of Standard
The limits which are sufficiently determinate and

determinable to which the delegate must conform in
the performance of his actions.
E.g.
Public interest People v. Rosenthal, [ GR Nos.
L-46076 and L-46077 June 12, 1939]
Fair and equitable employment practices
Page 17 of 214
Eastern Shipping Lines v. POEA, supra

justice and equity
public convenience and welfare
simplicity, economy and efficiency.
======================================

H. Forms of Government
======================================
NOTE: Congress can only delegate, usually to

administrative agencies, RULE-MAKING POWER or LAW
EXECUTION. This involves either of two tasks for the
administrative agencies:
1.
2.
FILLING UP ON THE DETAILS of an otherwise

complete statute; or
ASCERTAINING THE FACT necessary to bring a
contingent law or provision into actual
operation.
Any post-enactment congressional measure should
be limited to scrutiny and investigation. In
particular, congressional oversight must be
confined to the following: (SAHM)
1. SCRUTINY based primarily on Congress
power of appropriation and the budget
hearings conducted in connection with it
2. Its power to ask heads of departments to
APPEAR before and be HEARD by either of its
Houses on any matter pertaining to their
departments and its power of confirmation
investigation
3. MONITORING of the implementation of laws
pursuant to the power of Congress to conduct
inquiries in aid of legislation
Any action or step beyond that will undermine the
separation of powers guaranteed by the
Constitution. Legislative vetoes fall in this class.
Abakada Guro Party List v. Purisima, [G.R. No.
166715, August 14, 2008].
Reorganization involves the reduction of

personnel, consolidation of offices, or abolition
thereof by reason of economy or redundancy of
functions. The general rule has always been that
the power to abolish a public office is lodged with
the legislature. The EXCEPTION, however, is that as
far as bureaus, agencies or offices in the
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT are concerned, the
Presidents power of control may justify him to
inactivate the functions of a particular office, or
certain laws may grant him the broad authority to
carry out reorganization measures. Malaria
Employees v. Romulo, [July 31, 2007].
H. FORMS OF GOVERNMENT
GOVERNMENT An element of a state; that institution
through which the State exercises power; the aggregate
of institutions by which an independent society makes
and carries out rules of action which are necessary to
enable men and women to live in a social state, or
which are imposed upon the people forming that
society by those who possess the power or authority of
prescribing them. Bacani v. NACOCO, [100 Phil. At
471].
NOTE: On the National level, refers to the Legislative,
Executive, Judicial departments. On the local level,
refers to the regional, provincial, city, municipal and
barrio governments.
ADMINISTRATION Set of people currently running
the government institution.
a.
Classification of Government Function
i. Constituent
CONSTITUENT Compulsory functions which constitute
the very bonds of society.
E.g.
1. Keeping order and providing protection to
persons and property
2. Fixing of legal relations between husband and
wife, parents and children
3. Regulation of the holding, transmission,
interchange of property; determination of
liabilities for debt or crime
4. Determination of contract rights between
individuals
5. Definition and punishment of crime
6. Administration of justice in civil cases
7. Determination of political duties, privileges,
and relations of citizens
8. Dealings of the State with foreign powers:
preservation of the State from external
danger or encroachment and advancement of
international interest
ii. Ministrant
Page 18 of 214
MINISTRANT Discretionary or optional functions

intended to achieve a better life for the community.
PRINCIPLES FOR DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT

GOVERNMENT SHOULD EXERCISE MINISTRANT
FUNCTIONS:
ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF A PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

OF GOVERNMENT
1.
2.
Government should do for the public welfare those
things which private capital would not naturally
undertake.
Government should do those things which by its nature
it is better equipped to administer for the public
welfare than is any private individual or group of
individuals.
b. Classification According to Legitimacy

1.
2.
De Jure Legitimate; possessing all the legal

requisites of government
De facto Lacking one or more of the legal
requisites of government
TYPES OF DE FACTO GOVERNMENTS (VIP)
1. Government that usurps government and
maintains itself against the will of the majority
by force or by violence.
2. Government established and maintained by
military forces which invade or occupy a
territory of the enemy in the course of war; a
government of paramount force.
3. Government established as an independent
government by inhabitants who rise in
insurrection against the parent state.
c.
Common Forms
Government
of
Democratic
i. Presidential
Government is characterized by a separation of powers
among the Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary. This
system embodies interdependence by separation and
coordination. The head of State is the President, who
likewise presides over the Executive Department.
ii. Parliamentary
Government characterized by interdependence by
integration. Here, the ministers of the executive
branch get their democratic legitimacy from the
legislature and are accountable to that body, such that
the executive and legislative branches are intertwined.
3.
4.
5.
Members of government, or the cabinet, or the

executive are as a rule, simultaneously members of
the legislature.
The government or cabinet is in effect a
committee of the legislature.
The government or cabinet has a pyramidal
structure at the apex of which is the Prime
Minister or his equivalent.
Government or cabinet stays in power only so long
as it enjoys the support of the majority of the
legislature.
Both government and legislature possess control
devices with which each can demand of the other
immediate political responsibility.
LEGISLATURE possess power to exercise a vote of no

confidence (censure) whereby government may be
ousted.
EXECUTIVE possess the power to dissolve the
legislature and call for new elections.

II. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
=======================================
III. LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

=======================================
III. Legislative Department
1. Congress
1. Senate
a) District representatives and
C. Legislative privileges, inhibitions and
disqualifications
Page 19 of 214
D. Sessions, Quorum and voting majorities

E. Discipline of members
F. Records and Journals
G. Electoral tribunals and the commission on
appointments
1. Nature
2. Powers
1. Legislative
a) Legislative inquiries and the
oversight functions
b)
Bicameral
conference
committee
c) Limitations on legislative
power
i.
Limitations
on
revenue,
appropriations
and
tariff measures
ii. Presidential veto and
Congressional override
2. Non-legislative
a)Informing function
====================================
III.LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
1. Congress
====================================
A. WHO MAY EXERCISE LEGISLATIVE POWER
1. CONGRESS
GEN. RULE: Legislative power is vested in Congress
(Senate + House of Representatives) by the sovereign
Filipino people. Congress cannot delegate its legislative
power under the maxim delegata potestas non potest
delegari (delegated power may not be delegated).
EXCEPTIONS: (PLATE)
1. To the extent reserved to the PEOPLE by the
provision on initiative and referendum.
2. Delegation to LOCAL GOVERNMENT
3. Delegation to ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES
4. Congress may delegate TARIFF POWERS to the
President
5. EMERGENCY POWERS delegated by Congress to the
President
i. Classification of Legislative Power:
1.
2.
3.
4.
CONSTITUENT - The power to amend or revise the

Constitution
ORDINARY - The power to pass ordinary laws
ORIGINAL - Possessed by the people in their
sovereign capacity, exercised via INITIATIVE and
REFERENDUM.
DELEGATED - Possessed by Congress and other
legislative bodies by virtue of the Constitution
ii. Limits
1.
2.
3.
SUBSTANTIVE - limitations on the content of laws

NOTE: No law shall be passed establishing a state
religion.
PROCEDURAL - limitations on the manner of
passing laws
NOTE: Generally, a bill must go through three
readings on three separate days.
Congress CANNOT pass irrepealable laws
iii. Post enactment Congressional
Measure
Any post-enactment congressional measure should be

limited to scrutiny and investigation. In particular,
congressional oversight must be confined to the
following: (SAHM)
1. SCRUTINY based primarily on Congress power of
appropriation and the budget hearings conducted in
connection with it
2. Its power to ask heads of departments to APPEAR
before and be HEARD by either of its Houses on any
matter pertaining to their departments and its power
of confirmation investigation
Page 20 of 214
3. MONITORING of the implementation of laws

pursuant to the power of Congress to conduct inquiries
in aid of legislation
Any action or step beyond that will undermine the
separation of powers guaranteed by the Constitution.
Legislative vetoes fall in this class. Abakada Guro Party
List vs. Purisima, [G.R. No. 166715, August 14, 2008].
2. LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Local legislative bodies are allowed by our Constitution
to legislate on purely public matters. Since what was
given to local legislative bodies are not power to make
rules and regulations but legislative power, the rules on
valid delegation does not apply. However, when what is
given to local legislative body is executive power, the
rules applicable to the empowerment of administrative
agencies also becomes applicable Rubi v. Provincial
Board, [G.R. No. L-14078. March 7, 1901].
REQUISITES OF A VALID ORDINANCE:
CODE: Must NOT CUPPU, Must be GC
1. Must not CONTRAVENE the Constitution or any
statute
2. Must not be UNFAIR or oppressive
3. Must not be PARTIAL or discriminatory
4. Must not PROHIBIT, but may regulate trade
5. Must not be UNREASONABLE
6. Must be GENERAL and CONSISTENT with public
policy
3. PEOPLES INITIATIVE
INITIATIVE - The power of the people to propose
amendments to the Constitution or to propose and
enact legislation called for the purpose.
THREE TYPES OF INITIATIVE
1. INITIATIVE ON THE CONSTITUTION - A petition
proposing amendments to the Constitution.
2. INITIATIVE ON STATUTES - A petition proposing to
enact a national legislation.
3. INITIATIVE ON LOCAL LEGISLATION - A petition
proposing to enact a regional, provincial, city,
municipal, or barangay law, resolution or
ordinance.
LIMITATIONS ON THE POWER OF LOCAL INITIATIVE
1. Should not be exercised more than once a year;
2. Extended only to subjects or matters which are
3.
within the legal powers of local legislative bodies

to enact;
If the local legislative body adopts the proposition
in toto before the initiative is held, the initiative
shall be cancelled. Those against such action may
apply for initiative.
REFERENDUM - Power of the electorate to approve or

reject legislation through an election called for the
purpose.
REQUIRED PETITION
1. Petition should be registered with the Commission
on Elections (RA 6735 )
2. Should be signed by at least 10% of the total
number of registered voters
3. Every legislative district must be represented by at
least 3% of the registered voters thereof
The petition to be signed by the people should contain
a definite proposal of the amendment of the
Constitution; not merely a general question whether
they approve of the amendment or not. Lambino v.
COMELEC, [G.R. No. 174153, October 25, 2006].
TWO CLASSES OF REFERENDUM
1. Referendum on statutes
2. Referendum on local laws
MATTERS WHICH MAY NOT BE THE SUBJECT OF
INITIATIVE OR REFERENDUM
1. A petition embracing more than one subject
2. Statutes involving emergency measures
===================================
1. Senate
a) District representatives and
====================================
B. HOUSES OF CONGRESS
1. SENATE
2. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Page 21 of 214
i. Creation of Legislative Districts

SENATOR
24 Senators
REPRESENTATIVE
Not more than 250
representatives
unless
otherwise fixed by law
At least 35 y.o. on the At least 25 y.o. on the DAY
DAY OF THE ELECTION
OF THE ELECTION
Natural- born citizen of the Philippines
Able to read and write
Registered voter
Registered voter in the
district in which he shall
be elected (except partylist representatives)
Resident
of
the Resident of the said
Philippines for at least 2 district for at least 1 year
years
immediately immediately
preceding
preceding the election
election (except party-list
representative)
Term of 6 yrs.
Term of 3 yrs.
Commencing at noon on
Commencing at noon on
June 30,
June 30,
next
following
their next
following
their
election
election
Term limit: no more than Term limit: no more than 3
2 consecutive terms
consecutive terms
The qualifications of both Senators and Members of the
House are LIMITED to those provided by the
Constitution. Congress cannot, by law, add or subtract
from these qualifications. Pimentel v. COMELEC, [G.R.
No. 161658, Nov. 3, 2008].
a.
1.
2.
3.
4.
District Representative
Elected from legislative districts that are

APPORTIONED in accordance with the number of
inhabitants in each area and on the basis of a
UNIFORM AND PROGRESSIVE RATIO.
Each district shall comprise, as far as practicable,
CONTIGUOUS,
COMPACT
and
ADJACENT
TERRITORY. (CCA)
Each city with at least 250,000 inhabitants will be
entitled to at least one representative while each
province will have at least one representative.
Legislative districts shall be RE-APPORTIONED by
Congress within 3 years after the return of each
census.
Only Congress can create provinces and cities because

the creation of provinces and cities necessarily includes
the creation of legislative districts, a power only
Congress can exercise under Section 5, Article VI of the
Constitution and Section 3 of the Ordinance appended
to the Constitution. The ARMM Regional Assembly
cannot create a province without a legislative district
because the Constitution mandates that every province
shall have a legislative district. Sema v. COMELEC, [G.R.
No. 177597, July 16, 2008].
An Act converting the municipality of Mandaluyong to a
highly urbanized city of Mandaluyong included
resulting conversion of city into congressional district
was held to be valid. Tobias vs. Abalos, [G.R. No. L114783, December 8, 1994].
When a municipality is converted into a city large
enough to entitle it to one district, the incidental effect
is splitting the district into two. This does not need a
consensus. There is no need for plebiscite under Art. X
of the Constitution when one district is split into two,
because you are not creating new juridical personalities
or dividing the territory per se. There is only a need for
plebiscite if you are creating a new Local Government
Unit.
The COMELEC cannot correct the imbalance resulting
from the increase of districts by transferring districts.
The COMELEC must wait for a legislative enactment.
b.
Apportionment
The standards used to determine the apportionment of

legislative
districts
is
meant
to
prevent
GERRYMANDERING,
GERRYMANDERING - the formation of one legislative
district out of separate territories for the purpose of
favoring a candidate or a party. Navarro vs. Executive
Secretary [G.R. No. 180050, February 10, 2010].
A province is entitled to at least one representative,
with nothing mentioned about population; a city must
first meet a population minimum of 250,000 in order to
Page 22 of 214
be similarly entitled. Plainly read, Section 5(3) of the

Constitution requires a 250,000 minimum population
only for a city to be entitled to a representative, but not
so for a province. Senator Aquino III and Mayor
Robredo vs. Commission on Elections, [G.R. No.
189793, April 7, 2010].
DIFFERENCE OF REAPPORTIONMENT IN SEC. 5(10),
ART. VI AND THE CREATION OF A PROVINCE, CITY,
ETC. IN SEC. 10, ART. X.
In the first, the purpose is to ensure better access to
ones district representative in Congress. No political or
corporate unit is created. Thus, there is no need for a
plebiscite in the creation, dissolution, or any other
similar action on a legislative district.
Under Art. XVIII, Sec. 7, until a law is passed, the

President may fill by appointment from a list of
nominees by the respective sectors the seats reserved
for sectoral representation.
RA 7941, the Party-List System Act was approved on
March 3, 1995. This law put into place the mechanics
for a party-list system of representation based on
election and ended the appointment of sectoral
representatives by the President as provided in the
Transitory Provisions.
FOR PURPOSES OF THE MAY 1998 ELECTIONS, the first
five (5) major political parties on the basis of party
representation in the House of Representatives at the
start of the Tenth Congress of the Philippines shall not
be entitled to participate in the party-list system.
i.
In the second, political and corporate units are created

or altered. These possess legal personality and are
considered instrumentalities of the State in carrying
out the functions of government. They exercise
special functions for the sole benefit of constituents.
Thus, the need for a plebiscite to expressly secure the
consent of the people affected by the creation, division,
merger, abolition or alteration of boundaries of local
government units through a plebiscite. Bagabuyo v.
COMELEC, [G.R. No. 176970, December 8, 2008].
c.
1.
Registered party-lists, organizations, or coalitions

shall submit to the COMELEC a list of not less than
five (5) nominees in ORDER OF PRIORITY.
- A person may be nominated in one (1) list
only.
- Only persons who have given their
consent in writing may be named in the
list.
- Candidates for any elective office in the
immediately preceding election shall be
disqualified from becoming a nominee.
- No change of names or alteration of the
order of nominees shall be allowed after
the same shall have been submitted to
the COMELEC, EXCEPT:
a. when the nominee dies, or
b. withdraws in writing his nomination,
c. becomes incapacitated in which
case the name of the substitute
nominee shall be placed last in the
list.
- Incumbent sectoral representatives in the
House of Representatives who are
nominated in the party-list system shall
not be considered resigned.
2.
The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall

be ranked from the highest to the lowest based on
the number of votes garnered during elections.
Party-List Representatives
Constitute 20% of the total number of representatives

(the total includes the party-list representatives).
Currently the maximum number of House of
Representative members is set at 250, which means a
maximum of 50 part-list members are allowed. But this
number can be increased through a passage of a law.
Banat v. COMELEC, [G.R. Nos. 179271 & 179295, July
8, 2009].
However, for 3 consecutive terms after the ratification
of the 1987 Constitution (1987-1992, 1992-1995 and
1995-1998) from February 2, 1987 until 1998, 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.
ii.
1.
Mechanics
Parameters
In
Party-List
Elections
Twenty percent (20%) of the total number of the
Page 23 of 214
membership of the House of Representatives is the

maximum number of seats available to party-list
organizations, such that there is automatically one
party-list seat for every four existing legislative
districts.
2.
3.
4.
Garnering two percent (2%) of the total votes cast

in the party-list elections guarantees a party-list
organization one seat. The guaranteed seats shall
be distributed in a first round of seat allocation to
parties receiving at least two percent of the total
party-list votes.
The additional seats, that is, the remaining seats
after allocation of the guaranteed seats, shall be
distributed to the party-list organizations including
those that received less than two percent of the
total votes. The additional seats shall be
distributed to the parties in a second round of seat
allocation according to the two-step procedure laid
down in the Decision of 21 April 2009 as clarified in
this Resolution. The continued operation of the
two percent threshold as it applies to the
allocation of the additional seats is now
unconstitutional
because
this
threshold
mathematically and physically prevents the filling
up of the available party-list seats.
The three-seat cap is constitutional. The three-seat
cap is intended by the Legislature to prevent any
party from dominating the party-list system. There
is no violation of the Constitution because the
1987 Constitution does not require absolute
proportionality for the party-list system. The wellsettled rule is that courts will not question the
wisdom of the Legislature as long as it is not
violative of the Constitution Banat v. COMELEC [
G. R. No. 179271, July 8, 2009] ( Resolution).
iii.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Qualifications Of Party List

Representatives
Natural born citizen of the Philippines;

Registered voter;
Resident of the Philippines for a period of not less
than one (1) year immediately preceding the day
of the election;
At least 25 years of age on the day of the election
(Youth sector nominee must be at least 25 years
but not more than 30 years old on day of election);
5.
6.
Able to read and write;

A bona fide member of the party or organization
he seeks to represent for at least ninety (90) days
before the day of the election.
A nominee who changes his sectoral affiliation within

the same party will only be eligible for nomination
under the new sectoral affiliation if the change has
been effected at least six months before the elections.
Amores v. HRET, [G.R. No. 189600, June 29,
2010].
iv.
1.
Guidelines For The Election Of

Party List Representatives
The parties or organizations must represent the

marginalized and underrepresented. (Sec 5, RA
7941)
The enumeration of marginalized and underrepresented sectors is not exclusive. The crucial
element is not whether a sector is specifically
enumerated, but whether a particular organization
complies with the requirements of the Constitution and
RA 7941. Moral disapproval, without more, is not a
sufficient governmental interest to justify exclusion of
homosexuals from participation in the party-list system.
Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v. COMELEC [G.R. No.
190582, April 8, 2010].
2.
3.
Its nominees must be able to contribute to the

formation and enactment of legislation that will
benefit the nation.
Disqualifications:
The party or organization must not be
disqualified under Sec 6, R.A. 7941:
-
religious sector;
advocates of violence or unlawful means of
seeking its goal;
foreign party or organization;
receiving support from any foreign
government,
foreign
political
party,
foundation, organization, whether directly or
through any of its officers or members or
indirectly through third parties for partisan
election purposes;
fails to comply with laws, rules or regulations
relating to elections;
declares untruthful statements in its petition;
ceased to exist for at least one (1) year; or
fails to participate in the last two (2)
Page 24 of 214
preceding elections or, fails to obtain at least

two per centum (2%) of the votes cast under
the party-list system in the two (2) preceding
elections for the constituency in which it has
registered.
4.
The party or organization must not be an

adjunct of, or a project organized, or an entity
funded, or assisted by the FOREIGN
government.
COMELEC has jurisdiction to determine whether an

organization applying for the party list system
represents marginalized sector.
It cannot be
challenged by certiorari because the decision is based
on facts and the SC does not try facts. V.C. Cadangen
vs. COMELEC [G.R. 177179, June 5, 2009].
d.
Term and Tenure
TERM
The period during which
the elected officer is
legally authorized to
assume his office and
exercise the powers
thereof
CANNOT be reduced
TENURE
The period during which
such officer actually
holds his position
Senator or Member of the House of Representatives

thus elected shall serve only for the unexpired term.
SPECIAL ELECTION (R.A. 6645)
1. Special election will be called if vacancy occurs:
- At least 18 months BEFORE the next regular
election for the members of the Senate;
- At least 1 year BEFORE the next regular
election for members of Congress
2. The particular House of Congress where vacancy
occurs must pass either a RESOLUTION if Congress
is in session, or the Senate President or the
Speaker must SIGN A CERTIFICATION, if Congress is
not in session,
- Declaring the existence of vacancy
- Calling for a special election to be held within
45 to 90 days from the date of the resolution
or certification
3. The Senator or representative elected shall serve
only for the UNEXPIRED TERM.
====================================
C. Legislative privileges, inhibitions and
disqualifications
====================================
MAY be limited (by law)

C. LEGISLATIVE PRIVILEGES, INHIBITIONS AND
WAYS BY WHICH TENURE OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

MAY BE SHORTENED
Code: FRED
1. FORFEITURE of his seat by holding any other office
or employment in the government or any
subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof,
including government-owned or controlled
corporations or subsidiaries (Art VI, Sec 13);
2. VOLUNTARY RENUNCIATION of office (Art VI, Sec
7, par. 2)
3. EXPULSION as a disciplinary action for disorderly
behavior (Art VI, Sec 16[3]);
4. DISQUALIFICATION as determined by resolution of
the electoral tribunal in an election contest (Art VI,
Sec 17);
e.
Vacancy and Special Election
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
DISQUALIFICATIONS
a.
Privileges
i.
Immunity From Arrest
Legislators are privileged from arrest while Congress is

IN SESSION ONLY (whether regular or special) with
respect to offenses punishable by not more than 6
years of imprisonment. The immunity does not extend
to the prosecution of criminal offenses.
ii.
Privilege Speech
No member shall be questioned or held liable in any

forum other than his/her respective Congressional
body for any debate or speech in Congress or in any
Committee thereof.
Page 25 of 214
LIMITATIONS:
1. Protection is only AGAINST PROSECUTION IN ANY
FORUM other than Congress itself. Hence, the
Senate or the House may discipline their
respective members.
2. The speech or debate must be made IN
PERFORMANCE of their duties as members of
Congress.
3. Congress need NOT be in session when the
utterance is made, as long as it forms part of
legislative action (e.g. part of the deliberative and
communicative process used to participate in
legislative proceedings in consideration of
proposed legislation or with respect to other
matters with Congress jurisdiction)
b. Inhibitions
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.
N.B. therefore, senators and representatives are not
prohibited from introducing bills that have conflicts
with their interest, as long as they disclose
c. Disqualifications
DISQUALIFICATION
WHEN APPLICABLE
Cannot hold any other

office or employment in
the Government or any
subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof,
including GOCCS or their
subsidiaries.
Cannot be appointed
to any office
During his term. If he does

so, he forfeits his seat in
Congress.
If the office was created or

the emoluments thereof
increased during the term
for which he was elected.
Cannot personally
appear as counsel before
any court of justice,
electoral tribunal, quasijudicial and
administrative body.
Cannot be financially
interested directly or
indirectly in any
contract, franchise, or
special privilege granted
by the Government, or
any subdivision, agency
or instrumentality
thereof, including any
GOCC or its subsidiary.
Cannot intervene in any
matter before any office
of the government.
During his term of office.
During his term of office.
When it is for his pecuniary

benefit or where he may be
called upon to act on
account of his office.
A congressman cannot buy nominal amount of shares

in a corporation in a suit before the SEC and appear in
intervention. This is a circumvention of the
constitutional policy. Puyat vs. De Guzman [G.R. No. L51122, March 25, 1982].
d.
Rules on Increase in Salaries
No increase in their salaries shall take effect until AFTER

the EXPIRATION OF THE FULL TERM (NOT TENURE) of
all the members of the Senate and the House of
Representatives approving such increase.
Since the Constitution provides for rules on salaries
and not emoluments, members of the House may
appropriate for themselves other sums of money such
as travel allowances, as well as other benefits.
A new senator or representative elected through
special election is not entitled to the new salary rate
because the new members are serving the terms of
those who approved the increase. Thus, they are not
entitled to the increase.
e.
Right of Members to
Congressional Sessions
Attend
Page 26 of 214
Sen. Trillanes, who remained in detention, cannot be

allowed to go to the Senate to attend all its official
functions. All prisoners whether under preventive
detention or serving final sentence cannot practice
their profession nor engage in any business or
occupation, or hold office, elective or appointive, while
in detention. This is a necessary consequence of arrest
and detention. The presumption of innocence does not
carry with it the full enjoyment of civil and political
rights. Trillanes v. Judge Pimentel [G.R. No 179817,
June 28, 2008].
====================================
D. Sessions, Quorum and voting majorities
====================================
D. SESSIONS,
MAJORITIES
QUORUM
AND
VOTING
1. SESSIONS
REGULAR SESSIONS - Congress convenes once every
year on the 4th MONDAY OF JULY (unless otherwise
provided for by law). It continues in session for as long
as it may determine, until 30 days before the opening
of the next regular session, excluding Saturdays,
Sundays, and legal holidays.
SPECIAL SESSIONS - called by the President at any time
when Congress is not in session
2.
A smaller number may ADJOURN from day to day and

may COMPEL THE ATTENDANCE of absent members.
In computing a quorum, members who are outside the
country and thus outside of each Houses coercive
jurisdiction are not included.
The basis in determining the existence of a quorum in
the Senate is the total number of Senators who are in
the country and within the coercive jurisdiction of the
Senate. Avelino v. Cuenco, [83 Phil. 17, March 4,
1949].
3.
VOTING MAJORITIES OF CONGRESS
House of Representatives
Nature of
Proceeding
Affirm/Overrid
e Resolution to
Impeach
Required Votes
Basis
1/3 of All
Sec. 3(3),
Art. XI
Senate
Nature of
Proceeding
Conviction
in Impeachment
Required Votes
Basis
2/3 of All
Sec. 3(6),
Art. XI
QUORUM TO DO BUSINESS
Majority of each House shall constitute a quorum.
Page 27 of 214
4.
OFFICERS OF CONGRESS
1.
2.
3.
Senate President
Speaker of the House
Such other officers as it may deem necessary.
a.
Common to Both
Nature of Proceeding
Discipline Members
Election of Officers
Declare the Existence of a
State of War
Override President's Veto
Quorum to do business
Tax Exemption
Confirmation of new VP
nominated by President
Determination that Pres.

Unable to discharge powers
& duties
To break a tie in presidential
election
Revocation of Proc. Of
Martial Law/ Suspension of
Priv. of Writ of Habeas
Corpus
Extension of Proc.
Of ML/Suspension
of Priv. of WHC
To Concur w/ President in
granting amnesty
Required
Votes
2/3 of All
Majority of
All
2/3 of Both
Houses,
voting
separately
2/3 of All in
the House of
Origin
Majority w/in
Compulsive
Power of the
House
Majority of
All
Majority of
Both Houses,
voting
separately
2/3 of Both
Houses,
voting
separately
Majority of
All, voting
separately
Authority
Sec. 16(3)
By a MAJORITY VOTE of ALL respective members

The Senate has prerogative to choose how to elect
other officers apart from the Senate President and
House Speaker. So the Court cannot de-proclaim
Guingona. Tatad v. Guingona [G.R. No. 134577,
November 18, 1988].
5. INTERNAL RULES
Sec. 16(1)
Sec. 23
Sec. 27(1)
As part of their inherent power, each House may

determine its own rules. Hence, the COURTS CANNOT
INTERVENE in the implementation of these rules insofar
as they affect the members of Congress.
Sec. 16(2);
Avelino v.
Cuenco
====================================
E. Discipline of Members
====================================
Sec. 28(4)
E. DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS
Sec. 9, Art. VII
1.
2.
Sec. 11, Art.

VII
Sec. 4, Art. VII
Majority of
All, voting
jointly
Sec. 18, Art.

VII
Majority of
All, voting
jointly
Sec. 18, Art.

VII
Majority of
All
Sec. 19, Art.

VII
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
SUSPENSION - shall not exceed 60 days, with the

concurrence of 2/3 of ALL its members
EXPULSION - concurrence of 2/3 of ALL its
members
The disciplinary action taken by Congress against a

member is not subject to judicial review because each
House is the sole judge of what disorderly conduct is.
Osmea v. Pendatun [G.R. No. L-17144, October 28,
1960].
The parliamentary immunity of members of Congress is
not absolute. While parliamentary immunity
guarantees the legislator complete freedom of
expression without fear of being made responsible
before the courts or any other forum outside of
Congressional Hall, it does NOT protect him(her) from
responsibility before the legislative body itself
whenever words and conduct are considered disorderly
or unbecoming a member thereof.
Page 28 of 214
For unparliamentary conduct, members of Congress

can be censured, committed to prison, suspended,
even expelled by the votes of their colleagues. Osmea
v. Pendatun, [G.R. No. L-17144, October 28, 1960].
====================================
F. Congressional Journals and Records
====================================
F. CONGRESSIONAL JOURNALS AND RECORDS
GEN. RULE: The Journal is conclusive upon the courts.
EXCEPTION: An enrolled bill prevails over the contents
of the Journal.
Insures publicity
of
legislative
proceedings
Supports
the
journal entry
2. CASES WHEN THE CONSTITUTION REQUIRES YEAS

AND NAYS TO BE RECORDED
1. Last and third readings of a bill
2. Upon 1/5 members request
3. Re-passing a bill over Presidential veto
====================================
G. Electoral tribunals and the Commission on
Appointments
1. Nature
2. Powers
====================================
1. ENROLLED BILL
ENROLLED BILL - The official copy of approved
legislation and bears the certifications of the presiding
officers of each House. Thus, where the certifications
are valid and are not withdrawn, the contents of the
enrolled bill are conclusive upon the courts as regards
the provision of that particular bill.
ENROLLED BILL DOCTRINE The signing of a bill by the
Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate
and its certification by the secretaries of both Houses of
Congress that such bill was passed are conclusive of its
due enactment. Arroyo v. De Venecia, [G.R. No.127255
August 14, 1997].
G. ELECTORAL TRIBUNALS AND THE COMMISSION

ON APPOINTMENTS
1. ELECTORAL TRIBUNALS
The Senate and the House shall each have an Electoral
Tribunal.
a. Composition
-
ENROLLED BILL
Official copy of
approved
legislation, With
certifications of
presiding
officers
JOURNAL
Abbreviated
Account of daily
proceedings in
Congress
RECORD
Word for word
transcript
of
deliberations in
Congress
Submitted to the
President
for
signature,
indicating
approval
Provides proof of
what transpired
during
deliberations
Provides detailed
proof of what
transpired during
deliberations
3 Supreme Court Justices to be designated by

the Chief Justice
6 Members of the Senate or House, as the
case may be. They shall be chosen on the
basis of proportional representation from the
political parties and party-list organizations.
The senior Justice in the Electoral Tribunal
shall be its Chairman.
b.
Jurisdiction
Each Electoral tribunal shall be the SOLE JUDGE of all

CONTESTS relating to the (ERQ) election, returns, and
qualifications of their respective members. This
includes determining the validity or invalidity of a
proclamation declaring a particular candidate as the
winner.
Once a winning candidate has been proclaimed, taken
his oath, and assumed office as a Member of the House
Page 29 of 214
of Representatives, the COMELEC's jurisdiction over

election contests relating to his election, returns, and
qualifications ends, and the HRET's own jurisdiction
begins. It follows then that the proclamation of a
winning candidate divests the COMELEC of its
jurisdiction over matters pending before it at the time
of the proclamation. The fact that the proclamation of
the winning candidate was alleged to have been tainted
with irregularity does not divest the HRET of its
jurisdiction. Limkaichong v. COMELEC, [G.R. No.
178831-3, April 1, 2009].
ELECTION CONTEST -Where a defeated candidate who
received the 2nd highest number of votes challenges
the qualifications of a winning candidate and claims for
himself the seat of a proclaimed winner
In the absence of an election contest, the Electoral
Tribunal is without jurisdiction. However, the power of
each House to expel its own members or even to defer
their oath taking until their qualifications are
determined may still be exercised even without an
election contest.
Since the Electoral Tribunals are independent
constitutional bodies:
1. Neither Congress nor the Courts may interfere
with procedural matters relating to the functions
of the Electoral Tribunals.
2. Its members may NOT BE ARBITRARILY REMOVED
from their positions in the tribunal by the parties
that they represent. Neither may they be removed
for not voting according to party lines, since they
are acting independently of Congress.
3. The mere fact that the members of either the
Senate or the House sitting on the Electoral
Tribunal are themselves the ones sought to be
disqualified (due to the filing of an election contest
against them) does not warrant the disqualification
of all the members of the Electoral Tribunal.
4. Judicial review of decisions of the Electoral
Tribunals may be had with the SC only on the
ground of grave abuse of discretion, the decision
or resolution having been rendered without or in
excess of jurisdiction.
2. COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENTS (CA)
a. Composition
1.
2.
3.
Senate President as ex-officio chairman

12 Senators
12 Members of the House
b. Manner Of Constitution
Elected on the BASIS OF PROPORTIONAL

REPRESENTATION from the political parties and partylist organizations within 30 days after the Senate and
the House of Representatives shall have organized with
the election of the Senate President and the Speaker of
the House. (Sec. 19, Art. VI)
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. Guingona vs. Gonzales, [G.R. No.
106791, March 1, 1993].
The two houses have primary jurisdiction on who
should sit in the CA. This includes determination of
party affiliation and number of party members for
purpose of determining proportional representation.
Drilon v. De Venecia, [G.R. No. 180055, July 31, 2009].
c. Voting
1.
2.
3.
4.
The Commission shall rule by a MAJORITY VOTE of

all the Members.
The chairman shall only vote in case of a TIE.
The Commission shall act on all appointments
submitted to it within 30 session days.
The Commission shall meet only while Congress is
in session, at the call of its Chairman or a majority
of all its members.
d. Jurisdiction
Commission on Appointments shall CONFIRM the

appointments by the President with respect to the
following positions: E-MA-C
1. HEADS of the Executive Departments (except if it is
the Vice-President who is appointed to the post).
2. AMBASSADORS,
3. Other PUBLIC MINISTERS or CONSULS
4. OFFICERS OF THE AFP from the rank of Colonel or
Naval Captain and above; and
Page 30 of 214
5.
Other officers whose appointments are vested in

him by the Constitution (e.g. COMELEC members)
the materiality of a question is determined not by its

connection to any pending legislation, but by its
connection to the general scope of the inquiry.
e. Limitations
1.
Congress CANNOT by law prescribe that the

appointment of a person to an office created by
such law shall be subject to confirmation by the
CA.
Appointments extended by the President to the
enumerated positions while Congress is not in
session shall only be effective until DISAPPROVAL
by the CA, or until the NEXT ADJOURNMENT of
Congress.
Since the Commission on Appointments is an
independent constitutional body, its rules of
procedure are outside the scope of congressional
powers as well as that of the judiciary.
2.
3.
====================================
1. Legislative
a) Legislative inquiries and the oversight
functions
b) Bicameral conference committee
c) Limitations on legislative power
i.
Limitations
on
revenue,
appropriations and tariff measures
ii. Presidential veto and Congressional
override
====================================
H. POWERS OF CONGRESS
1.
LEGISLATIVE
a. Legislative inquiries, the oversight
functions, invocation of executive
privilege
If the investigation is no longer in aid of legislation

but, IN AID OF PROSECUTION with the stated purpose
of the investigation being, to determine the existence
of violations of the law, it is beyond the scope of
congressional powers.
ENFORCEMENT - Congress or local government units if
they are expressly authorized to do so, has the inherent
power to punish recalcitrant witnesses for CONTEMPT,
and may have them INCARCERATED until such time that
they agree to testify.
NOTE: The continuance of such incarceration only
subsists for the lifetime, or term, of such body. Thus,
each Congress of the House lasts for only 3 years. But,
if the Senate incarcerates a witness, the term is
indefinite. The Senate, with its staggered terms, is a
continuing body.
The exercise by Congress or by any of its committees of
the power to punish contempt is based on the principle
of self-preservation. As the branch of the government
vested with the legislative power, independently of the
judicial branch, it can assert its authority and punish
contumacious acts against it. Such power is sui generis,
as it attaches not to the discharge of legislative
functions per se, but to the sovereign character of the
legislature as one of the three independent and
coordinate branches of government. Standard
Chartered v. Senate, [G.R. No. 167173, December 27,
2007].
LIMITATIONS: (ADR)
1. The inquiry must be IN AID OF LEGISLATION.
2. The inquiry must be conducted in accordance with
the duly published rules of procedure of the
House conducting the inquiry; and
3. The rights of persons appearing in or affected by
such inquiries shall be respected.
E.g. The right against self-incrimination
i. Legislative Inquiries
ii.
Must be conducted IN AID OF LEGISLATION which
does not necessarily mean that there is pending
legislation regarding the subject of the inquiry. Hence,
Oversight Functions
QUESTION HOUR Appearance of department heads

before Congress
Page 31 of 214
Under Sec 22, department heads (members of the

Executive Department) cannot be compelled to appear
before Congress (Legislative Department). Neither may
department heads impose their appearance upon
Congress. This is in line with the principle of separation
of powers.
1. Department heads may appear before Congress in
the following instances:
a. Upon their own initiative, with the consent of
the President (and that of the House
concerned)
b. Upon the request of either House
2.
Written questions shall be submitted to the
President of the Senate or Speaker of the House at
least 3 days before the scheduled appearance of
the department heads.
3. Interpellations shall not be limited to written
questions, but may cover related matters.
4. The inquiry will be conducted in EXECUTIVE
SESSION when:
a. Required by the security of state, or public
interest,
and
b. When the President so states in writing
Who may
appear
Who
conducts the
investigation
Subject
matter
QUESTION
HOUR
(Sec. 22, Article
VI)
Only
department
heads
Entire body
Matters related
to the
department
only
LEGISLATIVE
INVESTIGATION
(Sec. 21, Article
VI)
Any person
It is incumbent upon the Senate to publish the rules for

its legislative inquiries in each Congress or otherwise
make the published rules clearly state that the same
shall be effective in subsequent Congresses or until
they are amended or repealed to sufficiently put public
on notice. If it was the intention of the Senate for its
present rules on legislative inquiries to be effective
even in the next Congress, it could have easily adopted
the same language it had used in its main rules
regarding effectivity. Publication in the internet does
not satisfy the requirement of publication as provided
in the Constitution. Garcillano v. House of
Representatives, [G.R. No. 170388, December 3,
2008].
Violation of internal procedures of Senate cannot be, as
a general rule, subject to judicial supervision since
Each house shall determine the rules of its
proceedings. The exceptions are when there is
arbitrary and improvident use of power, which
ultimately denies due process. Dela Paz v. Senate, [G.R.
No. 184849, February 13, 2009].
iii. Invocation
Privilege
of
Executive
Entire body or its

respective
committees
This really applies to Sec. 21 because this is the

mandatory provision, whereas Sec. 22 is merely
optional.
Any matter in aid

of legislation
Only the President may invoke this. If it is invoked by

some other person, there must be proof that he or she
has Presidential authority.
The mere filing of a criminal or an administrative

complaint before a court or a quasi-judicial body should
not automatically bar the conduct of legislative
investigation. The exercise of sovereign legislative
authority, of which the power of legislative inquiry is an
essential component, cannot be made subordinate to a
criminal or an administrative investigation. Standard
Chartered v. Senate, [G.R. No. 167173, December 27,

2007].
The President has constitutional authority to prevent

any member of the Armed Forces from testifying
before a legislative inquiry by virtue of her power as
commander-in-chief, and that as a consequence a
military officer who defies such injunction is liable
under military justice. The only way to circumvent this
is by judicial order because the President may be
commanded by judicial order to compel the attendance
of the military officer. Final judicial orders have the
Page 32 of 214
force of the law of the land which the President has the
duty to faithfully execute. Gudani v. Senga, [G.R. No.
170165, August 15, 2006].
When Congress exercises its power of inquiry, the only
way for department heads to exempt themselves
therefrom is by a valid claim of privilege. They are not
exempt by the mere fact that they are department
heads. Only one executive official may be exempted
from this power - the President. Section 1 therefore, in
view of its specific reference to Section 22 of Article VI
of the constitution and the absence of any reference to
inquiries in aid of legislation, must be construed to be
limited in its application to appearances of department
heads in the question hour. The requirement then to
secure presidential assent is limited as it is only to
appearances in the question hour, is valid on its face.
Senate of the Philippines v. Eduardo Ermita, [G.R. No.
169777, April 20, 2006].
ways of reconciling conflicting provisions found in the

Senate version and in the House version of a bill.
It is within the power of a conference committee to
include in its report an entirely new provision that is
not found either in the House bill or in the Senate bill. 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 such amendment is germane to
the subject of the bills before the committee. After all,
its report was not final but needed the approval of both
houses of Congress to become valid as an act of the
legislative department. Tolentino v. Secretary of
Finance [G.R. No. 115455, August 25, 1994].
c.
Limitations on Legislative Power

i. General Limitations
b. Bicameral Conference Committee

1.
BICAMERAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE an extraconstitutional creation which is intended to resolve
conflicts between house and Senate versions of bills.
SCOPE
OF
THE
BICAMERAL
CONFERENCE
COMMITTEES POWERS
The Bicameral Conference Committee may: (A2R2P)
1. Adopt the Bill entirely; or
2. Amend; or
3. Revise; or
4. Reconcile the House Bill and the Senate Bills;
5. Propose entirely new provisions not found in
either the House Bill or the Senate Bill.
(Amendments in the nature of a substitute)
An Act creating the Videogram Regulatory Board

included 30% tax on gross receipts on video
transactions was held to be valid. Taxation is
sufficiently related to regulation of the video
industry. Tio v. Videogram Regulatory Board,
[G.R. No. L-75697, June 18, 1987].
2.
3.
LIMITATION: So long as the amendment is germane to
the subject of the bills before the Committee.
In a bicameral system bills are independently processed
by both Houses of Congress. It is not unusual that the
final version approved by one House differs from what
has been approved by the other. The conference
committee, consisting of members nominated from
both Houses, is an extra-constitutional creation of
Congress whose function is to propose to Congress
Every bill shall embrace only one (1) subject, as

expressed in the title thereof, which does not have
to be a complete catalogue of everything stated in
the bill.
It is sufficient that the title expressing the general

subject of the bill and all the provisions of the
statute are germane to such general subject.
Bills passed by either House must pass three (3)
readings on SEPARATE DAYS, and printed copies
thereof in its final form distributed to its members
3 days before its passage.
FIRST READING - Only the title is read; the bill is
passed to the proper committee
SECOND READING - Entire text is read and debates
are held; amendments introduced.
THIRD READING - Only the title is read, no
amendments are allowed. Vote shall be taken
Page 33 of 214
immediately thereafter and the yeas and nays

entered in the journal.
EXCEPTION: When the President certifies to the
necessity of the bills immediate enactment to
meet a PUBLIC CALAMITY OR EMERGENCY, the 3
readings can be held on the same day
If the president disapproves a bill enacted by Congress,

he should veto the entire bill. He is not allowed to veto
separate items of a bill.
EXCEPTION: Item veto in the case of appropriation,
revenue, and tariff bills
EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXCEPTION:
Every bill passed by Congress shall be presented to the

President before it becomes law. To approve, he shall
sign it. Otherwise, he shall veto the bill. (Sec. 27, Art. VI)
ii. Specific Limitations
1.
2.
No law shall be enacted increasing the Supreme

Courts appellate jurisdiction without the SCs
advice and concurrence.
No law shall be enacted granting titles of royalty or
nobility.
DOCTRINE OF INAPPROPRIATE PROVISIONS - A

provision that is constitutionally inappropriate for an
appropriation bill may be subject to veto even if it is
not an appropriation or revenue item.
EXECUTIVE IMPOUNDMENT - Refusal of the President
to spend funds already allocated by Congress for a
specific purpose. It is in effect, an impoundment of
the law allocating such expenditure of funds
TYPE OF BILL
Revenue/tax bill
iii. Operative Fact Doctrine

The OPERATIVE FACT DOCTRINE is a rule of equity that
provides that a law produces effects until it is declared
unconstitutional. As such, it must be applied as an
exception to the general rule that an unconstitutional
law produces no effects.
It can never be invoked to validate as constitutional an
unconstitutional act. The unconstitutional law remains
unconstitutional, but its effects, prior to its judicial
declaration of nullity, may be left undisturbed as a
matter of equity and fair play.
iv. Congressional Override of Veto
OVERRIDING A VETO
If, after such reconsideration, 2/3 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 2/3 of all the members of that House, it shall
become law.
To OVERRIDE the veto, at least 2/3 of ALL the members
of each House must agree to pass the bill. In such case,
the veto is overridden and becomes a law without need
of presidential approval.
ITEM VETO
Appropriations bill
ITEM
Subject of the tax, and
tax rate imposed thereon
Indivisible sum dedicated
to a stated purpose
VETO OF RIDER - A rider is a provision that does not

relate to a particular appropriation stated in the bill.
Being an invalid provision under Section 25(2), the
President may exercise item veto.
d.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Bills that must originate in the

House
Bills authorizing the increase of PUBLIC DEBT

PRIVATE bills
TARIFF bills
Bills of LOCAL APPLICATION
BILLS OF LOCAL APPLICATION - 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.
5.
REVENUE bills
REVENUE BILL - One specifically designed to raise

money or revenue through imposition or levy.
Page 34 of 214
REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIAL APPROPRIATIONS

BILL
E.g. Registration fees used for the construction and

maintenance of highways. PAL vs. Edu, [G.R. No. L41383, August 15, 1988].
The Videogram Regulatory Board Law imposing a tax
on video rentals does NOT make the law a revenue bill
because the purpose is primarily regulation, and not to
raise revenue.
6.
APPROPRIATION bills
APPROPRIATION BILLS - The primary and specific aim is

to appropriate a sum of money from the public
treasury. E.g. Budget
A bill creating a new office, and appropriating funds for
it is NOT an appropriation bill.
GENERAL RULE: No money shall be paid out of the
National Treasury
EXCEPTION: in pursuance of an appropriation made by
law.
This rule does not prohibit continuing appropriations
(e.g. for debt servicing). This is because the rule does
not require yearly or annual appropriation.
LIMITATIONS:
1. CANNOT
INCREASE
the
appropriations
recommended by the President for the operation
of the Government as specified in the budget.
2. The provisions must RELATE specifically to some
particular appropriation therein and any such
provision or enactment must be limited in its
operation to the appropriation to which it relates.
3. The procedure in approving appropriations for
Congress shall strictly follow the procedure for
approving appropriations for other departments
and agencies.
A special appropriations bill must specify the
purpose for which it is intended and must be
supported by funds actually available as certified
by the National Treasurer or to be raised by a
corresponding revenue proposal therein
1. Must specify purpose for which it is intended.

2. Supported by funds actually available (certified
by National Treasurer) OR raised by revenue
proposal
4.
5.
Appropriations must be for a PUBLIC PURPOSE

Cannot appropriate public funds or property,
directly or indirectly, in favor of
a. Any sect, church, denomination, or sectarian
institution, or system of religion, or
b. Any priest, preacher, minister, or other
religious teacher or dignitary as such.
EXCEPTION: if the priest, etc. is assigned to:
(APOL)
1. The Armed Forces
2. Any penal institution
3. Government orphanage
4. Government leprosarium
The government is NOT prohibited from appropriating

money for a valid secular purpose, even if it incidentally
benefits a religion. (E.g. Appropriations for a national
police force is valid even if the police also protects the
safety of clergymen)
The temporary use of public property for religious
purposes is valid, as long as the property is available for
all religions.
The TRB, by warranting to compensate MNTC for loss
of revenue resulting from the non- implementation of
the periodic and interim toll fee adjustments, violates
the constitutionally guaranteed and exclusive power of
the Legislature toappropriate money for public
purpose from the General Funds of the Government.
SPECIAL FUNDS
1. Money collected on a tax levied for a special
purpose shall be treated as a special fund and paid
out for such purpose only.
2. Once the special purpose is fulfilled or abandoned,
any balance shall be transferred to the general
funds of the Government.
TRANSFER OF APPROPRIATION
GENERAL RULE: No law shall be passed authorizing any
transfer of appropriations.
Page 35 of 214
EXCEPTION: The following 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:
1. President
2. Senate President
3. Speaker of the House of Representatives
4. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
5. Heads of the Constitutional Commissions
NOTE: The list is exclusive.
DISCRETIONARY FUNDS OF PARTICULAR OFFICIALS:
1. Disbursed only for public purposes
2. Should be supported by appropriate vouchers
3. Subject to guidelines as may be prescribed by law
If Congress fails to pass the General Appropriations Bill
(GAB) by the end of any fiscal year, the GA law for the
preceding fiscal year is deemed reenacted. It will
remain in force and effect until Congress passes the
GAB
e.
Power to Tax
LIMITATIONS
Code: UP DEP
1. The rule of taxation should be UNIFORM.
2. Congress should evolve a PROGRESSIVE system of
taxation.
The VAT law is constitutional since progressive system
of taxation is not a judicially enforceable right.
Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, [G.R. 115455,
August 25, 1994].
3.
4.
5.
The power to tax must be exercised for a PUBLIC

PURPOSE because the power exists for the general
welfare.
It should be EQUITABLE.
The DUE PROCESS and EQUAL PROTECTION clauses
of the Constitution should be observed.
3.
4.
5.
or
convents
All revenues and assets of NON-STOCK NON-PROFIT

EDUCATIONAL institutions are exempt from taxes and
duties PROVIDED that such revenues and assets are
actually, directly and exclusively used for educational
purposes.
Grants, endowments, donations or contributions used
actually, directly and exclusively for educational
purposes shall be exempt from tax, subject to
conditions prescribed by law.
f.
Power to Fix Rates
DELEGATION OF POWER TO FIX RATES - Congress may,

BY LAW, authorize the President to fix the following:
(TITO)
1. Tariff rates
2. Import and export quotas
3. Tonnage and wharfage dues
4. Other duties and imposts within the framework of
the national development program
2. NON-LEGISLATIVE
a.
Informing Function
What appears to have been forgotten is an equally

important and fundamental power and duty of
Congress and that is its informing function by way of
investigating for the purpose of enlightening the
electorate. The informing function of Congress should
be preferred even to its legislative function. For the
only really self-governing people is that people which
discusses and interrogates its administration.
b.
1.
CONSTITUTIONAL TAX EXEMPTION - The following

properties are EXEMPT from REAL PROPERTY taxes:
Code: MAC3
1. MOSQUES
2. ALL LANDS, buildings and improvements
ACTUALLY, DIRECTLY AND EXCLUSIVELY USED for
religious, charitable, or educational purposes.
CHARITABLE institutions
CHURCHES, and parsonages
appurtenant thereto
Non-profit CEMETERIES
2.
3.
Non-Legislative Functions Of Congress
To act as national board of canvassers for

President and Vice President. (Art. VII, sec. 4).
To decide whether the President is temporarily
disabled in the event he reassumes his office after
the Cabinet, by a majority of vote of its members,
declares that he is unable to discharge the powers
and duties of his office. (Art. VII, sec. 11).
To concur in the grant of amnesty by the
Page 36 of 214
President. (Art. VII, sec. 19).

4. To initiate (HOR) and, to try all cases of
impeachment (Senate), against the:
a. President
b. Vice President
c. Members of the SC
d. Members of the Constitutional Commissions
e. Ombudsman
For any of the following offenses:
i.
culpable violation of the Constitution
ii. treason
iii. bribery
iv. graft and corruption
v. betrayal of public trust
vi. other high crimes
(Art. XI, Sec. 2-3).
5. To act as a constituent assembly for the revision or
amendment of the Constitution. (Art. XVII).

===========================================
IV.EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
====================================
A. Privileges, inhibitions and disqualifications
B. Powers
a) In general
b) Commission on
appointments confirmation
d) Power of removal
a) Doctrine of qualified
political agency
b) Executive departments and
offices
3. Military powers
4. Pardoning power
5. Diplomatic power
======================================
===========================================
====================================
A. Privileges, inhibitions and disqualifications
B. Powers
a) In general
b) Commission on
d) Power of removal
a) Doctrine of qualified
political agency
b) Executive departments and
offices
3. Military powers
4. Pardoning power
5. Diplomatic power
======================================

III.EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
A.Privileges, inhibitions and disqualification
1. Presidential Immunity
2. Presidential Privilege
======================================
A. PRIVILEGES, INHIBITIONS AND

DISQUALIFICATIONS
The Presidents Executive powers are not limited to
those set forth in the Constitution. The President has
RESIDUAL POWERS as the Chief Executive of the
country, which powers include others not set forth in
the Constitution. Marcos v. Manglapus, [G.R. No.
88211, October 27, 1989].
Page 37 of 214
1. PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY
2.
Immunity from suit is PERSONAL to the President and

may be invoked by him alone. The President may waive
it impliedly, as when he himself files suit. Soliven v.
Makasiar, [GR No. 8287, November 14, 1988].
Power of the President to withhold certain types of

information from the court, the Congress, and the
public. Neri v. Senate [G.R. No. 180643, March 25,
2008].
The presidential immunity from suit remains preserved

under our system of government, albeit not expressly
reserved in the present constitution. Rubrico, et al.
v. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, et al.,[G.R. No.
183871, February 18, 2010].
FOR COMMUNICATIONS TO BE PRIVILEGED, THE

FOLLOWING MUST CONCUR:
1. Communications relate to a QUINTESSENTIAL
AND NON-DELEGABLE POWER of the President.
E.g. The power to enter into an executive
agreement with other countries without the
concurrence of the Legislature has traditionally
been recognized in Philippine jurisprudence.
2. Communications are RECEIVED by a close advisor
of the President. Under the OPERATIONAL
PROXIMITY TEST, Secretary Neri of NEDA can be
considered a close advisor, being a member of
President Arroyos cabinet.
3. There is no adequate showing of a compelling
need that would justify the limitation of the
privilege and of the unavailability of the
information elsewhere by an appropriate
investigating authority.
Unlawful acts of public officials are not acts of State

and the officer who acts illegally is not acting as such
but stands in the same footing as any other trespasser.
Once out of office, even before the end of the six year
term, immunity for non-official acts is lost. Estrada v.
Desierto, [G.R. No. 146710-15, Mar. 2, 2001].
Even if the DECS Secretary is an alter ego of the
President, the Presidents immunity from suit cannot
be invoked because the questioned acts are not the
acts of the President but merely those of a Department
Secretary. Gloria v. CA, [G.R. No. 119903, Aug. 15,
2000].
1.
The President CANNOT dispose of state property

unless authorized by law.
While the final text of the JPEPA may not be kept

perpetually confidential - since there should be ample
opportunity for discussion before a treaty is approved
- the offers exchanged by the parties during the
negotiations continue to be privileged even after the
JPEPA is published.
Diplomatic negotiations privilege bears a close
resemblance to the deliberative process and
presidential communications privilege. Clearly, the
privilege accorded to diplomatic negotiations follows as
a logical consequence from the privileged character of
the deliberative process. Akbayan v. Aquino, [G.R. No.
170516, July 16, 2008].
The Executive Department did not commit grave abuse
of discretion in not espousing petitioners claims for
official apology and other forms of reparations against
Japan. From a domestic law perspective, the Executive
Department has the exclusive prerogative to determine
whether to espouse petitioners claims against Japan.
Isabelita C. Vinuya, et al. v. Hon. Executive
Secretary, et al., [G.R. No. 162230, April 28, 2010].
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
Presidential communications are presumptively

privileged and such presumption can be overcome only
by mere showing of public need by the branch seeking
access to conversations. The oversight function of
Congress may be facilitated by compulsory process
ONLY to the extent that it is performed in pursuit of
legislation. Neri v. Senate [G.R. No. 180643, March
25, 2008].
COVERAGE OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE:
1. Conversations/correspondences between President
and official under E.O. 464
2. Military, diplomatic, public order national security
matters
3. Information between inter-government agencies
prior to conclusion of treaties/executive agreements
4. Discussion in close-door Cabinet meetings
WHEN TO APPLY EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE:
1. Must fall within one of the above
2. Must be stated with SUFFICIENT PARTICULARITY so
the Congress/court can determine the legitimacy of the
claim of the privilege
EXCEPTION TO EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE:
1. The President's generalized assertion of privilege
must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for
Page 38 of 214
2.
evidence in a pending criminal trial. U.S. v. Nixon,

[418 U.S. 683, 1974].
Executive privilege cannot be used to conceal a
crime or a possible wrongdoing. Thus, the specific
need for evidence in a pending criminal trial
outweighs the Presidents generalized interest in
confidentiality. Neri v. Ermita, [G.R. No. 169777,
April 20, 2006].
3. QUALIFICATIONS
PRESIDENT
VICE PRESIDENT
Natural- born citizen of the Philippines
Registered voter
Able to read and write
At least 40 years old on the day of election
Resident of the Philippines for at least 10 years
immediately preceding the election
Term of 6 yrs
Unless otherwise provided by law, term of office
commence at noon of June 30 next following the
election
Single term only; not

eligible for any reelection
(but can run if no longer
incumbent president like
ERAP in May 2010)
Any person who has
succeeded as President,
and served as such for
more than 4 years shall
NOT be qualified for
election to the same office
at any time.
Term limitation: 2
successive terms
Voluntary renunciation
of the office for any
length of time shall NOT
be considered an
interruption in the
continuity of service
4. DISQUALIFICATIONS
SUBJECT
President
VicePresident
Cabinet
Members
SOURCE OF DISQUALIFICATION
PROHIBITED FROM:
1. Holding any office or employment
during their tenure
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Otherwise
provided
in
the
Constitution
E.g. Secretary of Justice sits on
Judicial and Bar Council
Deputies or
Assistants of 2.
Cabinet
Members
The positions are ex-officio and

they do not receive any salary or
other emoluments therefor
E.g. Sec. of Finance is head of
Monetary Board
NOTE:
The 3. Practicing, directly or indirectly,
rule
on
any other profession during their
disqualificatio
tenure
ns for the 4. Participating in any business
President and 5. Being financially interested in any
his Cabinet
contract with, or in any franchise,
are stricter
or special privilege granted by the
than
the
government or any subdivision,
normal rules
agency or instrumentality thereof,
applicable to
including
GOCCs
or
their
appointive
subsidiaries.
and elective
officers.
Spouses and CANNOT BE APPOINTED DURING
4th
degree PRESIDENTS TENURE AS:
relatives of 1. Members of the Constitutional
the President
Commissions
(consanguinity 2. Office of the Ombudsman
or affinity)
3. Department Secretaries
4. Department Under-secretaries
5. Chairman or heads of bureaus or
offices including GOCCs and their
subsidiaries.
If the spouse, etc., was already in any
of the above offices before his/ her
spouse became President, he/ she may
continue in office. What is prohibited
is appointment and reappointment,
NOT continuation in office.
Spouses, etc., can be appointed to the
judiciary and as ambassadors and
consuls.
The Chief Presidential Legal Counsel (CPLC) has the
duty of giving independent and impartial legal advice
on the actions of the heads of various executive
departments and agencies and to review investigations
involving heads of executive departments and agencies,
as well as other Presidential appointees.
The PCGG is charged with the responsibility, under the
President, of recovering ill-gotten wealth. The two
offices are incompatible. Without question, the PCGG is
an agency under the Executive Department. Thus, the
actions of the PCGG Chairman are subject to the review
of the CPLC. Public Interest Group v. Elma, [G.R. No.
138965, June 30, 2006].
=============================================

Page 39 of 214
B. POWERS
1. Executive Power in general
a) In general
b) Commission on
d) Power of removal
i) Doctrine of qualified political
agency
ii) Executive departments and
offices
iii) Local government units
4. Military powers
5. Pardoning power
i) Nature and limitations
ii) Forms of executive clemency
6. Diplomatic power
=============================================
B. POWERS
1. EXECUTIVE POWER IN GENERAL
The Constitution provides that "[t]he executive power
shall be vested in the President of the Philippines.
However, it does not define what is meant by executive
power" although in the same article it touches on the
exercise of certain powers by the President, i.e., the
power of control over all executive departments,
bureaus and offices, the power to execute the laws, the
appointing power, the powers under the commanderin-chief clause, the power to grant reprieves,
commutations and pardons, the power to grant
amnesty with the concurrence of Congress, the power
to contract or guarantee foreign loans, the power to
enter into treaties or international agreements, the
power to submit the budget to Congress, and the
power to address Congress.
Although the 1987 Constitution imposes limitations on
the exercise of specific powers of the President, it
maintains intact what is traditionally considered as
within the scope of "executive power." Corollarily, the
powers of the President cannot be said to be limited
only to the specific powers enumerated in the
Constitution. In other words, executive power is more
than the sum of specific powers so enumerated.
Marcos v. Manglapus [G. R. No. 88211, September 15,
1989].
2. POWER OF APPOINTMENT
POWER TO APPOINT - Executive in nature; while

Congress (and the Constitution in certain cases) may
prescribe the qualifications for particular offices, the
determination of who among those who are qualified
will be appointed is the Presidents prerogative.
The prohibition against midnight appointments does
not apply to appointments to the Judiciary. The
Constitutional Commission confined the prohibition to
appointments made in the Executive Department. The
framers did not need to extend the prohibition to
appointments in the Judiciary, because their
establishment of the JBC and their subjecting the
nomination and screening of candidates for judicial
positions to the unhurried and deliberate prior process
of the JBC ensured that there would no longer be
midnight appointments to the Judiciary. Also, the
intervention of the JBC eliminates the danger that
appointments to the Judiciary can be made for the
purpose of buying votes in a coming presidential
election, or of satisfying partisan considerations. De
Castro v. JBC, [G.R. No. 191002, March 17, 2010].
SCOPE:
1. The following may be appointed by the president,
subject to approval by the Commission on
Appointments (CA)
(HAPCOO)
- Heads of executive departments
- Ambassadors, consuls, and other public
ministers
- Officers of AFP from the rank of colonel or
naval captain
- Other officers whose appointment is vested in
him by the Constitution, such as:
a. Chairmen and members of the COMELEC,
COA, and CSC
b. Regular members of the JBC
c. The Ombudsman and his deputies
d. Sectoral representatives in Congress, as
provided in Transitory Provisions
2. The President also appoints members of the SC
and judges of the lower courts, but these
appointments do NOT need CA confirmation.
3. All other officers whose appointments are not
otherwise provided for by law and those whom he
may be authorized by law to appoint. This includes
the Chairman and members of the Commission on
Human Rights (CHR), whose appointments are
provided for by law, and NOT by the Constitution.
Congress may, by law, vest in the President alone or in
the courts, or in the heads of departments, agencies,
Page 40 of 214
boards or commissions the appointment of other

officers lower in rank than those mentioned above.
However, Congress cannot, by law, require CA
confirmation of the appointment of other officers for
offices created subsequent to the 1987 Constitution.
Calderon v. Carale, [GR No. 91636, April 23, 1992].
E.g. NLRC Commissioners, Bangko Sentral Governor
Voluntary submission by the President to the CA for
confirmation of an appointment, which is not required
to be confirmed, does not vest the CA with jurisdiction.
The President cannot extend the scope of the CAs
power beyond what is provided for in the Constitution.
1.
CA CONFIRMATION NEEDED:
a. Nomination by President
b. Confirmation by CA
c. Appointment by President
d. Acceptance by appointee.
At any time before all four steps have been complied

with, the President can withdraw the nomination or
appointment.
2. NO CA CONFIRMATION NEEDED:
1. Appointment
2. Acceptance
Once appointee accepts, President can no longer
withdraw the appointment.
AD-INTERIM APPOINTMENTS
1. When Congress is in recess, the President may still
appoint officers to positions subject to CA
confirmation.
2. These appointments are EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY,
but are only effective until they are disapproved by
the CA or until the next adjournment of Congress.
3. Applies only to positions requiring confirmation of
CA
4. Appointments to fill an office in an acting capacity
are NOT ad-interim in nature and need no CA
approval.
APPOINTMENTS BY AN ACTING PRESIDENT - These
shall remain effective UNLESS revoked by the elected
President within 90 days from his assumption or reassumption of office.
GENERAL RULE: Two (2) months immediately before
the next Presidential elections and up to the end of his
term, the President or Acting President SHALL NOT
make appointments. This is to prevent the practice of
MIDNIGHT APPOINTMENTS.
EXCEPTION:
TEMPORARY
APPOINTMENTS
to
EXECUTIVE POSITIONS if continued vacancies will
prejudice public service or endanger public safety
The Board of the Cultural Center of the Philippines is
not authorized to fill a vacancy in the Board. Sec. 16
says: The Congress may, by law, vest the appointment
of other officers lower in rank in the President alone, in
the courts, or in the heads of departments, agencies,
commissions, or boards. It is the chairman who may
be given authority; but even he can appoint only
officers lower in rank, not officers equal in rank with
the appointing authority. Rufino v. Endriga, [G.R. No.
139554, July 21, 2006].
In case of vacancy in an office occupied by an alter ego
of the President, such as the office of a department
secretary, the President must necessarily appoint an
alter ego of her choice as acting secretary before the
permanent appointee of her choice could assume
office. Congress, through a law, cannot impose on the
President the obligation to appoint automatically the
undersecretary as her temporary alter ego. An alter
ego, whether temporary or permanent, holds a position
of great trust and confidence. Congress, in the guise of
prescribing qualifications to an office, cannot impose
on the President who her alter ego should be. Pimentel
v. Ermita [G.R. No. 16497, October 13, 2005].
Prohibition does not extend to appointments in the
Supreme Court. Had the framers intended to extend
the prohibition to the appointment of Members of the
Supreme Court, they could have explicitly done so. The
prohibition is confined to appointments in the
Executive Department. De Castro v JBC, [GR No.
191002, April 20, 2010]; overturned In re: Appointment
of Valenzuela, [AM 98-0501 SC, November 9, 1998]
Art. 8 Sec. 9 requires vacancies in the SC to be filled
within 90 days from occurrence of the vacancy.
Existence of the JBC also prevents possible abuses in
appointment
There is no law that prohibits local elective officials
from making appointments during the last days of his
or her tenure. Prohibition only applies to appointments
by the president. De la Rama v CA, [GR No. 131136,
February 28, 2001].
3. POWER OF CONTROL AND SUPERVISION
Page 41 of 214
POWER OF CONTROL - The power of an officer to alter,

modify, or set aside what a subordinate officer has
done in the performance of his duties, and to substitute
the judgment of the officer for that of his subordinate.
The Presidents power over GOCCs comes NOT from
the Constitution but from statute. Hence, it may
similarly be taken away by statute.
QUALIFIED POLITICAL AGENCY - Acts of department
heads, etc., performed and promulgated in the regular
course of business, are presumptively acts of the
President.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. If the acts are disapproved or reprobated by the
President
2. If the President is required to act in person by law
or by the Constitution
E.g. The power to grant pardons
For Administrative Proceedings, decisions of
Department Secretaries need not be appealed to the
President in order to comply with the requirement of
exhaustion of administrative remedies.
DISCIPLINARY POWERS - The power of the President to
discipline officers flows from the power to appoint the
officer, and NOT from the power to control.
While the President may remove from office those who
are not entitled to security of tenure, or those officers
with no set terms, such as Department Heads, the
officers, and employees entitled to security of tenure
cannot be summarily removed from office.
POWER OF SUPERVISION - The power of a superior
officer to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed
by subordinates.
The power of supervision does not include the power of
control; but the power of control necessarily includes
the power of supervision.
The power of the president over local government units
is only of general supervision. He can interfere with the
actions of their executive heads only if these are
contrary to law.
President exercises DIRECT SUPERVISION over
autonomous regions, provinces, and independent cities
The execution of laws is an OBLIGATION of the
President. He cannot suspend the operation of laws.
Since both LOI and EO are presidential issuances, one

may repeal or otherwise alter, modify or amend the
other, depending on which comes later. PASEI v.
Torres, [G.R. No. 98472, August 19, 1993].
The President may, by executive or administrative
order, direct the reorganization of government entities
under the Executive Department. Section 17, Article VII
of the 1987 Constitution, clearly states: The president
shall have control of all executive departments,
bureaus and offices. The Administrative Code also
grants the President the power to reorganize the Office
of the President in recognition of the recurring need of
every President to reorganize his or her office to
achieve simplicity, economy and efficiency. Tondo
Medical v. Court of Appeals, [G.R. No. 167324, July 17,
2007).
The President may transfer any agency under the Office
of the President to any other department or agency,
subject to the policy in the Executive Office and in
order to achieve simplicity, economy and efficiency.
Anak Mindanao v. Executive Secretary, [G.R. No.
166052, August 29, 2007].
The creation of the Truth Commission does not fall
within the Presidents power to reorganize. It flows
from the faithful-execution clause of the Constitution
under Article VII, Section 17 thereof. One of the
recognized powers of the President is the power to
create ad hoc committees. This flows from the need to
ascertain facts and determine if laws have been
faithfully executed or guide the President in performing
his duties relative to the execution and enforcement of
laws. The Truth Commission will not supplant the
Ombudsman or the Department of Justice or erode
their respective powers. The investigative function of
the Commission will complement those of the two
offices. Biraogo v. The Philippine Truth
Commission of 2010 / Rep. Edcel C. Lagman, et
al. v. Exec. Sec. Paquito N. Ochoa, Jr., et
al., [G.R. No. 192935 & G.R. No. 19303,
December 7, 2010].
4. MILITARY/EXTRAORDINARY POWERS
SCOPE: As Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces,
whenever necessary, the President may call out the
Armed Forces to:
1. PREVENT or SUPPRESS
1.
Lawless violence
2.
Invasion
3.
Rebellion
Page 42 of 214
2.
He may also:
1.
Suspend the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus
2.
Proclaim a state of martial law
GROUNDS FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE PRIVILEGE OF

THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND DECLARATION OF
MARTIAL LAW
1. Actual, and not merely imminent:
a. Invasion
b. Rebellion
2. Public safety requires it
LIMITATIONS:
1. Suspension or proclamation is effective for only 60
days.
2. Within 48 hours from the declaration or
suspension, the President must submit a report in
person or in writing to Congress.
3. Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a
majority, may revoke the same, and the President
cannot set aside the revocation.
4. In the same manner, upon the Presidents
initiative, Congress may extend the proclamation
or suspension for a period determined by Congress
if:
1. Invasion or rebellion persists, and
2. Public safety requires it
2.
Anyone arrested or detained during the

suspension of the writ shall be charged within 3
days. Otherwise, he should be released.
While the suspension of the privilege of writ and the

proclamation of martial law is subject to judicial review,
the actual use by the President of the armed forces is
not. Thus, troop deployments in times of war are
subject to the Presidents judgment and discretion.
DECLARATION OF STATE REBELLION
The factual necessity of calling out the armed forces is
something that is for the President to decide, but the
Court may look into the factual basis of the declaration
to determine if it was done with grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction. IBP v.
Zamora, [G.R. No. 141284, August 15, 2000].
Judicial inquiry can go no further than to satisfy the
Court not that the Presidents decision is correct but
that the President did not act arbitrarily. Thus, the
standard laid down is not correctness, but arbitrariness.
PP 1017 is CONSTITUTIONAL insofar as it constitutes a
call by PGMA on the AFP to suppress lawless violence,
which pertains to a spectrum of conduct that is
manifestly subject to state regulation, and not free
speech.
Congress CANNOT extend the period motu propio.

SUPREME COURT REVIEW
1. In an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen;
2. The SC may review the sufficiency of the FACTUAL
BASIS of the proclamation or suspension, or the
extension thereof.
3. Its decision must be promulgated within 30 days
from filing.
MARTIAL LAW DOES NOT
1. Suspend the operation of the Constitution
2. Supplant the functioning of the civil courts or
legislative assemblies
3. Authorize conferment of jurisdiction on military
courts over civilians where civil courts are able to
function
4. Automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus
SUSPENSION OF PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS
1. Applies ONLY to persons judicially charged for
rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly
connected with invasion.
PP 1017 is UNCONSTITUTIONAL insofar as it grants

PGMA the authority to promulgate decrees.
Legislative power is within the province of the
Legislature. She can only order the military, under PP
1017, to enforce laws pertinent to its duty to suppress
lawless violence. David v. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo,
[G.R. No. 171396, May 3, 2006].
The President does not have the power to take over
privately owned public utilities or businesses affected
with public interest, without prior legislation.
Gen. Order No. 5 is CONSTITUTIONAL since it provides a
standard by which the AFP and the PNP should
implement PP 1017, that is, suppressing lawless
violence. However, considering that acts of terrorism
have not yet been defined and made punishable by the
Legislature, such portion of G.O. No. 5 is declared
UNCONSTITUTIONAL. David v. Macapagal-Arroyo,
[G.R. No. 171396, May 3, 2006].
The declaration of a state of emergency is merely a
description of a situation that authorizes (the
President) to call out the Armed Forces to help the
Page 43 of 214
police maintain law and order. It gives no new power to

her, or to the military, or to the police. Certainly, it does
not authorize warrantless arrests or control of media.
David v. Ermita, [G.R. No. 171409, May 3, 2006].
A public act; subject to

judicial notice
Extinguishes the
offense itself
5. PARDONING POWER
Executive Clemency
SCOPE:
CODE: CR PaRe
1. COMMUTATIONS
2. REPRIEVES
3. PARDONS (conditional or plenary)
4. REMITTANCE of fines and forfeitures
NOTE: The power to grant clemency includes cases
involving administrative penalties. Where a conditional
pardon is granted, the determination of whether it has
been violated rests with the President.
LIMITATIONS:
1. CANNOT BE GRANTED:
a. Before conviction, in cases of impeachment
b. For violations of election laws, rules, and
regulations
without
the
favorable
recommendation of the COMELEC
c. In cases of civil or legislative contempt
2. AS TO EFFECT:
a. Does not absolve civil liabilities for an offense
b. Does not restore public offices already
forfeited, although eligibility for the same may
be restored Monsanto v. Factoran, [170 SCRA
190].
AMNESTY - An act of grace concurred in by Congress,
usually extended to groups of persons who commit
political offenses, which puts into oblivion the offense
itself. The President alone CANNOT grant amnesty for it
needs the concurrence by a majority of all the
members of Congress
When a person applies for amnesty, he must admit his
guilt of the offense that is subject to such amnesty. If
his application is denied, he can be convicted based on
this admission of guilt.
AMNESTY
POLITICAL offenses
To a CLASS of persons
Need not be accepted
Requires concurrence
of majority of all
members of Congress
PARDON
ORDINARY offenses
To INDIVIDUALS
Must be accepted
No need for Congressional
concurrence
May be granted before

or after conviction
Private act of President;

it must be proved.
Only penalties are
extinguished;
May or may not restore
political rights;
Absolute pardon restores;
Conditional, does not.
Civil indemnity is not
extinguished.
Only granted after
conviction by final
judgment
TAX AMNESTY: General pardon to impose penalties on

persons guilty of evasion or violation of revenue or tax
law Republic v. IAC, [GR No. 69344, April 26, 1991].
EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY IN ADMINISTRATIVE CASES:
President can extend it to administrative cases but only
in the Executive Branch, not in the Judicial or Legislative
Branches of government. Llamas v. Orbos, [G.R. No.
99031, Oct. 15, 1991].
6. DIPLOMATIC POWER
Power to Contract or Guarantee Foreign Loans
LIMITATIONS:
1. The President may contract or guarantee foreign
loans on behalf of the Republic of the Philippines
with the prior concurrence of the Monetary Board;
and
2. Subject to such limitations as may be provided by
law
3. The Monetary Board shall, within 30 days from the
end of every quarter of the calendar year, submit
to Congress a complete report on loans to be
contracted or guaranteed by the government or
GOCCs that would have the effect of increasing
foreign debt.
Principle of Transformation of International Law
No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and
effective unless concurred in by at least 2/3 of ALL the
Members of the Senate.
POWER TO ENTER INTO FOREIGN RELATIONS
INCLUDES:
1. The Power to NEGOTIATE treaties and other
international agreements. However, such treaty or
international agreement shall be transmitted to
the Senate, with the following options:
Page 44 of 214
1. Approve it by 2/3 majority vote

2. Disapprove it outright
3. Approve it conditionally, with suggested
amendments. If re-negotiated and the
Senates suggestions are incorporated, the
treaty goes into effect without need of further
Senate approval
a. While a treaty is re-negotiated, there is
yet no treaty.
b. Although municipal law makes a
distinction
between
international
agreements and executive agreements,
with the former requiring Senate
approval and the latter not needing the
same, under international law, there is
no such distinction.
c. The President cannot, by executive
agreement, undertake an obligation that
indirectly circumvents a legal prohibition.
2. The power to APPOINT ambassadors, other public
ministers, and consuls.
3. The power to RECEIVE ambassadors and other public
ministers accredited to the Philippines.
4. The power to contract and guarantee FOREIGN
LOANS on behalf of the Republic.
5. The power to DEPORT aliens
- This power is vested in the President by virtue
of his office, subject only to restrictions as
may be provided by legislation as regards
grounds for deportation.
- In the absence of any legislative restriction to
authority, the President may exercise this
power.
Treaty
Executive Agreement
Involves political
issues, national. policy
Involve details carrying out

national. policy
International
agreements of a
permanent kind
Must be
Ratified
EXCEPTION: Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties

Art. 46 Constitutional violation was:
1. Manifest Objectively evident to any State
conducting itself in the matter in accordance
with normal practice and in good faith
2. Concerned a rule of its internal law of
fundamental importance
An EXCHANGE OF NOTES is a record of a routine
agreement that has many similarities with a private law
contract. The agreement consists of the exchange of
two documents, each of the parties being in possession
of the one signed by the representative of the other.
Under the usual procedure, the accepting State repeats
the text of the offering State to record its assent. An
exchange of notes is considered a form of an
EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT, which becomes binding
through executive action without the need of a vote by
the Senate or Congress. Abaya vs. Edbane, [G.R. No.
167919, February 12, 2007].
7. POWERS RELATIVE TO APPROPRIATION BILL
ITEM VETO POWER on the basis of:
DOCTRINE OF INAPPROPRIATE PROVISIONS - A
provision that is constitutionally inappropriate for an
appropriation bill may be subject to veto even if it is
not an appropriation or revenue item.
EXECUTIVE IMPOUNDMENT - Refusal of the President
to spend funds already allocated by Congress for a
specific purpose. It is in effect, an impoundment of
the law allocating such expenditure of funds
8. DELEGATED POWER
More or less temporary in

character
Congress may delegate TARIFF POWERS to the

President
No need
to be ratified
Art. VI, Section 23 (2) authorizes Congress to give the

President power necessary and proper to carry out a
declared national policy; Section 28(2) authorizes
Congress to delegate the power to fix tariff rates,
import and export quotas, tonnage, wharfage dues and
other duties and impost.
RULES IN CASE OF CONFLICT BETWEEN TREATY AND

MUNICIPAL LAW, DEPENDING ON VENUE
1. PHILIPPINE COURT: Provided both are selfexecuting, the later enactment will prevail, be it
treaty or law, as it is the latest expression of the
will of the State.
2. INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL: Treaty will always
prevail. A State cannot plead its municipal law to
justify noncompliance with an international
obligation.
EMERGENCY POWERS delegated by Congress to the

President.
9.
VETO POWER
Page 45 of 214
The President must COMMUNICATE his decision to veto

WITHIN 30 days from the date of receipt thereof. If he
fails to so communicate, the bill shall become law as if
he signed it. This rule eliminates the possibility of a
pocket veto whereby the President simply refuses to
act on the bill.
In exercising the veto power, the bill is rejected and
returned with his objections to the House from which it
originated. The House shall enter the objections in the
journal and proceed to reconsider it.
3.
4.
5.
6.
10. RESIDUAL POWER

The President shall exercise such other powers and
functions vested in the President which are provided
for under the laws and which are not specifically
enumerated above, or which are not delegated by the
President in accordance with law.
The power involved is the President's residual power to
protect the general welfare of the people. It is founded
on the duty of the President, as steward of the people.
To paraphrase Theodore Roosevelt, it is not only the
power of the President but also his duty to do anything
not forbidden by the Constitution or the laws that the
needs of the nation demand [See Corwin, supra, at
153]. It is a power borne by the President's duty to
preserve and defend the Constitution. It also may be
viewed as a power implicit in the President's duty to
take care that the laws are faithfully executed
[see Hyman, The American President, where the author
advances the view that an allowance of discretionary
power is unavoidable in any government and is best
lodged in the President. Marcos v Manglapus [G. R. No.
88211, September 15, 1989].
7.
Upon receipt of the certificates of canvass, the

Senate President shall, not later than 30 days after
the day of the election, open all the certificates IN
THE PRESENCE of both houses of Congress,
assembled in joint public session.
The Congress, after determining the authenticity
and due execution of the certificates, shall
CANVASS the votes.
The person having the highest number of votes
shall be proclaimed elected.
In case of a tie between 2 or more candidates, one
shall be chosen by a majority of ALL the members
of both Houses, voting separately. In case this
results in a deadlock, the SENATE PRESIDENT
SHALL BE THE ACTING PRESIDENT until the
deadlock is broken.
The Supreme Court en banc shall act as the sole
judge over all contests relating to the election,
returns, and qualifications of the President or VicePresident and may promulgate its rules for the
purpose.
Congress may delegate counting to a committee

provided it approves it as a body
Considered as a NON-LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION of
Congress. Ergo, Final adjournment of Congress only
affects Congress legislative functions
Proclamation of PRESIDENT-Elect & VP-Elect is the
function of Congress not the COMELECs
=============================================
Salaries and Emoluments of the President and VicePresident

LIMITATIONS:
1. Shall be determined by law
2. Shall not be decreased during the TENURE of the
President and the Vice-President
3. Increases take effect only after the expiration of
the TERM of the incumbent during which the
increase was approved.
4. No other emolument from the government or any
other source during their TENURE may be
received.
C. RULES ON SUCCESSION
Succession of President-elect and Vice-President elect
MANNER OF ELECTION:
1. The President and Vice-President shall be elected
by the DIRECT VOTE of the people.
2. Election returns for President and Vice-President,
duly certified by the Board of Canvassers of each
province or city, shall be transmitted to Congress,
directed to the Senate President.
VACANCY
President-elect
fails to qualify or
to be chosen
President-elect
dies or
permanently
===========================================

SUCCESSOR
VP-elect will be Acting President
until someone is qualified/chosen
as President
VP becomes President
Page 46 of 214
disabled
Both President
and VP-elect are
not chosen, or do
not qualify, or
both die, or both
become
permanently
disabled
1. Senate President, or in case of

his inability,
2. Speaker of the House shall act
as President until a President or
a VP shall have been chosen and
qualified.
Death,
permanent
disability, or
inability of
Senate President
and Speaker of
the House as
Acting President
Congress shall determine, by law,

who will be the Acting President
until a President or VP shall have
qualified.
PROCEDURE
1. Congress shall convene 3 days after the vacancy in
the offices of both the President and the VP,
without need of a call. The convening of Congress
cannot be suspended.
2. Within 7 days after convening, Congress shall
enact a law calling for a special election to elect a
President and a VP. The special election cannot be
postponed.
3. The requirement of three readings on separate
days under Sec. 26(2), Art VI shall not apply to a
bill calling for a special election. The law shall be
deemed enacted upon its approval on third
reading.
4. The special election shall be held within 45-60 days
from the time of the enactment of the law.
LIMITATION: No special election shall be called if the
vacancy occurs within 18 months before the date of the
next presidential election.
Succession of President and Vice-President

VACANCY
President dies/
permanently
disabled/ impeached
or resigns
Both President and
VP die/ permanently
disabled/
impeached, or resign
SUCCESSOR
VP becomes President for the
unexpired term
Death, permanent
disability, or inability
of Senate President
and Speaker of the
House as Acting
President
Congress shall determine, by law,

who will be the Acting President
until a President or VP shall have
been elected and qualified,
subject to the same restrictions of
powers and disqualifications as
the Acting President
1. Senate President, or in case of

his inability,
2. Speaker of the House shall act
as President until the President
or VP shall have been elected
and qualified.
Temporary Disability of the President to discharge his

duties
MAY BE RAISED IN EITHER OF TWO WAYS:
1. By the President himself, when he sends a written
declaration to the Senate President and the
Speaker of the House. In this case, the VicePresident will be Acting President until the
President transmits a written declaration to the
contrary.
2. When a majority of all Cabinet members transmit
to the Senate President and the Speaker of the
House their written declaration. The VP will
immediately assume the powers and duties of the
office as Acting President.
PROCEDURE TO FILL UP VACANCY

1. President will nominate new VP from among the
members of either House of Congress.
2. Nominee shall assume office upon confirmation by
majority vote of ALL members of BOTH Houses,
voting separately. (In effect, nominee forfeits his
seat in Congress.)
SUBSEQUENT SCENARIOS:
1. If the President transmits a written declaration
that he is not disabled, he reassumes his position.
2. If within 5 days after the President re-assumes his
position, the majority of the Cabinet transmits
their written declaration, Congress shall decide the
issue. In this event, Congress shall convene within
48 hours if it is not in session, without need of a
call.
3. Within 10 days after Congress is required to
assemble, or 12 days if Congress is not in session, a
2/3 majority of both Houses, voting separately, is
needed to find the President temporarily disabled,
in which case, the VP will be Acting President.
Election of President and Vice-President after vacancy
Presidential Illness
Vacancy in the Office of the Vice-President
Page 47 of 214
GENERAL RULE
1. If the President is seriously ill, the public must be
informed thereof.
2. During such illness, the following shall NOT be
denied access to the President:
a. National Security Adviser
b. Secretary of Foreign Affairs
c. Chief of Staff of the AFP

IV. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
=============================================
V. JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
VESTED IN - The Supreme Court and such lower courts

as may be established by law. Hence, they may neither
attempt to assume or be compelled to perform nonjudicial functions. They may not be charged with
administrative functions, except when reasonably
incidental to the fulfillment of their duties.
DUTIES OF THE COURTS
1. To SETTLE actual controversies involving rights
which are legally demandable and enforceable;
2. To DETERMINE whether or not there has been a
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the government.
3. The courts CANNOT give advisory opinions.
==================================
TOPICS UNDER THE SYLLABUS
A. Concepts
1. Judicial power
2. Judicial review
a) Operative fact doctrine
b) Moot questions
c) Political question doctrine
B. Safeguards of Judicial independence
C. Judicial restraint
E. Supreme Court
3. Administrative supervision over
lower courts
======================================

A. Concepts
======================================
A.CONCEPTS
1. JUDICIAL POWER
JUDICIAL POWER - The authority to settle justiciable
controversies or disputes involving rights that are
enforceable and demandable before the courts of
justice or the redress of wrongs for violations of such
rights.
POWERS OF THE SUPREME COURT

1.
Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL
Cases affecting
foreign
ambassadors,
other foreign
public
ministers and
consuls
stationed
in
the Philippines
Petitions for
certiorari,
prohibition,
mandamus,
quo warranto,
and
habeas
corpus
APPELLATE
Over final judgments and
orders in the following:
All
cases
involving
constitutionality of LAW,
INTERNATIONAL
AGREEMENT OR TREATY
(Code:LIT)
All cases involving the
constitutionality,
application or operation of
PROCLAMATION, ORDER,
PRESIDENTIAL
DECREE,
ORDINANCE, REGULATION
OR INSTRUCTION (Code:
POPORI)
All cases involving the
legality of any: TAX,
IMPOST,
TOLL,
ASSESSMENT
or
any
PENALTY
imposed
in
relation thereto (Code:
TITA P)
All cases in which the
jurisdiction of any lower
court is in issue
Criminal cases where the
penalty
imposed
is
reclusion perpetua or
higher
All cases where ONLY
errors or questions of law
Page 48 of 214
are involved
3.
4.
An ACTUAL CASE calling for the exercise of judicial

power.
Resolution of the issue of constitutionality is
unavoidable or is the very LIS MOTA of the case.
The person challenging the governmental act must
have STANDING
E.g. A personal and substantial interest in the case
such that he has sustained, or will sustain, direct
injury as a result of its enforcement.
2.
Temporarily assign lower court judges to other

stations in the public interest.
Temporary assignment - shall not exceed 6
months without the consent of the judge
concerned.
5.
3.
Promulgate rules concerning:

1. The protection and enforcement of
constitutional rights
2. Pleading, practice and procedure in all courts
3. Admission to the practice of law
4. The Integrated Bar
5. Legal assistance to the underprivileged
The Court can waive the procedural rule on standing in

cases that raise issues of transcendental importance.
Following are the guidelines in determining whether or
not a matter is of transcendental importance: (1) the
character of the funds or other assets involved in the
case; (2) the presence of a clear case of disregard of a
constitutional or statutory prohibition by the public
respondent agency or instrumentality of the
government; and (3) the lack of any other party with a
more direct and specific interest in the questions being
raised. Chamber of Real Estate and Builders
Association,
Inc.
v.
Energy
Regulatory
Commission, et al., [G.R. No. 174697, July 8,
2010].
LIMITATIONS ON JUDICIAL RULE-MAKING:

1. It should provide a simplified and inexpensive
procedure for the speedy disposition of cases.
2. It should be uniform for all courts of the same
grade.
3. It should not diminish, increase, or modify
substantive rights.
4.
5.
6.
Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a

miscarriage of justice.
Appoint ALL officials and employees of the
Judiciary, in accordance with Civil Service Law.
Exercise administrative supervision over ALL courts
and the personnel thereof.
2.
JUDICIAL REVIEW
JUDICIAL REVIEW:
1.
2.
3.
The power of the SC to declare a law, treaty,

ordinance, etc. unconstitutional
Lower courts may also exercise the power of
judicial review, subject to the appellate jurisdiction
of the SC.
Only SC decisions set precedents. As thus, only SC
decisions are binding on all.
REQUISITES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:

Code: REALS
1. The question involved must be RIPE FOR
ADJUDICATION, E.g. The challenged government
act must have had an adverse effect on the person
challenging it.
2. The question of Constitutionality must be raised in
the first instance, or at the EARLIEST opportunity.
A taxpayer suit is proper only when there is an exercise

of the spending or taxing power of Congress, whereas
citizen standing must rest on direct and personal
interest in the proceeding. In sum, it bears to stress
that generalized interests, albeit accompanied by the
assertion of a public right, do not establish locus standi.
Evidence of a direct and personal interest
is key. Southern
Hemisphere
Engagement
Network, Inc., et al. v. Anti-Terrorism Council,
et al.; KMU, et al. v. Hon. Eduardo Ermita., et
al.; Bayan, et al. v. GloriaMacapagal-Arroyo, et
al.; Karapatan, et al. v. Gloria MacapagalArroyo, et al.; IBP, et al. v. Exec. Sec.
Eduardo Ermita, et al.; Bayan-Southern Tagalog,
et al. v. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, et al. [G.R. No.
178552, 178554, 178581, 178890, 179157, 179461,
Oct. 5, 2010].
a.
EFFECT
OF
A
DECLARATION
OF
UNCONSTITUTIONALITY - Prior to the declaration that
a particular law is unconstitutional, it is considered an
operative fact. Vested rights acquired under such law
before it was declared unconstitutional are not
prejudiced by the subsequent declaration that the law
is unconstitutional.
b.
Operative Fact
Moot Questions
Page 49 of 214
An action is considered MOOT when it no longer

presents a justiciable controversy because the issues
involved have become academic or dead or when the
matter has already been resolved. There is nothing for
the court to resolve as the determination thereof has
been overtaken by subsequent events. Atty. Evillo c.
Pormento v. Estrada and COMELEC, [G.R. No. 191988,
Aug. 31, 2010].
A MOOT CASE is one that ceases to present a

justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events,
so that a declaration thereon would be of no practical
use or value. Generally, courts decline jurisdiction over
such case or dismiss it. However, Courts will decide
cases, otherwise moot and academic if: (1) there is a
GRAVE VIOLATION of the Constitution; (2) the situation
is of an EXCEPTIONAL CHARACTER and paramount
public interest is involved; (3) the constitutional issue
raised requires formulation of controlling principles to
guide the bench, the bar, and the public; (4) the case is
capable of repetition yet evading review. COMELEC vs.
Quizon, [G.R. No. 177927, Feb. 15, 2008].
c.
Political Questions Doctrine
POLITICAL QUESTION - A question, the resolution of

which has been vested by the Constitution exclusively
1. In the people, in the exercise of their sovereign
capacity, or
2. In which full discretionary authority has been
delegated to a co-equal branch of the Government
Those question, 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 legislative or executive branch of the
government. Tanada v. Cuenco, [G.R. No. L-10520, Feb.
28, 1957].
constitutional and the legitimacy of the new

government that resulted from it cannot be the subject
of judicial review, but EDSA II is extra constitutional and
the resignation of the sitting President that it caused
and the succession of the Vice President as President
are subject to judicial review. EDSA I presented a
political question; EDSA II involves legal questions.
Estrada v. Desierto, [G.R. No. 146710-15, Mar. 2,
2001].
A determination of what constitutes an impeachable
offense is a purely political question, which the
Constitution has left to the sound discretion of the
legislature. Ma. Merceditas N. Gutierrez v. The
House of Representatives Committee on Justice,
et al., [G.R. No. 193459, Feb. 15, 2011].
The Ombudsman comes within the purview of the
Courts power of judicial review. The Ombudsman,
despite being a constitutionally created body with
constitutionally mandated independence, it comes
within the purview of judicial review which serves as a
safety net against its capricious and arbitrary acts
Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest
Loans v. Desierto, [G.R. No. 135715, Apr. 13, 2011].
======================================

B.
Safeguards
of
Securing
Independence
======================================
B.
SAFEGUARDS
INDEPENDENCE
1.
OF
SECURING
JUDICIAL
Being a Constitutional body, it may NOT be

abolished by law;
CREATION AND ABOLITION OF COURTS - The
power to create courts IMPLIES the power to
abolish and even re-organize courts. BUT this
power cannot be exercised in a manner that would
undermine the security of tenure of the judiciary.
If the abolition or re-organization is done in GOOD
FAITH and not for political or personal reasons, it is
VALID.
While courts can determine questions of legality with

respect to governmental action, they cannot review
government policy and the wisdom behind such
policies.
These questions are vested by the
Constitution in the Executive and Legislative
Departments.
EDSA I involves the exercise of the people power of
revolution which overthrew the whole government.
EDSA II is an exercise of people power of freedom of
speech and freedom of assembly to petition the
government for redress of grievances which only
affected the office of the President. EDSA I is extra
Judicial
2.
3.
Members are only removable by impeachment;

SC may not be deprived of minimum and appellate
jurisdiction; appellate jurisdiction may not be
increased without its advice or concurrence;
Page 50 of 214
Congress cannot deprive the Supreme Court of its

jurisdiction over cases provided for in the
Constitution.
Congress can only do the following:
- Define enforceable and demandable rights;
prescribing remedies for violations of such
rights
- Determine the court with jurisdiction to hear
and decide controversies or disputes arising
from legal rights
4.
5.
6.
SC has ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION over all

inferior courts and personnel;
SC has exclusive power to discipline judges/
justices of inferior courts;
Members of the judiciary enjoy security of tenure;
SC justices may be removed from office only by
IMPEACHMENT. They cannot be disbarred while
they hold office.
7.
Members of judiciary may not be designated to

any agency performing quasi-judicial or
administrative functions;
The Court rejected petitioners claim that the
Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) exercises
quasi-judicial functions contrary to Section 12,
Article VIII of the Constitution. When the Supreme
Court, as the PET, resolves a presidential or vicepresidential election contest, it performs what is
essentially a judicial power. Atty. Macalintal v.
Presidential Electoral Tribunal, [G.R. No.
191618, Nov. 23, 2010].
Any exemption from the payment of legal fees

granted by Congress to government-owned or
controlled corporations and local government
units will necessarily reduce the Judiciary
Development Fund (JDF) and the Special Allowance
for the Judiciary Fund (SAJF). Undoubtedly, such
situation is constitutionally infirm for it impairs the
Court's guaranteed fiscal autonomy and erodes its
independence. GSIS v. Heirs of Caballero, et al.,
[G.R. No. 158090, Oct. 4, 2010].
10. SC alone may initiate Rules of Court;
11. SC alone may order temporary detail of judges;
12. SC can appoint all officials and employees of the
Judiciary.
======================================

C. Judicial Restraint
======================================
C. JUDICIAL RESTRAINT
JUDICIAL RESTRAINT: The Supreme Court exercises

judicial restraint where the issue before it has already
been mooted by subsequent events.
======================================

======================================
D.APPOINTMENT TO THE JUDICIARY

8.
Salaries of judges may not be reduced.
1. QUALIFICATIONS
Salaries of SC Justices and judges of lower courts
shall be fixed by law. It cannot be decreased during
their continuance in office, but can be increased.
Members of the Judiciary are NOT exempt from
payment of income tax. Nitafan v. CIR, [G.R. No.
78780, July 23, 1987].
9.
SUPREME
COURT
Natural born citizen of the Philippines
The judiciary enjoys fiscal autonomy;

The entire judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy.
Annual appropriations for the judiciary cannot be
reduced below the amount appropriated for the
previous year. Once approved, appropriations shall
be automatically and regularly released.
LOWER COLLEGIATE
COURTS (CA, CTA,
Sandiganbayan)
At least 40
years old
LOWER
NONCOLLEGIATE
COURTS
Citizen of
the
Philippines
(may be a
naturalized
citizen)
Possesses other qualifications

prescribed by Congress
Page 51 of 214
At least 15
years of
experience as
a judge or in
the practice
of law in the
Philippines
Member of the Philippine Bar

b.
c.
d.
Person of proven competence, integrity, probity and

independence
Every prospective appointee to the judiciary must

apprise the appointing authority of every matter
bearing on his fitness for judicial office including such
circumstances as may reflect on his integrity and
probity. Office of the Court Administrator v. Estacion,
Jr., [ A.M. No. RTJ-87-104, Jan. 11, 1990; Gutierrez v.
Belan, A.M. No. MTJ-95-1059, Aug. 7, 1998].
Until a correction of existing records on ones birth and
citizenship, one cannot accept an appointment to
judiciary as that would be a violation of the
constitution. For this reason, he can be prevented by
injunction from doing so Kilosbayan v. Ermita, [G.R.
No. 177721, July 3, 2007].
2. THE JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL
a. Composition
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Chief Justice, as ex-officio chairman

Secretary of Justice, as ex-officio member
Representative of Congress (One from the Senate
and one from the House), as ex-officio member
Representative of the Integrated Bar
A professor of law
A retired member of the SC
Private sector representative
The last four are the regular members of the JBC. The
President, with CA approval, appoints regular members
who serve for 4 years, in staggered terms.
b.
Functions Of The JBC
Recommend appointees to the Judiciary (PRIMARY

FUNCTION). It may also exercise such other functions as
the SC may assign to it (SECONDARY FUNCTION).
3.
RULES ON APPOINTMENTS
a.
President shall appoint Members of the

Supreme Court and judges of lower courts
e.
from a list of at least 3 nominees for each

vacancy, as prepared by the JBC.
No CA confirmation is needed for
appointments to the Judiciary.
Vacancies in SC should be filled within 90 days
from the occurrence of the vacancy.
Vacancies in lower courts should be filled
within 90 days from submission to the
President of the JBC list.
MIDNIGHT APPOINTMENT
President may appoint SC Justice within 60 days prior

to election. Article VII deals entirely with the executive
department while Article VIII deals with the judiciary.
Had the framers intended to extend the 60-day
prohibition contained in Section 15, Article VII to the
appointment of Members of the Supreme Court, they
could have explicitly done so. That such specification
was not done only reveals that the prohibition against
the President or Acting President making appointments
within two months before the next presidential
elections and up to the end of the Presidents or Acting
Presidents term does not refer to the Members of the
Supreme Court. The usage in Section 4(1), Article VIII of
the word shall an imperative, operating to impose a
duty that may be enforced should not be disregarded.
The framers did not need to extend the prohibition
against midnight appointments to appointments in the
Judiciary, because the establishment of the JBC and the
subjecting the nomination and screening of candidates
for judicial positions to the unhurried and deliberate
prior process of the JBC ensured that there would no
longer be midnight appointments to the Judiciary. JBC
intervention eliminates the danger that appointments
to the Judiciary can be made for the purpose of buying
votes in a coming presidential election, or of satisfying
partisan considerations. The creation of the JBC was
precisely intended to de-politicize the Judiciary by
doing away with the intervention of the Commission on
Appointments. De Castro v. JBC, [G.R. No. 191002,
March 17, 2010].
4.
TERM
Members of the SC and judges of the lower courts hold

office during good behavior until:
1. The age of 70 years old
2. They become incapacitated to discharge their
duties
======================================

Page 52 of 214
E. Supreme Court
3. Administrative supervision over
lower courts
======================================
E.SUPREME COURT
COMPOSITION OF THE SUPREME COURT:
1. Chief Justice, and
2. 14 Associate Justices
HEARING OF CASES IN THE SUPREME COURT:
1. Divisions of 3, 5, or 7 members
2. En Banc
1. DIVISION AND EN BANC CASES
1.
2.
a. Cases Heard By Division:

Decided with the concurrence of a majority of the
members who took part in the deliberations and
voted thereon
Majority vote in a division should be at least 3
members
b.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Cases Required To Be Heard En

Banc
All cases involving constitutionality of a:

Code: LIT
1. LAW
2. INTERNATIONAL or executive agreement
3. TREATY
All cases involving the constitutionality, application
or operation of:
Code: POPORI
1. PRESIDENTIAL DECREES
2. ORDERS
3. PROCLAMATIONS
4. ORDINANCES
5. Other REGULATIONS
6. Instructions
All cases required to be heard en banc under the
Rules of Court
Appeals from Sandiganbayan and from the
Constitutional Commissions
Cases heard by a division where required majority
of 3 was not obtained
Cases where SC modifies or reverses a doctrine or
principle of law laid down by the SC en banc or by
a division
Administrative cases to discipline or dismiss judges
of lower courts
8.
Election contests for President and Vice-President.
2. PROCEDURAL RULE-MAKING:
The Supreme Court has the power to promulgate rules
concerning the protection and enforcement of
constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure
in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the
integrated bar, and legal assistance to the
underprivileged.
A legislative grant of exemption from the payment of
legal fees under RA 8291 was held to be
unconstitutional since the payment of legal fees is an
integral part of the rules promulgated by the court
pursuant to its rule-making power under the
Constitution. The Separation of powers among the
three co-equal branches of our government has
erected an impregnable wall that keeps the powers to
promulgate rules of pleading, practice and procedure
within the sole province of the Supreme Court. The
other branches cannot trespass upon this prerogative
by enacting laws or issue orders that effectively repeal,
alter or modify any of the procedural rules Re: Petition
for Recognition of the GSIS from Payment of Legal
Fees [A.M. No. 08-2-01-0, February 11, 2010].
However, it was ruled that Congress can amend the
Rules of Court in cases where it involves not just
procedural elements but also substantive matters
Republic v. Gingoyon, [G.R. No. 166429, Feb. 1, 2006].
Rule-making power also includes the inherent power to
suspend its own rules in particular cases in the interest
of justice.
LIMITATIONS ON JUDICIAL RULE-MAKING:
1. It should provide a simplified and inexpensive
procedure for the speedy disposition of cases.
2. It should be uniform for all courts of the same grade.
3. It should not diminish, increase, or modify
substantive rights.
4. Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a
miscarriage of justice.
5. Appoint ALL officials and employees of the Judiciary,
in accordance with Civil Service Law.
6. Exercise administrative supervision over ALL courts
and the personnel thereof
3. ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION OVER LOWER
COURTS
SC has ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION over all inferior
courts and personnel
Page 53 of 214
Disciplinary action against judges of lower courts:

1. Only the SC en banc has jurisdiction to
discipline or dismiss judges of lower courts.
2. DISCIPLINARY ACTION / DISMISSAL: Majority
vote of SC Justices who took part in the
deliberations and voted therein.
4. DECISIONS BY THE SUPREME COURT
1.
2.
Reached IN CONSULTATION before being assigned

to a member for the writing of the courts opinion.
A CERTIFICATION to this effect must be signed by
the Chief Justice and attached to the record of the
case, and served upon the parties.
Absence of a certification does not mean that
there was no consultation prior to assignment of
the case to a member. The presumption of
regularity prevails but the erring officer will be
liable administratively Consing v. Court of Appeals,
[G.R. No. 78272, Aug. 29, 1989].
3.
Members of the SC who took no part, or who

dissented or abstained must STATE the reasons
therefor.
All lower collegiate courts shall observe the same

procedure. E.g. CA, CTA, and Sandiganbayan
Generally: Inapplicable to Administrative Agencies
5. DECISIONS BY THE LOWER COURTS
Memorandum decisions, where the appellate court

adopts the findings of fact and law of the lower court,
are allowed as long as the decision adopted by
reference is attached to the Memorandum for easy
reference.
6. TIMEFRAME FOR DECIDING
24 months
from
submission
Collegiate Courts
12 months
from
submission
Lower Courts
3 months
from
submission
Periods above commence from the date of submission

for decision or resolution.
Upon expiration of the period without decision or

resolution, a certification stating why no decision or
resolution has been rendered shall be issued and
signed by the Chief Justice or presiding judge.
A copy of the certification shall be attached to the
record of the case or matter, and served upon the
parties.
The expiration of the period notwithstanding, the court
shall decide or resolve the case or matter without
further delay.
The Sandiganbayan falls under the 3-month rule
because it is a trial-court, not a collegiate court Re:
Problems of Delays in Cases Before the
Sandiganbayan, [A.m. No. 00-8-05-sc, Jan. 29, 2002].

=======================================
VI. CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS
Decisions MUST state clearly and distinctly the facts

and the law on which they are based.
Supreme
Court
A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for

decision or resolution upon the filing of the last
pleading, brief, or memorandum required by the Rules
of Court or by the Court itself.
====================================
A. Constitutional safeguards to ensure
independence of commissions
B. Powers and functions of each commission
C. Prohibited offices and interests
D. Jurisdiction of each constitutional
commission
E. Review of final orders, resolutions and
decisions
1. Rendered in the exercise of quasijudicial functions
2. Rendered in the exercise of
administrative functions
============================================
Page 54 of 214

A. Constitutional Safeguards to
Independence of Commissions
Ensure
============================================
A. CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS TO ENSURE

INDEPENDENCE OF COMMISSIONS
INDEPENDENT CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS:
1. Civil Service Commission (CSC)
2. Commission on Elections (COMELEC)
3. Commission on Audit (COA)
SAFEGUARDS TO GUARANTEE INDEPENDENCE OF
COMMISSIONS:
1. Being constitutionally created, they may NOT be
abolished by law
2. Each is expressly described as independent
3. Each is conferred certain powers and functions by
the Constitution which cannot be reduced by
statute
4. The Chairmen and members cannot be removed,
except by impeachment
5. The chairmen and the members are given a fairly
long term of office of 7 years
6. The Chairmen and members may not be reappointed or appointed in an acting capacity
7. The salaries of the Chairmen and members are
relatively high and may not be decreased during
continuance in office
8. The Commissions enjoy fiscal autonomy (Sec. 5,
Art. IX-A).
i. This means that there is automatic and regular
released as opposed to the fiscal autonomy of
the judiciary, which includes the rule that
appropriation may not be less than the
previous year.
9. Each Commission en banc may promulgate its own
procedural rules, provided they do not diminish,
increase or modify substantive rights (Sec. 6, Art.
IX-A)
i. In case of conflict between the Rules of Court
and the Rules promulgated by the commission,
the prevailing rule will depend on where the
case is filed. If before the commission, the rule
of the commission prevails, if before a regular
court, the Rules of Court will prevail.
ii. The power of the Supreme Court to review the
rules of quasi-judicial agencies does not apply
to Constitutional Commissions.
10. The Chairmen and members are subject to certain
disqualifications calculated to strengthen their
integrity.
11. The Commissions may appoint their own officials

and employees in accordance with Civil Service
Law1
============================================

B. Powers and Functions of Each Commission
============================================
B. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF EACH

COMMISSION
1.
1. As the CENTRAL PERSONNEL AGENCY OF THE

GOVERNMENT, shall establish a career service and
adopt measures to promote morale, efficiency,
integrity, responsiveness, progressiveness and
courtesy in the Civil Service.
It may revoke a certificate of eligibility motu proprio
and consequently, the power to revoke one that has
been given.
Where the case simply involves the rechecking of
examination papers and nothing more than a reevaluation of documents already in the records of
the CSC according to a standard answer key
previously set by it, notice and hearing is not
required. Instead, what will apply in such a case is
the rule of res ipsa loquitur Lazo v.Civil Service
Commission, [G.R. No. 108824, Sept. 14, 1994].
2.
3.
4.
5.
Strengthen the MERIT AND REWARDS SYSTEM

INTEGRATE all human resources development
programs for all levels and ranks
INSTITUTIONALIZE a management climate
conducive to public accountability
SUBMIT to the President and the Congress an
annual report of personnel programs
2. Commission on Elections
1.
Civil Service Commission
ENFORCE AND ADMINISTER all laws and

regulations relative to the conduct of an election,
plebiscite, initiative, referendum, and recall.
E.g. COMELEC can enjoin construction of public
works within 45 days of an election.
Nachura, Reviewer in Political Law, p. 209
Page 55 of 214
The COMELEC can take cognizance of any question

on the conduct of plebiscite such as to correct or
check what the Board of Canvassers erroneously or
fraudulently did during the canvassing, verify or
ascertain the results of the plebiscite either
through pre pre-proclamation case or through
revision of ballots. The power of the COMELEEC to
ascertain the results of the plebiscite is implicit in
the power to enforce all laws relative to the
conduct of plebiscite.
1. May be appealed to the SC EN BANC on

questions of law
2. When the decision is brought on a special
civil action for certiorari, prohibition, or
mandamus under Rule 65 for grave abuse of
discretion under Article IX-A Section 7.
d.
COMELEC can take jurisdiction over cases involving

party identity and leadership or controversy as to
leadership in the party. Such jurisdiction is sourced
from the general power of the Commission to
administer laws and rules involving the conduct of
election.
2.
If it is a pre-proclamation controversy,
the COMELEC exercises quasi-judicial or
administrative powers.
EXERCISE
a. EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL jurisdiction over all
contests relating to the elections, returns, and
qualifications of all elective REGIONAL,
PROVINCIAL and CITY officials
Election contests in the Sangguniang
Kabataan (SK) are not under COMELEC
jurisdiction but, under the jurisdiction of the
DILG.
b.
APPELLATE jurisdiction over all contests

involving:
i. ELECTIVE MUNICIPAL officials decided by
trial courts of general jurisdiction
ii. ELECTIVE BARANGAY officials decided by
trial courts of limited jurisdiction
e.
3.
Decisions, final orders, or rulings of the

COMELEC
contests
involving
elective
municipal and barangay offices shall be final,
executory, and not appealable.
DECIDE, except those involving the right to vote,

all questions affecting elections, including
determination of the number and location of
polling places, appointment of election officials
and inspectors, and registration of voters.
4.
DEPUTIZE, with the concurrence of the President,

law enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of
the Government, including the Armed Forces of
the Philippines, for the EXCLUSIVE PURPOSE of
ensuring free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and
credible elections.
1.
2.
5.
This power is NOT limited to the election

period.
Applies to both criminal and administrative
cases.
REGISTER political parties, organizations, or

coalitions, accredit citizens arms of the
Commission on Elections.
1.
EXCEPTION:
2.
Its jurisdiction over contests (after

proclamation) is in exercise of its judicial
functions.
ISSUE writs of certiorari, prohibition and
mandamus in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction.
These petitions are cognizable by the Regular

Courts (MTC).
A petition for certiorari questioning an

interlocutory order of a trial court in an
electoral protest was within the appellate
jurisdiction of the COMELEC. The Court
recognizes the COMELECs appellate
jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari
against all acts or omissions of courts in
election cases Bulilis v. Nuez, [G.R. No.
195953, Aug. 9, 2011].
c.
Contempt powers
i. COMELEC can exercise this power only in
relation to its adjudicatory or quasijudicial functions. It CANNOT exercise
this in connection with its purely
executive or ministerial functions.
Political parties, etc. must present their

platform or program of government.
There should be sufficient publication.
Page 56 of 214
3.
6.
Groups that cannot be registered:

i. Religious denominations/ sects
ii. Those that seek to achieve their goals
through violence or unlawful means
iii. Those that refuse to uphold and adhere
to the Constitution
iv. Those supported by any foreign
government e.g. receipt of financial
contributions related to elections
II. Any of its subdivisions, agencies or

instrumentalities
III. GOCCs with original charters.
COA is endowed with enough latitude to
determine, prevent and disallow irregular,
unnecessary, excessive, extravagant or
unconscionable expenditures of government
funds. In resolving cases brought before it on
appeal, respondent COA is not required to
limit its review only to the grounds relied
upon by a government agencys auditor with
respect to disallowing certain disbursements
of public funds. In consonance with its
general audit power, respondent COA is not
merely legally permitted, but is also dutybound to make its own assessment of the
merits of the disallowed disbursement and
not simply restrict itself to reviewing the
validity of the ground relied upon by the
auditor of the government agency concerned.
To hold otherwise would render COAs vital
constitutional power unduly limited and
thereby useless and ineffective. Yap v.
Commission on Audit, [G.R. No.158562,
Apr. 23, 2010].
FILE, upon a verified complaint, or on its own

initiative, petitions in court for inclusion or
exclusion of voters; investigate and, where
appropriate, prosecute cases of violations of
election laws, including acts or omissions
constituting elections frauds, offenses and
malpractices.
1.
2.
3.
COMELEC has EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION to

investigate and prosecute cases for violations
of election laws.
COMELEC can deputize prosecutors for this
purpose. The actions of the prosecutors are
the actions of the COMELEC.
COMELEC
can
conduct
preliminary
investigation on election cases falling within
its jurisdiction
7.
RECOMMEND to the Congress effective measures

to minimize election spending, including limitation
of places where propaganda materials shall be
posted, and to prevent and penalize all forms of
election frauds, offenses, malpractices, and
nuisance candidacies.
8.
RECOMMEND to the President the removal of any

officer or employee it has deputized, or the
imposition of any other disciplinary action, for
violation or disregard of, or disobedience to its
directive, order, or decision.
9.
SUBMIT to the President and the Congress a

comprehensive report on the conduct of each
election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or
recall.
2.
Funds cannot be released without auditing in pre-audit

while in post-audit, the auditing is done only after the
funds are released.
3.
If COA finds the internal control system of

audited agencies inadequate, COA may adopt
measures, including temporary or special preaudit, as necessary to correct deficiencies.
4.
Keep the general accounts of the government,

preserving vouchers and other supporting
papers pertaining thereto.
3. Commission on Audit
1.
Examine, audit, and settle all accounts

pertaining to:
1. Revenue and receipts of funds or property
2. Expenditures and uses of funds or property
owned or held in trust by, or pertain to:
I. The Government
Conduct post-audit with respect to the

following:
1. Constitutional bodies, commissions, and
offices granted fiscal autonomy
2. Autonomous state colleges and universities
3. GOCCs and their subsidiaries incorporated
under the Corporation Code
4. Non-governmental
entities
receiving
subsidy or equity, directly or indirectly,
from or through the government, which are
required by law the granting institution to
submit to such audit.
Page 57 of 214
5.
Exclusive authority to define the scope of COAs

audit and examination and to establish the
techniques and methods required.
6.
Promulgate accounting and auditing rules and

regulations:
a. Including those for the prevention or
disallowance of irregular, unnecessary,
excessive,
extravagant,
or
unconscionable
expenditures
of
government funds and properties.
b. Failure to comply with these rules can be a
ground for disapproving the payment of
a proposed expenditure.
The functions of COA can be classified as:
1. Examining and auditing all forms of
government revenues and expenditures
2. Settling government accounts
3. Promulgating accounting and auditing rules
4. Deciding administrative cases involving
expenditures of public funds.
COA can settle only LIQUIDATED ACCOUNTS or

those accounts, which may be adjusted simply by
arithmetic process.
techniques and methods for such review and

promulgate accounting and auditing rules and
regulations Veloso v. Commission on Audit, [G.R.
No. 193677, Sept. 6, 2011].
============================================

C. Prohibited Offices and Interests
============================================
C. PROHIBITED OFFICES AND INTERESTS

DISQUALIFICATIONS DURING TENURE:
1. Holding any other office or employment
2. Engaging in the practice of any profession
3. Engaging in the active management or control of
any business, which in any way, may be affected
by the functions of their office
4. Being financially interested, directly or indirectly,
in any contract, franchise, privilege granted by the
government, any of its subdivisions, agencies,
instrumentalities, including GOCCs and their
subsidiaries
============================================
COA has authority not just over accountable officers

but also over other officers who perform functions
related to accounting such as verification of
evaluations and computation of fees collectible, and
the adoption of internal rules of control.

D. Jurisdiction of Each Constitutional
Commission
COA does not have the power to fix the amount of

an unfixed or undetermined debt.
D. JURISDICTION OF EACH CONSTITUTIONAL

COMMISSION
Prosecutors may still review accounts already

settled and approved by COA for the purpose of
determining possible criminal liability. This is
because COAs interest in such accounts is merely
administrative.
1. Civil Service Commission
COA has the power to determine the meaning of

public bidding and what constitutes failure of the
same when regulations require public bidding for
the sale of government property.
1. The power to examine and audit is NONEXCLUSIVE. Thus, private auditors can be hired but
if there is a conflict, COA audit prevails.
2. Money claims must be decided based on law.
3. Pursuant to its mandate as the guardians of public
funds, the COA has the authority to define the
scope of its audit and examination, establish the
============================================
SCOPE OF THE CSC:

All branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, agencies
of the government, including government owned and
controlled corporations with original charters.
2. Commission on Elections
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL jurisdiction over all contests
relating to the elections, returns, and qualifications of
all elective REGIONAL, PROVINCIAL and CITY officials
Election contests in the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) are
not under COMELEC jurisdiction but, under the
jurisdiction of the DILG.
Page 58 of 214
APPELLATE jurisdiction over all contests involving:

a. ELECTIVE MUNICIPAL officials decided by trial courts
of general jurisdiction
b. ELECTIVE BARANGAY officials decided by trial courts
of limited jurisdiction
A petition for certiorari questioning an interlocutory
order of a trial court in an electoral protest was within
the appellate jurisdiction of the COMELEC. The Court
recognizes the COMELECs appellate jurisdiction over
petitions for certiorari against all acts or omissions of
courts in election cases Bulilis v. Nuez, [G.R. No.
195953, Aug. 9, 2011].
3. Commission on Audit
1. COA is endowed with enough latitude to determine,
prevent and disallow irregular, unnecessary, excessive,
extravagant or unconscionable expenditures of
government funds. In resolving cases brought before it
on appeal, respondent COA is not required to limit its
review only to the grounds relied upon by a
government agencys auditor with respect to
disallowing certain disbursements of public funds. In
consonance with its general audit power, respondent
COA is not merely legally permitted, but is also dutybound to make its own assessment of the merits of the
disallowed disbursement and not simply restrict itself
to reviewing the validity of the ground relied upon by
the auditor of the government agency concerned. To
hold otherwise would render COAs vital constitutional
power unduly limited and thereby useless and
ineffective. Yap v. Commission on Audit, [G.R.
No.158562, Apr. 23, 2010].
2. COA has authority not just over accountable
officers but also over other officers who perform
functions related to accounting such as verification
of evaluations and computation of fees collectible,
and the adoption of internal rules of control.
3. COA has the authority to define the scope of its audit
and examination, establish the techniques and
methods for such review and promulgate accounting
and auditing rules and regulations Veloso v.
Commission on Audit, [G.R. No. 193677, Sept. 6,
2011].
============================================

E. Review of Final Orders, Resolutions and
Decisions
1. Rendered in the Exercise of QuasiJudicial Functions

2. Rendered in the Exercise of
Administrative Functions
============================================
E. REVIEW OF FINAL ORDERS, RESOLUTIONS AND

DECISIONS
Each commission shall decide matters or cases by a
MAJORITY VOTE OF ALL ITS MEMBERS within 60 days
from submission.
The rule on majority vote shall apply both in a division
or en banc.
This provision is clear when it says that the voting
should be a majority vote of all its members and not
only of those who participated in the deliberation and
voted therein.
When a commissioner resigns, it does not automatically
invalidate the decision. So long as the required majority
of the commission is still achieved despite the
withdrawal of the vote of the one who resigned, the
decision shall stand.
EXCEPTION: COMELEC may sit en banc or in 2 divisions.
Election
cases,
including
pre-proclamation
controversies are decided in division, with motions for
reconsideration filed to the COMELEC en banc.
The SC has held that a majority decision decided by a
division of the COMELEC is a valid.
As COLLEGIAL BODIES, each commission must act as
one, and no one member can decide a case for the
entire commission.
E.g. The Chairman cannot ratify a decision that would
otherwise have been void.
1. RENDERED IN THE EXERCISE OF QUASI-JUDICIAL
FUNCTIONS
1.
2.
3.
Decisions, orders or rulings of the COMELEC or the

COA may be brought on certiorari to the SC under
Rule 64.
Decisions, orders or ruling of the CSC should be
appealed to the CA under Rule 43.
Period for appeals is thirty (30) days from receipt
of a copy of the decision, order, or ruling.
Page 59 of 214
4.
5.
It is however a requirement, that a motion for

reconsideration must first be filed before the
commission en banc, before resort to court is
taken.
The certiorari jurisdiction of the court is limited
only to cases and matters rendered by a
commission in the exercise of its adjudicatory
power, or those relating to an election dispute and
not to cases and matters purely administrative or
executive in nature
2. RENDERED IN THE EXERCISE OF ADMINISTRATIVE

FUNCTIONS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Administrative disciplinary cases involving penalty

of suspension for more than 30 days, or fine in an
amount exceeding 30 days salary, demotion,
transfer, removal, or dismissal from office shall be
appealable to the CSC.
Decision may be executed pending appeal.
Decision of CSC may be brought on appeal to the
CA under Rule 43.
Decision of CA may be brought on appeal to the SC
under Rule 45.
Exoneration of officers or employees from
administrative charges does not bar appeal. The
CSC is the proper party to bring the appeal. Sec.
37- 39, P.D. 807 / CSC v. Dacoycoy, [G.R. No.
135805, April 29, 1999].
3. ENFORCEMENT - It has been held that the CSC can

issue a writ of execution to enforce judgments, which
are final.

VI. CONSTIUTIONAL COMMISSIONS
=======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS

============================================

VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
A. Fundamental powers of the state
(police power, eminent domain,
taxation)
4. Delegation
B. Private acts and the bill of rights
C. Due process

2. Procedural and substantive
due process
3. Constitutional and statutory
due process
D. Equal protection
1. Concept
2. Requisites for valid
classification
c) Intermediate
Scrutiny Test
1. Concept
a) Requisites
6. Drug, alcohol and blood
tests
F. Privacy of communications and
correspondence
1. Private and public
communications
a) Prior restraint
(censorship)
b) Subsequent
punishment
2. Content-based and contentneutral regulations
a) Tests
b) Applications
3. Facial challenges and the
overbreadth doctrine
4. Tests
5. State regulation of different
types of mass media
Page 60 of 214
7. Private vs. Government
speech
8. Hecklers veto
b) Acts permitted and
not permitted by the
clause
c) Test
3. Tests
a) Clear and Present
Danger Test
b) Compelling State
Interest Test
c) Conscientious
Objector Test
I. Liberty of abode and freedom of
movement
1. Limitations
2. Right to travel
3. Return to return to ones
county
1. Limitations
2. Publication of laws and
regulations
4. Right to information relative
to
a) Government
contract negotiations
b) Diplomatic
negotiations
L. Eminent domain
1. Concept
2. Expansive concept of public
use
a) Determination
b) Effect of delay
4. Abandonment of intended
use and right of repurchase
M. Contract clause
1. Contemporary application of
the contract clause
N. Legal assistance and free access to
courts
1. Availability
2. Requisites
3. Waiver
2. Bail
7. Right to speedy, impartial
and public trial
R. Writ of amparo
S. Right to Speedy Disposition of Cases
a) Foreign laws
2. Application
U. Involuntary servitude and political
prisoners
V. Excessive fines and cruel and
inhuman punishments
X. Double jeopardy
1. Requisites
2. Motions for
reconsideration and appeals
3. Dismissal with consent of
accused
Y. Ex post facto laws and bills of
attainder
=======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
A. Fundamental powers of the state (police
power, eminent domain, taxation)
Page 61 of 214

4. Delegation
============================================
A. FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE (POLICE

POWER, EMINENT DOMAIN, TAXATION)
What constitutes taking? (1) Expropriator must

enter the private property, (2) Entrance must not be for
a momentary period, must be permanent (3.) Entry
must be legally authorized, (4.) Property must then be
devoted to a public use, (5.)Utilization of property must
deprive owner of all beneficial enjoyment of the
property. Republic v. Vda. Castellvi, 58 SCRA 336, 350352 (August 15, 1974).
6. CONCEPT
POLICE POWER - Power vested in the legislature by the
Constitution to make, ordain, and establish all manner
of wholesome and reasonable laws, statutes, and
ordinances either with or without penalties not
repugnant to the constitution, as they shall judge to be
for the good and welfare of the commonwealth and of
the subjects of the same.
TAXATION As a power, taxation refers to the inherent
power of the state to demand enforced contributions
for public purposes.
EMINENT DOMAIN The right to eminent domain is
usually understood to be the ultimate right of the
sovereign power to appropriate, not only the public but
the private property of all citizens within the territorial
sovereignty, to public purpose.
Just Compensation - includes not only the

determination of the amount to be paid (market value)
to the owner of the land but also the payment of the
land within a reasonable period of time from its taking.
Municipality of Makati v. Court of Appeals, 190 SCRA
206, 213 (1990).
The matter is legislative, however, once authority is
given to exercise the power, the matter ceases to be
wholly legislative. The executive authorities may then
decide whether the power will be invoked and to what
extent. Republic v. Juan , G.R. No24740, July 10, 1979.
3. THE GREAT POWERS DISTINGUISHED FROM EACH
OTHER
1.
2. REQUISITES FOR VALID EXERCISE

POLICE POWER Public necessity and the right of
the State and of the public to self protection. For this
reason, its scope expands and contracts with
changing needs.
2.
To cite some examples, police power has intervened

in such fields as public health, public safety, and
even public morals. They fall under public
necessity.
TAXATION Must be exercised for public purpose, it
must be uniform and equitable.
By uniformity, the constitution does not signify an
intrinsic, but simply a geographic uniformity A tax
is uniform when it operates with the same force and
effect in every place where the subject of it is
found. Churchill v. Concepcion
EMINENT DOMAIN (1) The purpose of the taking
must be public use, (2) Just compensation must be
given to the private owner.
3.
4.
As to authority which exercises the power

a. Police power and taxation may be exercised
only by the government or its political
subdivisions and,
b. The exercise of the power of eminent domain
may be granted to public service companies
or public utilities.
As to purpose
a. In police power, the use of the property is
regulated for the purpose of promoting the
general welfare, hence it is not compensable
b. In taxation, the property (generally in the
form of money) is taken for the support of
government,
c. In eminent domain, the property is taken
for public use of benefit, hence it must be
compensated.
As to persons affected
a. Police power (usually) and operate upon a
community or a class of entities or individuals
and,
b. Eminent domain operates on an entity or an
individual as the owner of a particular
property.
As to effect
a. In police power, there is not transfer of title,
at most there is a restraint on the injurious
use of the property
Page 62 of 214
b.
5.
6.
7.
In taxation, the money contributed in the

concept of taxes becomes part of the public
funds
c. In eminent domain, there is a transfer of the
right to property whether it be ownership or
to a lesser right (e.g possession.)
As to benefits received
a. In police power, the person affected receives
no direct and immediate benefit but only such
as may arise from the maintenance of a
healthy economic standard of society and is
often referred to as damnum absque injuria,
i.e damage without injury.
b. In taxation, it is assumed that the person
affected receives the equivalent of the tax in
the form of protection and benefits he
receives from the government as such.
c. In eminent domain, the person affected
receives the market value of the property
taken from him.
As to amount of imposition
a. In police power, the amount imposed should
not be more than sufficient to cover the cost
of the license and the necessary expense of
police
surveillance
and
inspection,
examination, or regulation as nearly as can be
estimated.
b. In taxation, there is generally no limit to the
amount that may be imposed.
c. In eminent domain, there is no amount
imposed but rather the owner is paid the
market value of the property taken.
As to relationship with the Constitution
a. Police power is relatively free from
constitutional limitations and is superior to
the impairment provision. In appropriate
cases, the constitutional injunction against
impairment of the obligation of contracts
cannot be invoked as against the right of the
state to exercise its police power.
b. Taxing power is subject to certain
constitutional limitations including the
prohibitions against the impairment of the
obligation of contracts
c. Eminent domain is also inferior to the
impairment prohibition so that the
government cannot appropriate property
which was under a contract it had previously
bound itself to purchase from the other
contracting party.
4. DELEGATION
POLICE POWER While police power rests primarily

with the national legislature, such power may be
delegated. Section 16 of the LGC , known as the general
welfare clause, encapsulates the delegated police
power to local governments. Social Justice Society v.
Atienza, G.R. No. 156052[February 13, 2008].
TAXATION The power to tax may be delegated to the
president or to local government as provided for in the
constitution.
As to the President 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.
As to Local Government Under the present
Constitution, each local government is now expressly
given the power to create its own sources of revenue
and to levy taxes, subject to such guidelines and
limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent
with the basic policy of local autonomy
EMINENT DOMAIN May be delegated to LGUs, other
public entities and public utilities, the exercise of such
power by the delegated entity is not absolute. The
scope is narrower and may be exercised only when
authorized by congress, subject to its control and
restraints imposed through the law conferring the
power or in other legislations. Thus, the power of
eminent domain delegated to an LGU is in reality not
eminent but inferior. The national legislature is still
the principal of the LGUs, the latter cannot go beyond
the principals will or modify the same. Beluso v.
Municipality of Panay, [G.R No. 153974, August 7,
2006].
======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
C. Private acts and the Bill of Rights
=======================================
The constitutional proscription against unlawful
searches and seizures therefore applies as a restraint
directed only against the government and its agencies
tasked with the enforcement of the law. Thus, it could
only be invoked against the State to whom the restraint
against arbitrary and unreasonable exercise of power is
imposed.
Page 63 of 214
If the search is made upon the request of law enforcers,

a warrant must generally be first secured if it is to pass
the test of constitutionality. However, if the search is
made at the behest or initiative of the proprietor of a
private establishment for its own and private purposes,
and without the intervention of police authorities, the
right against unreasonable search and seizure cannot
be invoked for only the act of private individual, not the
law enforcers, is involved.
The constitution, in laying down the principles of the
government and fundamental liberties of the people,
does not govern relationships between individuals.
Alleged violations against unreasonable search and
seizure may only be invoked against the State by an
individual unjustly traduced by the exercise of
sovereign authority. People v. Marti [G.R. No. 81561,
Jan. 18, 1991].
======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
C. Due process
2. Procedural and substantive due
process
3. Constitutional and statutory due
process
=======================================
C. DUE PROCESS
1. RELATIVITY OF DUE PROCESS
The concept of due process is not a static one. What
due process is depends on circumstances. It varies with
the subject matter and the necessities of the situation.
STANDARDS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROCEEDINGS
TYPE
Judicial
Proceedi
ngs
STANDARD
CODE: Ju3NO
1. An IMPARTIAL COURT or tribunal
clothed with JUDICIAL POWER to
hear and determine the matter
before it.
2. JURISDICTION must be lawfully
acquired over the person or subject
matter.
JUDGMENT must be rendered upon
a lawful hearing.
4. The defendant must be given
NOTICE and an OPPORTUNITY to be
HEARD.
CODE: HIP DESK
1. The RIGHT TO A HEARING, which
includes the right to present ones
case and submit evidence in
support thereof.
2. The tribunal or body or any of its
judges must act on its or his own
INDEPENDENT CONSIDERATION of
the law and facts of the
controversy, and not simply accept
the views of a subordinate in
arriving at a decision.
3. The decision must be based on the
EVIDENCE PRESENTED at the
hearing or at least contained in the
record and disclosed to the parties
affected.
4. The
DECISION
must
have
something to support itself.
5. The tribunal must CONSIDER THE
EVIDENCE presented.
6. Evidence supporting the conclusion
must be SUBSTANTIAL.
7. The board or body should, in all
controversial questions, render its
decision in such a manner that the
parties to the proceeding can
KNOW the various ISSUES involved
and the REASONS for the decision
rendered
3.
Administrative
and
QuasiJudicial
Proceed
-ings
What is required is not actual hearing,

but a real opportunity to be heard.
The requirement of due process can be
satisfied by subsequent due hearing.
Notice and hearing are required in
judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings,
but not in the promulgation of general
rule.
While the NTC may fix a temporary rate
pending final determination of the
application of petitioner, such ratefixing order, temporary though it may
be, is not exempt from the statutory
procedural requirements of notice and
hearing, as well as the requirement of
Page 64 of 214
School
Discipli
-nary
Proceed
-ings
reasonableness.
CODE: PACE3
1. The penalty imposed must be
PROPORTIONATE to the offense.
2. The student shall have the right to
ANSWER the charges against him,
with the assistance of COUNSEL if
desired.
3. The student must be INFORMED in
WRITING of the nature and CAUSE
of any accusation against them.
4. The student has the right to be
INFORMED of the EVIDENCE against
him.
5. The student has the right to
ADDUCE EVIDENCE in his own
behalf.
6. The EVIDENCE must be DULY
CONSIDERED by the investigating
committee or official designated by
the school authorities to hear and
decide the case.
Proceedings in student disciplinary
cases may be summary; crossexamination is not essential.
The school has a contractual obligation
to afford its students a fair opportunity
to complete the course they seek to
pursue.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Serious breach of discipline
2. Failure to maintain the required
academic standard
Deportati
on
Proceedin
gs
CODE: GIN- HO
1. There should be a prior determination
by the Board of Commissioners of the
existence of the GROUND as charged
against the alien.
2. The alien should be INFORMED of the
specific grounds for deportation
3. A HEARING should be conducted
pursuant to the Rules of Procedure
presented by the CID Commissioner
4. ORDER based on the determination of
the CID commissioner
Extradition
Proceed
-ings
GRANTING OF BAIL - If bail can be

granted in deportation cases, there is no
justification why it should not also be
allowed in extradition cases. After all,
both are administrative proceedings
where the innocence or guilt of the
person detained is not in issue.
Government of Hong Kong v. Olalia Jr.
[G.R. No. 153675, April 19, 2007].
When Bail may be granted to a
prospective extradite:
1. Upon a clear and convincing
showing that he/she will not be a
FLIGHT RISK or a DANGER TO THE
COMMUNITY.
2. When
there
exist
SPECIAL,
HUMANITARIAN,
COMPELLING
CIRCUMSTANCES.
The cancellation of petitioners bail,
without prior notice and hearing, could
be considered a violation of petitioners
right to due process tantamount to
grave abuse of discretion. Rodriguez v.
Presiding Judge [G.R. No. 157977,
February 27, 2006].
The doctrine in Purganan states that a
possible extraditee is not entitled to
notice and hearing before the issuance
of a warrant of arrest, since notifying
him before his arrest only tips him of his
pending arrest. However, this is not
applicable insituations pending the
issuance of a warrant of arrest, not in a
cancellation of a bail that had been
issued after determination that the
extraditee is a no-flight risk.
2. PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS

a.
Procedural Due Process
The mode of procedure that government agencies must

follow in the enforcement and application of laws. It
contemplates NOTICE and OPPORTUNITY TO BE
HEARD before judgment is rendered affecting ones
person or property.
Procedural due process requires the employer to give
the employee two notices - first is the notice apprising
Page 65 of 214
him of the particular acts or omissions for which his

dismissal is sought, and, second is the subsequent
notice informing him of the employers decision to
dismiss him. Millares v. Philippine Long Distance
Telephone Co. Inc., [458 SCRA 102, May 6, 2005].
Adversarial proceeding becomes necessary only when
there is a need to propound searching questions to
unclear witnesses, a procedural right which the
employee must ask for. Where the dismissal of the
employee from service is due to dishonesty or for a just
cause but due process was not observed as no hearing
was conducted despite her request, the employer
should be held liable for indemnity in the form of
nominal damages. Lavador v. J Marketing
Corporation, [461 SCRA 497, June 28, 2005].
3 copies of every administrative issuance should be
filed in the Office of the National Administrative
Register (ONAR) of the UP Law Center. Non-compliance
makes it invalid and may not be enforced. This
requirement is put into place as a guarantee to the
constitutional right to due process. Republic v. Pilipinas
Shell [G.R. No. 173918, April 8, 2008].
INSTANCES WHEN HEARINGS ARE NOT NECESSARY:
1. When administrative agencies are exercising their
QUASI-LEGISLATIVE functions
2. When administrative agencies are exercising their
QUASI-JUDICIAL functions if TEMPORARY pending
HEARING.
3. Abatement of NUISANCE PER SE
4. Granting by courts of PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
5. Cases of PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION
6. Removal of TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES in the
government
7. Issuance of warrants of DISTRAINT and/or LEVY by
the BIR Commissioner.
8. Cancellation of the PASSPORT of a person charged
with a crime.
9. Suspension of a BANKS OPERATIONS by the
Monetary Board upon a prima facie finding of
liquidity problems in such bank.
PUBLICITY AND TV COVERAGE - The right of an accused
to a fair trial is not incompatible to a free press.
Pervasive publicity is not per se prejudicial to the right
of an accused to fair trial. The mere fact that the trial of
appellant was given a day-to-day, gavel-to-gavel
coverage does not by itself prove that the publicity so
permeated the mind of the trial judge and impaired his
impartiality. People vs. Claudio Teehankee, Jr. [G.R.
Nos. 111206-08, Oct. 6, 1995].
b.
Substantive Due Process
REQUISITES:
1. The INTERESTS of the PUBLIC generally, as
distinguished from those of a particular class,
requires the interference by the government
(Lawful Subject)
2. The means employed are REASONABLY NECESSARY
for the accomplishment of the purpose and NOT
UNDULY OPPRESSIVE upon individuals. (Lawful
Means)
REQUISITES OF A VALID ORDINANCE:
7. Must not CONTRAVENE the Constitution or any
statute
8. Must not be UNFAIR or oppressive
9. Must not be PARTIAL or discriminatory
policy
3. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY DUE PROCESS
What is often said about statutory due process is a
procedure created by law which upholds the
constitutional right of a person to due process.
The case of Timber Co. v. Ababon, a labor case, is
illustrative - Although the closure was done in good
faith and for valid reasons, we find that ITC did not
comply with the notice requirement. While an
employer is under no obligation to conduct hearings
before effecting termination of employment due to
authorized cause, however, the law requires that it
must notify the DOLE and its employees at least one
month before the intended date of closure. In light of
the factual circumstances of the cases at bar, we deem
it wise and reasonable to award P50,000.00 to each
employee as nominal damages. Timber Co. v Ababnon
[G. R. 164518, January 25, 2006].
In criminal cases, the matter of a preliminary
investigation is worth discussing The purpose of a
preliminary investigation is to secure the innocent
against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecution,
and to protect him from an open and public accusation
of crime, from the trouble, expense and anxiety of a
public trial, and also to protect the state from useless
and expensive trials. The right to a preliminary
investigation is a statutory grant, and to withhold it
would be to transgress constitutional due process.
However, in order to satisfy the due process clause it is
Page 66 of 214
not enough that the preliminary investigation is

conducted in the sense of making sure that a
transgressor shall not escape with impunity. A
preliminary investigation serves not only the purposes
of the State. More important, it is a part of the
guarantees of freedom and fair play which are
birthrights of all who live in our country. It is, therefore,
imperative upon the fiscal or the judge as the case may
be, to relieve the accused from the pain of going
through a trial once it is ascertained that the evidence
is insufficient to sustain a prima facie case or that no
probable cause exists to form a sufficient belief as to
the guilt of the accused. Salonga v. Panon [G.R. No.
59524, February 18, 1985].
most liberal test. This is often used to all subjects

other than those listed above.
To overcome the presumption of constitutionality, it
must be demonstrated explicitly that the classification
is hostile and oppressive discrimination against
particular persons and classes and that there is no
conceivable basis which might support it.
6. VOID FOR VAGUENESS DOCTRINE

VOID FOR VAGUENESS DOCTRINE - A law is vague
when it lacks COMPREHENSIBLE STANDARDS such that
men of common intelligence must necessarily GUESS as
to its meaning and differ as to its application.
4. HIERARCHY OF RIGHTS
NOTE: A vague law is UNCONSTITUTIONAL because:
HIERARCHY OF RIGHTS - While the Bill of Rights also
protects property rights, the primacy of human rights
over property rights is recognized. Property and
property rights can be lost thru prescription; but
human rights are imprescriptible. The superiority of
these freedoms over property rights is underscored by
the fact that a mere reasonable or rational relation
between the means employed by the law and its
object or purpose that the law is neither arbitrary
nor discriminatory nor oppressive would suffice to
validate a law which restricts or impairs property rights.
5. JUDICIAL STANDARD FOR REVIEW

The equality guaranteed by the Equal Protection Clause
is not a disembodied equality. It recognized that
inherent in the right to legislate is the right to classify.
The problem is one of determining the validity of the
classification made by law. Jurisprudence has
developed three kinds of test depending on the subject
matter involved.
1.
2.
3.
Strict scrutiny test - compelling state interest and

the classification is necessary to serve that
interest. Applied traditionally to suspect
classifications like gender or illegitimacy.
Intermediate scrutiny test - classification is at least
substantially related to serving that interest. Often
used in cases involving classification based on race,
national origin, religion, alienage, denial of the
right to vote, interstate migration, access to courts
and other rights recognized as fundamental.
Rational basis test - classification is rationally
related to serving a legitimate state interest. The
It VIOLATES DUE PROCESS for failure to accord

persons fair notice of the conduct to avoid.
Law enforcers have UNBRIDLED DISCRETION

in carrying out its provisions.
a.
Overbreadth Doctrine
OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE - A government purpose

may not be achieved by means which sweep
unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade the area of
protected freedoms.
In sum, the doctrines of strict scrutiny, overbreadth and
vagueness are analytical tools developed for testing on
their faces statutes in free speech cases. They cannot
be made to do service when what is involved is a
criminal statute. Estrada v. Sandiganbayan. [G.R. No.
148560, Nov. 19, 2001].
VOID FOR VAGUENESS v. OVERBREADTH
1.
2.
Vagueness and overbreadth are distinct from each

other; a vague law must lack clarity and precision,
while an overbroad law need not.
Overbreadth as an analytical tool is applicable only
to cases involving speech.
Void for Vagueness
statute or act
Overbreadth
gov't regulation of free
speech
lacks comprehensible
standards
Means
sweep unnecessarily broadly
people guess its

meaning; differ in
Not necessarily unclear
Page 67 of 214
application
Violates due process;
encourages discretion
Invades protected freedoms
Unconstitutional
FACIAL INVALIDATION is an examination of the entire

law, pinpointing its flaws and defects, not only on the
basis of its actual operation to the parties, but also on
the assumption or prediction that its very existence
may cause others not before the court to refrain from
constitutionally
protected
speech
or
activities. Southern
Hemisphere
Engagement
Network, Inc., et al. v. Anti-Terrorism Council,
et al.; KMU, et al. v. Hon. Eduardo Ermita, et
al. [G.R. Nos. 178552, 178554, Oct. 5, 2010].
==========================================

VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
D. Equal protection
1. Concept
2. Requisites for valid classification
c) Intermediate Scrutiny Test
=======================================
D.EQUAL PROTECTION
7. CONCEPT
EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE - Guarantees equality of
all persons before the law. It does not demand absolute
equality. It merely requires that all persons shall be
treated alike, under like circumstances and conditions
both as to privileges conferred and liabilities enforced.
2. REQUISITES FOR VALID CLASSIFICATION
People v. Cayat, [68 PHIL 12, May 5, 1939].
CODE: GEES
1. Be GERMANE to the purposes of the law
2. NOT limited to EXISTING CONDITIONS only
3. Applied EQUALLY to all members of the same class.
4. Rest on SUBSTANTIAL distinctions
The classification freeze provision does not violate the
equal protection and uniformity of taxation. Even
though it failed to promote fair competition among the
players in the industry, the classification freeze
provision was not precipitated by a veiled attempt or

hostile attitude on the part of Congress to unduly favor
older brands. Since the provision was done in good
faith and is germane to the purpose of the law, the
Court cannot declare it unconstitutional nor question
its wisdom. British American Tobacco v. Camacho,
[G.R. No. 163583, Apr. 15, 2009].
The rational basis test was properly applied to gauge
the constitutionality of the assailed law in the face of
an equal protection challenge. Under the rational basis
test, it is sufficient that the legislative classification is
rationally related to achieving some legitimate State
interest. British American Tobacco v. Camacho [G.R.
No. 163583, April 15, 2009].
A differentiated rule of computation of the money
claims of illegally dismissed OFWs based on their
employment periods violates the Equal Protection
Clause because one category is singled out which
includes those whose contracts have an unexpired
portion of one year or more and have their monetary
awards limited to their salaries for 3 months or for the
unexpired portion, whichever is less. Imbued with the
same sense of obligation to afford protection to
labor, the Court in the present case also employs the
standard of strict judicial scrutiny, for it perceives in the
subject clause a suspect classification prejudicial to
OFWs. Serrano v. Gallant Maritime Service [G.R. No.
167614, March 24, 2009].
The Cityhood laws were constitutional. Based on the
deliberations by Congress on R.A. No. 9009, Congress
intended that those with pending cityhood bills during
the 11th Congress would not be covered by the new and
higher income requirement of P100 million imposed by
R.A. No. 9009. The exemption clauses found in the
individual Cityhood Laws are the express articulation of
that intent to exempt respondent municipalities from
the coverage of R.A. No. 9009. Such Cityhood Laws are,
therefore, also amendments to the LGC itself. In the
enactment of the Cityhood Laws, Congress merely took
the 16 municipalities covered thereby from the
disadvantaged position brought about by the abrupt
increase in the income requirement (from 20 million to
100 million) of R.A. No. 9009, acknowledging the
privilege that they have already given to those newlyconverted component cities, which prior to the
enactment of R.A. No. 9009, were undeniably in the
same footing or class as the respondent
municipalities. But in effect, the Cityhood Laws granted
to 33 municipalities amended R.A. No. 9009 through
the exemption clauses found therein. League of
Cities of the Phil. etc., et al. v. COMELEC, et al.;
Page 68 of 214
League of Cities of the Phil. etc., et al. v.

COMELEC, et al.; League of Cities of the Phil.
etc., et al. v. COMELEC, et al., [G.R. No.
176951;G.R. No. 177499;G.R. No. 178056, Feb.
15, 2011].
RELATIVE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY DOCTRINE: A
statute valid at one time may become void at another
time because of altered circumstances. Thus, if a
statute in its practical operation becomes arbitrary or
confiscatory, its validity, even though affirmed by a
former adjudication, is open to inquiry and
investigation in the light of changed conditions. Central
Bank Employees Association, Inc. v. Bangko Sentral ng
Pilipinas, [G.R. No. 148208, Dec. 15, 2004].
2. STANDARDS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW

LEVELS
OF
COURT
REVIEW
ON
THE
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A CLASSIFICATION IMBUED IN
A STATUTE
1. DEFERENTIAL/ RATIONAL BASIS SCRUTINY - The
challenged classification needs only be shown to
be rationally related to serving a legitimate state
interest
2. MIDDLE TIER/ INTERMEDIATE SCRUTINY- The
government must show that the challenged
classification serves an important state interest
and that the classification is at least substantially
related to serving that interest
3. STRICT JUDICIAL SCRUTINY - A legislative
classification which impermissibly interferes with
the exercise of a fundamental right or operates to
the peculiar disadvantage of a suspect class is
presumed unconstitutional, and the burden is
upon the government to prove that the
classification is necessary to achieve a compelling
state interest and that it is the least restrictive
means to protect such interest.
=======================================
E. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
1. CONCEPT
The right of the people to be secure in their persons,
houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable
searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any
purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or
warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable
cause to be determined personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation of the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and the
person or things to be seized.
SEARCH WARRANT
WARRANT OF ARREST
The Applicant must

show that the items
sought are in fact
1. seizable by
virtue of being
connected with
criminal activity
2. will be found in
the place to be
searched
The judge must
personally examine in
the form of
SEARCHING
QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS the
complainant and the
witnesses he may
produce on facts
personally known to
them.
The Applicant must show

1. Probable cause that an
offense has been
committed and
2. the person to be
arrested has committed
it
==========================================

VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
1. Concept
i) Requisites
6. Drug, alcohol and blood tests
Prescribes in 10 days
The judge is not required to

personally examine the
complainant and his
witnesses. Instead, he may
opt to personally evaluate the
report and supporting
documents submitted by the
prosecutor or he may
disregard the prosecutors
report and require the
submission of supporting
affidavits of witnesses. What
the Constitution underscores
is the exclusive and personal
responsibility of the issuing
judge to satisfy himself of the
existence of probable cause.
Soliven v. Makasiar [167
SCRA 394, November 14,
1988].
Until served
SEARCHES AND SEIZURES

GENERAL RULE: Search and seizures are unreasonable
EXCEPTION: Authorized by a validly issued search
warrant
Page 69 of 214
WITH A VALID
WARRANT
CODE: JPEPO
1. The existence of
probable cause is
determined
personally by the
JUDGE.
2. It must be issued
upon PROBABLE
CAUSE.
3. The judge must
EXAMINE UNDER
OATH
the
complainant and
the witnesses he
may produce.
4. The warrant must
PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBE
the
place
to
be
searched
and
person or things
to be seized.
5. It must be in
connection with
ONE
SPECIFIC
offense.
WITHOUT A WARRANT
CODE: WIPE MS CAC
1. WAIVER OF RIGHT
2. INCIDENTAL TO A LAWFUL
ARREST
3. PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE
4. DURING EXIGENT AND
EMERGENCY SITUATIONS
5. MOVING VEHICLE
6. STOP AND FRISK RULE
7. SEIZURE
OF
GOODS
CONCEALED TO AVOID
CUSTOMS DUTIES
8. AIRPORT SEARCHES
9. CHECKPOINTS
10. WARRANTLESS SEARCH BY
A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL
NOTE: The Commissioner of
Immigration may order the
ARREST of an alien in order to
carry out a FINAL DEPORTATION
order.
2. WARRANT REQUIREMENT
SEARCHES WITH A WARRANT
PROBABLE CAUSE - Refers to such facts and
circumstances, which would lead a reasonably discreet
and prudent man to believe that an offense has been
committed by the person sought to be arrested
(warrant of arrest) or that the objects sought in
connection with the offense are in the place to be
searched (search warrant).
NOTE:
1. The warrant must PARTICULARLY DESCRIBE the
place to be searched and person or things to be
seized.
2. A search warrant may be said to particularly
describe the things to be seized when the
description therein is as specific as the
circumstances will ordinarily allow or when the
description expresses a conclusion of fact not of
law by which the warrant officer may be guided
in making the search and seizure or when the
things described are limited to those which bear a
3.
4.
direct relation to the offense for which the warrant

is being issued. Bache and Co. v. Ruiz [37 SCRA
823, February 27, 1971].
The test of sufficiency of an affidavit for a search
warrant is whether it has been drawn in such a
manner that perjury could be charged thereon and
the affiant could be held liable for the damages
caused. Alvarez v. CFI [64 Phil. 33, January 29,
1937].
The offense of illegal possession of firearms is
malum prohibitum but it does not follow that the
subject thereof is necessarily illegal per se. Motive
is immaterial in mala prohibita but the subjects of
this kind of offense may not be summarily seized
simply because they are prohibited. A search
warrant is still necessary.
No search of a house, room or any other premise shall

be made except in the presence of the lawful
occupant thereof or any member of his family or in
the absence of the latter, in the presence of two (2)
witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in
the same locality. This requirement is mandatory to
ensure regularity in the execution of the search
warrant. The Rules of Court clearly and explicitly
establishes a hierarchy among the witnesses in whose
presence the search of the premises must be
conducted. Thus, Section 8, Rule 126 provides that the
search should be witnessed by two witnesses of
sufficient age and discretion residing in the same
locality only in the absence of either the lawful
occupant of the premises or any member of his family.
People v. Go [G.R. No. 144639, Sept. 12, 2003].
Section 2, Article III of the 1987 Constitution requires
that a search warrant should particularly describe the
things to be seized. The evident purpose and intent of
the requirement is to limit the things to be seized to
those, and only those, particularly described in the
search warrant to leave the officers of the law with
no discretion regarding what articles they should
seize, to the end that unreasonable searches and
seizures may not be made and that abuses may not be
committed. People v. Go [G.R. No. 144639, Sept. 12,
2003].
3. VALID WARRANTLESS SEARCH

1.
WAIVER OF RIGHT
REQUISITES:
1. The right exists
2. The person had actual or constructive
knowledge of the existence of such right
Page 70 of 214
3.
There is an actual intention to relinquish such

right
NOTE: The right against unreasonable searches and

seizures is a personal right. Thus, only the person being
searched can waive the same. Waiver requires a
positive act from the person. Mere absence of
opposition is not a waiver.
2.
INCIDENTAL TO A LAWFUL ARREST
General Rule: The arrest must precede that search; the

process cannot be reversed.
Exception: A search substantially contemporaneous
with an arrest can precede the arrest if the police have
probable cause to make the arrest at the outset of the
search. People of the Philippines v. Belen
Mariacos, [G.R. No. 188611, June 16, 2010].
The search must be SIMULTANEOUS with the arrest
and it may only be made in the area within the
IMMEDIATE CONTROL of the person arrested.
An officer making an arrest MAY TAKE from the
person:
1. Any money or property found upon his person
which was used in the commission of the
offense or
2. Was the fruit thereof or
3. Which might furnish the prisoner with the
means of committing violence or escaping or
4. Which may be used in evidence in the trial of
the case
3.
PLAIN VIEW DOCTRINE

REQUISITES: (VIAJ)
1. There was a prior valid intrusion
2. The evidence was inadvertently discovered
3. The evidence is immediately apparent
4. Plain view is justified seizure without further
search
The immediate requirement means that the executing

officer can, at any time of discovery of the object or the
facts therein available to him, determine probable
cause of the objects incriminating evidence. Probable
cause must be the direct result of the officers
instantaneous sensory perception of the object. The
immediately apparent test does not require an unduly
high degree of certainty as to the incriminating
character of the evidence. United Laboratories, Inc. v.
Isip [461 SCRA 574, June 28, 2005].
The seizure of the passports, bankbooks, checks,

typewriter, check writer, dry seals and stamp pads and
other assorted documents does not fall within the
plain view exception. The assertions of the police
officers that said objects were inadvertently seized
within their plain view are mere legal conclusions
which are not supported by any clear narration of the
factual circumstances leading to their discovery. The
supposed illegal character of the items claimed to have
been seized within the plain view of the policemen
was not readily and immediately apparent. Rather, the
suspicions of the policemen appear to have been
aroused by the presence of the numerous passports
and immigration documents which they discovered in
the course of their search. People v. Go [G.R. No.
144639, Sept. 12, 2003].
4.
DURING EXIGENT AND EMERGENCY SITUATIONS

E.g. war, prevailing chaos, disorder or ongoing
coupd etat.
5.
MOVING VEHICLE
NOTE:
1. This exception is based on exigency. If there is
TIME to obtain a warrant in order to search the
vehicle, a warrant must first be OBTAINED.
2. According to the Carroll rule, a warrantless search
of a vehicle that can be quickly moved out of the
locality or jurisdiction is valid.
A confidential informer tipped the police that a Gemini
car was going to deliver shabu. When they stopped the
car, they saw a gun tucked in Tuazons waist. He did not
have any documents which strengthened the polices
suspicion. After he was told to step out of the car, they
found plastic sachets containing shabu on the drivers
seat. These circumstances are sufficient to establish
probable cause for the warrantless search of the car.
Hence, the sachets of shabu may be admitted as
evidence. People v. Tuazon [G.R. No. 175783, Sept. 3,
2007].
6.
STOP AND FRISK RULE

REQUISITES: URIRA
1. Police Officer observes unusual conduct
2. Reasonable Suspicion that person is engaged
in some type of criminal activity
3. Identifies himself as a policeman upon
approach
4. Makes reasonable inquiries
5. There is reasonable fear for ones own, or
others safety. Thus, he is entitled to conduct
Page 71 of 214
a limited search of the outer clothing of such

persons in an attempt to discover weapons
that might be used for assault
The rule that searches and seizures must be

supported by a valid warrant of arrest is not an
absolute rule. What is prohibited are
unreasonable searches and seizures. Thus, a
search made incidental to an arrest is not
prohibited. The purpose of this exception is to
protect the arresting officer against physical harm
from the person who is being arrested who might
be armed with a concealed weapon and also to
prevent the person arrested from destroying
evidence within his reach. Moreno v. Ago Chi,
[G.R. No. L-4680, Jan. 9, 1909]..
NOTE: Even before an arrest, an officer justified in

believing that the individual whose suspicious behavior
he is investigating at close range is presently
dangerous, he may conduct a LIMITED PROTECTIVE
SEARCH. The purpose of this limited search is not to
discover evidence of a crime but to allow the officer to
pursue his investigation WITHOUT RISK OF VIOLENCE.
7.
SEIZURE OF GOODS CONCEALED TO AVOID

CUSTOMS DUTIES
NOTE: Includes searches at borders and ports of entry.

An exception to this exception is the search of a
dwelling house.
8.
AIRPORT SEARCHES:
This search was made pursuant to routine airport

security procedure, which is allowed under Section 9 of
Republic Act No. 6235 reading as follows: SEC. 9. Every
ticket issued to a passenger by the airline or air carrier
concerned shall contain among others the following
condition printed thereon: Holder hereof and his handcarried luggage(s) are subject to search for, and seizure
of, prohibited materials or substances. Holder refusing
to be searched shall not be allowed to board the
aircraft, which shall constitute a part of the contract
between the passenger and the air carrier.
To limit the action of the airport security personnel to
simply refusing her entry into the aircraft and sending
her home, and thereby depriving them of the ability
and facility to act accordingly, including to further
search without warrant, in light of such circumstances,
would be to sanction impotence and ineffectivity in law
enforcement, to the detriment of society. Thus, the
strip search in the ladies room was justified under the
circumstances. People v. Canton [G.R. No. 148825,
December 27, 2002].
9.
1.
CHECKPOINTS:
CODE: No body LAV
1. Passengers NOT subjected to BODY search
2. Limited to visual search
3. Abnormal times
4. Vehicle not searched
10. WARRANTLESS
INDIVIDUAL
SEARCHES
BY
2.
3.
4.
5.
Arrest with
Warrant
The existence of 1.
probable cause is
determined
personally by the
JUDGE.
It must be issued
upon
PROBABLE
CAUSE.
The judge must 2.
EXAMINE
UNDER
OATH
the
complainant and the
witnesses he may
produce.
The warrant must
PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBE the person
to be arrested.
It must be in
connection with ONE
SPECIFIC offense.
3.
Warrantless
Arrests
When the person to be
arrested
has
COMMITTED, is actually
COMMITTING, or is
ABOUT TO COMMIT an
offense
in
the
PRESENCE
of
the
arresting officer.
When an offense has in
fact
just
been
committed and the
arresting officer has
probable
cause
to
believe
based
on
PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE
of
facts
and
circumstances
indicating that the
person to be arrested
has committed it.
When the person to be
arrested is a PRISONER
who has escaped.
If the search is made at the behest or initiative of the

proprietor of a private establishment for its own and
private purposes, and without the intervention of
police authorities, the right against unreasonable
search and seizure cannot be invoked for only the act of
private individual, not the law enforcers, is involved. In
sum, the protection against unreasonable searches and
seizures cannot be extended to acts committed by
private individuals so as to bring it within the ambit of
alleged unlawful intrusion by the government. People
v. Marti, [G.R. No.81561, January 18, 1991].
PRIVATE
4. WARRANTLESS ARRESTS
Page 72 of 214
VALID WARRANTLESS ARRESTS

NOTE: A person who is detained applies for BAIL, he is
deemed to have WAIVED any irregularity that may have
occurred in relation to his arrest. However, when a
person who is detained applies for bail, BEFORE he
enters his PLEA, he is not barred from later questioning
the legality of his arrest.
HOT PURSUIT - The pursuit of the offender by the
arresting officer must be CONTINUOUS from the time
of the commission of the offense to the time of the
arrest. There must be NO SUPERVENING EVENT which
breaks the continuity of the chase.
STOP AND FRISK - When a policeman observes
SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY, which leads him to believe that a
crime is about to be committed, he can investigate the
suspicious looking person and may frisk him for
weapons as a measure of SELF-PROTECTION. Should he
find, however, a weapon on the suspect, which is
unlicensed, he can ARREST such person for having
committed an offense IN HIS PRESENCE.
GENERAL WARRANT - Does not allege any specific acts
or omissions constituting the offense charged in the
application for the issuance of the warrant. It
contravenes the requisite that the things to be seized
be particularly described. Void.
JOHN DOE WARRANT - This warrant can satisfy the
requirement of particularity of description if it contains
a descriptio personae such as will enable the officer to
identify the accused.
DOCTRINE OF THE WAIVER OF RIGHTS - The
constitutional immunity from unreasonable searches
and seizures, being a personal one, cannot be waived
by anyone except the person whose rights are invaded
or one who is expressly authorized to do so in his or her
behalf.
5. ADMINISTRATIVE ARREST
ADMINISTRATIVE ARRESTS - Deportation proceedings Section 37 of the Immigration Law, empowers the
Commissioner of Immigration to issue warrants for the
arrest of overstaying aliens is constitutional. The arrest
is a stop preliminary to the deportation of the aliens
who had violated the condition of their stay in this
country. The requirement of probable cause, to be
determined by a Judge, does not extend to deportation
proceedings." There need be no "truncated" recourse
to both judicial and administrative warrants in a single

deportation proceeding. Harvey v. Miriam Defensor
Santiago, [G.R. No. 82544, June 28, 1988].
2.
DRUG, ALCOHOL AND BLOOD TEST
DRUG, ALCOHOL AND BLOOD TEST - The Court

acknowledged that compelled urinalysis was a form of
search but its reasonableness must be judged by
balancing the intrusion on the individuals interests
against the promotion of legitimate government
interests. What was essential was the schools custodial
responsibility and authority, the nature of the intrusion,
the confidentiality of the test results and the legitimate
government interest. See Vernonia School District v.
Acton as well as Board of Educations v. Earls.
The Philippine courts followed the ruling in Vernonia
when it decided a Philippine case involving the
mandatory drug testing of candidates for public office,
students of secondary and tertiary schools, officers and
employees of public and private offices, and persons
charged before the prosecutors office with certain
offenses. Except for testing candidates for public office
(which was ruled unconstitutional because it added to
the exclusive qualifications for such offices prescribed
by the Constitution) the court ruled that the
requirement was reasonable. Social Justice Society v.
Dangerous Drugs Board, [G.R. Nos. 157870, 158633,
161658, Nov. 3, 2008].
=======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
F. Privacy of communications and
correspondence
1. Private and public communications
=======================================
F.
PRIVACY
OF
CORRESPONDENCE
COMMUNICATIONS
AND
1. PRIVATE AND PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS

(1) The privacy of communication and correspondence
shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the
court, or when public safety or order requires
otherwise as prescribed by law.
Page 73 of 214
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the

preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose
in any proceedings.
2. INTRUSION, WHEN ALLOWED

R.A. 4200 (ANTI-WIRETAPPING ACT)
1. Only protects letters, messages, telephone calls,
telegrams and the like.
2. The substance of the conversation need not be
specifically alleged in the information.
3. Under Section 3 of R.A. 4200, a peace officer, who
is authorized by a written order of the Court,
may execute any of the acts declared to be unlawful in
the said law in cases involving the crimes of:
a. Treason
b. Espionage
c. Provoking war and disloyalty in case of war
d. Piracy and mutiny in the high seas
e. Rebellion (conspiracy and proposal to commit;
inciting to commit)
f. Sedition (conspiracy to commit and inciting to
commit)
g. Kidnapping
h. Violations of C.A. No. 616 (punishing
espionage and other offenses against national
security)
4. The Hello Garci tape is a taped conversation
conducted through cellular phones. The wording of the
prohibition is relative to tapping any wire or cable.
Cellular technology does away with both wires and
cables. Thus, R.A. 4200 is inapplicable (Prof. Harry
Roque of U.P. Law).
5. R.A. 4200 does not distinguish between a party to
the private communication or a third person. Hence,
both could be held liable under R.A. 4200 if they
commit any of the prohibited acts under R.A. 4200.
Ramirez v. CA [G.R. No. 93833,September 28, 1995].
6. The use of a telephone extension to overhear a
private conversation is not a violation of R.A. 4200
because it is not similar to any of the prohibited devices
under the law. Also, a telephone extension is not
purposely installed for the purpose of secretly
intercepting or recording private communication.
Gaanan v. IAC [145 SCRA 112, October 16, 1986].
EXCLUSIONARY RULE - Any evidence obtained shall be
INADMISSIBLE for any purpose in any proceeding.
However, in the absence of governmental interference,
the protection against unreasonable search and seizure
cannot be extended to acts committed by private
individuals.
THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA [A.M. No. 08-1-16-SC] - A

remedy available to any person whose right to privacy
in life, liberty or security is violated or threatened by an
unlawful act or omission of a public official or
employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged
in the gathering, collecting or storing of data or
information regarding the person, family, home and
correspondence of the aggrieved party.
Who may file:
1. Person whose right to privacy is threatened
2. in case of extrajudicial disappearance/killings:
i. spouse, children and parents
ii. Any ascendant, descendant or collateral relative
of the aggrieved party within the fourth civil
degree of consanguinity or affinity
Where to file:
1. Residence of petitioner
2. Place where the data is gathered or stored
3. In case of actions involving PUBLIC DATA of
government offices:
i. Supreme Court
ii. Court of Appeals
iii. Sandiganbayan
Contents of the petition:
1. The personal circumstances of the petitioner and the
respondent;
2. The manner the right to privacy is violated or
threatened and how it affects the right to life, liberty or
security of the aggrieved party;
3. The actions and recourses taken by the petitioner to
secure the data or information;
4. The location of the files registers or databases, the
government office, and the person in charge, in
possession or in control of the data or information, if
known;
5. The reliefs prayed for, which may include the
updating, rectification, suppression or destruction of
the database or information or files kept by the
respondent. In case of threats, the relief may include a
prayer for an order enjoining the act complained of;
and
6. Such other relevant reliefs as are just and equitable.
The Court shall immediately order the issuance of the
writ if on its face it ought to issue. The clerk of court
shall issue the writ under the seal of the court and
served within three (3) days from its issuance.
3. WRIT OF HABEAS DATA
Page 74 of 214
In case of urgent necessity, the justice or judge may

issue the writ under his or her own hand, and may
deputize any officer or person to serve it.
Date and time for SUMMARY HEARING - not be later
than ten (10) working days from the date of its
issuance.
It bears reiteration that like the writ of amparo, habeas
data was conceived as a response, given the lack of
effective and available remedies, to address the
extraordinary rise in the number of killings and
enforced disappearances. Its intent is to address
violations of or threats to the rights to life, liberty or
security as a remedy independently from those
provided
under
prevailing
Rules.
Writs
of amparo and habeas data will NOT issue to protect
purely property or commercial concerns nor when the
grounds invoked in support of the petitions therefor
are vague or doubtful. Employment constitutes a
property right under the context of the due process
clause of the Constitution. It is evident that
respondents reservations on the real reasons for her
transfer - a legitimate concern respecting the terms and
conditions of ones employment - are what prompted
her to adopt the extraordinary remedy of habeas
data. Manila Electric Company v. Lim [GR No. 184679,
October 5, 2010].
=======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
a) Prior restraint (censorship)
b) Subsequent punishment
2. Content-based and content-neutral
regulations
a) Tests
b) Applications
3. Facial challenges and the
overbreadth doctrine
4. Tests
5. State regulation of different types of
mass media
7. Private vs. Government speech
8. Hecklers veto
=======================================
1. CONCEPT AND SCOPE

No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of
speech, of expression, or of the press, or of the right of
the people peaceably to assemble and petition the
government for redress of grievances.
FREEDOM OF SPEECH - Formulated primarily for the
protection of core speech. These enjoy the same
degree of protection. Commercial speech, however,
does not.
GOVERNMENT REGULATION IS JUSTIFIED:
1. It is within the constitutional power of the
government
2. It furthers a substantial government interest
3. The governmental interest is unrelated to the
suppression of free expression
4. The incidental restriction is no greater than essential
to the furtherance of the interest.
Applicable to both core and commercial speech.
PROHIBITIONS UNDER SEC. 4
a. Prior restraint
PRIOR RESTRAINT - Official governmental restrictions
on the press or other forms of expression in advance of
actual publication or dissemination.
e.g. movie censorship and injunction against
publication
The prohibition does not apply:
a. When the nation is at war.
e.g. The government can prevent publication
about the number or location of its troops
b. Obscene publications
c. Security of community life may be protected
against incitements to acts of violence or
overthrow by force of orderly government.
b. Subsequent punishment
The free speech and press clause also prohibits systems
of subsequent punishment which have the effect of
unduly curtailing expression. For, indeed, if prior
restraint were all that the constitutional guarantee
prohibited and government could impose subsequent
punishment without restraint, freedom of expression
would be a mockery and a delusion.
G. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
Page 75 of 214
2. CONTENT-BASED AND CONTENT-NEUTRAL

REGULATIONS
merely a summary of the petition. GMA Network v.

Bustos [G.R. No. 146848, October 17, 2006].
CONTENT BASED REGULATION - the restriction is based

on the subject matter of the utterance or
speech. Content-based laws are generally treated as
more suspect than content-neutral laws because of
judicial concern with discrimination in the regulation of
expression.
OPINIONS - With respect to public personalities

(politicians, actors, anyone with a connection to a
newsworthy event), opinions can be aired regarding
their public actuations.
CONTENT-NEUTRAL REGULATIONS - merely concerned

with the incidents of the speech, or one that merely
controls the time, place or manner, and under well
defined standard. Content-neutral regulations of
speech or of conduct that may amount to speech, are
subject to lesser but still heightened scrutiny.
The Court is of the position that the actions of the
respondents warrant heightened or strict scrutiny from
the Court, the test which we have deemed appropriate
in assessing content-based restrictions on free speech,
as well as for laws dealing with freedom of the mind or
restricting the political process, of laws dealing with the
regulation of speech, gender, or race as well as other
fundamental rights as expansion from its earlier
applications to equal protection. The immediate
implication of the application of the "strict scrutiny"
test is that the burden falls upon respondents as agents
of government to prove that their actions do not
infringe upon petitioners constitutional rights. As
content regulation cannot be done in the absence of
any compelling reason, the burden lies with the
government to establish such compelling reason to
infringe the right to free expression. Newsbound
Broadcasting Network v. Dy [G.R. Nos. 170270 &
179411, April 2, 2009].
FAIR COMMENTARIES - These are privileged and
constitute a valid defense in an action for libel or
slander. When the discreditable imputation is directed
against a public person in his public capacity, it is not
necessarily actionable. In order for it to be actionable, it
must either be a false allegation of fact or a comment
based on a false supposition.
If the comment is an expression of opinion based on
established facts, then it is immaterial that the opinion
happens to be mistaken, as long as it might reasonably
be inferred. The insertion of an old picketing footage in
a news report was not libelous because it did not
convey anything derogatory in nature, it was actually
simultaneously voiced over by the narration of the
news report. The report was also merely quoted from
the contents and allegations in the petition and is
Exception: Comments on their private lives, if not

germane to their public personality, are not protected.
PROTECTED SPEECH
UNPROTECTED SPEECH
Every form of
expression (oral,
written, tape or disc
recorded)
LIBEL - Every defamatory

imputation is presumed
malicious.
It includes motion
pictures as well as
what is known as
symbolic speech such
as the wearing of an
armband as a symbol
of protest. Peaceful
picketing has also
been included within
the meaning of
speech.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. A private communication
made by any person to
another in the performance
of any legal, moral or social
duty.
2. A fair and true report, made
in good faith, without any
comments or remarks
3.
FACIAL
CHALLENGES
OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE
AND
Prohibiting placing of campaign decals on private cars is

overbroad, and thus invalid prohibition Adiong v.
COMELEC [G.R. No. 103956, March 31, 1992].
Banning the publishing of survey results is also
overbroad because it does not meet the OBrien test,
since it suppresses one type of expression while
allowing others like editorials. SWS v. COMELEC [G.R.
No. 147571, May 5, 2001].
4. TESTS
TEST
Dangerous
Tendency
CRITERION
1. There should be a RATIONAL
CONNECTION between the speech and
the evil apprehended.
2. Focus on CONTENT
Page 76 of 214
Clear and
Present
Danger
Balancing
of Interests
1. The words when used under such

circumstances are of such a nature as to
create a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER
that they will bring about the
substantive evils that the STATE has a
RIGHT TO PREVENT
2. Focus on CONTENT & CONTEXT
1. The courts should BALANCE the
PUBLIC INTEREST served by legislation
and the FREEDOM OF SPEECH (or any
other constitutional right).
2. The courts will then decide where the
greater weight should be placed.
3. Focus on weighing Government and
Private interest
5. STATE REGULATION OVER DIFFERENT TYPES OF

MASS MEDIA
Cannot prohibit columnists from using their columns or
programs to campaign against or for a plebiscite choice,
since the authority given by the Constitution is over
holders of franchises and to give candidates equal
opportunity and equal access to media not restrain
free discussion. Sanidad v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 90879,
January 29, 1990].
Cannot ban exit polls because the evils envisioned are
merely speculative. ABS CBN v. COMELEC [G.R. No.
133486, January 28, 2000]
MTRCB has power to review both religious shows like
the INC program, as well as public affairs and
documentary programs like The Inside Story. MTRCB v.
ABS-CBN [G.R. No. 155282, January 17, 2005].
6. COMMERCIAL SPEECH
COMMERCIAL SPEECH
OBSCENITY
Communication which no
more than proposes a
commercial transaction.
TEST FOR OBSCENITY

(MILLER TEST):
1. Whether the average
person, applying
contemporary
community standards
would find that the
work, taken as a
whole, appeals to the
prurient interest
2. Whether the work
depicts or describes,
Commercial speech may

be protected:
1. It must not be false
or misleading; and
2. It should not propose
an illegal transaction.
Central Hudson Test: (to
regulate truthful and

lawful commercial
speech)
1.
Government
has
substantial interest to
protect
2. The regulation directly
advances the interest
3. It is not more extensive
than is necessary to
protect that interest.
3.
in a patently
offensive way, sexual
conduct, specifically
defined by law
Whether the work,
taken as a whole,
lacks serious literary,
artistic, political or
scientific value.
PROCEDURE FOR SEIZURE

1. Authorities must APPLY for issuance of search
warrant
2. Court must be convinced that the materials are
obscene (apply CLEAR and PRESENT DANGER test)
3. Judge DETERMINES whether they are obscene
4. Judge will ISSUE a search warrant
5. Proper action should be filed under Art. 201 of the
RPC (Immoral documents, obscene publications and
exhibitions, and indecent shows)
7. PRIVATE v. GOVERNMENT SPEECH

PRIVATE SPEECH
1. Concerns only private
individuals
in
their
personal and private
capacity
2. Can be content-based
speeches
2. Can ONLY be regulated
by
content-neutral
regulations and under due
process of law
GOVERNMENT SPEECH
1. Speech made by the
government.
2. Government need not
maintain
a
neutral
viewpoint in its own
speech;
may
make
content-based speeches
3.
Government
may
advance or restrict its own
speech in a manner that
would
clearly
be
forbidden
were
it
regulating the speech of a
private citizen.
8. HECKLERS VETO
HECKLERS VETO- It involves situations in which the
government attempts to ban protected speech because
it might provoke a violent response. The mere
possibility of a violent reaction to protected speech is
simply not a constitutional basis on which to restrict
the right to speak. Roe v. Crawford
Page 77 of 214
RIGHT OF ASSEMBLY AND PETITION

The standards for allowable impairment of speech and
press also apply to the right of assembly and petition
RULES ON ASSEMPLY IN PUBLIC PLACES
CODE: ICP DEO
1. Applicant should inform the licensing authority of the
date, the public place where and the time when the
assembly will take place.
2. The application should be filed ahead of time to
enable the public official concerned to appraise
whether there are valid objections to the grant of the
permit or to its grant, but in another public place. The
grant or refusal should be based on the application of
the Clear and Present danger test.
3. If the public authority is of the view that there is an
imminent and grave danger of a substantive evil, the
applicants must be heard on the matter.
4. The decision of the public authority, whether
favorable or adverse, must be transmitted to the
applicants at the earliest opportunity so that they may,
if they so desire, have recourse to the proper judicial
authority. Reyes v. Bagatsing [G.R. No. L-65366,
November 9, 1983].
RULE ON ASSEMBLY IN PRIVATE PROPERTIES - Only
the consent of the owner of the property or person
entitled to possession thereof is required.
B.P. 880 or the Public Assembly Act of 1985 - It sets
forth the requirements and procedure which are
necessary to regulate the time, place and manner of
public assemblies. It is a Content-Neutral legislation. It
refers to all kinds of public assemblies that would use
public places. The reference to lawful cause does not
make it content-based because assemblies really have
to be for lawful causes; otherwise they would not be
peaceable and entitled to protection.
The Calibrated Preemptive Response (CPR) - issued in
lieu of the Maximum Tolerance for the protection
and benefit of all rallyists and is independent of the
content of the expressions in the rally.
The existence of freedom parks is an essential part of
the laws system of regulation of the peoples exercise
of their right to peacefully assemble and petition. No
prior permit may be required for the exercise of such
right in any public park or plaza of a city or municipality
until that city or municipality shall have established or
designated such freedom parks. For without such
alternative forum, to deny the permit would in effect
be to deny the right. Advance notices should, however,

be given to the authorities to ensure proper
coordination and orderly proceeding.
The use of the term CPR should be discontinued, since
it does not mean anything other than the maximum
tolerance policy set forth in B.P. 880. Bayan v. Ermita
[G.R. No. 169838, April 25, 2006].
=======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
b) Acts permitted and not
permitted by the clause
c) Test
3. Tests
a) Clear and Present Danger
Test
b) Compelling State Interest
Test
c) Conscientious Objector Test
===========================================
H. FREEDOM OF RELIGION
No law shall be made respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The
free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and
worship, without discrimination or preference, shall
forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required
for the exercise of civil or political rights.
1. NON-ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE
2. FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE
NON-ESTABLISHMENT
CLAUSE 1. Does not depend
upon any showing of
direct governmental
compulsion. It is
violated by the
enactment of laws
which establish an
official religion
whether those laws
operate directly to
FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION

1. In order to show a violation
of this clause, the person
affected must show the
COERCIVE effect of the
legislation as it operates against
him in the practice of his
religion.
2. While the non-establishment
clause is absolute, the moment
Page 78 of 214
coerce non-observing
individuals or not.
such belief flows over into

action, it becomes subject to
government regulation.
Philippines, Inc. v. Office of the Secretary [G.R. No.

153888, July 9, 2003].
State sponsored Bible readings are invalid. School
District v. Schempp [374 U.S. 203, 1963].
Compliance with the Non-establishment Clause:

1. It has a secular legislative purpose
2. Its primary effect neither advances nor inhibits
religion
3. It must not require excessive entanglement with
recipient institutions (applicable only for government
aid)
3. TESTS
COMPELLING STATE INTEREST TEST- The state has the
burden to justify any possible sanction. This step
involves three steps:
1. The courts should look into the sincerity of the
religious belief without inquiring into the truth of the
belief
2. The state has to establish that its purposes are
legitimate and compelling
3. The state used the least intrusive means possible.
Estrada v. Escritor [492 SCRA 1, August 4, 2003].
The free exercise of religion enjoys a preferred position
in the hierarchy of rights. The states broad interest in
protecting the institutions of marriage and the family is
not a compelling interest enforcing the concubinage
charges.
The Constitution adheres to the benevolent neutrality
approach that gives room for accommodation of
religious exercises as required by the Free Exercise
Clause. Estrada v. Escritor [492 SCRA 1, June 22, 2006].
To allow the Muslim employees in the Judiciary to be
excused from work from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. every
Friday during the entire calendar year would mean a
diminution of the prescribed government working
hours. The performance of religious practices should
not prejudice the court and the public. The remedy of
the Muslim employees, with respect to their request to
be excused from work is legislative. Re: Request of
Muslim Employees in Different Courts in Iligan City
(Re: Office Hours) [477 SCRA 648, December 14, 2005].
The government cannot certify food as halal only the
religion can do this. Islamic Dawah Council of the
Lending secular textbooks to parochial school kids is

allowed Board of Education v. Allen [392 U.S. 236,
1968], but not when there is close government
supervision since there is excessive entanglement.
Lemon v. Kurtzman [403 U.S. 602, 1971].
A case involving a minister who failed to account for
funds and was dismissed is not an ecclesiastical affair
since it did not involve doctrines or religious teachings.
Austria v. NLRC [G.R. No. 124382, August 16, 1999].
Other Constitutional provisions expressing nonestablishment:
1. Art VI, Sec 29 no public money/property given to
religious sect or minister/religious personnel (except
for those assigned to Army, penal institution,
government orphanage or leprosarium)
2. Art II, Sec6 Separation of church and State is
inviolable
3. Art IX(C), Sec 2(5) No religious sects can be
registered as political parties
Constitutional exceptions to non-establishment
clause:
1. Art VI, Sec. 28(3) charitable institutions, churches,
etc and all lands, buildings, improvements A,D,E used
for religious, charitable, or educational purposes
exempt from taxation
2. Art VI, Sec. 1(2) [Cited above: the Armed Forces,
penal institution, government orphanage or
leprosarium]
3. Arv XIV, Sec 3(3) At the option in writing of parents
or guardians, religion can be taught in public
elementary and HS within regular class hours
4. Art XIV, Sec 4(2) usually there is citizenship
requirement for ownership of educational institutions
(60%), but not for those established by religious groups
and mission boards
=======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
I. Liberty of abode and freedom of movement
1. Limitations
2. Right to travel
3. Return to return to ones county
================================================
Page 79 of 214
I. LIBERTY OF
MOVEMENT
ABODE
AND
FREEDOM
OF
The liberty of abode and of changing the same within

the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired
except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the
right to travel be impaired except in the interest of
national security, public safety or public health, as may
be provided by law.
RIGHT
Liberty
abode
Right
travel
of
to
MANNER OF CURTAILMENT
Lawful order of the court and within the
limits prescribed by law
May be curtailed even by administrative
officers in the interest of national security,
public safety, or public health, as may be
provided by law.
RIGHTS GUARANTEED:
1. Freedom to choose and change ones place of
abode
2. Freedom to travel within the country and outside
The Universal Declaration of Humans Rights and the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights treat
the right to freedom of movement and abode within
the territory of a state, the right to leave a country, and
the right to enter one's country as separate and distinct
rights. The Declaration speaks of the "right to freedom
of movement and residence within the borders of each
state". It would therefore be inappropriate to construe
the limitations to the right to return to one's country in
the same context as those pertaining to the liberty of
abode and the right to travel. Marcos v. Manglapus,
G.R. No. 88211, October 27, 1989].
=======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
1. Limitations
2. Publication of laws and regulations
4. Right to information relative to
a) Government contract
negotiations
b) Diplomatic negotiations
=======================================
J. RIGHT TO INFORMATION
The right of the people to information on matters of

public concern shall be recognized.
RIGHTS GUARANTEED:
1. Right to information on matters of public concern
2. Right of access to official records and documents
1. LIMITATIONS
The government has discretion with respect to the
authority to determine what matters are of public
concern and the authority to determine the manner of
access to them.
EXCEPTIONS
CODE: BENT DISC
1. Banking transactions
2. Executive Sessions
3. National Security matters
4. Trade secrets
5. Diplomatic correspondence
6. Intelligence information
7. Supreme Court deliberations
8. Closed Door cabinet meetings
The chemical composition of special lubricants is a
trade secret. The ingredients constitute the very fabric
of the companys business. To compel its disclosure is
to cripple their business and to place it at an undue
disadvantage. Trade secrets should receive greater
protection from discovery because they deserve
economic value from being generally unknown and not
readily ascertainable by the public. Air Philippines v.
Pennswell, Inc. [G.R. No. 172835, December 13, 2007].
The COMELEC may not deny a request to disclose the
names of the nominees of participating party-lists in an
election. The COMELEC may not show the names of the
nominees in the Certified List. However, nothing in
RA7941 prohibits the COMELEC from disclosing or even
publishing through mediums other than the Certified
List. The identity of candidates for an elective office is
a matter of public interest. Ba-Ra7941 v. COMELEC
[G.R. No. 177271, May 4, 2007].
2. PUBLICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS

The very first clause of Section I of Commonwealth Act
638 reads: "There shall be published in the Official
Gazette ..." The word "shall" used therein imposes
upon respondent officials an imperative duty. That duty
must be enforced if the Constitutional right of the
people to be informed on matters of public concern is
to be given substance and reality. The law itself makes
Page 80 of 214
a list of what should be published in the Official

Gazette. It is needless to add that the publication of
presidential issuances "of a public nature" or "of
general applicability" is a requirement of due process. It
is a rule of law that before a person may be bound by
law, he must first be officially and specifically informed
of its contents. Publication is necessary to apprise the
public of the contents of [penal] regulations and make
the said penalties binding on the persons affected
thereby. Tanada v. Tuvera [G.R. No. L-63915, April 24,
1985].
3. ACCESS TO COURT RECORDS

Pleadings and other documents filed by the parties are
not matters of public concern or interest. Access to
court records may be permitted at the discretion and
subject to the supervisory and protective powers of the
court. Only those who are interested persons who
have a legitimate reason for accessing the records may
ask the courts to access pleadings. Hilado v. Judge
Reyes [G.R. No. 163155, July 21, 2006].
It is clear that while the final text of the JPEPA may not
be kept perpetually confidential since there should be
'ample opportunity for discussion before a treaty is
approved' the offers exchanged by the parties during
the negotiations continue to be privileged even after
the JPEPA is published. It is reasonable to conclude that
the Japanese representatives submitted their offers
with the understanding that 'historic confidentiality'
would govern the same. Disclosing these offers could
impair the ability of the Philippines to deal not only
with Japan but with other foreign governments in
future negotiations. Akbayan v. Aquino [G.R. No.
170516, July 16, 2008].
4. RIGHT TO INFORMATION RELATIVE TO

a. Government contract
negotiations
b. Diplomatic negotiations
The peoples right to information on matters of public
concern under Sec. 7, Article III of the Constitution is in
splendid symmetry with the state policy of full public
disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest
under Sec. 28, Article II of the Constitution. The right to
information guarantees the right of the people to
demand information, while Section 28 recognizes the
duty of officialdom to give information even if nobody
demands. The complete and effective exercise of the
right to
information
necessitates
that
its
complementary provision on public disclosure derive
the same self-executory nature, subject only to
reasonable safeguards or limitations as may be

provided by law. The contents of the MOA-AD are a
matter of paramount public concern involving public
interest in the highest order. In declaring that the right
to information contemplates steps and negotiations
leading to the consummation of the contract,
jurisprudence finds no distinction as to the executory
nature or commercial character of the agreement.
Province of North Cotabato v. GRP, G.R. No. 183591,
Oct. 14, 2008].
PCGG may be compelled to reveal contents of a
compromise agreement if there has already been a firm
proposal, even when there is no contract yet. Chavez v.
Public Estates Authority [G.R. No. 133250, July 9,
2002].
Information regarding negotiations for treaties and
executive agreements prior to conclusion of the
agreement is privileged information. Senate v. Ermita
[G.R. No. 169777, April 20, 2006].
An office who gave out information has no obligation to
give a summary of such information. Valmonte v.
Belmonte [G.R. No. 74930, February 13, 1989].
The right to information is paramount, and that the
wiretapping issue is subservient to this right. The Hello
Garci tapes should be played, prohibiting its airing
would be prior restraint (Fr. Bernas of Ateneo Law).
=======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
=======================================
K. RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION
The right of the people, including those employed in
the public and private sectors, to form unions,
associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to
law, shall not be abridged.
The right to form associations shall not be impaired
without due process of law and is thus an aspect of the
right of liberty.
It is also an aspect of the freedom of contract. In
addition, insofar as the associations may have for their
object the advancement of beliefs and ideas, the
freedom of association is an aspect of the freedom of
speech and expression, subject to the same limitation.
Page 81 of 214
The right also covers the right not to join an

association.
L. EMINENT DOMAIN
1.
GENERAL RULE (Public vs. Private Employees): The

ability to strike is not essential to the right of
association. To grant employees of the public sector
the right to strike, there must be a clear and direct
legislative authority therefor. In the absence of any
express legislation allowing government employees to
strike, recognizing their right to do so, or regulating the
exercise of the right, employees in the public service
may not engage in strikes, walkouts and temporary
work stoppages like workers in the private sector.
Bangalisan vs. CA [G.R. No. 124678, July 31, 1997].
IN CASES OF CSC EMPLOYEES e.g. SSS: It is relevant to
state at this point that the settled rule in this
jurisdiction is that employees in the public service may
not engage in strikes, mass leaves, walkouts, and other
forms of mass action that will lead in the temporary
stoppage or disruption of public service. Social Security
System Employees Association (SSEA) vs. Court of
Appeals [G.R. No. 85279, July 28, 1989].
A closed shop agreement is legal since it is a valid form

of union security. Villar v. Inciong [G.R. No. L-5028384, April 20, 1983].
Prohibiting managerial employees from forming unions
is valid because the legal prohibition has a valid
purpose which is ensuring freedom of unions. United
Pepsi Cola v. Laguesma [G.R. No. 122226, March 25,
1998].
=====================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
L. Eminent domain
1. Concept
2. Expansive concept of public use
a) Determination
b) Effect of delay
4. Abandonment of intended use and
right of repurchase
=========================================
CONCEPT
Private property shall not be taken for public use

without just compensation.
POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN- The right of the
sovereign power to appropriate, not only public but
even private property of all citizens within the
territorial sovereignty for public purposes. This power is
exercised by the national government but may be
delegated to local governments and public utilities.
The power of eminent domain is available only when
the owner does not want or opposes the sale of his
property. Thus, if a valid contract exists between the
government and the owner, the government cannot
exercise the power of eminent domain as a substitute
to the enforcement of the contract.
Where the landowner agrees voluntarily to the taking
of his property by the government for public use, he
thereby waives his right to the institution of a formal
expropriation proceeding covering such property.
Failure for a long time of the owner to question the lack
of expropriation proceedings covering a property that
the government had taken constitutes a waiver of his
right to gain back possession. The landowners remedy
in such case is an action for the payment of just
compensation, not ejectment. Republic of the
Philippines v. Primo Mendoza and Maria Lucero
[G.R. No. 185091, Aug. 8, 2010].
The exercise of the power of eminent domain by a local
government unit is now governed by Section 19 of
Republic Act 7160. For properties under expropriation,
the law now requires the deposit of an amount
equivalent to fifteen percent (15%) of the fair market
value of the property based on its current tax
declaration. Knecht v. Municipality of Cainta [G.R. No.
145254, July 20, 2006].
Expropriation is not limited to the acquisition of real
property with a corresponding transfer of title or
possession. The right-of-way easement resulting in a
restriction or limitation on property rights over the land
traversed by transmission lines also falls within the
ambit of the term expropriation. The ownership of land
extends to the surface as well as to the subsoil under it.
Underground tunnels impose limitations on the
owners use of the property for an indefinite period and
deprive them of its ordinary use. Notwithstanding the
fact that NPC only occupies the sub-terrain portion, it is
Page 82 of 214
liable to pay not merely an easement fee but rather the

full compensation for land. The nature of the easement
deprives the owners of its normal beneficial use. NPC v.
Lucman Ibrahim [G.R. No. 168732, June 29, 2007].
The power of eminent domain is not an unlimited
power. Section 9, Article III of the 1987 Constitution
sets down the essential limitations upon this inherent
right of the State to take private property, namely: (a)
that the taking must be for a public purpose; and (b)
that just compensation must be paid to the owner. The
State must first establish that the exercise of eminent
domain is for a public purpose, which, here, is already
settled. What remains to be determined is the just
compensation. EPZA v. Estate of Salud Jimenez [G.R.
No. 188995, Aug. 24, 2011].
The owner is entitled to legal interest from the time of
the taking of the property until the actual payment in
order to place the owner in a position as good as, but
not better than, the position he was in before the
taking occurred. EPZA v. Estate of Salud Jimenez [G.R.
No. 188995, Aug. 24, 2011].
a.
1.
The construction of floodwalls causes the deprivation

and dispossession of the property. True, no burden was
imposed and title still belonged to the owner. But the
nature and effect of floodwalls would deprive the
owner of the normal use of the remaining areas. It
would prevent ingress and egress to the property.
Republic v. Andaya [G.R. No.160656, June 15, 2007].
There is "taking" when the expropriator enters private
property not only for a momentary period but for a
more permanent duration, or for the purpose of
devoting the property to a public use in such a manner
as to oust the owner and deprive him of all beneficial
enjoyment thereof. In this context, there was taking
when the MIAA occupied a portion thereof for its
expanded runway. MIAA v. Rodriguez [G.R. No. 16183,
Feb. 28. 2006].
Who May Exercise
1. National Government
2. Congress
3. Executive, pursuant to legislation enacted by
Congress
4. Local government units, pursuant to an ordinance
enacted by their respective legislative bodies (under
LGC)
5. Public utilities, as may be delegated by law
b.
of the ordinary uses for which the property was

intended such as the establishment of an easement. A
regulation w/c substantially deprives the owner of his
proprietary rights and restricts the beneficial use and
enjoyment for public use amounts to compensable
taking. Didipio Earth Savers et al v. Secretary [G.R. No.
157882, Mar. 30, 2006].
Requisites
There is a TAKING of private property

ELEMENTS OF TAKING
CODE: BEAPP
a. Utilization of the property must be in such a
way as to oust the owner and DEPRIVE him of
the BENEFICIAL enjoyment of his property.
b. The expropriator ENTERS the property
c. Entry is made under warrant or color of LEGAL
AUTHORITY
d. Property is devoted to PUBLIC USE
e. The entrance must be PERMANENT
While the power of eminent domain often results in the

taking of property, "taking" may include trespass
without actual eviction of the owner, material
impairment of the value of the property or prevention
There was a full taking on the part of NPC,

notwithstanding that the owners were not completely
and actually dispossessed. It is settled that the taking of
private property for public use, to be compensable,
need not be an actual physical taking or appropriation.
NPC constructed a tunnel underneath the land of the
Heirs of Macabangkit without going through formal
expropriation proceedings and without procuring their
consent or at least informing them beforehand of the
construction. NPCs construction adversely affected the
owners rights and interests because the subterranean
intervention by NPC prevented them from introducing
any developments on the surface, and from disposing
of the land or any portion of it, either by sale or
mortgage. NAPOCOR v. Heirs of Mabangkit Sangkay
[G.R. No. 165828, Aug. 24, 2011].
Compensable taking includes destruction, restriction,
diminution, or interruption of the rights of ownership
or of the common and necessary use and enjoyment of
the property in a lawful manner, lessening or
destroying its value. It is neither necessary that the
owner be wholly deprived of the use of his property,
nor material whether the property is removed from the
possession of the owner, or in any respect changes
hands. NAPOCOR v. Heirs of Mabangkit Sangkay [G.R.
No. 165828, Aug. 24, 2011].
Page 83 of 214
LGUs
On the part of local
government units,
expropriation is also
governed by Section 19
of the Local Government
Code.
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
Thus, pursuant to Section 2
of Rule 67 of the 1997
Revised Rules of Civil
Procedure and the Robern
Development Corporation
case.
(1) the filing of a

complaint for
expropriation sufficient
in form and substance;
and
(1) the filing of a complaint

for expropriation sufficient
in form and substance; and
(2) the deposit of the

amount equivalent to 15
percent of the fair
market value of the
property to be
expropriated based on
its current tax
declaration. Iloilo v.
Legaspi [G.R. No.
154614, 25 November
2004].
(2) the making of a deposit

equivalent to the assessed
value of the property
subject to expropriation.
Upon compliance with the
requirements the issuance
of the writ of possession
becomes ministerial.
Biglang-awa vs. Bacalla
[G.R. Nos. 139927 and
139936, November 22,
2000].
2. Taking is for PUBLIC USE

PUBLIC USE - synonymous with public welfare as the
latter term is used in the concept of police power (e.g.
land reform and socialized housing).
Urban renewal or redevelopment and the construction
of low-cost housing is recognized as a public purpose,
not only because of the expanded concept of public use
but also because of specific provisions in the
Constitution. Housing is a basic human need. Shortage
in housing is a matter of state concern since it directly
and significantly affects public health, safety, the
environment and in sum, the general welfare. Manapat
v. CA [G.R. No. 110478, Oct. 15, 2007].
2.
Payment of JUST COMPENSATION
JUST COMPENSATION - It is just if the owner receives a

sum equivalent to the market value of his property and
if it is paid within a reasonable period. Market value is
generally defined as the fair value of the property as
between one who desires to purchase and one who
desires to sell.
If municipal property is acquired in its corporate or
private capacity, the State must pay just compensation.
But if is any other property such as public buildings or

held by the municipality for the State in trust for the
inhabitants, the State is free to dispose of it at will,
without any compensation.
Without prompt payment, compensation cannot be
considered "just" inasmuch as the property owner is
made to suffer the consequences of being immediately
deprived of his land while being made to wait for a
decade or more before actually receiving the amount
necessary to cope with his loss. Land Bank v. Spouses
Orilla [G.R. No. 157206, June 27, 2008].
The date of taking of the subject land for purposes of
computing just compensation should be reckoned from
the issuance dates of the emancipation patents. Land
Bank v. Domingo [G.R. No. 168533, Feb. 4, 2008].
The tax benefit granted to the establishments can be
deemed as their just compensation for private property
taken by the State for public use. The taxation power
can also be used as an implement for the exercise of
the power of eminent domain. Commissioner of
Internal Revenue v. Central Luzon Drug Corporation
[456 SCRA 414, Apr. 15, 2005].
The DAR acquired the subject property in 1972 through
its Operation Land Transfer Program, pursuant to
Presidential Decree No. 27. Since then, the subject
property has already been distributed to the farmerbeneficiaries who, since then, have exclusively
possessed the same and harvested its produce.
Eventually, the Emancipation Patents were issued in
the beneficiaries favor. Even after the lapse of 23
years, the full payment of just compensation due
respondent has yet to be made by petitioner. These
circumstances make it more equitable for the SAC to
determine the just compensation due the respondent
for the remainder of the subject property using values
at the time of its payment. Land Bank v. Pacita
Agricultural [G.R. No. 177607, Jan. 19, 2009].
Upon the filing of the complaint or at any time
thereafter and after due notice to the defendant, the
plaintiff shall have the right to take or enter upon the
possession of the real property involved if he deposits
with the authorized government depositary an amount
equivalent to the assessed value of the property. It
bears reiterating that in Republic v. Vda. de Castellvi,
we ruled that just compensation is determined as of
the date of the taking of the property or the filing of
the complaint, whichever came first. We have made it
clear that there was no taking of the property in 1985
by PEA for purposes of expropriation. As shown by the
Page 84 of 214
records, PEA filed with the RTC its petition for

expropriation on September 22, 2003. The trial court,
therefore, was correct in ordering respondent, through
PEA, upon the filing of its complaint for expropriation,
to pay petitioner just compensation on the basis of the
BIR zonal valuation of the subject property at
P20,000.00 per square meter. Tan v. Republic [G.R.
170740, May 25, 2007].
The time of the taking may be reckoned on October 24,
1994, the date of the filing of the complaint. Although
the plaintiff took possession of the property in 1991,
due to a lease contract executed between plaintiff and
defendant, the intention to expropriate was manifested
only upon the filing of the complaint. PNOC v.
Maglasang [G.R. No. 155407, Nov. 11, 2008].
Contrary to petitioners DPWHs and ATOs undertakings
in the Compromise Agreement, they failed to reconvey
Lot No. 913-E-3 to respondent despite her return of the
purchase price therefor. Such failure amounts to
expropriation without just compensation. DPWH and
the ATO should thus be held solidarily liable to
reconvey Lot No. 913-E-3 to respondent and pay rentals
therefore effective July 8, 1985 when she
tendered/returned the P3,105.00 purchase price.
Mactan v. Urgello [G.R. No. 162288, Apr. 4, 2007].
Just compensation is defined as the full and fair
equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the
expropriator. The measure is not the takers gain, but
the owners loss. The word just is used to intensify
the meaning of the word compensation and to
convey thereby the idea that the equivalent to be
rendered for the property to be taken shall be real,
substantial, full and ample. Republic of the Philippines,
represented by the National Irrigation Administration
v. Rural Bank of Kabacan Inc. [G.R. No. 185124, Jan.
25, 2012].
The constitutional limitation of just compensation is
considered to be a sum equivalent to the market value
of the property, broadly defined as the price fixed by
the seller in open market in the usual and ordinary
course of legal action and competition; or the fair value
of the property; as between one who receives and one
who desires to sell it, fixed at the time of the actual
taking by the government. Republic of the Philippines,
represented by the National Irrigation Administration
v. Rural Bank of Kabacan Inc. [G.R. No. 185124, Jan.
25, 2012].
The Court also upheld the CA ruling, which deleted the

inclusion of the value of the excavated soil in the
payment for just compensation. There is no legal basis
to separate the value of the excavated soil from that of
the expropriated properties. In the context of
expropriation proceedings, the soil has no value
separate from that of the expropriated land. Just
compensation ordinarily refers to the value of the land
to compensate for what the owner actually loses. Such
value could only be that which prevailed at the time of
the taking. Republic of the Philippines, represented by
the National Irrigation Administration v. Rural Bank of
Kabacan Inc. [G.R. No. 185124, Jan. 25, 2012].
While the prevailing doctrine is that "the non-payment
of just compensation does not entitle the private
landowner to recover possession of the expropriated
lots, however, in cases where the government failed to
pay just compensation within five (5) years from the
finality of the judgment in the expropriation
proceedings, the owners concerned shall have the
right to recover possession of their property. This is in
consonance with the principle that "the government
cannot keep the property and dishonor the
judgment." To be sure, the five-year period limitation
will encourage the government to pay just
compensation punctually. This is in keeping with justice
and equity. After all, it is the duty of the government,
whenever it takes property from private persons
against their will, to facilitate the payment of just
compensation. We defined just compensation as not
only the correct determination of the amount to be
paid to the property owner but also the payment of the
property within a reasonable time. Without prompt
payment, compensation cannot be considered "just."
Republic v. Lim, [G.R. No. 161656, June 29, 2005].
2.
EXPANSIVE MEANING OF PUBLIC USE
Public use, as an eminent domain concept, has now

acquired an expansive meaning to include any use that
is of "usefulness, utility, or advantage, or what is
productive of general benefit of the public. Ouano, et.
al. v. Republic [G.R. No.168770, February 9, 2011].
a.
Effect if public use for the taking

ceases
If the genuine public necessitythe very reason or

condition as it wereallowing, at the first instance, the
expropriation of a private land ceases or disappears,
then there is no more cogent point for the
Page 85 of 214
governments retention of the expropriated land. The

same legal situation should hold if the government
devotes the property to another public use very much
different from the original or deviates from the
declared purpose to benefit another private person. It
has been said that the direct use by the state of its
power to oblige landowners to renounce their
productive possession to another citizen, who will use it
predominantly for that citizens own private gain, is
offensive to our laws.
A condemnor should commit to use the property
pursuant to the purpose stated in the petition for
expropriation, failing which it should file another
petition for the new purpose. If not, then it behooves
the condemnor to return the said property to its
private owner, if the latter so desires. The government
cannot plausibly keep the property it expropriated in
any manner it pleases and, in the process, dishonor the
judgment of expropriation. This is not in keeping with
the idea of fair play,
The notion, therefore, that the government,
via expropriation proceedings, acquires unrestricted
ownership over or a fee simple title to the covered
land, is no longer tenable. We suggested as much
in Heirs of Moreno and in Tudtud and more recently
in Lozada, Sr. Expropriated lands should be
differentiated from a piece of land, ownership of which
was absolutely transferred by way of an unconditional
purchase and sale contract freely entered by two
parties, one without obligation to buy and the other
without the duty to sell. In that case, the fee simple
concept really comes into play. There is really no
occasion to apply the "fee simple concept" if the
transfer is conditional. The taking of a private land in
expropriation proceedings is always conditioned on its
continued devotion to its public purpose. As a
necessary corollary, once the purpose is terminated or
peremptorily abandoned, then the former owner, if he
so desires, may seek its reversion, subject of course to
the return, at the very least, of the just compensation
received. Ouano, et. al. v. Republic [ G.R. No.168770,
February 9, 2011].
3.
JUST COMPENSATION
a.
Determination
i.
General Principles
Just compensation is the fair market value of the

property. Fair market value is that "sum of money which a
person desirous but not compelled to buy, and an owner

willing but not compelled to sell, would agree on as a
price to be given and received therefor. NAPOCOR v.
Ong Co[ G. R. No. 166973,February 10, 2009].
Among the factors to be considered in arriving at the fair
market value of the property are the cost of acquisition,
the current value of like properties, its actual or potential
uses, and in the particular case of lands, their size, shape,
location, and the tax declarations thereon. The measure is
not the takers gain but the owners loss. To be just, the
compensation must be fair not only to the owner but also
to the taker.
To determine just compensation, the trial court should
first ascertain the market value of the property, to which
should be added the consequential damages after
deducting therefrom the consequential benefits which
may arise from the expropriation. If the consequential
benefits exceed the consequential damages, these items
should be disregarded altogether as the basic value of the
property should be paid in every case. The award of
consequential damages is not tantamount to unjust
enrichment. Republic v. CA [G. R. No. 160379, August 14,
2009.
ii.
Determination of Just Compensation

is a Judicial Prerogative
The determination of "just compensation" in eminent

domain case is a judicial function. The executive
department or the legislature may make the initial
determinations, but when a party claims a violation of the
guarantee in the Bill of Rights that private property may
not be taken for public use without just compensation, no
statute, decree, or executive order can mandate that its
own determination shall prevail over the courts findings.
Much less can the courts be precluded from looking into
the "just-ness" of the decreed compensation. Land Bank
v. Dumlao, et. al., [G. R. No. 167809, July 23, 2009].
iii. Reckoning period
The value of the property must be determined either as
of the date of the taking of the property or the filing of
the complaint, "whichever came first." Eslaban v. De
Onorio [G. R. No. 146062,June 28, 2001].
iv. Just Compensation in Agrarian
Cases
In determining just compensation, the cost of
acquisition of the land, the current value of like
properties, its nature, actual use and income, the
Page 86 of 214
sworn valuation by the owner, the tax declarations,

and the assessment made by government assessors,
shall be considered. The social and economic benefits
contributed by the farmers and the farm workers and
by government to the property as well as the nonpayment of taxes or loans secured from any
government financing institution on the said land shall
be considered as additional factors to determine its
valuation (Section 17, R. A. 6657, otherwise known as
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988).
brings the action for recovery of just compensation

does not change the essential nature of the suit as an
inverse condemnation, for the suit is not based on tort,
but on the constitutional prohibition against the taking
of property without just compensation. It would very
well be contrary to the clear language of the
Constitution to bar the recovery of just compensation
for private property taken for a public use solely on the
basis of statutory prescription.
b.
v.
Effect of non-payment
compensation
Effect of Delay
of just
Non-payment of just compensation does not entitle the

private landowners to recover possession of their
expropriated lot. But, the prolonged occupation of the
government
without
instituting
expropriation
proceedings will entitle the landowner to damages.
Such pecuniary loss entitles him to adequate
compensation in the form of actual or compensatory
damages, which in this case should be the legal interest
(6%) on the value of the land at the time of taking, from
said point up to full payment. City of Iloilo v. Besana
[G. R. No. 168967, February 12, 2010].
vi. Action
To
Recover
Just
Compensation Vs. Action For
Damages
ACTION TO RECOVER JUST COMPENSATION - also
known as inverse condemnation, has the objective to
recover the value of property taken in fact by the
governmental defendant, even though no formal
exercise of the power of eminent domain has been
attempted by the taking agency
ACTION FOR DAMAGES- seeks to vindicate a legal
wrong through damages, which may be actual, moral,
nominal, temperate, liquidated, or exemplary. When a
right is exercised in a manner not conformable with the
norms enshrined in Article 19 and like provisions on
human relations in the Civil Code, and the exercise
results to the damage of another, a legal wrong is
committed and the wrongdoer is held responsible.
The two actions are radically different in nature and
purpose. The action to recover just compensation is
based on the Constitution while the action for damages
is predicated on statutory enactments.
NAPOCOR v. Heirs of Mabangkit Sangkay [G.R. No.
165828, Aug. 24, 2011].
While confirming the States inherent power and right

to take private property for public use, this provision at
the same time lays down the limitation in the exercise
of this power. When it takes property pursuant to its
inherent right and power, the State has the
corresponding obligation to pay the owner just
compensation for the property taken. For
compensation to be considered "just," it must not only
be the full and fair equivalent of the property taken; it
must also be paid to the landowner without delay.
APO v. Land Bank [G.R. No.164195,April 5, 2011].
The Court imposes interest of 12% per annum until
payment of just compensation whenever the
expropriator has not immediately delivered the just
compensation. EPZA v. Pulido [G.R. No.188995, August
24, 2011].
4.
ABANDONMENT OF INTENDED USE AND

RIGHT OF REPURCHASE
If the property ceases to be used for a public purpose,

the property reverts to the owner in fee simple. (Bernas
Primer 2006 ed., p.106)
We now expressly hold that the taking of private
property, consequent to the Governments exercise of
its power of eminent domain, is always subject to the
condition that the property be devoted to the specific
public purpose for which it was taken. Corollarily, if this
particular purpose or intent is not initiated or not at all
pursued, and is peremptorily abandoned, then the
former owners, if they so desire, may seek the
reversion of the property, subject to the return of the
amount of just compensation received. In such a case,
the exercise of the power of eminent domain has
become improper for lack of the required factual
justification. Mactan-Cebu International Airport v.
Lozada, [G.R. No. 176625, Feb. 25, 2010].
The fact that the owner rather than the expropriator
Page 87 of 214
5.
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION
b.
a.
Judicial Review
Expropriation by local governments

MATTERS THAT MAY BE REVIEWED BY THE COURTS:
The power of eminent domain is not a valid substitute

for the enforcement of a contract. (Bernas Primer 2006
ed., p.114).
i. Essential requisites that must
concur before an LGU can
exercise the power of eminent
domain
1. An ordinance is enacted by the local legislative
council authorizing the local chief executive, in behalf
of the LGU, to exercise the power of eminent domain
or pursue expropriation proceedings over a particular
private property.
1. The adequacy of the compensation

2. The necessity of the taking
3. The Public Use character of the taking.
If the expropriation is pursuant to a specific law passed
by Congress, the courts cannot question the public use
character of the taking. Any law fixing the amount of
just compensation is not binding on the courts because
it is a question of fact which is always subject to review
by the courts.
i.
2. The power of eminent domain is exercised for public

use, purpose or welfare, or for the benefit of the poor
and the landless.
ii.
3. There is payment of just compensation, as required
under Section 9, Article III of the Constitution, and
other pertinent laws.
4. A valid and definite offer has been previously made
to the owner of the property sought to be
expropriated, but said offer was not accepted.
ii.
Limitations on the Exercise of

the Eminent domain powers of
Local Government Units
Exceptions
1. When the filing of the case comes later than the time
of taking and meanwhile the value of the property has
increased because of the use to which the expropriator
has put it, the value is that of the time of the earlier
taking.
2. Where this Court fixed the value of the property as
of the date it was taken and not the date of the
commencement of the expropriation proceedings. NPC
v. Lucman Ibrahim [G.R. No. 168732, June 29, 2007].
iii.
1. Order of priority in acquiring land for socialized

housing: Private lands rank last in the order of priority
for purposes of socialized housing.
General Rule: The value must

be that as of the time of the
filing of the complaint for
expropriation.
Exception To The Exception
If the value increased independently of what the

expropriator did, then the value is that of the FILING of
the case.
2. Other modes of acquisition must first be exhausted.

A local government unit (LGU), like the Municipality of
Paraaque, cannot authorize an expropriation of
private property through a mere resolution of its
lawmaking body. The Local Government Code expressly
and clearly requires an ordinance or a local law for the
purpose. A resolution that merely expresses the
sentiment or opinion of the Municipal Council will not
suffice. On the other hand, the principle of res judicata
does not bar subsequent proceedings for the
expropriation of the same property when all the legal
requirements for its valid exercise are complied with.
Municipality of Paranaque vs. V.M. Realty Corporation
[G.R. No. 127820, July 20, 1998].
Even before compensation is given, entry may be made

upon the property condemned by depositing the
money or an equivalent form of payment such as
government bonds.
Page 88 of 214
=====================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
M. Contract clause
1. Contemporary application of the
contract clause
=========================================
M. CONTRACT CLAUSE
No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be
passed.
IMPAIRMENT:
1. If it changes the terms and conditions of a legal
contract either as to the time or mode of performance
2. If it imposes new conditions or dispenses with those
expressed
3. If it authorizes for its satisfaction something different
from that provided in its terms.
A mere change in procedural remedies which does not
change the substance of the contract, and which still
leaves an efficacious remedy for enforcement DOES
NOT IMPAIR the obligation of contracts.
The non-impairment clause of the Constitution must
yield to the loftier purposes targeted by the
Government. Time and again, this Court has said that
contracts affecting public interest contain an implied
reservation of the police power as a postulate of the
existing legal order. This power can be activated at
anytime to change the provisions of the contract, or
even abrogate it entirely, for the promotion or
protection of the general welfare. Such an act will not
militate against the impairment clause, which is subject
to and limited by the paramount police power. Chavez
v. Comelec [G.R. No. 162777, Au. 31, 2004].
obligations. The promises made by a Philippine

president or his alter egos to a foreign monarch are not
transubstantiated by divine right so as to ipso facto
render legal rights of private persons obviated. Kuwait
Airways v. Philippine Airlines [G.R. No. 156087, May
8, 2009].
License agreements are not contracts within the
purview of the due process and the non-impairment of
contracts clauses enshrined in the Constitution.
Republic v. Pagadian City Timber [G.R. No. 159308,
Sept. 16, 2008].
======================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
N. Legal assistance and free access to courts
===========================================
N. LEGAL ASSISTANCE AND FREE ACCESS TO

COURTS
Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and
adequate legal assistance shall not be denied to any
person by reason of poverty.
=======================================
VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
1. Availability
2. Requisites
3. Waiver
=======================================
O. RIGHTS OF SUSPECTS UNDER CUSTODIAL
INVESTIGATION
There is nothing in Section 5 (c) of P.D. No. 902-A

(Rehabilitation Act) authorizing the change or
modification of contracts entered into by the distressed
corporation and its creditors. It merely provides that
all actions for claims against corporations,
partnerships or associations under management or
receivership pending before any court, tribunal, board
or body shall be suspended accordingly. Leca Realty v.
Manuela Corporation, [G.R. No. 166800, Sept. 25,
2007].
1. AVAILABILITY
2. REQUISITES
Even granting that the "agreement" between the two

governments or their representatives creates a binding
obligation under international law, it remains
incumbent for each contracting party to adhere to its
own internal law in the process of complying with its
APPLIES TO
TESTIMONIAL
COMPULSION
Rights of person under

commission of an offense.
investigation
for
the
CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION - Commences when a

person is taken into custody and SINGLED OUT as a
suspect in the commission of a crime under
investigation.
DOES NOT APPLY TO
BODY of the accused is proposed to
be examined.
e.g. urine sample, photographs,
measurements, garments
Page 89 of 214
3. Waiver should be made in the presence of counsel

MIRANDA RIGHTS:
CODE: SCIP
1. Right to remain silent
2. Right to have competent and independent counsel,
preferably of his own choice
3. Right to be informed of these rights.
4. Right to be provided with the services of counsel if
he cannot afford the services of one
WHEN AVAILABLE:
1. After a person has
been taken into
custody
2. When a person is
deprived of his
freedom of action in
any significant way
3. When a person is
merely invited for
questioning (R.A. No.
7438)
4. The investigation is
being conducted by the
government with
respect to a criminal
offense (police, DOJ,
NBI)
5. Signing of arrest
reports and booking
sheets.
WHEN NOT AVAILABLE:

1. During a police line-up
EXCEPTION: Once there is
a move among the
investigators to elicit
admissions or confessions
from the suspect.
2. During administrative
investigations.
3. Confessions made by
an accused at the time he
voluntarily surrendered to
the police or outside the
context of a formal
investigation.
4. Statements made to a
private person.
The moment a police officer tries to elicit information

from the suspect, a counsel should at that juncture,
assist the suspect, unless he waives this right in writing
and in the presence of counsel. If the participation of
the lawyer was limited to notarization of a suspects
confession, in legal contemplation, that is not
considered to be the kind of legal assistance that
should be accorded to the suspect. People v. Rapeza
[G.R. No. 169431, April 3, 2007].
EXCLUSIONARY RULE - Any confession or admission
obtained in violation of this section shall be
inadmissible in evidence against the accused. Any
evidence obtained by virtue of an illegally obtained
confession is also inadmissible, being the fruit of a
poisonous tree.
3. WAIVER
REQUISITES OF A VALID WAIVER:
1. Made voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently
2. Waiver should be made in writing
REQUISITES
FOR
A
VALID
EXTRA-JUDICIAL
CONFESSION: (WAVES)
1. Made in writing
2. Made with the assistance of competent and
independent counsel
3. Voluntary
4. Must be express
5. Signed, or if the confessant does not know how to
read and write, thumb marked by him
=====================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
2. Bail
6. Right to speedy, impartial and public
trial
=========================================
P. RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
1. CRIMINAL DUE PROCESS
RIGHTS OF A PERSON CHARGED WITH A CRIMINAL
OFFENSE: (FISHI CD)
1. Right to face the witnesses
2. Right to be presumed innocent
3. Right to have a speedy, impartial and public trial
The right to speedy trial is considered violated only
when the proceeding is attended by vexatious,
capricious and oppressive delays. Courts are required
to do more than a mathematical computation of the
number of postponements of the scheduled hearings of
the case and to give particular regard to the facts and
circumstances peculiar to each case. Nelson
Imperial, et al. v. Maricel M. Joson, et
al./Santos O. Francisco v. Spouses Gerard and
Maricel Joson Nelson/Imperial, et al. v. Hilarion
C. Felix, et al. [G.R. No. 160067/G.R. No.
170410/G.R. No. 171622, Nov. 17, 2010].
Page 90 of 214
4. Right to be heard by himself and counsel

5. Right to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation against him
6. Right to have compulsory process to secure the
attendance of witness and the production of EVIDENCE
in his behalf
7. Right to due process of law
2. BAIL
GENERAL RULE: All persons actually detained shall,
before conviction be entitled to bail.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Persons charged with offenses punishable by
reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment and death, when
evidence of guilt is strong
2. Persons who are members of the AFP facing a court
martial
3. If convicted by the trial court, bail is only
discretionary pending appeal
OTHER RIGHTS IN RELATION TO BAIL:
1. The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is suspended
2. Excessive bail shall not be required
FACTORS CONSIDERED IN SETTING THE AMOUNT OF
BAIL: (F3P3 WANC)
1. Financial Ability of the accused to give bail
2. Forfeiture of other bail
3. The accused was a fugitive from justice when
arrested
4. Probability of the accused appearing at the trial
5. Penalty for the offense charged
6. Pendency of other cases where the accused is on bail
7. Character and reputation of the accused
8. Age and health of the accused
9. Weight of the evidence against the accused
10. Nature and circumstance of the offense
WAIVER:
1. If appellant ESCAPES from prison or confinement
2. If appellant JUMPS bail
3. If appellant FLEES to another country during the
pendency of the appeal
Apart from bail, a person may attain provisional liberty
through recognizance, which is an obligation of record
entered into by a third person before a court,
guaranteeing the appearance of the accused for trial. It
is in the nature of a contract between the surety and
the state.
BAIL IN EXTRADITION CASES - Our extradition law does

not provide for the grant of bail to an extraditee. There
is no provision prohibiting him or her from filing a
motion for bail, a right to due process under the
Constitution.
The STANDARD used in granting bail in extradition
cases is clear and convincing evidence. This standard
should be lower than proof beyond reasonable doubt
but higher than preponderance of evidence. The
potential extraditee must prove by clear and
convincing evidence that he is not a flight risk and will
abide with all the orders and processes of the
extradition court. Government of Hong Kong v. Olalia,
Jr. [G.R. No.153675, Apr. 19, 2007].
A mere claim of illness is not a ground for bail. Bail is
not a sick pass for an ailing or aged detainee or prisoner
needing medical care outside the prison facility. People
v. Fitzgerald [G.R. 149723, Oct. 27, 2006].
Since the grant of bail is discretionary and can only be
determined by judicial findings, such discretion can only
be exercised after evidence is submitted to the court,
the petitioner has the right of cross examination and to
introduce his own evidence in rebuttal. Santos v. Judge
How [A.M./ RTJ-05-1946, Jan. 27, 2007].
RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
RIGHT TO FACE WITNESSES
Purposes of this right:
1. To afford the accused an opportunity to cross-examine
the witness
2. To allow the judge the opportunity to observe the
conduct or demeanor of the witness
EXCEPTIONS TO THE RIGHT TO FACE WITNESSES:
1. The admissibility of dying declarations
2. Trial in absentia under Section 14(2)
3. With respect to child testimony
If the failure of the accused to cross-examine a witness is
due to his own fault or was not due to the fault of the
prosecution, the testimony of the witness should be
excluded.
It is demandable only during trials. Thus, it cannot be
availed of during preliminary investigations.
PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
The Constitution does not prohibit the legislature from
providing that proof of certain facts leads to a prima facie
presumption of guilt, provided that the facts proved have
Page 91 of 214
a reasonable connection to the ultimate fact presumed.
ARRAIGNMENT to PROMULGATION of sentence. After

arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding absence
of accused.
RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL

Factors used in determining whether the right to a
speedy trial has been violated:
1. Time expired from the filing of the information
2. Length of delay involved
3. Reasons for the delay
4. Assertion or non-assertion of the right by the accused
5. Prejudice caused to the defendant
RIGHT TO BE INFORMED
Purposes of this right:
1. To furnish the accused with a description of the charge
against him as will enable him to make his defenses
2. To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal against a
further prosecution for the same cause
3. To inform the court of the facts alleged
REMEDY IF RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL WAS VIOLATED:

1. He can move for the dismissal of the case
2. If he is detained, he can file a petition for the issuance
of writ of habeas corpus
If the information fails to allege the material elements of

the offense, the accused cannot be convicted thereof
even if the prosecution is able to present evidence during
the trial with respect to such elements.
DISMISSAL BASED ON RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL - If the

dismissal is VALID, it amounts to an acquittal and can be
used as basis to claim double jeopardy. This would be the
effect even if the dismissal was made with the consent of
the accused.
The real nature of the crime charged is determined from

the recital of facts in the information. It is not based on
the caption, preamble or from the cited provision of law
allegedly violated.
SPEEDY TRIAL v. SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES

The right to a speedy trial is available only to an accused
and is a peculiarly criminal law concept, while the
broader right to a speedy disposition of cases may be
tapped in any proceedings conducted by state agencies.
In this case, the appropriate right involved is the right to a
speedy disposition of cases, the recovery of ill-gotten
wealth being a civil suit. Philippine Coconut Producers
Federation, Inc. (COCOFED), et al. vs. Republic of the
Philippines; Wigberto E. Tanada, et al., intervenors;
Danilo S. Ursua vs. Republic of the Philippines [G.R. Nos.
177857-58 & G.R. No. 178193, Jan. 24, 2012].
IMPARTIAL TRIAL
The accused is entitled to the cold neutrality of an
impartial judge. It is an element of due process.
PUBLIC TRIAL
The attendance at the trial is OPEN TO ALL irrespective of
their relationship to the accused. However, if the
evidence to be adduced is offensive to DECENCY or
PUBLIC MORALS, the public may be excluded.
The right of the accused to a public trial is not violated if
the hearings are conducted on Saturdays, either with the
consent of the accused or if failed to object thereto.
RIGHT TO BE HEARD
Includes the right to be PRESENT at the trial from
GEN RULE: It is unnecessary to state in the information

the precise date that the offense was committed
EXCEPTION: when it is an essential element of the
offense.
When the time given in the complaint is not essential, it
need not be proven as alleged. The complaint will be
sustained if there is proof that the offense was
committed at any time within the period of the statute of
limitations and before the commencement of the action.
The date of commission is not an element of rape. The
gravamen of rape is carnal knowledge of a woman.
People v. Rafon [G.R. No. 169059, Sept. 5, 2007].
COMPULSORY PROCESS
The 1973 and 1987 Constitutions expanded the right to
compulsory process which now includes the right to
secure the production of evidence in one's behalf.28 By
analogy, U.S. vs. Ramirez29 which laid down the requisites
for compelling the attendance of witnesses, may be
applied to this expanded concept. Thus, the movant must
show: (a) that the evidence is really material; (b) that he
is not guilty of neglect in previously obtaining the
production of such evidence; (c) that the evidence will be
available at the time desired; and (d) that no similar
evidence could be obtained
TRIAL IN ABSENTIA
Allowed only if the accused has been validly arraigned
and:
Page 92 of 214
1. Accused has been duly NOTIFIED

2. His failure to appear is UNJUSTIFIABLE.
EXCEPTION:
1. If the accused, after arraignment, has stipulated that
he is indeed the person charged with the offense and
named in the information; and that any time a witness
refers to a name by which he is known, the witness is to
be UNDERSTOOD as referring to him.
2. The accused may WAIVE the right to be present at the
trial by not showing up. However, the court can still
compel the attendance of the accused if necessary for
IDENTIFICATION purposes.
PROMULGATION OF JUDGMENT: While the accused is
entitled to be present during promulgation of judgment,
the absence of his COUNSEL during such promulgation
does not affect its validity.
Promulgation of judgment in absentia is valid provided
that the essential elements are present:
(1) that the judgment be recorded in the criminal docket
(2) that a copy be served upon the accused or counsel.
Recording the decision in the criminal docket of the court
satisfies the requirement of notifying the accused of the
decision wherever he may be. Estrada v. People [468
SCRA 233, Aug. 25, 2005].
ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL
If the accused appears at the arraignment without
counsel, the judge must:
1. Inform the accused that he has a right to a counsel
before arraignment
2. Ask the accused if he desires the aid of counsel
3. If the accused desires counsel, but cannot afford one, a
counsel de oficio must be appointed
4. If the accused desires to obtain his own counsel, the
court must give him reasonable time to get one
=====================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
==============================================
Q. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall be
suspended except in cases of invasion or rebellion
when the public safety requires it.
PRIVILEGE OF THE
WRIT OF HABEAS
CORPUS
The right to have
an immediate
determination of
the legality of the
deprivation of
physical liberty.
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
A writ directed to the person

detaining another commanding
him to produce the body of the
prisoner at a designated time
and place, with the day and
cause of his caption and
detention, to do, submit to, and
receive whatever the court or
judge awarding the writ shall
consider in that behalf.
Writ of Habeas Corpus

Extends to
A writ of habeas corpus
extends to all cases of
illegal confinement or
detention by which any
person is deprived of his
liberty, or by which the
rightful custody of any
person is withheld from
the person entitled to it.
Its essential object and
purpose is to inquire into
all manner of involuntary
restraint and to relieve a
person from it if such
restraint is illegal.
Writ of Habeas Corpus

DOES NOT EXTEND TO
The writ of habeas corpus
does not extend into
questions of conditions of
confinement; but only to
the fact and duration of
confinement. Its object is
to inquire into the legality
of ones detention, and if
found illegal, to order the
release of the detainee. It
is not a means for the
redress of grievances or to
seek injunctive relief or
damages. In re: Major
Aquino [G.R. 174994,
Aug. 31, 2007].
An essential requisite for the availability of the writ is

actual deprivation of personal liberty.
It is only the privilege that may be suspended. Only the
president may suspend the privilege. For the validity of
the suspension, two requisites must exist:
1. Existence of actual invasion or rebellion
2. Public safety requires the suspension
A petition for habeas corpus will be given due course
only if it shows that petitioner is being detained or
restrained of his liberty unlawfully. Restrictive custody
and monitoring of movements or whereabouts of
police officers under investigation by their superiors is
not a form of illegal detention or restraint of liberty.
They were not deprived of their liberties. Manalo v.
PNP Chief, [G.R. No. 178920, [Oct. 15, 2007].
=====================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
R. Writ of amparo
Page 93 of 214
===========================================
R. WRIT OF AMPARO
WRIT OF AMPARO - A remedy available to any person
whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or
threatened with violation by an unlawful act or
omission of a PUBLIC official or employee, or of a
private individual or entity.
The threatened demolition of dwelling is not included
among the enumeration of rights in which the remedy
is a Writ of Amparo. The claim to their dwelling does
not constitute right to life, liberty and security. This is,
therefore, not a legal basis for the issuance of the Writ
of Amparo. Canlas v. Napico Homeowners, [G.R. No.
182795, June 5, 2008].
The burden for the public authorities to discharge in
these situations, under the Rule on the Writ of Amparo,
is twofold. The first is to ensure that all efforts at
disclosure and investigation are undertaken under pain
of indirect contempt from this Court when
governmental efforts are less than what the individual
situations require. The second is to address the
disappearance, so that the life of the victim is
preserved and his or her liberty and security restored.
Razon v. Tagitis [G.R. No. 182498, Dec. 3, 2009].
The remedy of the writ of amparo provides rapid
judicial relief as it partakes of a summary proceeding
that requires only substantial evidence to make the
appropriate reliefs available to the petitioner; it is not
an action to determine criminal guilt requiring proof
beyond reasonable doubt, or liability for damages
requiring preponderance of evidence, or administrative
responsibility requiring substantial evidence that will
require full and exhaustive proceedings. Razon v.
Tagitis [G.R. No. 182498, Dec. 3, 2009].
The framers of the Amparo Rule never intended Section
5(c) to be complete in every detail in stating the
threatened or actual violation of a victims rights. As in
any other initiatory pleading, the pleader must of
course state the ultimate facts constituting the cause of
action, omitting the evidentiary details. In an Amparo
petition, however, this requirement must be read in
light of the nature and purpose of the proceeding,
which addresses a situation of uncertainty; the
petitioner may not be able to describe with certainty
how the victim exactly disappeared, or who actually
acted to kidnap, abduct or arrest him or her, or where
the victim is detained, because these information may
purposely be hidden or covered up by those who
caused the disappearance. Section 5(e) merely requires
that the Amparo petitioner (the respondent in the

present case) allege the actions and recourses taken
to determine the fate or whereabouts of the aggrieved
party and the identity of the person responsible for the
threat, act or omission. Razon v. Tagitis [G.R. No.
182498, Dec. 3, 2009].
=====================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
S. Right to Speedy Disposition of Cases
==============================================
S. SPEEDY DISPOSITION OF CASES

All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition
of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or
administrative bodies.
SECTION 14
Only applies to
the TRIAL phase
of criminal cases
SECTION 16
Covers ALL phases of judicial,
quasi-judicial and
administrative proceedings
=====================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
2. Application
=======================================
T. SELF-INCRIMINATION CLAUSE
1. SCOPE AND COVERAGE
2. APPLICATION
No person shall be compelled to be a witness against
himself.
WHEN MAY BE INVOKED:
1. In criminal cases
2. In all other government proceedings, including civil
actions and administrative or legislative investigations.
Only natural persons can invoke the right. Juridical
persons are subject to the visitorial powers of the state
in order to determine compliance with the conditions
of the charter granted to them.
Page 94 of 214
PROHIBITED
NOT PROHIBITED
What is prohibited is the

use of physical or moral to
extort communication from
the witness or to otherwise
elicit evidence which would
not exist were it not for the
actions compelled from the
witness.
The accused cannot be
compelled to produce a
private document in his
possession that might tend
to incriminate him.
Obtaining a sample of the
handwriting of the accused
would violate this right if he
is charged for falsification.
The right does not

prohibit the examination
of the body of the
accused or the use of
findings with respect to
his body as physical
evidence.
However, a third person
in custody of the
document may be
compelled to produce it.
Fingerprinting of an
accused would not
violate the right against
self-incrimination.
his right against self- incrimination. The dictates of fair

play, which is the hallmark of due process, demands
that private respondents should have been informed of
their rights to remain silent and warned that any and all
statements to be given by them may be used against
them. This, they were denied, under the pretense that
they are not entitled to it and that the Board has no
obligation to so inform them. Galman v. Pamaran,
[G.R. Nos. 71208-09 & 71212-13, Aug. 30, 1985].
=====================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
U. Involuntary servitude and political prisoners
========================================
U. INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE AND POLITICAL

PRISONERS
INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE - Every condition of enforced
INCRIMINATING QUESTION - A question tends to

incriminate when the answer of the accused or the
witness would establish a fact which would be a
necessary link in a chain of evidence to prove the
commission of a crime by the accused or the witness.
ACCUSED
Can refuse to take
the witness stand
altogether by
invoking the right
against selfincrimination.
ORDINARY WITNESS
Cannot refuse to take the
witness stand. He can only
refuse to answer specific
questions that would
incriminate him in the
commission of an offense.
3. IMMUNITY STATUTES
1. USE IMMUNITY - prohibits use of witness'
compelled testimony and its fruits in any
manner in connection with the criminal
prosecution of the witness
2. TRANSACTIONAL IMMUNITY - grants
immunity to the witness from prosecution for
an offense to which his compelled testimony
relates.
It is beyond dispute that said law belongs to the first
type of immunity statutes (use immunity). It grants
merely immunity from use of any statement given
before the Board, but not immunity from prosecution
by reason or on the basis thereof. Merely testifying
and/or producing evidence do not render the witness
immune from prosecution notwithstanding his
invocation of the right against self- incrimination. He is
merely saved from the use against him of such
statement and nothing more. Stated otherwise ... he
still runs the risk of being prosecuted even if he sets up
or compulsory service of one to another no matter

under what form such servitude may be disguised.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Punishment for a crime
2. Personal military or civil service in the interest of
national defense
3. In naval enlistment, a person who enlists in a
merchant ship may be compelled to remain in service
until the end of the voyage
4. Posse Comitatus (every able-bodied person is
ultimately responsible for keeping peace) for the
apprehension of criminals
5. Return to work order issued by the DOLE Secretary
or the President
6. Minors under patria potestas are obliged to obey
their parents
=====================================
TOPIC UNDER THE SYLLABUS
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
V. Excessive fines and cruel and inhuman
punishments
================================================
V. EXCESSIVE FINES AND CRUEL AND INHUMAN

PUNISHMENTS
CRUEL AND INHUMAN - It involves torture or lingering
suffering. (e.g. being drawn and quartered)
DEGRADING - It exposes a person to public humiliation.
(e.g. being tarred and feathered, then paraded
throughout town)
Page 95 of 214
EXCESSIVE FINE - When under any circumstance, the

fine is disproportionate to the offense.
STANDARDS:
1. It must not be so severe as to be degrading to the
dignity of human beings.
2. It must not be applied arbitrarily.
3. It must not be unacceptable to contemporary society
4. It must not be excessive
It must serve a penal purpose more effectively than a
less severe punishment would.
R.A. 9346 prohibited the imposition of the death
penalty. Only by an Act of Congress can it be reborn.
======================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
===========================================
W. NON-IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBTS

No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment
of a poll tax.
DEBT - A contractual obligation, whether express or
implied, resulting in any liability to pay money. Thus, all
other types of obligations are not within the scope of
this prohibition.
If an accused fails to pay the fine imposed upon him,
this may result in his subsidiary imprisonment because
his liability is ex delicto and not ex contractu.
A debtor may be imprisoned if the fraudulent debt
constitutes a crime such as ESTAFA and has been duly
convicted.
=====================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
X. Double jeopardy
1. Requisites
2. Motions for reconsideration and
appeals
3. Dismissal with consent of accused
===========================================
X. DOUBLE JEOPARDY
No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment

for the same offense. If an act is punished by a law and
an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either shall
constitute a bar to another prosecution for the same
act.
KINDS OF JEOPARDY
No person shall
be twice put in
jeopardy
of
punishment for
the
SAME
OFFENSE.
Under this kind,
conviction,
acquittal, or
dismissal of the
case without the
express consent
of the accused
will BAR a
subsequent
prosecution.
When an act is punished by a

LAW and an ORDINANCE,
conviction or acquittal under
either shall constitute a bar to
another prosecution for the
same act.
Under this kind,
only conviction or acquittal
NOT dismissal without the
express consent of the accused
will bar a subsequent
prosecution.
1.
REQUISITES
1.
First jeopardy must have attached prior to the

second.
The first jeopardy must have terminated.
The second jeopardy must be for the same
offense, one that includes or is necessarily
included in the first offense, or is an attempt
or frustration of the first.
2.
3.
a.
Attachment of Jeopardy
WHEN
JEOPARDY
ATTACHES:
CODE: CICAP
1. A person is charged
2. Under a complaint
or information
sufficient in form and
substance to sustain a
conviction
3. Before a court of
competent jurisdiction
4. After the person is
arraignment
5. Such person enters
a valid plea.
WHEN JEOPARDY DOES

NOT ATTACH:
1. If information does not
charge any offense
2. If, upon pleading guilty,
the accused presents
evidence of complete selfdefense, and the court
thereafter acquits him
without entering a new plea
of not guilty for accused.
There is no valid plea here.
3. If the information for an
offense cognizable by the
RTC is filed with the MTC.
There is no jurisdiction here.
4. If a complaint filed for
Page 96 of 214
preliminary investigation is
dismissed.
b.
Termination of First Jeopardy
1. Acquittal
2. Conviction
3. Dismissal without the express consent of the accused
-
Dismissal based on violation of the right to a

speedy trial. This amounts to an acquittal.
Dismissal based on demurrer to evidence. This is
a dismissal on the merits
Dismissal on motion of the prosecution,
subsequent to a motion for reinvestigation filed
by the accused.
Discharge of an accused to be a state witness.
This amounts to an acquittal.
4. Dismissal on the merits

c.
Same Offense
1. Exact identity between the offenses charged in the

first and second cases.
2. One offense is an attempt to commit or a frustration
of the other offense.
3. One offense is necessarily included or necessary
includes the other.
Where a single act results in the violation of different
laws or different provisions of the same law, the
prosecution for one will not bar the other.
i.
Supervening Facts
Under the Rules of Court, a conviction for an offense

will not bar a prosecution for an offense which
necessarily includes the offense charged in the former
information where:
1. The graver offense developed due to a supervening
fact arising from the same act or omission constituting
the former charge.
2. The facts constituting the graver offense became
known or were discovered only after the filing of the
former information.
3. The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made
without the consent of the prosecutor and the
offended party.
If the facts could have been discovered by the

prosecution but were not discovered because of the
prosecutions incompetence, it would not be
considered a supervening event.
If the accused appeals his conviction, he waives his
right to plead double jeopardy. The whole case will be
open to review by the appellate court. It may even
increase the penalties imposed on the accused by the
trial court.
2.
MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION AND

APPEALS
a. Motions For Reconsideration
Sec 1, Rule 121: At any time before a judgment of

conviction becomes final, the court may, upon motion
of the accused or at its own instance, but with the
consent of the accused, grant a new trial or
reconsideration.
From the phraseology of the rule, it is evident that a
motion for new trial or a motion for reconsideration
applies when the judgment is one of conviction and it is
the accused, not the prosecution which avails of the
same. (Riano, Criminal Procedure, p.583)
b. Appeals
SEC 1, Rule 122: Any party may appeal from a judgment
or final order, unless the accused will be placed on
double jeopardy.
General Rule: The prosecution may not appeal an
acquittal and an acquittal is immediately final.
THE PROSECUTION MAY APPEAL AN ORDER OF
DISMISSAL WHEN:
1. The dismissal is on motion or with the express
consent of the accused.
EXCEPTION: If motion is based on violation of the
right to a speedy trial or on a demurrer to
evidence.
2. The dismissal does not amount to an acquittal or
dismissal on the merits.
3. The question to be passed upon is purely legal.
4. The dismissal violates the right of due process of the
prosecution.
5. The dismissal is made with grave abuse of discretion.
Page 97 of 214
Double jeopardy had set in because an appeal opens

the case wide open for review of an appellate court.
Although as a general rule, an appeal from a case
dismissed by motion violates double jeopardy, there
are recognized exceptions, to wit: (a) due process
violation and (b) grave abuse of discretion. The appeal
by the Ombudsman, however, does not show the
presence of any of the exceptions. People v.
Sandiganbayan et. al., [GR No. 164577, July 5, 2010].
Although, as a rule dismissal of a criminal case may be
used to abate an administrative case based on the
same facts, the same cannot be true in case
administrative case was dismissed and the latter will be
used to dismiss a criminal case. However, if the two
actions are based on the same facts and evidence, such
as in this case, dismissal in administrative case may be
used to negate criminal liability. People v.
Sandiganbayan et. al., [G.R. No. 164577, July 5, 2010]
EFFECT OF ACCUSEDS APPEAL OF HIS CONVICTION
a. Waiver of right to double jeopardy
b. The appellate court may place a penalty
higher than that of the original conviction.
Trono v. United States [11 Phil. 726, 1905].
3.
DISMISSAL WITH CONSENT OF ACCUSED
Equivalent to a waiver of the defense of double

jeopardy.
EXCEPTION: Motion is based on:
4.
PROVISIONAL DISMISSAL
RULE 117 SEC 8: A case shall not be provisionally

dismissed except with the express consent of the
accused and with notice to the offended party.
The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by
imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years or a fine of
any amount, or both, shall become permanent one (1)
year after issuance of the order without the case having
been revived. With respect to offenses punishable by
imprisonment of more than six (6) years, their
provisional dismissal shall become permanent two (2)
years after issuance of the order without the case
having been revived.
A motion of the accused for a provisional dismissal of a
case is an express consent to such provisional dismissal.
If a criminal case is provisionally dismissed with the
express consent of the accused, the case may be
revived only within the periods provided in the new

rule. On the other hand, if a criminal case is
provisionally dismissed without the express consent of
the accused or over his objection, the new rule would
not apply. The case may be revived or refiled even
beyond the prescribed periods subject to the right of
the accused to oppose the same on the ground of
double jeopardy or that such revival or refiling is barred
by the statute of limitations. People of the Philippines
v. Panfilo Lacson [G.R. 149453, April 1, 2003].
===================================
VII.BILL OF RIGHTS
Y. Ex post facto laws and bills of attainder
===================================
Y. EX POST FACTO LAWS AND BILLS OF ATTAINDER
No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be
enacted.
EX-POST FACTO LAW
1. Makes an action done before the passing of the law,
and which was innocent when done, criminal, and
punishes such action.
2. Aggravates the crime or makes it greater than when
it was committed.
3. Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than that which the law annexed to the
crime when it was committed.
4. Alters the legal rules of evidence and receives less
testimony than the law required at the time of the
commission of the offense in order to convict the
accused.
5. Assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies but in
effect imposes a PENALTY or DEPRIVATION of a right,
which when done was lawful.
6. Deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful
protection to which he has become entitled such as the
protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a
proclamation of amnesty.
NOTE: The prohibition on ex post facto laws only
applies to retrospective penal laws.
CHARACTERISTICS OF AN EX POST FACTO LAW:
1. Refers to criminal matters
2. Retrospective
3. Causes prejudice to the accused
BILL OF ATTAINDER - An Act by the legislature that
inflicts punishment without judicial trial.
Page 98 of 214
4.
The bill of attainder does not need to be directed at a
specifically named person. It may also refer to easily
ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to
inflict punishment on them without judicial trial.
ELEMENTS:
1. There must be a law
2. The law imposes a penal burden
3. On a named individual or easily ascertainable
members of a group
4. The penal burden is imposed directly by the law
without judicial trial.

VII. BILL OF RIGHTS
====================================
VIII. CITIZENSHIP
===============================
VIII. CITIZENSHIP
B. Modes of acquiring citizenship
C. Naturalization and denaturalization
D. Dual citizenship and dual allegiance
E. Loss and re-acquisition of Philippine
citizenship
F. Natural-born citizens and public office
=================================
VIII. CITIZENSHIP
=======================================
A. WHO ARE FILIPINO CITIZENS
Who Are Citizens of The Philippines:
1. Those who are CITIZENS of the Philippines at
the time of the ADOPTION of the 1987
Constitution.
2. Those whose FATHERS or MOTHERS are
citizens of the Philippines.
3. Those born BEFORE January 17, 1973 of
Filipino MOTHERS, who ELECT Philippine
citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.
Those who are NATURALIZED in accordance

with law.
Rule for an illegitimate child of a foreign mother:

1. If the father is unknown, follow the mother's
citizenship.
2. If the father is known and is Filipino, the
illegitimate child is considered Filipino after
proving the paternity
=================================
VIII. CITIZENSHIP
B. Modes of Acquiring Citizenship
=======================================
B. MODES OF ACQUIRING CITIZENSHIP
Modes of Acquiring Citizenship:
1. JUS SOLI - Acquisition of citizenship on the
basis of PLACE OF BIRTH.
2. JUS SANGUINIS - Acquisition of citizenship on
the basis of BLOOD RELATIONSHIP.
3. NATURALIZATION - the legal act of adopting
an alien and clothing him with the privilege of
a native-born citizen
NOTE: The Philippines follows jus sanguinis and
naturalization. Naturalization is a mode for both
acquisition (governed by CA 4732) and reacquisition
(governed by CA 633) of Philippine citizenship.
Election of Citizenship:
1. PRIOR TO THE 1973 CONSTITUTION - If a
FILIPINA married an alien, she loses her
Filipino citizenship. Hence, her child would
have to ELECT Filipino citizenship upon
reaching the age of majority.
2. UNDER THE 1973 CONSTITUTION - Children
born of FILIPINO MOTHERS were already
considered FILIPINOS.
3. Therefore, the provision on ELECTION of
citizenship under the 1987 Constitution only
applies to those persons who were born
UNDER THE 1935 CONSTITUTION.
4. In order for the children to elect Filipino
citizenship, the mothers must have been
Filipinos at the TIME OF THEIR MARRIAGE.
Revised Naturalization Law
An Act Providing for the Ways in which Philippine Citizenship

May Be Lost or Reacquired
Page 99 of 214
NOTE: If your MOTHER was a Filipina who MARRIED an

alien UNDER THE 1935 CONSTITUTION and you were
BORN BEFORE JANUARY, 1973, you can elect Filipino
citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.
5.
The election must be made within a

REASONABLE PERIOD after reaching the age of
majority.
=================================
VIII. CITIZENSHIP
C. Naturalization and Denaturalization
=======================================
C.
NATURALIZATION AND
DENATURALIZATION
Who are Natural Born Citizens?

1. Citizens of the Philippines from birth who
do not need to perform any act to acquire
Philippine citizenship
2. Those who elect Philippine citizenship
under #3 above
3. Repatriated
Effects of Naturalization:
1. The LEGITIMATE MINOR children of the
naturalized FATHER become Filipinos as well.
2. The WIFE also becomes a Filipino citizen,
provided that she does not have any
disqualification which would bar her from
being naturalized.
=================================
VIII. CITIZENSHIP
D. Dual Citizenship and Dual Allegiance
=======================================
R.A. 92254 provides that a Filipino who has previously

renounced his Filipino citizenship can reacquire it
without renouncing his foreign citizenship. Likewise, a
Filipino who acquires foreign citizenship after the
effectivity of R.A. 9225 retains his Filipino citizenship.
R.A. 9225 is a law about dual citizenship not dual
allegiance. AASJS v. Datumanong, [G.R. No. 160869,
May 11, 2007].
DUAL CITIZENSHIP
Result of the
CONCURRENT
APPLICATION of the laws
of two or more states, a
person is simultaneously
considered a citizen of
those states.
DUAL ALLEGIANCE
A person simultaneously
owes, by some POSITIVE
ACT, loyalty to two or
more states.
Involuntary and legal
Voluntary and illegal
Unlike those with dual allegiance, who must, therefore,

be subject to strict process with respect to the
termination of their status, for candidates with dual
citizenship, it should suffice if, upon the filing of their
certificates of candidacy, they elect Philippine
citizenship to terminate their status as persons with
dual citizenship considering that their condition is the
unavoidable consequence of conflicting laws of
different states.
=================================
VIII. CITIZENSHIP
E. Loss and Re-acquisition of Philippine
Citizenship
=======================================
D. DUAL CITIZENSHIP AND DUAL ALLEGIANCE

DERIVATIVE CITIZENSHIP - The UNMARRIED child
(whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopted) BELOW 18
years old of those who RE-ACQUIRED the citizenship
shall likewise be deemed as citizens of the Philippines.
E.
Marriage of Filipino with an Alien

GENERAL RULE:
The Filipino RETAINS Philippine
citizenship
LOSS AND RE-ACQUISITION OF PHILIPPINE

CITIZENSHIP
Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003
Page 100 of 214
EXCEPTION: By their act or omission they are deemed,

under the law, to have renounced it.
How Citizenship is Lost (C.A. No. 63):
CODE: CANDOR
1. CANCELLATION of certificates of naturalization
2. Serving in the ARMED FORCES of an ENEMY
country
3. NATURALIZATION in a foreign country
4. Being a DESERTER of the armed forces of
ONES country
5. By subscribing to an OATH OF ALLEGIANCE to
the laws or constitution of a foreign country
6. EXPRESS RENUNCIATION of citizenship
Modes of Reacquiring Citizenship:
1. Direct act of Congress
2. Naturalization
3. Repatriation
REPATRIATION- NATURAL-BORN Filipinos who are
deemed to have lost their citizenship may re-acquire
the same via REPATRIATION proceedings. This involves
taking an OATH OF ALLEGIANCE and FILING the same
with the civil registry.
Repatriation is not a matter of right, but it is a
privilege granted by the State. The State has the power
to prescribe by law the qualifications, procedure, and
requirements for repatriation. It has the power to
determine if an applicant for repatriation meets the
requirements of the law for it is an inherent power of
the State to choose who will be its citizens, and who
can reacquire citizenship once it is lost.
As distinguished from the lengthy process of
naturalization, repatriation simply consists of the taking
of an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines and registering said oath in the Local Civil
Registry of the place where the person concerned
resides or last resided. He would not even need to file a
petition in court.
RA. 9225
(Citizen Retention and
Re-acquisition Act)
Citizens, who lost their
citizenship by reason of
their naturalization as
citizens of a foreign
RA 8171
(Repatriation)
The only persons entitled

to repatriation, are the
following:
country, are deemed to

have reacquired their
upon taking the OATH
OF ALLEGIANCE
1.
2.
Filipino women who

lost their Philippine
citizenship by marriage
to aliens
Natural-born Filipinos
including their minor
children who lost their
on account of political
or economic necessity
Exceptions to those Entitled to be Repatriated:

CODE: OVM2
1. Person opposed to organized government or
affiliated with any association or group of persons
who uphold and teach doctrines opposing
organized government;
2. Person defending or teaching the necessity or
propriety of violence, personal assault, or
association for the predominance of their ideas;
3. Person convicted of crimes involving moral
turpitude; or
4. Person suffering from mental alienation or
incurable contagious diseases.
Reacquisition of Philippine citizenship does NOT
automatically translate to reacquisition of domicile. It
must first be established that there is animus mandendi
and animus non revertendi.
=================================
VIII. CITIZENSHIP
F. Natural-Born Citizens and Public Office
=======================================
F. NATURAL-BORN CITIZENS AND PUBLIC OFFICE
Natural-Born Citizens:
1. Citizens of the Philippines from birth who DO
NOT NEED to perform ANY ACT to acquire or
perfect their Philippine citizenship. Bengson III
v. HRET, [G.R. No. 142840, May 7, 2001].
2. Those who ELECT Philippine citizenship under
Art. IV, Sec. 1(3) of 1987 Constitution.
Public Officers who must be Natural-Born Citizens
According to the 1987 Constitution:
1. President
2. Vice-President
3. Senators and Members of the House of
Representatives
Page 101 of 214
4. Members of the Supreme Court or any lower

collegiate court
5. Members of the Constitutional Commissions
6. Ombudsman and his Deputies
7. Chairman and Members of the Commission on
Human Rights
NOTE: Except for positions which the law or the
Constitution specifically requires that they be held by
natural born-citizens, it is enough that appointive or
elective officials be Filipino citizens. Filipino citizenship
is a CONTINUING qualification requirement for any
public office.5
It bears to point out that Republic Act No. 9225 governs
the manner in which a natural-born Filipino may
reacquire or retain his Philippine citizenship despite
acquiring a foreign citizenship, and provides for his
rights and liabilities under such circumstances. A close
scrutiny of said statute would reveal that it does not at
all touch on the matter of residence of the natural-born
Filipino taking advantage of its provisions. Republic Act
No. 9225 imposes no residency requirement for the
reacquisition or retention of Philippine citizenship; nor
does it mention any effect of such reacquisition or
retention of Philippine citizenship on the current
residence
of
the
concerned
natural-born
Filipino. Clearly, Republic Act No. 9225 treats
citizenship independently of residence. This is only
logical and consistent with the general intent of the law
to allow for dual citizenship. Since a natural-born
Filipino may hold, at the same time, both Philippine and
foreign citizenships, he may establish residence either
in the Philippines or in the foreign country of which he
is also a citizen. Residency in the Philippines only
becomes relevant when the natural-born Filipino with
dual citizenship decides to run for public office. Japzon
v. COMELEC, [G.R. No. 180088, Jan. 19, 2009].

VIII. CITIZENSHIP
=======================================
IX. LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS

==============================
5
Agpalo, Ruben, Administrative Law, Law on Public Officers and

Election Law, p. 263 (2005 ed.)
A. General Principles
B. Modes of Acquiring Title to Public Office
C. Modes and Kinds of Appointment
D. Eligibility and Qualification Requirements
E. Disabilities and Inhibitions of Public Officers
F. Powers and Duties of Public Officers
G. Rights of Public Officers
H. Liabilities of Public Officers
a. Preventive suspension and back
salaries
b. Illegal dismissal, reinstatement and
back salaries
I. Immunity of Public Officers
J. De Facto Officers
K. Termination of Official Relation
L. The Civil Service
1. Scope
2. Appointments to the civil service
M. Accountability of Public Officers
1. Impeachment
2. Ombudsman
a) Functions
b)
Judicial
review
in
c) Judicial review in penal
proceedings
3. Sandiganbayan
N. Term Limits
=====================================
=====================================
A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
PUBLIC OFFICE - The right, authority, and duty created
and conferred by law, by which for a given period,
Page 102 of 214
either fixed by law or enduring at the pleasure of the

appointing power, an individual is invested with some
portion of the sovereign functions of the government,
to be exercised by him for the benefit of the public.6
A Public Office Refers to Either Two Concepts 7:
1. Functional unit of government It is within the
framework of government organization, refers to any
major functional unit of a department or bureau
including regional office
2. Position - held by individual whose functions are
defined by law or regulation
Public Office Not a Property Right

It is not a property right but a protected right. It cannot
be taken from its incumbent without due process. It is
property in the broad sense since the right to hold
office includes everything of pecuniary value to its
possessor. The right to public office is protected by the
right to security of tenure guaranteed by the
Constitution. A public office is personal to the public
officer and is not transmissible to his heirs upon his
death. No heir may be allowed to continue holding his
office in his place.
Essential characteristics of a public office are:
(1) Authority conferred by law,
(2) Fixed tenure of office, and
(3) Power to exercise some of the sovereign functions
of government.
(4) Key element of such test is that officer is carrying
out a sovereign function.
(5) Essential elements to establish public position as
public office are:
(a)
Position must be created by Constitution,
legislature, or through authority
conferred by
legislature.
(b) Portion of sovereign power of government must
be delegated to position,
(c) Duties and powers must be defined, directly or
implied, by legislature or through legislative authority.
(d) Duties must be performed independently without
control of superior power other than law, and
(e) Position must have some permanency.
Elements of Public Office:
6

Election Law, p. 247-248 (2005 ed.) citing Fernandez v. Sto. Tomas,
59 SCAD 488, 242 SCRA 192 (1995).
7
Election Law, p. 247 (2005 ed.)
Code: LSCIP
1. Created by law or by authority of law
2. Possess a delegation of portion of sovereign powers
of government, for benefit of the public
3. Powers conferred and duties imposed defined by
Constitution, legislature, or by its authority
4. Duties performed independently and only controlled
by law UNLESS placed under general control of superior
office or body
5. Permanent or continuous
PUBLIC OFFICER
A person whose duties,
not being clerical in
nature, involves the
exercise of discretion in
the performance of the
functions of the
government when used
with reference to a
person having authority
to do a particular act or
perform a particular
function in the exercise of
government power,
officer includes any
government employee,
agent, or body having
authority to do so the act
or exercise that function.
(1987 Administrative
Code)
EMPLOYEE
A person in the service of
government or any of its
agencies, divisions,
subdivisions, or
instrumentalities. (1987
Administrative Code)
Any person, by direct

supervision of the law,
popular election, or
appointment by
competent authority,
shall take part in the
performance of public
functions in the RP or
shall perform in said
government or for any of
its branches public duties
as an employee, agent, or
subordinate official, of
any rank or class.
Temporary performance
of public function is
sufficient to constitute a
person a public official.
(Art. 203, Revised Penal
Code)
Page 103 of 214
Includes elective and

appointive officials and
employees, permanent or
temporary, whether in
the classified or
unclassified or exempt
service (non-career or
career), receiving
compensation, even
nominal, from the
government. (Anti-Graft
and Corrupt Practices
Act)
Includes elective and
appointive officials and
employees, permanent or
temporary, whether in
the career or non-career
service, including military
and police personnel,
whether or not they
receive compensation,
regardless of amount.
(Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards of
Public Officers)
Officer means any person
holding any public office
in the govt. of the RP by
virtue of an appointment,
election, or contract
(executed bet. private
person and government.
(RA 7080)
=====================================
B. Modes of Acquiring Title to Public Office
=====================================
B. MODES OF ACQUIRING TITLE TO PUBLIC OFFICE
Code: ADE
a. APPOINTMENT - The act of designation by the
executive officer, board, or body to whom that
power has been delegated, of the individual who is
to exercise the powers and functions of a given
office. It is to be distinguished from the selection
or designation by a popular vote.
b. DESIGNATION - The mere imposition of new or

additional duties upon an officer to be performed
by him in a special manner. It presupposes that the
officer is already in the service by virtue of an
earlier appointment, performing other functions.
c. ELECTION - The act of selecting or choosing a
person by popular vote to occupy the office.
=====================================
C. Modes and Kinds of Appointment
=====================================
C. MODES AND KINDS OF APPOINTMENT
GENERAL RULE: Acceptance of appointment is NOT
NECESSARY for the completion or validity of
appointment.
EXCEPTION: Acceptance is necessary to possession of
office, and to enable appointee to the enjoyment and
responsibility of an office.
GENERAL RULE: An appointment to an office, once
made and complete, is not subject to reconsideration
or revocation.
EXCEPTION: An officer is removable at will of the
appointing power.
NOTE: Acceptance may be EXPRESS when it is done
verbally or in writing. Acceptance is IMPLIED when,
without formal acceptance, the appointee enters upon
the exercise of the duties and functions of an office.
Officers
JC2AR
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
that the President Shall Appoint: E-MA2CHeads of executive departments

Ambassadors
Other public ministers and consuls
Officers of the armed forces from the rank of
COLONEL or NAVAL CAPTAIN
Other officers whose appointment are vested
in him in the Constitution
a. Regular members of the
Judicial and Bar Council
b. The Chairman and
Commissioners of the Civil
Service Commission
Page 104 of 214
the position.
c.
The Chairman and

Commissioners of the
COMELEC
d. The Chairman and
Commissioners of the
Commission on Audit
e. Members of the Regional
Consultative Commission
Ad Interim
Definition Made while
Congress is
NOT in
session or
during its
recess,
whether
such recess
is voluntary
(before
adjournmen)
or
compulsory
(congress
adjourns).
Appointment
shall cease to
be effective
upon rejection
by the COA, or
if not acted
upon, at the
adjournment
of the next
session of
Congress,
whether
regular or
special.
Temporary
or Acting
Those which
last until a
permanent
appointment
is issued.
Cannot be
validly
confirmed
by the COA
because
confirmation
presupposes
a valid
nomination
or ad interim
appointment
. Thus, the
appointee
has no
personality
to bring a
quo
warranto
proceeding
because the
appointee is
not entitled
to office
Designation
The mere
imposition of
new or
additional
duties upon
an officer to
be performed
by him in a
special
manner while
he performs
the function
of his
permanent
office.
Presupposes
that the
officer is
already in the
service by
virtue of an
earlier
appointment,
performing
other
functions.
Thus, there is
no new
appointment
and the
designation
does not
entitle the
officer
designated to
additional
benefits or
the right to
claim the
salary
attached to
As
to
nature
Permanent
in nature
Temporary
As
to
Duration
Not a mere
temporary
or acting
appointment
notwithstan
ding that it is
subject to
confirmation
by the COA.
No fixed
tenure of
office
As
to
terminat
ion
It may be
recalled or
revoked by
the
President
before
confirmation
.
May be
terminated
at the
pleasure of
the
appointing
power w/o
hearing or
cause.
Revocable
and
temporary
No fixed
tenure
May be
terminated
anytime; no
security of
tenure in the
position or
office which
he occupies
in an acting
capacity.
Steps in a regular appointment (NCIA)

1. Nomination by President
2. Confirmation by Comm. On Appointments
3. Issuance of the commission
4. Acceptance by the appointee
Page 105 of 214
Steps in an ad-interim appointment (AIAC)

1. Appointment by the appointing authority
4. Confirmation by the CA
a. Steps in the Appointment Process

1.
2.
3.
NOMINATION - Exclusive prerogative of the

President
CONFIRMATION - Congress (Commission on
Appointments)
ISSUANCE OF COMMISSION - A written authority
from a competent source given to the officer as his
warrant for the exercise of the powers and duties
of the office to which he is commissioned.
NOTE: Confirmation on the part of the Civil Service

Commission is called ATTESTATION.
REQUISITES FOR VALID APPOINTMENT:
Code: PA3
a. Appointing authority has power to appoint
b. Appointee possesses all qualifications
c. Appointment approved by the CSC
d. Appointee accepts appointment
Steps for appointments that do not
confirmation:
Code: AIA
1. Appointment by the appointing authority
require
It is long settled in the law of public offices and officers

that where the power of appointment is absolute, and
the appointee has been determined upon, no further
consent or approval is necessary, and the formal
evidence of the appointment, the commission, may
issue at once. Where, however, the assent or
confirmation of some other officer or body is required,
the commission can issue or the appointment may be
complete only when such assent or confirmation is
obtained. In either case, the appointment becomes
complete when the last act required of the appointing
power is performed. Until the process is completed,
the appointee can claim no vested right in the office
nor invoke security of tenure. Corpuz v. CA [G.R. No.
123989, Jan. 26, 1998].
After the elections, appointments by defeated
candidates are prohibited, except under the
circumstances mentioned in CSC Resolution No.
010988, to avoid animosities between outgoing and
incoming officials, to allow the incoming administration

a free hand in implementing its policies, and to ensure
that appointments and promotions are not used as a
tool for political patronage or as a reward for services
rendered to the outgoing local officials. Indeed, not all
appointments issued after the elections by defeated
officials are invalid. CSC Resolution No. 010988 does
not purport to nullify all mass appointments.
However, it must be shown that the appointments have
undergone the regular screening process, that the
appointee is qualified, that there is a need to fill up the
vacancy immediately, and that the appointments are
not in bulk. Nazareno vs. Dumaguete [G.R. No.
181559, Oct. 2, 2009].
Where the power of appointment is absolute and the
appointee has been determined upon, no further
consent or approval is necessary and the formal
evidence of the appointment, the commission, may
issue at once. The appointment is deemed complete
once the last act required of the appointing authority
has been complied with. A written memorial that can
render title to public office indubitable is required. This
written memorial is known as the commission. For
purposes of appointments to the judiciary, therefore,
the date the commission has been signed by the
President is the date of the appointment. Such date
will determine the seniority of the members of the
Court of Appeals in connection with Section 3, Chapter I
of BP 129, as amended by RA 8246. In other words, the
earlier the date of the commission of an appointee, the
more senior he is over the other subsequent
appointees. Re: Seniority among the four most
recent appointments to the position of
Associate Justices of the Court of Appeals [A.M.
No. 10-4-22-SC, Sept. 28, 2010].
The incumbent President can appoint the

successor of Chief Justice Puno upon his
retirement as the prohibition against presidential
appointments under Section 15, Article VII does
not extend to appointments in the Judiciary.
Arturo M. De Castro vs. Judicial and Bar Council
[G.R. No. 191002, Apr. 20, 2010]. (NOTE: THIS CASE
INVALIDATED THE PRONOUNCEMENTS IN THE
VALENZUELA CASE).
b. Kinds of Appointments (Code: PTP)

i. PERMANENT APPOINTMENTS - Issued to a
person who meets all the requirements for the
position to which he is being appointed, including
the appropriate eligibility prescribed, in
Page 106 of 214
accordance with the provisions of the laws, rules,

and standards promulgated in pursuance thereof.
ii. TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS - Issued in the
absence of eligibles, when necessary to public
interest, in order to fill a vacancy with a person
who meets all the requirements for the position to
which he/she is being appointed, except the
appropriate civil service eligibility.
11. Creation of a new office.
=====================================
D. Eligibility and Qualification Requirements
=====================================
D. ELIGIBILITY AND QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
NOTE:
1. Temporary appointments shall not exceed 12
months.
2. The appointee may be replaced sooner if a
qualified civil service eligible becomes
available.
3. Where a temporary appointee acquires civil
service eligibility during his tenure as such, his
temporary appointment does not thereby
automatically become permanent. What is
required is a new appointment.
4. Temporary appointment given to a non-civil
service eligible is without a definite tenure
and is dependent upon the pleasure of the
appointing power.
iii. PROVISIONAL APPOINTMENT - A person who
has not qualified in an appropriate examination
but who otherwise meets the requirements for
appointment to a regular position in the
competitive service, whenever a vacancy occurs
and the filling thereof is necessary in the interest
of the service and there is no appropriate register
of eligibles at the time of appointment.
VACANCY- There is a vacancy when an office is empty
and without a legally qualified incumbent appointed or
elected to it with a lawful right to exercise its powers
and perform its duties. There can be no appointment to
a non-vacant position.
CAUSES:
CODE: I RACED PAR2C
1. Impeachment
2. Removal from office or resignation of the
incumbent
3. Abandonment
4. Conviction of a crime
5. Expiration of term
6. Death
7. Permanent disability
8. Acceptance of incompatible office
9. Reaching the age limit
10. Recall
Eligibility State of being legally fit to be chosen.

Qualification - Acts which a person is required to do
before entering upon position. Means two things:
1. Endowments, qualities, or attributes that make an
individual eligible for public office
2. Act of entering into performance of public office
ELIGIBILITY
QUALIFICATION
Eligibility is the state or

quality of being legally fit
or qualified to be chosen.
Qualification refers to the

act which a person, before
entering upon the
performance of his duties, is
by law required to do such
as the taking, and often,
subscribing and filing of an
official oath, and, in some
cases, the giving of an
official bond.
When used in the sense of

endowments, qualities or
attributes
When referring to the act

of entering into the
performance of the
functions of a public office
The individual must

possess the qualifications
at the time of appointment
or election and
continuously for as long as
the official relationship
continues.
Notes:
1.
Property
qualifications may not be
imposed for the exercise of
the right to run for public
office.
2.
Loss of any of the
qualifications during
incumbency will be a
Failure of an officer to
perform an act required by
law could affect the officers
the officers title to the
given office.
Notes:
1.
Prolonged failure
or refusal to take the office
could result in forfeiture of
office.
2.
An oath of office
taken before one who has
no authority to administer
oath is no oath at all.
3.
Once proclaimed
Page 107 of 214
ground for termination.
and duly sworn in office, a

public officer is entitled to
assume office and to
exercise the functions
thereof. The pendency of an
election protest is not
sufficient basis to enjoin
him from assuming office.
5. a resident of the
Philippines for at least
ten years immediately
preceding such election.
Senators
(Consti, VI, sec. 3)
1. natural-born citizen of
the Philippines
2. on the day of the
election, is at least 35
years of age
3. able to read and write
4. a registered voter; and
5. a resident of the
Philippines for not less
than two years
immediately preceding
the day of the election.
Members of the House of

Representatives
(Consti, VI, sec. 3)
1. a natural-born citizen
of the Philippine
2. on the day of the
election, is at least 25
years of age
4. except the party-list
representatives, a
registered voter in the
district in which he shall
be elected; and
5. a resident thereof for a
period of not less than
one year immediately
preceding the day of the
election.
Members of the SC and

lower collegiate court
(Consti, VIII, sec. 7(1))
of the Philippines
2. A Member of the SC
must be at least forty
years of age; and
3. Must have been for
fifteen years or more, a
judge of a lower court or
engaged in the practice of
law in the Philippines.
4. A member of the
judiciary must be a
person of proven
Eligibility and Qualification Requirements

The position of department manager is not a third level
position which is appointed by the President. For said
reason, a PEZA department manager only needs the
approval of the PEZA Director-General to validate his
appointment or re-appointment. As he need not
possess a CESO or CSEE eligibility, the CSC has no valid
and legal basis in invalidating his appointment or reappointment. Agyao v CSC [GR No. 182591, Jan. 8,
2011].
Note: Qualifications must be possessed at the time of
appointment or election and continuously as long as the
official relationship continues. When a person loses the
qualifications, he loses his office.
a. Formal Qualifications:
CODE: CAP CARES
1. CITIZENSHIP
2. AGE
3. POLITICAL AFFILIATION
4. CIVIL SERVICE EXAMINATION
5. ABILITY TO READ AND WRITE
6. RESIDENCE
7. EDUCATION
8. SUFFRAGE
NOTE: Only ACCOUNTABLE PUBLIC OFFICERS or those
who are entrusted with the collection and custody of
public money, and public ministerial officers whose
actions may affect the rights and interests of individuals
are required to give an official bond.
b. Those Prescribed by the Constitution.

Position
President and Vice
President
(Consti, VII, sec. 2)
Qualifications
of the Philippines
2. a registered voter
4. at least forty years of
age on the day of the
election; and
Page 108 of 214
competence, integrity,
probity and
independence (Consti,
VIII, sec. 7(3))
Chairman and the
Commisioners of the CSC
(Consti, IX-B, sec. 1(1))
Chairman and the

Commissioners of the COA
(Consti, IX)
Chairman and the

Commissioners of the COA
(Consti, IX)
1. natural-born citizens of
the Philippines and
2. at the time of their
appointment, at least
thirty-five years of age
3. with proven capacity
for public administration;
and
4. Must not have been
candidates for any
elective position in the
elections immediately
preceding their
appointment.
1.natural-born citizens of
the Philippines and
3. holders of a college
degree; and
4. must not have been
candidates for any
elective positions in the
immediately preceding
elections
5. However, a majority
thereof, including the
Chairman, shall be
members of the
Philippine Bar who have
been engaged in the
practice of law for at least
ten years.
the Philippines
3. Certified Public
Accountants with not less
than ten years of auditing
experience, or members
of the Philippine Bar who

have been engaged in the
practice of law for at least
ten years; and
4. must not have been
candidates for any
elective position in the
elections immediately
preceding their
appointment
5. At no time shall all
Members of the
Commission belong to
the same profession.
Chairman and Members
of the Commission on
Human Rights
(Consti, XII, sec. 17(2))
the Philippines; and
2. A majority of whom
shall be members of the
Bar.
The term of office and
other qualifications and
disabilities of the
Members of the
Commission shall be
provided by law.
=====================================
E. Disabilities and Inhibitions of Public Officers
=====================================
E. DISABILITIES AND INHIBITIONS OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS
a.
Disqualifications
CODE: IM RIPE C2ORN

1. Mental or physical INCAPACITY
2. MISCONDUCT or crime
3. REMOVAL or suspension from office
4. IMPEACHMENT
5. PREVIOUS tenure of office
6. Being an ELECTIVE official
7. CONSECUTIVE terms
8. Having been a CANDIDATE for any elective position
9. Holding more than ONE office
10. RELATIONSHIP with the appointing power
Page 109 of 214
11. Office NEWLY created or the emoluments of which

have been increased
12. Grounds under the LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
General Disqualifications under the Constitution:
1.
No candidate who lost in an election shall,
within one year after such election, be appointed to
any office in Government. [Sec.6, Art. IX-B]
2.
No elective official shall be eligible for
appointment or designation in any capacity to any
public office or position during his tenure. [Sec. 7 (1),
Art. IX-B]
3.
Unless otherwise provided by law or by the
primary functions of his position, no appointive official
shall hold any other position in Government [Sec. 7(2),
Art IX-B]
Special Disqualifications under the Constitution
1. The President, Vice-president, the Members of the
Cabinet, and their deputies or assistants shall not,
unless otherwise provided in the Constitution, hold any
other office or employment during their tenure. [Sec.
13, Art. VII]
2. 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 increase
during the term for which he was elected. [Sec. 13, Art
VI]
3. The Members of the Supreme Court and of other
courts established by law shall not be designated to any
agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative
functions [Sec.12, Art VIII]
4. No Member of a Constitutional Commission shall,
during his tenure, hold any other office or employment
[Sec. 2, Art IX-A]. The same disqualification applies to
the Ombudsman and his deputies. [Sec.8, Art XI].
5. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall not be
qualified to run for any office in the election
immediately succeeding their cessation from office.
[Sec. 11, Art. XI].
6. Members of Constitutional Commissions, the
Ombudsman and his deputies must not have been
Candidates for any elective position in the elections
immediately preceding their appointment. [Sec. 1, Art

IX-B, Art IX-C, Art. IX-D; Sec. 8, Art. XI].
7. Members of the Constitutional Commissions, the
Ombudsman and his deputies are appointed to a term
of seven (7) years, without reappointment. [Sec. 1(2),
Art. IX-B; Sec. 1 (2), Art. IX-C; Sec, 1 (2), Art. IX-D;
Sec.11, Art IX].
8. The spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity
within the fourth civil degree of the President shall not
during his tenure be appointed as Members of the
Constitutional Commissions, or the Office of the
Ombudsman, or as Secretaries, Undersecretaries,
chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices, including
government-owned or controlled corporations [Sec. 13,
Art. VII].
Improper notarization is not among the grounds for
disqualification as stated under the OEC and LGC. Apart
from the qualifications provided for in the Constitution,
the power to prescribe additional qualifications for
elective office and grounds for disqualification
therefrom, consistent with the constitutional
provisions, is vested in Congress. Amora v COMELEC
[GR NO. 19228, Jan. 25, 2011].
b. Limits on Legislatures Power to Prescribe

Qualifications:
1.
2.
3.
The legislature may not reduce or increase the

qualifications prescribed in an exclusive manner by
the Constitution.
The legislature may prescribe only general
qualifications.
The qualifications must be relevant to the office
for which they are prescribed.
Where a person is prohibited from holding two offices

at the same time, his appointment or election to a
second office MAY OPERATE TO VACATE THE FIRST or
HE MAY BE INELIGIBLE FOR THE SECOND.
A person who accepts and qualifies for a second and
incompatible office is DEEMED TO VACATE, or by
implication, TO RESIGN FROM THE FIRST OFFICE. The
same rule obtains where the holding of more than one
position is prohibited by constitutional or statutory
provision although the second position is not
incompatible with the first.
Page 110 of 214
In the absence of constitutional inhibition, Congress has

the same right to provide disqualifications that it has to
provide qualifications for office.
PD 8078, Sec. 49 prohibits the appointment of a Senator
or Congressman to any office which may have been
created or emoluments thereof increased during the
term for which he was elected.
When the constitution has attached a disqualification
to the holding of any office, Congress cannot remove it
under the power to prescribe qualifications as to such
offices as it may create. The Constitution imposes
limitations on the right of certain officials to hold more
than one office at the same time.
(a) The President, Vice President, Members of

the Cabinet, their deputies or assistants shall
not, unless otherwise provided in the
Constitution, hold any other office or
employment during their tenure.
(b) A Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives may not hold any office or
employment in the Government, or any
subdivision, agency, or instrumentality,
including GOCCS or their subsidiaries, during
his TERM (NOT TENURE) without FORFEITING
HIS SEAT.
(c) The members of the Supreme Court and of
other courts established bylaw shall not be
designated to any agency performing quasijudicial or administrative functions.
(d) A member of the Constitutional
Commission shall not, during his tenure, hold
any other office or employment.
(e) During their tenure, the Ombudsman and
his deputies are subject to the same
disqualifications and prohibitions as provided
Providing for the Organization of the Civil Service Commission in

Accordance with Provisions of the Constitution, Prescribing its
Powers and Functions and for other Purposes
for
members
Commissions.
of
the
Constitutional
(f) Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the

primary functions of his position, no
appointive official shall hold any other office
or employment in the government or any
subdivision, agency, or instrumentality,
including GOCCs or their subsidiaries.
(g) No member of the armed forces in the
active service shall, at any time, be appointed
or designated in any capacity to a civilian
position in the government including GOCCs
or any of their subsidiaries.
c. Spoils Systems and Political Lame Ducks

SPOILS SYSTEM
No elective official shall be
eligible for appointment or
designation in any capacity
to any public office or
position during his tenure.
(Art. IX B, SEC. 7.)
The disqualification subsists
only during the tenure in
office of the elective official.
He may be appointed
provided he forfeits his seat.
EXCEPTION (examples):
1. The Vice President
may be appointed as
a Cabinet member
2. A Congressman may
sit in the Judicial and
Bar Council
3. To be eligible to hold
any other office, the
elected official must
first resign from his
office
POLITICAL LAME DUCKS

No candidate who has lost in
any election shall, within one
year after such election, be
appointed to any office in the
Government of any
government-owned or
controlled corporations or in
any of its subsidiaries. (Art. IX
B Sec.6)
Members of The Civil Service
shall not have been
candidates for any elective
position in the elections
immediately preceding their
appointment. (Art.9 B Sec.
1(1))
Except for losing candidates
in barangay elections no
candidate who lost in any
election shall, within one (1)
year after such election, be
appointed to any office in the
Government or any
government-owned or
controlled corporations or in
a any of their subsidiaries.
(Section 94. Local
Government Code of 1991)
Page 111 of 214
NEPOTISM- Since a public office is

created for the benefit and in the
people, appointments thereto should
on merit and fitness uninfluenced by
filial consideration.
a public trust,
interest of the
be based solely
any personal or
1. The Constitution prohibits the president from

appointing his close relatives (within the 4th civil degree
by consanguinity or affinity to the president or his
spouse) to high positions in government during his
tenure. No relative of the President, within the 4th civil
degree, shall be appointed to/as:
1. A Constitutional Commission
2. The Office of the Ombudsman
3. Secretary of a Department
4. Undersecretary of a Department
5. Chairman or Head of Bureaus of Offices
6. Any GOCC
7. Any GOCC subsidiary
2. Under the Civil Service Decree, all appointments in
the national, provincial, city, and municipal
governments or in any branch or instrumentality,
including GOCCs, made in favor of the appointing or
recommending authority, or of the chief of the bureau
of the office, or of persons exercising immediate
supervision over him, are PROHIBITED. As used in the
Civil Service Law, the term relative and members of
the family referred to those within the 3rd degree of
consanguinity or affinity.
Exceptions:
Code: CTAP
1. Persons employed in confidential capacity
2. Teachers
3. Physicians
4. Members of AFP
The restriction shall not be applicable to any family
who, after his or her appointment to any position in an
office or bureau, contracts marriage with someone in
the same office or bureau. In this event, the
employment or retention therein of both husband and
wife may be allowed.
The mere issuance of appointment in favor of a relative

within the third degree of consanguinity or affinity is
sufficient to constitute nepotism. Also, even if the case
is one of falsification of public document, the
requirement of disclosure of relationship to the
appointing power in the local government units simply
aims to ensure strict enforcement of the prohibition
against nepotism. Galeos v. People of the Philippines
[G.R. No. 174730-37, Feb. 9, 2011].
The following are exempted from the rules on
nepotism:
Code: CTAP
1. Persons employed in a confidential
capacity
2. Teachers
3. Physicians
4. Members of the Armed Forces
DIVESTMENT - When a public official is in a conflict-ofinterest situation. Such official must resign from his
position in any private business enterprise within 30
days from his assumption of office and/ or divest
himself of his shareholdings or interest within 60 days
from such assumption.
=====================================
F. Powers and Duties of Public Officers
=====================================
F. POWERS AND DUTIES OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
1.
2.
3.
Expressly conferred UPON HIM by the LAW under

which he has been appointed or elected
Expressly annexed to the OFFICE by the LAW which
created it or some other law referring to it
Attached to the OFFICE as an INCIDENT to it
DOCTRINE OF NECESSARY IMPLICATION - All powers

necessary to the exercise of the power expressly
granted are deemed impliedly granted. The fact that a
particular power has not been expressly conferred does
not necessarily mean that it is not possessed by the
officer claiming it.
Page 112 of 214
MINISTERIAL POWERS
When it is absolute,
certain, and imperative
involving merely
execution of a specific
duty arising from fixed
and designated facts.
DISCRETIONARY POWERS
When it requires the
exercise of reason and
discretion in determining
how or whether the act
shall be done or the course
pursued.
NOTE:
1. The law exacting its
discharge prescribes
and defines the time,
mode, and occasion
of its performance
with such certainty
that nothing is left
for judgment or
discretion.
2. It is susceptible of
delegation and can
be compelled by
judicial action.
NOTE: The officer is

expected to discharge the
duty directly and not
through the intervening
mind of another.
GENERAL RULE: It cannot
be delegated to another
EXCEPTION: Power of the
President to conclude
treaties may be assigned
to a treaty panel, which
can negotiate the treaty
on his behalf, under his
instructions and subject to
his approval.
General Duties of Public Officers

1. To be accountable to the people, to serve them with
utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency;
to act with patriotism and justice; and to lead modest
lives
2. Submit a declaration under oath of assets, liabilities,
and net worth upon assumption of officer and
thereafter as may be required
3. Owe the State and Constitution allegiance at all
times
=====================================
G. Rights of Public Officers
=====================================
G. RIGHTS OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
1. Right to Office - Just and legal claim to exercise
powers and responsibilities of public office.
2. Right to Wages
3. Right to Preference in Promotion subject to the
discretion of the appointing authority
4. Right to vacation and sick leave
5. Right to maternity leave
6. Right to retirement pay
7. Other rights:
a. Right to reimbursement for expenses

incurred in due performance of duty (Does not include
transportation allowance for those using government
vehicles)
b. Right to be indemnified against liabilities
they may incur in bona fide discharge of duties
c. Right to longetivity pay
The purpose of the prohibition against additional or
double compensation for public officials: to manifest a
commitment to the fundamental principle that a public
office is a public trust. It is expected of a government
official or employee that he keeps uppermost in mind
the demands of public welfare. He is there to render
public service. He is of course entitled to be rewarded
for the performance of the functions entrusted to him,
but that should not be the overriding consideration.
The intrusion of the thought of private gain should be
unwelcome. The temptation to further personal ends,
public employment as a means for the acquisition of
wealth, is to be resisted. That at least is the idea. There
is then to be an awareness on the part of the officer or
employee of the government that he is to receive only
such compensation as may be fixed by law. With such a
realization, he is expected not to avail himself of
devious or circuitous means to increase the
remuneration attached to his position. Veloso v. COA
[G.R. No. 193677, Sept. 6, 2011].
Retirement has been defined as a withdrawal from
office, public station, business, occupation, or public
duty. It involves bilateral act of the parties, a voluntary
agreement between the employer and the employee
whereby the latter, after reaching a certain age, agrees
and/or consents to sever his employment with the
former. Retirement plans create a contractual
obligation in which the promise to pay benefits is made
in consideration of the continued faithful service of the
employee for the requisite period. Before a right to
retirement benefits vests in an employee, he must have
met the stated conditions of eligibility with respect to
the nature of employment, age, and length of service.
This is a condition precedent to his acquisition of rights
thereunder. Reyes v. CA [G.R. No. 167002, Dec. 12,
2011].
PROMOTION - The movement from one position to
another with increase in duties and responsibilities as
authorized by law and usually accompanied by an
increase in pay.
DEMOTION- There is demotion when an employee is
appointed to a position resulting in diminution of
duties, responsibilities, status or rank, which may or
Page 113 of 214
may not involve a reduction in salary. Where an

employee is appointed to a position with the same
duties and responsibilities but with rank and salary
higher than those enjoyed in his previous position,
there is no demotion and the appointment is valid.
Bautista v. CSC [G.R. No. 185215, July 22, 2010].
A Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs who
tendered her courtesy resignation may file a complaint
for damages for being excluded from a centennial
anniversary memorabilia and for being prevented from
exercising the functions of her office, while an
injunction is in order. A Preliminary Injunction order
issued by a court of law had to be obeyed, especially
since the question of replacing a public officer had not
yet been properly resolved. Villanueva v. Rosqueta
[G.R. No. 180764, Jan. 19, 2010].
NEXT-IN-RANK RULE - The person next in rank shall be
given preference in promotion when the position
IMMEDIATELY ABOVE his is vacated.
HOLD-OVER - A public officers term has expired or his
services terminated but he should continue holding his
office until his successor is appointed or chosen and
had qualified
NOTE:
1. The concept of next-in-rank does NOT import any
MANDATORY or peremptory requirement that the
person next in rank must be appointed to the
vacancy.
2. The appointing authority has the DISCRETION to fill
the vacancy under the next-in-rank rule or by any
other method authorized by law. e.g. by transfer
=======================================
1. Preventive suspension and back
salaries
2. Illegal dismissal, reinstatement and
back salaries
=======================================
H. LIABILITIES OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
General Rule: A public officer is not liable for injuries
sustained by another due to official acts done within
the scope of his authority.
Exceptions:
Code: BM-NID
1. Bad faith
2. Malice
3. Negligence
4. Death or injury to persons or damage to property
GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINE:
Code: DOOD IPOD MINI MUG
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
DISCOURTESY in the course of official duties

Refusal to perform OFFICIAL DUTY or render
OVERTIME SERVICE
Falsification of OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS
Habitual DRUNKENNESS
INEFFICIENCY and incompetence in the
performance of official duties
Willful refusal to PAY just DEBTS or willful failure to
pay TAXES due to the government
OPPRESSION
DISHONESTY
MISCONDUCT
Disgraceful and IMMORAL CONDUCT
NEGLECT of duty
Physical or mental INCAPACITY due to immoral or
vicious habits
Conviction of a crime involving MORAL TURPITUDE
Being notoriously UNDESIRABLE
GAMBLING
NEGLIGENCE
DISHONESTY
In the case of public

officials, there is negligence
when there is a breach of
duty or failure to perform
the obligation, and there is
gross negligence when a
breach of duty is flagrant
and palpable. Failing to
comply with his duty to
provide a detailed list of his
assets and business
interests in his SALN and
for relying on the family
bookkeeper/accountant to
fill out his SALN and in
signing the same without
checking or verifying the
entries is NEGLIGENCE.
Presidential Anti-Graft
Commission (PAGC) and
the Office of the President
v. Salvador A. Pleyto [G.R.
No. 176058, March 23,
Dishonesty begins when

an individual
intentionally makes a
false statement in any
material fact, or
practicing or attempting
to practice any
deception or fraud in
order to secure his
examination,
registration,
appointment or
promotion. It should be
emphasized only when
the accumulated wealth
becomes manifestly
disproportionate to the
employees income or
other sources of income
and his failure to
properly account or
explain his other sources
of income does he
Page 114 of 214
2011].
become susceptible to
dishonesty. Ombudsman
v. Nieto, [GR No.
185685, Jan. 31, 2011].
Good faith is ordinarily used to describe that state

of mind denoting honesty of intention and
freedom from knowledge of circumstances which
ought to put the holder upon inquiry. In other
words, good faith is actually a question of
intention. Although this is something internal, one
can ascertain a persons intention not from his
own protestation of good faith, which is selfserving, but from evidence of his conduct and
outward acts. Dumduma v. CSC [G.R. No. 182606.
October 4, 2011].
Simple neglect of duty is defined as the failure of
an employee to give proper attention to a required
task or to discharge a duty due to carelessness or
indifference. On the other hand, gross neglect of
duty is characterized by want of even the slightest
care, or by conscious indifference to the
consequences, or by flagrant and palpable breach
of duty. Marigomen v. Manabat [Court of
Appeals, Manila, A.M. No. CA-11-24-P (Formerly
A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 10-163-CA-P) : November 16,
2011].
Every public official who signs or initials
documents in the course of standard operating
procedures does not automatically become a
conspirator in a crime that transpired at some
stage in which the official had no participation.
Peralta v. Desierto [473 SCRA 322, October 19,
2005].
Even if the dishonest act was committed by the
employee prior to entering government service,
such act is still a ground for disciplinary action.
Orbase v.
Ombudsman [G.R. No. 175115,
December 23, 2009].
Misconduct in office refers to "any unlawful
behavior by a public officer in relation to the duties
of his office, willful in character. The term
embraces acts which the office holder had no right
to perform, acts performed improperly, and failure
to act in the face of an affirmative duty to act." In
grave misconduct, as distinguished from simple
misconduct, the elements of corruption, clear
intent to violate the law, or flagrant disregard of
established rule must be manifest. Corruption as
an element of grave misconduct consists in the act
of an official or employee who unlawfully or
wrongfully uses his station or character to procure
some benefit for himself or for another, contrary
to the rights of others. Gabon v. Merka [A.M. No.
P-11-3000, December 14, 2011].
Grave misconduct, consists in a government

officials deliberate violation of a rule of law or
standard of behavior. It is regarded as grave when
the elements of corruption, clear intent to violate
the law, or flagrant disregard of established rules
are present. In particular, corruption as an element
of grave misconduct consists in the officials
unlawful and wrongful use of his station or
character to procure some benefit for himself or
for another person, contrary to duty and the rights
of others. Rigging by a public official at a bidding in
the organization where he belongs is a specie of
corruption. NPC v. CSCG.R. No. 152093
January 24, 2012].
A motion for reconsideration from a decision of
the CSC may be filed only in two ways, either by
mail or personal delivery. A facsimile is not a
genuine and authentic pleading. It is, at best, an
exact copy preserving all the marks of an original.
Without the original, there is no way of
determining on its face whether the facsimile
pleading is genuine and authentic and was
originally signed by the party and his counsel. It
may, in fact, be a sham pleading. Torres v.
PAGCOR [G.R. No. 193531, December 14, 2011].
WHEN DEMOTION IS
PROPER
A complaint for damages
and injunction against the
members of the Philippine
army cannot be held
personally accountable for
the demolition since the act
was done in connection with
their official duties in
carrying the AFP program of
Oplan Linis. There was no
showing that such acts
constitute ultra vires acts
nor was there a showing of
bad faith on the part of
petitioners. Philippine Army,
5th Infantry Division v.
Spouses Pamittan, et. al.,
[G.R. No. 187326, June 15,
2011].
WHEN DEMOTION IS
NOT PROPER
If a Sanggunian
resolution only
authorized a Mayor to
file an unlawful
detainer case in case of
resistance to obey the
order or to demolish
the building using legal
means, the act of
demolition without
legal order is not
proper. After all, the
present Local
Government Code does
not expressly provide
for the abatement of
nuisance. Asilo v.
People of the
Philippines, [GR
159017-18, Mar. 9,
2011].
Page 115 of 214
1. Preventive Suspension and Back Salaries

PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION There are two kinds of
preventive suspension of government employees
charged with offenses punishable by removal or
suspension,
(1)
preventive
suspension
pending investigation; and (2) preventive suspension
pending appeal if the penalty imposed by
the disciplining authority is suspension or dismissal and,
after review, the respondent is exonerated. Preventive
suspension pending investigation is not a penalty. It is a
measure intended to enable the disciplining authority
to investigate charges against respondent by
preventing the latter from intimidating or in any way
influencing witnesses against him. If the investigation is
not finished and a decision is not rendered within that
period, the suspension will be lifted and the respondent
will automatically be reinstated. If after investigation,
respondent is found innocent of the charges and is
exonerated, he should be reinstated. CSC vs. Alfonso,
[G.R. No. 179452, June 11, 2009].
There are two kinds of preventive suspension of civil
service employees who are charged with offenses
punishable by removal or suspension: (i) preventive
suspension pending investigation and (ii) preventive
suspension pending appeal. Compensation is due only
for the period of preventive suspension pending appeal
should the employee be ultimately exonerated. CSC v
Cruz [G.R. No. 187858, Aug. 9, 2011].
The duration is coextensive with the period prescribed
for deciding administrative disciplinary cases.
If the case is decided

BEFORE 90 days
The suspension will last
LESS THAN 90 days.
If the case is NOT DECIDED

WITHIN 90 days
The suspension may NOT
EXCEED the maximum
period of 90 days.
Preventive suspension is merely a preventive measure,

a preliminary step in an administrative investigation;
the purpose thereof is to prevent the accused from
using his position and the powers and prerogatives of
his office to influence potential witnesses or tamper
with records which may be vital in the prosecution of
the case against him. Office of the Deputy
Ombudsman v. Francisco [G.R. No. 172553
Dec. 14, 2011]
It is now settled that Sec. 13 of Republic Act No. 30199

makes it mandatory for the Sandiganbayan to suspend
any public official against whom a valid information
charging violation of that law, Book II, Title 7 of the
Revised Penal Code, or any offense involving fraud
upon government or public funds or property is filed.
The court trying a case has neither discretion nor duty
to determine whether preventive suspension is
required to prevent the accused from using his office to
intimidate witnesses or frustrate his prosecution or
continuing committing malfeasance in office.
Villasenor v. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 180700, March
4, 2008]
There is no dispute as to the power of the Ombudsman
to place a public officer charged with an administrative
offense under preventive suspension. That power is
clearly confined under Section 24 of R.A. No. 6770 10.
The law sets forth two conditions that must be satisfied
to justify the issuance of an order of preventive
suspension pending an investigation, to wit:
1. The evidence of guilt is strong; and
2. Either of the following circumstances co-exists with
the first requirement:
a. The charge involves dishonesty, oppression or grave
misconduct or neglect in the performance of duty;
b. The charge would warrant removal from the service;
or
c. The respondent's continued stay in office may
prejudice the case filed against him. Ombudsman v.
Valeroso (G.R. No. 167828, Apr. 2, 2007)
3. Settled is the rule that prior notice and hearing are
not required in the issuance of a preventive suspension
order. Carabeo v. CA (G.R. Nos. 178000 and 178003,
Dec. 4, 2009)
4. Two conditions before an employee may be entitled
to back salaries: a) the employee must be found
innocent of the charges and b) his suspension must be
unjustified. The reasoning behind these conditions runs
this way: although an employee is considered under
preventive suspension during the pendency of a
successful appeal, the law itself only authorizes
preventive suspension for a fixed period; hence, his
suspension beyond this fixed period is unjustified and
must be compensated. The rule on payment of back
9
The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act

The Ombudsman Act of 1989
10
Page 116 of 214
salaries during the period of suspension of a member of

the civil service who is subsequently ordered
reinstated, is already settled in this jurisdiction. Such
payment of salaries corresponding to the period when
an employee is not allowed to work may be decreed
not only if he is found innocent of the charges which
caused his suspension (Sec. 35, RA 2260), but also when
the suspension is unjustified. CSC v Cruz [G.R. No.
187858, Aug. 9, 2011].
The mere reduction of the penalty on appeal does not
entitle a government employee to back salaries if he
was not exonerated of the charge against him. If the
exoneration of the employee is relative (as
distinguished from complete exoneration), an inquiry
into the factual premise of the offense charged and of
the offense committed must be made.
If the
administrative offense found to have been actually
committed is of lesser gravity than the offense charged,
the employee cannot be considered exonerated if the
factual premise for the imposition of the lesser penalty
remains the same. CSC v. Cruz [G.R. No. 187858, Aug.
9, 2011].
GROUNDS FOR PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION OF POLICE
OFFICERS [RA 855111, SEC 55]
(Preventive Suspension Pending Criminal Case)
The court shall immediately suspend the accused from
office for a period not exceeding ninety (90) days from
arraignment:
1. Upon the filing of a complaint or information
sufficient in form and substance against a member
of the PNP
2. for grave felonies where the penalty imposed by
law is six (6) years and one (1) day or more,
EXCEPT: if it can be shown by evidence that
the accused is harassing the complainant
and/or witnesses, the court may order the
preventive suspension of the accused PNP
member even if the charge is punishable by a
penalty lower than six (6) years and one (1)
day:
GENERAL RULE: period of preventive suspension shall
not be more than ninety (90) days
EXCEPTION: if the delay in the disposition of the case is
due to the fault, negligence or petitions of the
respondent:
The preventive suspension may be sooner lifted by the

court in the exigency of the service upon
recommendation of the chief, PNP. Such case shall be
subject to continuous trial and shall be terminated
within ninety (90) days from arraignment of the
accused.
BACK SALARIES DURING PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION
General Rule: A public official is not entitled to any
compensation if he has not rendered any service. Reyes
v. Hernandez [G.R. No. Apr. 8, 1941]. Based on the no
work-no pay principle.
Exception: 2 conditions before an employee may be
entitled to back salaries:
a) The employee must be found innocent of the
charges and
b) His suspension must be unjustified or the official was
innocent. Civil Service Commission vs. Cruz [G.R. No.
187858, Aug. 9, 2011].
Preventive Suspension
Pending Investigation
Preventive Suspension
Pending Appeal
Not a penalty. It is a
measure intended to
enable the disciplining
authority to investigate
charges against
respondent by preventing
the latter from
intimidating or in any way
influencing witnesses
against him. If the
investigation is not
finished and a decision is
not rendered within that
period, the suspension
will be lifted and the
respondent will
automatically be
reinstated. If after
investigation, respondent
is found innocent of the
charges and is
exonerated, he should be
reinstated. CSC vs.
Alfonso (G.R. No.
179452, June 11, 2009)
f the penalty imposed by

the disciplining authority is
suspension or dismissal and,
after review, the
respondent is exonerated.
NOTE:
No back salaries shall be
due for the period of
preventive suspension
PENDING INVESTIGATION
but only for the period of
preventive suspension
PENDING APPEAL, in the
event the employee is
exonerated. Gloria v. CA
(G.R. No. 131012, Apr. 21,
1999)
11
Philippine National Police Reform and Reorganization Act of

1998
Amount of Back Salaries

An illegally terminated civil service employee is entitled
to back salaries limited only to a maximum period of
Page 117 of 214
five years, and not full back salaries from his illegal
termination up to his reinstatement. Galang v. Land
Bank [G.R. No. 175276, May 31, 2011].
2. Illegal dismissal, reinstatement and back

salaries
or separated. One who

is reinstated assumes
the position he had
occupied prior to the
dismissal and is, as an
ordinary rule, entitled
only to the last salary in
that position.
of unlawful dismissal.
GENERAL RULE: A public officer or employee, who has

been dismissed or suspended from service and who is
later found innocent of charges, is entitled to
reinstatement with full back salary and wages12
Where to File Claims for Backwages: The claim for

recovery of back salaries involves settlement of
accounts or claims against the government and should
therefore be filed with the Commission on Audit.
The rule is settled that back salaries may be awarded to

civil servants only if they have been illegally dismissed
and thenceforth ordered reinstated, or to those
acquitted of the charge against them. Tanjay Water
District v. Quinit, Jr. [G.R. No. 160502, Apr. 27, 2007].
NOTE:
A public officer is entitled after his acquittal not only to
reinstatement but also to payment of the salaries,
allowances, and other benefits withheld from him by
reason of his discharge from the service even if there
has been valid suspension from the service pending the
adjudication of the criminal case. P/Chief
Superintendent Roberto L. Calinisan v. Spo2 Reynaldo
Roaquin [G.R. No. 159588, Sept. 15, 2010].
When an official or employee was illegally dismissed

and his reinstatement has later been ordered, for all
legal purposes he is considered as not having left his
office. Therefore, he is entitled to all the rights and
privileges that accrue to him by virtue of the office he
held. Galang v. Land Bank [G.R. No. 175276, May 31,
2011].
EXCEPTION: When Removal or Suspension is Lawful
The denial of salary to an employee during the period
of his suspension, if he should later be found guilty, is
proper because he had given ground for his suspension.
It does not impair his constitutional rights because the
Constitution itself allows suspension for cause as
provided by law and the law provides that an employee
may be suspended pending an investigation or by way
of penalty. Bangalisan v. CA [G.R. No. 124678, July 31,
1997].
Reinstatement - the issuance of an appointment to a
person who has been previously appointed to a
position in the career service and who has, through no
delinquency or misconduct, been separated therefrom,
or to the restoration of one who has been exonerated
of the administrative charges filed against him. Galang
v. Land Bank [G.R. No. 175276, May 31, 2011].
REINSTATEMENT
BACKWAGES
restoration to a state or
condition from which
one had been removed
a form of relief that

restores the income
that was lost by reason
12
=====================================
I. IMMUNITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
=====================================
I.
IMMUNITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
OFFICIAL IMMUNITY - Only protects public officials

from tort liability for damages arising from acts or
functions in the performance of their official duties.
Exceptions: when liability does not devolve ultimately
to the State such as:
1. A petition to require official to do his duty
2. A petition to restrain him from doing an act
3. To recover taxes from him
4. Those where the officer impleaded may by himself
alone comply with the decision of the court
5. Where the government itself has violated its own
laws
Where a public officer has committed an ultra vires act,
or where there is a showing of bad faith, malice or
gross negligence, the officer can be held personally
accountable even if such acts are claimed to have been
performed in connection with official duties. Wylie v.
Rarang, [209 SCRA 357].
Agpalo, 2005
Page 118 of 214
Immunity
from
suit
cannot
institutionalize
irresponsibility and non-accountability nor grant a
privileged status not claimed by any other official of the
Republic. Republic v. Sandoval, [G.R. No. 84607, Mar.
19, 1993].
Where the public officer is sued in his personal
capacity, state immunity will not apply. Lansang v. CA
[G.R. No. 102667, Feb. 23, 2000].
=====================================
J. De Facto Officers
=====================================
USURPER - One who takes possession of the office and

undertakes to act officially without any color of right or
authority, either actual or apparent.
Effects of Acts of De Facto Officers:
1. If done within the scope and by the apparent
authority of the office, considered VALID and
binding as if he were the officer legally elected and
qualified for the office and in full possession
thereof.
2. The de facto officer cannot claim a salary and
other compensations for services rendered by him
as such.
NOTE: There is authority to the effect that the de
facto officer may retain salaries collected by him
for services rendered in good faith where there is
no de jure officer claiming the office.
J. DE FACTO OFFICERS
3.
DE FACTO OFFICER - One who actually possesses an
office although he has an imperfect or colorable title.
His acts, though not those of a lawful officer, the law,
upon principles of policy and justice, will hold valid so
far as they involve the interests of the public and third
persons.
REQUISITES:
1. A de jure office
2. Color of right or general acquiescence by the
public
3. Actual physical possession of the office in good
faith
Entitlement to Salaries
General Rule: The rightful incumbent of a public officer
may recover from an officer de facto the salary
received by the latter during the time of his wrongful
tenure, even though he entered into the office in good
faith and under color of title. General Manager v.
Monserate (GR No. 129616, Apr. 17 2002)
The de facto officer is subject to the same liabilities

imposed on the de jure officer in the discharge of
official duties, in addition to whatever special
damages may be due from him because of his
unlawful assumption of office.
Challenging a De Facto Officer:

1. The incumbency of a de facto officer may not be
challenged collaterally or in an action to which he
is not a party.
2. The challenge must be made in a direct proceeding
where title to the office will be the principal issue.
3. The authorized proceeding is quo warranto either
by the Solicitor General in the name of the
Republic or by any person claiming title to the
office.
=====================================
K. Termination of Official Relation
======================================
Exception: Where there is no de jure public officer13
K. TERMINATION OF OFFICIAL RELATION
DE JURE OFFICER - One who has the lawful right to the

office in all respects, but who has either been ousted
from it, or who has never actually taken possession of
it. When the officer de jure is also the officer de facto,
the lawful title and possession are united.
a. Modes of Termination:
CODE: TAD PAIR CAIRR
13
Nachura, 452
1.
NATURAL CAUSES:
1. Expiration of the TERM or tenure of office UNLESS authorized to hold over, his/her rights
and duties ipso facto ceases.
2. Reaching the AGE limit (retirement) - 65 years
for public officers and employees
3. DEATH or permanent disability
Page 119 of 214
2.
NOTE: If the authority to be exercised is

conferred upon two or more officers, a different
rule applies. While the death of one terminates
his/her authority and leaves a vacancy to be
filled, the whole office is not vacant. Unless the
joint action of all is expressly required, the
survivors may execute the office. (De Leon,
2008)
ACTS OR NEGLECT OF OFFICER:
1. PRESCRIPTION of Right to Office - Quo
Warranto is the proper remedy against a
public officer or employee for his/her ouster
from office which should be commenced
within 1 year after the cause of such ouster;
otherwise the action shall be barred (De Leon,
2008)
2. ABANDONMENT of Office - the voluntary
relinquishment of an office by the holder, with
the intention of terminating his possession
and control thereof. .. There are, therefore,
two essential elements of abandonment: first,
an intention to abandon and second, an overt
or external act by which the intention is
carried into effect.
NOTE: Generally speaking, a person holding a
public office may abandon such office by
nonuser or acquiescence. Non-user refers to a
neglect to use a right or privilege or to
exercise an office. However, nonperformance
of the duties of an office does not constitute
abandonment where such nonperformance
results from temporary disability or from
involuntary failure to perform. Abandonment
may also result from an acquiescence by the
officer in his wrongful removal or discharge,
for instance, after a summary removal, an
unreasonable delay by an officer illegally
removed in taking steps to vindicate his rights
may constitute an abandonment of the office.
Canonizado v. Aguirre, [G.R. No. 133132, Feb.
15, 2001].
3. Acceptance of an INCOMPATIBLE office
It is a well settled rule that he who, while
occupying one office, accepts another
incompatible with the first, ipso facto vacates
the first office and his title is thereby
terminated without any other act or
proceeding.
Public policy considerations
dictate against allowing the same individual to
perform inconsistent and incompatible duties.
The incompatibility contemplated is not the
mere physical impossibility of one persons
performing the duties of the two offices due
to a lack of time or the inability to be in two
3.
places at the same moment, but that which

proceeds from the nature and relations of the
two positions to each other as to give rise to
contrariety and antagonism should one
person attempt to faithfully and impartially
discharge the duties of one toward the
incumbent of the other. Canonizado v.
Aguirre [G.R. No. 133132, Feb. 15, 2001].
4. RESIGNATION Formal renunciation or
relinquishment of office.
NOTE: To constitute a complete and operative
act of resignation, the officer or employee
must show a clear intention to relinquish or
surrender his position accompanied by the act
of relinquishment. Resignation implies an
expression of the incumbent in some form,
express or implied, of the intention to
surrender, renounce and relinquish the office,
and its acceptance by competent and lawful
authority Verily, a "courtesy resignation"
cannot properly be interpreted as resignation
in the legal sense for it is not necessarily a
reflection of a public official's intention to
surrender his position. Rather, it manifests his
submission to the will of the political authority
and the appointing power. Ortiz v. COMELEC,
[G.R. No. 78957, June 28, 1988].
ACTS OF THE GOVERNMENT OR PEOPLE:
1. CONVICTION of a crime - termination results
when the penalties of perpetual or temporary
absolute disqualification or penalties of
perpetual
or
temporary
special
disqualification are imposed upon conviction
by final judgment in a trial court
2. ABOLITION of office 3. IMPEACHMENT - way of removing the
President, Vice President, Members of the
Supreme Court and the Constitutional
Commissions and the Ombudsman.
4. REMOVAL - ouster of the incumbent before
the expiration of his/her term
GROUNDS:
a.
Members of Congress each House
may punish its members for disorderly
behavior with the concurrence of 2/3 of
ALL its members. Suspension if imposed
shall not exceed 60 days.
b.
Civil Service Officers/Employees for
causes provided by law
5. RECALL - refers to the election itself by means
of which voters decide whether they should
retain their local official or elect replacement.
The ground for recall is loss of confidence.
Page 120 of 214
It is a fundamental principle in the law on public

officers that administrative liability is separate from
and independent of criminal liability. A simple act or
omission can give rise to criminal, civil or administrative
liability, each independently of the others. This is
known as the threefold liability rule. Thus,
absolution from a criminal charge is not a bar to an
administrative prosecution, and vice versa. The
dismissal of the administrative cases against the
petitioners will not necessarily result in the dismissal of
the criminal complaints filed against them. Regidor,
Jr. vs. People [G.R. No. 166086-92, Feb. 13, 2009];
office of the President v. Cataquiz [G.R. No. 183445,
Sept. 14, 2011].
b. Reorganization
A REORGANIZATION involves the reduction of
personnel, consolidation of offices, or abolition thereof
by reason of economy or redundancy of functions. It
alters the existing structure of government offices or
units therein, including the lines of control, authority
and responsibility between them to make the
bureaucracy more responsive to the needs of the public
clientele as authorized by law. It could result in the loss
of ones position through removal or abolition of an
office. For a reorganization for the purpose of economy
or to make the bureaucracy more efficient to be valid,
however, it must pass the test of good faith, otherwise
it is void ab initio. Pan v. Pena [G.R. No. 174244, Feb.
13, 2009].
If the reorganization is done in good faith, the abolition
of positions, which results in loss of security of tenure
of affected government employees, would be valid.
Except those who hold constitutional offices, which
provide for special immunity as regards salary and
tenure, no one can be said to have any vested right to
an office or salary. Banda v. Ermita [G.R. No. 166620,
Apr. 20, 2010].
The creation of the Truth Commission does not fall
within the Presidents power to reorganize. Section 31
of the Revised Administrative Code refers to reduction
of personnel, consolidation of offices, or abolition
thereof by reason of economy or redundancy of
functions. These refer to situations where a body or an
office is already existent but a modification or
alteration thereof has to be effected. Biraogo v. The
Philippine Truth Commission of 2010 [G.R. No.
192935/ G.R. No. 19303, Dec. 7, 2010].
The existence of any or some of the following
circumstances may be considered as evidence of bad
faith in the removals made as a result of reorganization,

giving rise to a claim for reinstatement or
reappointment by an aggrieved party:
(a) Where there is a significant increase in the
number of positions in the new staffing pattern of
the department or agency concerned;
(b) Where an office is abolished and other
performing substantially the same functions is
created;
(c) Where incumbents are replaced by those less
qualified in terms of status of appointment,
performance and merit;
(d) Where there is a reclassification of offices in
the department or agency concerned and the
reclassified offices perform substantially the same
function as the original offices;
(e) Where the removal violates the order of
separation provided in Section 3 hereof. Cotiangco
v. Province of Biliran [G.R. No. 157139; Oct. 19,
2011].
=====================================
L. The Civil Service
1. Scope
2. Appointments to the civil
service
=====================================
L. THE CIVIL SERVICE
1. SCOPE
Civil Service Commission (CSC) - Central personnel
agency of the government.
Composition
1. Chairman and 2 commissioners
2. Appointed by the President with consent of the
Commission on Appointments for a term of 7 years,
without reappointment.
Coverage of the Civil Service
All branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and
agencies of the government including GOCC with
original charters.
Authority of the Civil Service Commission
i. limited to reviewing appointments on the
basis of the civil service law.
Page 121 of 214
ii. Only allowed to check whether the

appointee possesses the appropriate civil eligibility o
the required qualification. CSC has no discretionary
power.
Limitations to the power to appoint
1. The power does not include authority to make the
appointment itself or to direct the appointing authority
to change the employment status of an employee.
2. No authority to revoke appointment simply because
it believed that another person is better qualified.
3. No power to pass upon the qualifications or tenure
of the appointing officer or declare the latters position
vacant for an act that produced forfeiture of his office.
4. Cannot change the tenure of office granted to
appointee such as where the appointing authority
indicated permanent appointment but CSC approved as
temporary such appointment.
2. APPOINTMENTS TO THE CIVIL SERVICE

Classifications
1. Career
Characteristics:
i. Entrance based on merit and
fitness to be determined by competitive examinations
or based on highly technical qualifications
ii. Opportunity for advancement to
higher career positions
Limited to the duration of a

particular project
iii. They, however, enjoy constitutional
guarantee that they cannot be removed
except for cause and after due hearing.
Oppositions to Appointment
Any person who feels aggrieved by the appointment of
a person may file a protest against the appointment.
Causes for protesting appointment
1. Appointee not qualified
2. Appointee is not the next-in-rank
3. In the case of appointment by transfer,
reinstatement, or by original appointment, that the
protestant is not satisfied with the written special
reason(s) given by the appointing authority
Meaning of For cause
For reasons which the law and sound public policy
recognized as sufficient warrant for approval, that is,
legal cause, and not merely causes w/c appointing
power in the exercise of discretion may deem
sufficient. The cause must relate to and affect the
administration of the office, and must be restricted to
something substantial in nature.
Revocation or Recall of Appointment
General Rule: Appointment once made is irrevocable
and not subject to reconsideration.
iii. Security of tenure

Levels of Positions
1st level: clerical, trades, crafts and custodial
service positions involving non-professional/subprofessional in a non-supervisory or supervisory
capacity requiring less than 4 yrs of collegiate studies
2nd level: professional, technical and scientific
positions in a non-supervisory/supervisory capacity
requiring at least 4 years of college work up to division
chief level
3rd level: career executive service positions
2. Non-career
Characteristics:
i. Entrance on bases other than those of the
usual test of merit and fitness
ii. Tenure which is limited to
Period specified by law
Coterminous with that of appointing
authority
Subject to appointing authoritys
pleasure
Grounds when CSC has power to recall, on its own

initiative, an appointment initially approved:
1. Non-compliance w/ the procedures/criteria provided
in the agencys merit promotional plan
2. Failure to pass through the agencys
selection/promotion board
3. Violation of the existing collective agreement
between management and employees relative to
promotion
4. Violation of other existing civil service law, rules &
regulations
3. PERSONNEL ACTIONS
PERSONNEL ACTION - any action denoting movement
or progress of personnel in the civil service. Section 1,
Rule V of the Omnibus Implementing Rules of EO 292;
cited in City Mayor Debulgado v. CSC [G.R. No.
111471, September 26, 1994].
Includes the following:
1. Appointment through certification
2. Promotion
Page 122 of 214
3. Transfer
4. Reinstatement
5. Reemployment
6. Detail
7. Reassignment
8. Demotion
It is the CSC which is empowered to look into the
validity of creation of positions and appointments of
personnel appointed by the Mayor which appointments
were confirmed by the CSC. There being a valid
appointment confirmed by CSC and the concerned
personnel having rendered services, payment of their
salaries is proper and legal. Tolentino vs. Atty. Roy
Loyola [G.R. No. 153809, July 27, 2011].
Valid Personnel actions
1. Extending temporary appointment but, must not
amount to removal.
2. Transfer or re-assignment
Shall not involve a reduction in rank, status, and salary,
without break in service.
3. Detail
Must be made in the interest of public service,
absent showing of manifest abuse or improper motive
or purpose
Personnel actions amounting to removal
1. Shortening term is removal
2. Control does not extend to removal
3. Demotion
4. Denial of optional retirement and refusal to reinstate
While a temporary transfer or assignment of personnel
is permissible even without the employees prior
consent, it cannot be done when the transfer is a
preliminary step toward his removal, or is a scheme to
lure him away from his permanent position, or
designed to indirectly terminate his service, or force his
resignation. Such a transfer would in effect circumvent
the provision which safeguards the tenure of office of
those who are in the Civil Service. Garcia v. Lejano
[G.R. No. L-12220, August 8, 1960]; cited in Hon.
Gloria v. CA [G.R. No. 119903, August 15, 2000]
Waiver of Security of tenure

Acceptance of temporary appointment or assignment,
without reservations.
=====================================
M. ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS

1. Impeachment
2. Ombudsman
a) Functions
b)
Judicial
review
in
c) Judicial review in penal
proceedings
3. Sandiganbayan
======================================
M. ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
1. IMPEACHMENT
WHO MAY BE IMPEACHED: (VP-SOC)
1. President
2. Vice President
3. Supreme Court Justices
4. Constitutional Commission members
5. Ombudsman
GROUNDS:
CODE: GOT BBC
1. GRAFT and corruption
2. OTHER high crimes
3. TREASON
4. BETRAYAL of public trust
5. BRIBERY
6. Culpable violation of the CONSTITUTION
It is an EXCLUSIVE LIST. Congress cannot add to the list
of impeachable offenses.
These officers cannot be charged in court with offenses
that have removal from office as penalty.
BUT AFTER an official has been impeached, he can be
charged with the appropriate offense.
Resignation by an impeachable official does not place
him beyond the reach of impeachment proceedings; he
can still be impeached.
OTHER PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES - They may
be removed from office as provided by law but, not by
impeachment.
The House of Representatives has exclusive power to
INITIATE all cases of impeachment.
PROCEDURE:
Page 123 of 214
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Filing of VERIFIED complaint. Can be filed by:

1. Any member of the House of Representatives
2. Any citizen upon a resolution or endorsement
by any Member of the House
3. By at least 1/3 of all the Members of the
House of Representatives
NOTE: If the verified complaint or resolution of
impeachment was filed by at least 1/3 of all the
Members of the House, it shall constitute the
ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT. Trial in the Senate
shall proceed.
Inclusion of complaint in the ORDER OF BUSINESS
with 10 session days
REFERRAL to proper Committee within 3 session
days thereafter
Submission of COMMITTEE REPORT to the House
together with corresponding resolution
The report should be submitted within 60 days
from referral, after hearing, and by a MAJORITY
VOTE OF ALL ITS MEMBERS.
CALENDARING of resolution for consideration by
the House
Should be done within 10 session days from
receipt thereof
Vote of at least 1/3 OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE
HOUSE necessary to:
1. Affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles
of Impeachment of the Committee or
2. To override its contrary resolution
The one-year period shall be counted from the
time of the filing of the first impeachment
complaint. Impeachment proceedings pertain to
the proceedings in the House of Representative
which commences from the initiation of the
complaint, to the referral to proper committees, to
submission of the report to the House, subsequent
deliberation, and ends with the transmittal of the
Article of Impeachment to the Senate. An
impeachment case pertains to a trial in the Senate
which commences at the time the Articles of
Impeachment are transmitted to the Upper House.
When the PRESIDENT is on trial, the CHIEF JUSTICE of

the Supreme Court presides. However, he will not vote.
Judgment of CONVICTION requires the concurrence of
2/3 of all the Members of the Senate
Only one impeachment proceeding should be initiated
against an impeachable officer within a period of one
year. Merceditas Gutierrez v. The House of
Representatives Committee on Justice [G.R. No.
193459, February 15, 2011].
The SC found it well-within its power to determine
whether Congress committed a violation of the
Constitution or gravely abused its discretion in the
exercise of its functions and prerogatives that could
translate as lack or excess of jurisdiction in taking
cognizance of two impeachment complaints that are
inquisitorial in function, akin to a preliminary
investigation. Merceditas Gutierrez v. The House
of Representatives Committee on Justice [ G.R.
No. 193459, February 15, 2011].
Effects:
1. Removal from office of the official concerned
2. Disqualification to hold any office
3. Officer still liable to prosecution, trial, and
punishment if the impeachable offense committed
also constitutes a felony or crime.
Even if the officer being impeached resigns, he may still be
impeached.
Roles of the 3 branches of Government in

impeachment:
1.
Senate has sole power to try and decide cases
of impeachment
2.
If the President is on trial, the Chief Justice
presides but does not vote
3.
The Supreme Court can determine if Congress
committed
GADALEJ
(ex.
Recognizing
two
impeachment complaints)
The determination of sufficiency of form and substance of

an impeachment complaint is an exponent of the express
constitutional grant of rule-making powers of the House of
Representatives. In the discharge of that power and in the
exercise of its discretion, the House has formulated
determinable standards as to the form and substance of
an
impeachment
complaint.
Furthermore,
the
Impeachment Rules are clear in echoing the constitutional
requirements and providing that there must be a "verified
complaint or resolution, and that the substance
requirement is met if there is "a recital of facts
constituting the offense charged and determinative of the
jurisdiction of the committee. As held also in Francisco,
questions on what constitutes as an impeachable offense
are considered to be purely political questions and thus
left to the sound determination of the legislature. Ma.
Merceditas Gutierrez v. The House of Representatives
Committee on Justice [G.R. No. 193459, Feb. 15, 2011].
Senate has the sole power to try and decide all cases of
impeachment.
Article XI, Section 3, paragraph (5) of the Constitution

states that "[n]o impeachment proceedings shall be
Page 124 of 214
initiated against the same official more than once within a

period of one year." In Francisco, the term "initiate"
means to file the complaint and take initial action on it.
The initiation starts with the filing of the complaint which
must be accompanied with an action to set the complaint
moving. It refers to the filing of the impeachment
complaint coupled with Congress taking initial action of
said complaint. The initial action taken by the House on
the complaint is the referral of the complaint to the
Committee on Justice. It is also important to note that the
filing of the complaint starts the initiation and that the
Houses action on the committee report/resolution is not
part of that initiation phase. Ma. Merceditas Gutierrez v.
The House of Representatives Committee on Justice [G.R.
No. 193459, Feb. 15, 2011].
2. OMBUDSMAN
GOCCs with original charters and those organized and
incorporated under the Corporation Code within the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan whenever they are
involved in graft and corruption. People v.
Sandiganbayan [451 SCRA 413, February 16, 2005]
The Ombudsman has the power to grant immunity by
itself and even prior to the filing of information in
court. RA No. 6770 fully recognizes this prosecutory
prerogative by empowering the Ombudsman to grant
immunity, subject to such terms and conditions as he
may determine. The only textual limitation imposed by
law on this authority is the need to take into account
the pertinent provisions of the Rules of Court, i.e.,
Section 17, Rule 119 of the Rules of Court. The rule
under RA No. 6770 clarifies that in cases already filed
with the courts, the prosecution merely makes a
proposal and initiates the process of granting immunity
to an accused-witness in order to use him as a witness
against his co-accused. If there is any distinction at all
between the public prosecutor and the Ombudsman in
this endeavor, it is in the specificity of and the higher
priority given by law to the Ombudsmans purpose and
objective. This accounts for the Ombudsmans unique
power to grant immunity by itself and even prior to the
filing of information in court, a power that the public
prosecutor himself generally does not enjoy. Quarto v.
Ombudsman [G.R. No. 169042. October 5, 2011].
In the exercise of his duties, the Ombudsman is given
full administrative disciplinary authority. His power is
not limited merely to receiving, processing complaints,
or recommending penalties. He is to conduct
investigations, hold hearings, summon witnesses and
require production of evidence and place respondents
under preventive suspension. This includes the power
to impose the penalty of removal, suspension,
demotion, fine, or censure of a public officer or

employee. The provisions in R.A. No. 6770 taken
together reveal the manifest intent of the lawmakers to
bestow on the Office of the Ombudsman full
administrative disciplinary authority. These provisions
cover the entire gamut of administrative adjudication
which entails the authority to, inter alia, receive
complaints, conduct investigations, hold hearings in
accordance with its rules of procedure, summon
witnesses and require the production of documents,
place under preventive suspension public officers and
employees pending an investigation, determine the
appropriate penalty imposable on erring public officers
or employees as warranted by the evidence, and,
necessarily, impose the said penalty. Thus, it is settled
that the Office of the Ombudsman can directly impose
administrative sanctions. Cabalit v. CoA [G.R. No.
180236, January 17, 2012].
Composition:
1. Ombudsman/ Tanodbayan
2. Overall deputy - at least one Deputy each for Luzon,
Visayas and Mindanao.
3. Deputy for military establishment may be appointed
Qualifications: (Ombudsman And Deputies):
1. Natural born citizen of the Philippines
2. At least 40 years old at time of appointment
3. Of recognized probity and independence
4. Member of the Philippine bar
5. Must not have been candidate for any elective
office in the immediately preceding election
6. For Ombudsman: He must have been for ten years
or more
1. A judge or
2. Engaged in the practice of law in the
Philippines
Disqualifications and Prohibitions:
1. Cannot hold any other OFFICE or EMPLOYMENT
during his tenure.
2. Cannot engage in the PRACTICE of any profession
or in the ACTIVE MANAGEMENT or control of any
business which may be affected by the functions of
his office
3. Cannot be FINANCIALLY INTERESTED, directly or
indirectly, in any contract with or in any franchise
or privilege granted by the Government, any of its
subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities,
including GOCCs or their subsidiaries
Appointment:
1. OMBUDSMAN AND DEPUTIES
Page 125 of 214
1.
2.
3.
By the president from a list of at least 6

nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar
Council. Vacancies will be filled from a list of 3
nominees.
Appointments do NOT require confirmation
All vacancies shall be filled within 3 months
after they occur.
1.
2.
NOTE: 7 years with reappointment and are not

qualified to run for any office in the election succeeding
their cessation from office.
2.
OTHER OMBUDSMAN OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES

1. By the Ombudsman
2. In accordance with Civil Service Law
3.
3.
a.Powers, Functions And Duties

1.
INVESTIGATE on its own, or on complaint by any

person, any act or omission of any public official,
employee, office or agency, when such act or
omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or
inefficient.
NOTE:
1. May be done on its own initiative or on
complaint in any form.
2. Such may be delegated.
3. The power to investigate includes the power
to impose preventive suspension. But, this is
not a penalty.
4. Investigate does not mean preliminary
investigation.
5. The complaint need not be drawn up in the
usual form.
6. The illegal act or omission need not be in
connection with the duties of the public
officer or employee concerned.
7. ANY illegal act may be investigated by the
Ombudsman.
In
this
regard,
the
Ombudsmans jurisdiction is concurrent with
that of the regular prosecutors.
2.
DIRECT, upon complaint or at its own instance, any

public official or employee of the government, or
any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof,
as well as of any GOCC with original charter, to
PERFORM and expedite any act of duty required
by law, or to STOP, PREVENT and CORRECT any
abuse or impropriety in the performance of duties.
The Ombudsman has persuasive power, and

may require that proper legal steps are taken
by the officers concerned.
The public official or employee must be
employed in:
1. The Government
2. Any
subdivision,
agency,
or
instrumentality
3. GOCCs with original charters
The Special Prosecutor may prosecute before
the Sandiganbayan, judges accused of graft
and corruption, even if they are under the
Supreme Court.
DIRECT the officer concerned to take the

appropriate action against a public official or
employee at fault, and RECOMMEND his removal,
suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or
prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith.
NOTE:
1. The Ombudsman does not himself prosecute
cases against public officers or employees.
2. Final say to prosecute still rests in the
executive department.
3. The Ombudsman or Tanodbayan may use
mandamus to compel the fiscal to prosecute.
3.
DIRECT the officer concerned, in any appropriate

case, and subject to such limitations as may be
provided by law to FURNISH it with copies of
documents relating to contracts or transactions
entered into by his office involving the
disbursement or use of public funds of properties,
and report any irregularity to COA for appropriate
action.
4.
REQUEST any government agency for ASSISTANCE

and information necessary in the discharge of its
responsibilities, and to examine, if necessary,
pertinent records and documents.
5.
PUBLIC MATTERS covered by its investigation

when circumstances so warrant and with due
process.
6.
DETERMINE THE CAUSE of mismanagement,

inefficiency, red tape, fraud and corruption in the
government and make recommendations for their
elimination and the observance of high standards
of ethics and efficiency
NOTE:
Page 126 of 214
7.
PROMULGATE ITS RULES OF PROCEDURE and

exercise such other powers or perform such
functions or duties as may be provided by law
NOTE: The Office of the Ombudsman enjoys fiscal
autonomy. Its approved annual appropriations should
be automatically and regularly released.
0.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The Ombudsman has jurisdiction over disciplinary

cases against government employees, which
includes public school teacher. However, Section 9
of R.A. 4670 or the Magna Carta for Public School
Teachers, provides that it must first go to a
committee appointed by the Secretary of
Education. Ombudsman v. Estandarte [G.R. No.
168670, April 13, 2007]
The administrative disciplinary authority of the
Ombudsman over a public school teacher is not an
exclusive power but is concurrent with the proper
committee of the Department of Education,
Culture and Sports (DECS). Ombudsman v.
Delijero [G.R. No. 172635, October 20, 2010]
Finally, as to the power to impose administrative
liability, the Office of the Ombudsman has the
authority to determine the administrative liability
of an erring public official or employee, and to
direct and compel the head of the concerned
officer or agency to implement the penalty
imposed. This power to impose administrative
liability is not merely recommendatory but actually
mandatory. Ombudsman v. Delijero [G.R. No.
172635, October 20, 2010].
The enumeration of the powers of the
Ombudsman in the Constitution is not exclusive.
Congress may add additional powers. The
Ombudsman Act grants to the Ombudsman fuller
authority, he has the power to impose the penalty
of suspension. Ombudsman v. CA [G.R. No.
160675, June 16, 2006]
The doctrine of qualified political agency does not
apply to the relation between the Ombudsman
and the Special Prosecutor. The Special Prosecutor
may only file an information only when authorized
by the Ombudsman. Perez v. Sandiganbayan [G.R.
No. 166062, September 26, 2006]
In administrative cases involving the concurrent
jurisdiction of two or more disciplining authorities,
the body in which the complaint is filed first, and
which opts to take cognizance of the case, acquires
jurisdiction to the exclusion of other tribunals
exercising concurrent jurisdiction. In this case,
since the complaint was filed first in the
Ombudsman, and the Ombudsman opted to
assume jurisdiction over the complaint, the
Ombudsmans exercise of jurisdiction is to the
6.
7.
8.
9.
exclusion of the sangguniang bayan exercising

concurrent jurisdiction. Jurisdiction could no
longer be transferred to the sangguniang
bayan by virtue of a subsequent complaint filed
by the same complainants. Office of the
Ombudsman vs. Rodriquez [G.R. No. 172700,
July 23, 2010].
The Office of the Ombudsman shall have
disciplinary authority over all elective and
appointive officials of the Government and its
subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies,
including Members of the Cabinet, local
government, government-owned or controlled
corporations and their subsidiaries, except over
officials who may be removed only by
impeachment or over Members of Congress, and
the Judiciary. (Sec. 21, RA 6770)
An administrative complaint filed against a public
officer before the Ombudsman does not bar an
administrative investigation before the PAGC. The
jurisdiction of Ombudsman over administrative
complaints are not exclusive, it may be exercised
concurrently with an authorized agency. Lacson v.
Executive Secretary [G. R. No. 165399, May 30,
2011].
Appeals from decisions of the Ombudsman in
administrative cases do not stay the execution of
the penalty imposed. This is in accordance with
Section 7 Rule III of the Rules of Procedure of the
Ombudsman which explicitly states that an appeal
shall not stop the decision from being executory.
No vested right is violated because pending appeal
the appellant is considered as preventively
suspended and will be paid backwages in case he
wins in his appeal. In addition, under Section 13(8)
Article XI of the Constitution authorizes the
Ombudsman to formulate its own rules. Hence, for
the CA to issue an injunction will be an
encroachment on the rule making powers of the
Ombudsman granted by the Constitution. Facura
et. al. v CA, et. al., [G.R. No. 166495, Feb. 16,
2011].
Section 20 of R.A. 6770 is merely directory and
does not prohibit the
Ombudsman from
conducting an administrative investigation after
the lapse of one year, reckoned from the time the
alleged act was committed. Without doubt, even
if the administrative case was filed beyond the one
(1) year period stated in Section 20(5), the
Ombudsman was well within its discretion to
conduct
the
administrative
investigation.
Ombudsman v. Andutan, [G.R. No. 164679, July
27, 2011].
Page 127 of 214
10. Although the Ombudsman is not precluded by

Section 20(5) of R.A. 6770 from conducting the
investigation, the Ombudsman can no longer
institute an administrative case against a resigned
public officer because the latter was not a public
servant at the time the case was filed.
Ombudsman v. Andutan, [G.R. No. 164679, July
27, 2011].
11. The decision of Ombudsman in administrative
cases may be executed pending appeal. This is
pursuant to the Rules of Procedure of the Office of
the Ombudsman which explicitly states that an
appeal shall not stop the decision from being
executory. Also, the power of the Ombudsman to
implement the penalty is not merely
recommendatory but mandatory. Ombudsman v.
CA [G.R. No. 172224, Jan. 26, 2011].
12. Findings of fact by the Office of the Ombudsman
when supported by substantial evidence are
conclusive. Any order, directive or decision
imposing the penalty of public censure or
reprimand, suspension of not more than one (1)
month's salary shall be final and unappealable. In
the same vein, decision of the Ombudsman
absolving a public officer of an administrative
charge is final and unappealable. Tolentino vs.
Atty. Roy Loyola et al., [G.R. No. 153809, July 27,
2011].
It is worth stressing that the Ombudsman's finding of
probable cause does not touch on the issue of guilt or
innocence of the accused. It is not the function of the
Office of the Ombudsman to rule on such issue. Hence,
Courts do not interfere in the Ombudsman's exercise of
discretion in determining probable cause unless there
are compelling reasons. Re Appointment. Ganaden v.
Ombudsman, [G.R. Nos. 170500 & 170510-11, June 1,
2011).
13. It is settled that the Office of the Ombudsman has
the sole power to investigate and prosecute on its
own or on complaint by any person, any act or
omission of any public officer or employee, office
or agency, when such act or omission appears to
be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient. The
power to withdraw the Information already filed is
a mere adjunct or consequence of the
Ombudsmans overall power to prosecute.
However, while it is the Ombudsman who has the
full discretion to determine whether or not a
criminal case should be filed in the Sandiganbayan,
once the case has been filed with said court, it is
the Sandiganbayan, and no longer the

Ombudsman, which has full control of the case so
much so that the Information may not be
dismissed without the approval of said court.
Further, it does not matter whether such filing of a
motion to dismiss by the prosecution is done
before or after the arraignment of the accused or
that the motion was filed after a reinvestigation.
City of Tuguerarao v. Ting [G.R. Nos. 192435-36
September 14, 2011].
b.
Judicial Review in Administrative

Proceedings
c.
Judicial Review in Penal Proceedings
Judicial Review in
Administrative Proceedings
Judicial Review in Penal

Proceedings
Appeals from resolutions

of the Office of the
Ombudsman in
administrative disciplinary
cases should be taken to
the Court of Appeals via
Petition for Review under
Rule 43 of the Rules of
Court. Fabian v. Desierto,
[G.R. No. 129742,
Sept.16, 1998]
The Supreme Court]is not

precluded from reviewing
the Ombudsmans action
when there is an abuse of
discretion, in which case
Rule 65 of the Rules of
Court Garcia-Rueda v.
Pascasio, [G.R. No.
118141, Sept. 5, 1997].
JUDICIAL REVIEW
FROM
APPEAL TO
Ombudsman (nonSupreme Court

administrative cases)
Rule 65
Ombudsman
Court of Appeals via
(administrative cases
Rule 43
ONLY)
The Ombudsmans decision imposing the
penalty of suspension for one year is
immediately executory pending appeal. For
the CA to issue a preliminary injunction that
will stay the penalty imposed by the
Ombudsman in an administrative case would
be to encroach on the rule-making powers of
the Office of the Ombudsman. Ombudsman
v. Samaniego, [G.R. No. 175573, October
5, 2010].
14. The provision in the Rules of Procedure of the
Office of the Ombudsman is clear that an
Page 128 of 214
appeal by a public official from a decision

meted out by the Ombudsman shall not stop
the
decision
from
being
executory. Ombudsman v. CA, [G.R. No.
172224, January 26, 2011].
15. A preliminary investigation partakes of
an investigative or inquisitorial power for the
sole purpose of obtaining information on
what future action of a judicial nature may be
taken. Even the action of the Secretary of
Justice in reviewing a prosecutors order or
resolution via appeal or petition for review
cannot be considered a quasi-judicial
proceeding. Hence, Section 14, Article VIII of
the Constitution does not thus extend to
resolutions
issued
by
the
DOJ
Secretary. Bondoc v. Tan Tiong, [G.R. No.
186652, October 6, 2010].
3.SANDIGANBAYAN
Jurisdiction in general
1. Violations of Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act,
2. Republic Act No. 1379
3. Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the Revised
Penal Code
4. One or more of the accused are officials occupying
the following positions in the government whether in a
permanent, acting or interim capacity, at the time of
the commission of the offense:
1. Officials of the executive branch occupying
the positions of regional director and higher, otherwise
classified as Grade '27' and higher, of the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989
(Republic Act No. 6758), specifically including:
a. Provincial governors, vicegovernors, members of the sangguniang panlalawigan
and provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers and
other provincial department heads;
b. City mayors, vice-mayors,
members of the sangguniang panlungsod, city
treasurers, assessors engineers and other city
department heads;
c. Officials of the diplomatic service
occupying the position of consul and higher;
d. Philippine army and air force
colonels, naval captains, and all officers of higher rank;
e. Officers of the Philippine National
Police while occupying the position of provincial
director and those holding the rank of senior
superintendent or higher;
f. City and provincial prosecutors and
their assistants, and officials and prosecutors in the
Office of the Ombudsman and special prosecutor;
g. Presidents, directors or trustees,

or managers of government-owned or -controlled
corporations, state universities or educational
institutions or foundations;
2. Members of Congress and officials thereof
classified as Grade'27'and up under the Compensation
and Position Classification Act of 1989;
3. Members of the judiciary without prejudice
to the provisions of the Constitution;
4. Chairmen and members of Constitutional
Commissions, without prejudice to the provisions of the
Constitution; and
5. All other national and local officials
classified as Grade'27'and higher under the
Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989.
ii. Other offenses or felonies whether simple
or complexed with other crimes committed by the
public officials and employees mentioned in subsection
a of this section in relation to their office.
iii. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to
and in connection with Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14
and 14-A, issued in 1986
Offenses committed in relation to public office
1. Accused is any one of the Public Officers and
Employees in Subsection (a) of Section 4 of RA 8249
[See 8.273], or with salary grade 27 and above
2. Accused commits any other offense/felony, than
those specified in Subsection (a), whether simple or
complexed with other crimes
3. The offender commits such other offense/felony in
relation to his office
In relation to his office
1. it cannot exist without the office, or
2. if the office is a constituent element of the crime as
defined in the statute, or
3. must be intimately connected with the office of the
offender
Appellate jurisdiction
Cases decided by the RTC filed against lower level
public officials or those classified as Grade 26 and
lower, involving:
1.
Violations of RA 3019
2.
RA 1379
3.
Direct/indirect
bribery
and
Corruption of Public officials
It is Sandiganbayan which has jurisdiction over appeals
from criminal cases where the accused is a government
employee. Pursuant to RA 8249, the Sandiganbayan
shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final
Page 129 of 214
judgments, resolutions or orders of regional trial courts

whether in the exercise of their own original
jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein
provided. Filomena v. People, [GR No. 188630, Feb. 23,
2011].
While it is the Ombudsman who has the full discretion
to determine whether or not a criminal case should be
filed in the Sandiganbayan, once the case has been filed
with said court, it is the Sandiganbayan, and no longer
the Ombudsman, which has full control of the case so
much so that the Information may not be dismissed
without the approval of said court. In this case, the
Sandiganbayan, ordered the Special Prosecutor to
conduct a reinvestigation and subsequently granted his
motion to withdraw the informations, after finding no
probable cause against the latter on reinvestigation.
The Sandiganbayan thus gave its approval to the
withdrawal of the informations and ordered the
dismissal of the cases. Since no appeal was taken by
the Special Prosecutor from the order of dismissal
within the reglementary period, the same had become
final and executory. CITY GOVERNMENT OF
TUGUEGARAO v. TING [G.R. Nos. 192435-36, Sept. 14,
2011].
In all cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from the
Sandiganbayan to the Supreme Court, the Office of the
Ombudsman, through its special prosecutor, shall
represent the People of the Philippines, except in cases
filed pursuant to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14A. A private complainant in a criminal case before the
Sandiganbayan is allowed to appeal only the civil aspect
of the criminal case after its dismissal by said court.
City Government of Tuguegarao v. Ting [G.R. Nos.
192435-36, Sept.14, 2011].
The special civil action of certiorari is not the proper

remedy to challenge a judgment conviction rendered
by the SB. Petitioner should have filed a petition for
review on certiorari under Rule 45. Pursuant to
Section 7 of Presidential Decree No. 1606,17 as
amended by Republic Act No. 8249, decisions and
final orders of the Sandiganbayan shall be
appealable to the Supreme Court by petition for
review on certiorari raising pure questions of law in
accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
Icdang v. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 185960
January 25, 2012].
4. ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH
The right of the State to recover properties unlawfully

acquired by public officials and employees from them
or from their nominees or transferees shall NOT BE
BARRED by prescription, laches or estoppel. However,
their right to prosecute criminally these officials and
employees may prescribe.
Section 26, Article 18 of the Constitution states that an
order of sequestration may only issue upon a showing
of a prima facie case that the properties are ill-gotten
wealth under Executive Orders 1 and 2. When a court
nullifies an order of sequestration for having been
issued without a prima facie case, the Court does not
substitute its judgment for that of the PCGG but simply
applies the law. Republic of the Philippines v.
Sandiganbayan and Imelda Marcos, [G.R. No. 155832,
Dec. 7, 2010].
In cases involving violations of R.A. No. 3019 committed
prior to the February 1986 EDSA Revolution that ousted
President Ferdinand E. Marcos, the prescriptive period
should be computed from the discovery of the
commission thereof and not from the day of such
commission. Salvador v. Mapa, [GR No. 135080, Nov.
28, 2007].
In order to hold a person liable under Section 3(e) of RA
3019, the following elements must concur: (1) the
accused must be a public officer discharging
administrative, judicial or official functions; (2) he must
have acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith or
gross inexcusable negligence; and (3) his action caused
any undue injury to any party, including the
government, or gave any private party unwarranted
benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of
his functions. Ambil v. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No.
175482 & 175457, July 6, 2011].
Section 3 of the Rules of PCGG requires that at least 2
commissioners must issue a writ of sequestration or
freeze order. It is already settled that sequestration,
due to its tendency to impede or limit the exercise of
proprietary rights by private citizens, is construed
strictly against the State, conformably with the legal
maxim that statutes in derogation of common rights
are generally strictly construed and rigidly confined to
the cases clearly within their scope and purpose.
Republic v. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 16685912, Apr.
12, 2011].
The scope of immunity that the Presidential
Commission on Good Government (PCGG) may offer to
witnesses may vary. It has discretion to grant
appropriate levels of criminal immunity depending on
Page 130 of 214
the situation of the witness and his relative importance

to the prosecution of ill-gotten wealth cases. The
immunity from criminal or civil prosecution covers
immunity from giving evidence in a case before a court
of law, because in reality the guarantee given to a
witness against being compelled to testify constitutes a
grant of immunity from civil or criminal prosecution.
Disini v. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 180564, June 22,
2010].
Prohibition on Certain Financial Transactions
COVERAGE: (C3PO-SIV)
1. President
2. Vice-President
3. Members of the Cabinet
4. Members of Congress
5. Members of Supreme Court
6. Members of Constitutional Commissions
7. Ombudsman
8. Any firm or entity in which they have controlling
interest
COVERAGE: (VAPOS-C3)
1. President
2. Vice-President
3. Members of the Cabinet
4. Members of Congress
5. Justices of the Supreme Court
6. Members of Constitutional Commissions
7. Other constitutional offices
8. Officers of the armed forces with general or flag
rank
Public officer and employee shall submit a declaration
under oath of his assets, liabilities and net worth UPON
ASSUMPTION and as often as REQUIRED under the law.
Nowhere in R.A. 6713 does it say that the Review and
Compliance Procedure is a prerequisite to the filing of
administrative charges for false declarations or
concealments in ones SALN. Presidential Anti-Graft
Commission (PAGC) and the Office of the President v.
Salvador A. Pleyto [G.R. No. 176058; March 23, 2011].
NOTE: The prohibition applies during their TENURE
Scope of Prohibition:
1. Cannot obtain, directly or indirectly for BUSINESS
PURPOSES:
1. Loans
2. Guarantees
3. Other forms of financial accommodation from
GOCC banks or financial institutions.
2. If the loan etc., is NOT for business purpose, the
prohibition does not apply.
e.g. a housing loan
Characteristics of a Behest Loan: UBE CU2PS
1. It is Under-collateralized
2. The Borrower corporation is undercapitalized;
3. Direct or indirect Endorsement by high government
officials like presence of marginal notes;
4. Stockholders, officers or agents of the borrower
corporation are identified as Cronies;
5. Deviation of Use of loan proceeds from the purpose
intended;
6. Use of corporate layering;
7. Non-feasibility of the Project for which financing is
being sought; and
8. Extraordinary Speed in which the loan release was
made.
STATEMENTS OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH
(SALN)
Section 10 of R.A. 6713 provides that when the head of

office finds the SALN of a subordinate incomplete or
not in the proper form such head of office must call the
subordinates attention to such omission and give him
the chance to rectify the same. However, THERE IS NO
right to notice regarding errors in his SALNs and to be
told to correct the same. The notice and correction
referred to in Section 10 are intended merely to ensure
that SALNs are submitted on time, are complete, and
are in proper form. These refer to formal defects in
the SALNs and do not include charges for falsification of
the assets side of ones SALNs and for declaring a false
net worth these are substantive, not formal defects.
Carabeo v. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 190580-81, Feb.
21, 2011].
The requirement to file the SSAL must not be treated as
a simple and trivial routine, but as an obligation that is
part and parcel of every civil servants duty to the
people. It serves as the basis of the government and
the people in monitoring the income and lifestyle of
officials and employees in the government in
compliance with the Constitutional policy to eradicate
corruption, promote transparency in government, and
ensure that all government employees and officials
lead just and modest lives. It is for this reason that the
SSAL must be sworn to and is made accessible to the
public, subject to reasonable administrative
regulations. Flores v. Montemayor [G.R. No.
170146, August 25, 2010].
Page 131 of 214
Prohibition in Section 7(d) of RA 6713 is malum

prohibitum. It is the commission of that act as defined
by the law, and not the character or effect thereof, that
determines whether or not the provision has been
violated.
Therefore, it is immaterial whether
respondent has fully paid her loans since the law
prohibits the mere act of soliciting a loan under the
circumstances provided in Section 7(d) of R.A. No.
6713. Martinez v. Villanueva [G.R. No. 169196/G.R.
No. 169198, July 6, 2011]
=====================================
N. Term Limits
=======================================
N. TERM LIMITS
TERM
a period fixed by the Const.
or by law, during w/c an
officer or employee claims
to hold office as of right
and fixes the interval after
w/c the several
incumbents shall succeed
one another.
TENURE
the period during w/c the
incumbent actually holds
the office, w/c may be
shorter than the term.
Kinds of Terms
a. Expressly fixed in the Constitution/Law
b. During good behavior until reaching retirement
c. Indefinite terminates at the pleasure of the
appointing authority
Terms of Office
a. President - 6 years, without re-election
b. Vice-president 6 years, with re-election. If succeeds
to the President, he shall not be qualified for election
to the same office if he served as such successor for
more than 4 years.
c. Senators 6 years, with 1 re-election.
d. Members of the House of Representatives 3 years
with re-election for 2 additional terms.
e. Local elective officials 3 years, with re-election for 2
additional terms.
f. Barangay officials and members of the sangguniang
kabataan 3 years
1. The concept of holdover when applied to a public
officer implies that the office has a fixed term and the
incumbent is holding onto the succeeding term. It is
usually provided by law that officers elected or
appointed for a fixed term shall remain in office not
only for that term but until their successors have been
elected and qualified. Where this provision is found,

the office does not become vacant upon the expiration
of the term if there is no successor elected and
qualified to assume it, but the present incumbent will
carry over until his successor is elected and qualified,
even though it be beyond the term fixed by law.
Lecaros v. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 130872, March 25,
1999].
2. Voluntary renunciation, while involving loss of office
and the total incapacity to render service, is disallowed
by the Constitution as an effective interruption of a
term. It is therefore not allowed as a mode of
circumventing the three-term limit rule. Preventive
suspension, by its nature, does not involve an effective
interruption of a term and should therefore not be a
reason to avoid the three-term limitation. Aldovino v.
COMELEC, [G.R. No. 184836, December 23, 2009].

=======================================
X. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
=======================================
B. Administrative agencies
1. Definition
3. Kinds
C. Powers of administrative agencies
1. Quasi-legislative (rule making)
power
a) Kinds of administrative rules
and regulations
b) Administrative appeal and
review
3. Fact-finding, investigative, licensing
and rate-fixing powers
D. Judicial recourse and review
Page 132 of 214

jurisdiction
2. Doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies
action
======================================
======================================
CLASSIFICATION
AS TO SOURCE
law that controls
administrative authorities
Constitution, statutes,
judicial decisions, E.O.s,
A.O.s, etc.
A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Administrative Law - part of public law which fixes the
organization and determines the competence of
administrative authorities and indicates to the
individuals remedies for the violation of his rights
a. Scope of Administrative Law

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
FIXES the administrative organization and

structure of the government.
EXECUTES OR ENFORCES that which is entrusted
to administrative authorities (all those public
officers and organs of the government charged
with amplification, application, and execution of
the law).
GOVERNS public officers
CREATES administrative agencies
PROVIDES the remedies to those aggrieved by
these agencies.
GOVERNS judicial review
INCLUDES rules, regulations, orders and decisions
made by administrative authorities.
INCLUDES the body of judicial decisions/doctrines
on any of the above.
b. Principal Subdivisions
LAW OF INTERNAL
ADMINISTRATION
treats of the legal relations
between the government
and its administrative
officers, and of the legal
relations that that one
administrative officer or
organ bears to another.
LAW OF EXTERNAL
ADMINISTRATION
concerned with the legal
relations between
and private interests. It can
be divided into four parts:
law made by
general regulations and
particular deternminations;
constitutes under
delegations of power
embodied in statutory
administrative law, and
imposing and constantly
expanding body of law.
AS TO PURPOSE
Adjective or procedural
administrative law
Establishes the procedure
which an agency must or
may follow in the pursuit
of its legal purpose.
Substantive administrative
law
Derived from same sources
but contents are different in
that the law establishes
primary rights and duties.
AS TO APPLICABILITY
General administrative
law
part that is of a general
nature and common to all,
or most, admin agencies;
chiefly, but not exclusively
procedural law.
Special/particular
administrative law
part that pertains to
particular agencies;
proceeds from the
particular statute creating
the individual agency.
ADMINISTRATION OF
GOVERNMENT
Administrative officers
must determine what is
the law in order to
determine whether they
are competent to act and
if it is wise to act.
ADMINISTRATION OF
JUSTICE
Work done consists in the
decision of controversies
between individuals and
government officers, as to
the applicability in the
cases in question; all that
judicial officers have to do
is determine what law is
applicable to the facts
Page 133 of 214
brought before them.

ADMINISTRATION
Refers to the aggregate of
persons in whose hands
the reins of the
government are entrusted
by the people for the time
being.
GOVERNMENT
Institution or aggregate of
institutions by which an
independent society makes
and carries out those rules
of action which are
necessary to enable men to
live in a civilized state, or
which are imposed upon
the people forming that
society by those who
possess the power or
authority of prescribing
them.
======================================
B. Administrative Agencies
1. Definition
3. Kinds
======================================
B. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
1. DEFINITION
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY - An agency exercising some
significant combination of executive, legislative and
judicial powers.
2. MANNER OF CREATION
1. Established by the Constitution
If created by the Constitution itself, it can only be
altered or abolished by the constitution itself.
2. Created by statute or law
Legislature may amend or repeal the law creating it,
thereby affecting the agency created by it.
3. By Authority of Law
3. KINDS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
e.g. MWSS, Philippine National Railways, National

Food Authority
Regulate businesses affected with public INTEREST
e.g. LTFRB, Energy Regulatory Board
Offer some GRATUITY, grant or special privilege
e.g. GSIS, SSS, Philippine Veterans Administration
It is true that under Section 41(n) of Republic Act
No. 8291 (the GSIS Law), GSIS is expressly granted
the power to adopt a retirement plan and/or
financial assistance for its employees, but a closer
look at the provision readily shows that this power
is not absolute. It is qualified by the words "early,"
"incentive," and "for the purpose of retirement."
The retirement plan must be an early retirement
incentive plan and such early retirement incentive
plan or financial assistance must be for the
purpose of retirement. But, the retirement plan in
this case is not such retirement plan, thus falls
outside the powers granted to the GSIS. GSIS v.
COA [G.R. No. 162372 ; October 19, 2011].
Seek to carry on certain functions of the
GOVERNMENT
e.g. BIR, Bureau of Customs, Bureau of
Immigration
Seek to ADJUST individual controversies because
of some strong social policy involved
e.g. NLRC, DAR
Seek under POLICE power to regulate private
businesses and individuals
e.g. SEC, MTRCB, Dangerous Drugs Board
The MMDA is a development authority created for the

purpose of laying down policies and coordinating with
various agencies, organizations and the private sector,
which may enforce, but not enact ordinances. RA 7924
does not grant the MMDA with the police power, let
alone the legislative power, and that all its functions
are administrative in nature. MMDA v. Garin [G.R. No.
130230, April 15, 2005].
Administrative agencies have powers and functions
which may be administrative, investigatory, regulatory,
quasi-legislative, or quasi-judicial, or a mix of the five,
as may be conferred by the Constitution or by statute.
They have in fine only such powers or authority as are
granted or delegated, expressly or impliedly, by law.
And in determining whether an agency has certain
powers, the inquiry should be from the law itself. But
once ascertained as existing, the authority given should
be liberally construed. Soriano v. MTRCB [G.R. No.
165785, April 29, 2009].
CODE: BIG GAP

1. Perform some BUSINESS for the public
Page 134 of 214
======================================
C. POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
1. Quasi-legislative (rule making)
power
a) Kinds of administrative rules
and regulations
review
3. Fact-finding, investigative, licensing
and rate-fixing powers
======================================
C. POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
1.
2.
DISCRETIONARY - The power or right conferred

upon them by law to act officially under certain
circumstances, according to the dictates of their
own judgment and conscience, and not controlled
by the judgment or conscience of others.
MINISTERIAL - Nothing is left to discretion; a
simple, definite duty arising under conditions
admitted or proved to exist, and imposed by law; a
duty performed in response to what has been
imposed by law under conditions specified by law
not being dependent upon the officers judgment
or discretion.
1. QUASI-LEGISLATIVE (RULE MAKING) POWER

a) Kinds of administrative rules and
regulations
Authority delegated by Congress to the administrative
body to adopt rules and regulations intended to carry
out the provisions of a law, and implement legislative
policy.
Kinds of Administrative Rules and Regulations:
CODE: SIC PIP
1. SUPPLEMENTARY - Those which only supply
details, also known as detailed legislation.
2. INTERPRETATIVE - Those that do no more than to
interpret a statute. These are given weight and
respect but are not conclusive to the courts.
3. CONTINGENT - Those which determine when a
statute will go into effect. Power to ascertain the
4.
5.
6.
happening of such facts may be delegated to

administrative agencies.
PROCEDURAL - Those which describe the method
by which the agency will carry out its appointed
functions
INTERNAL - Those issued by a superior
administrative or executive officer to his
subordinates for the proper and efficient
administration of law.
PENAL - Those that carry out penal or criminal
sanctions for violation of the same.
Special Requisites of Penal Rules:

1. The law which authorizes the promulgation of
rules and regulations must itself provide for the
imposition of a penalty for their violation;
1. The law must fix or define such penalty;
2. The violation for which the rules and regulations
impose a penalty must be punishable under the
law itself; and
3. The rules and regulations must be published in the
Official Gazette or Newspaper of General
Circulation AND Archived at the UP Law Center.
KIND
CODE: SIC PIP
Supplementary
Interpretative
Contingent
Procedural
Internal
Penal
GRANT
Express or
implied
Express or
implied
Express
Express or
Implied
Express or
implied
Express
PUBLICATION
REQUIREMENT
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
According to the Administrative Code, (three) 3 copies

of every rule should be filed in the Office of the
National Administrative Register (ONAR) of the UP Law
Center. Failure to comply with this makes the
administrative issuance ineffective & may not be
enforced. GMA v. MTRCB [G.R. No. 148579, February
5, 2007]
Not all rules and regulations adopted by every
government agency are to be filed with the UP Law
Center. Only those of general or of permanent
character are to be filed. Internal rules which are meant
to regulate the personnel of the GSIS are not subject to
with the UP Law Center. Board of Trustees v.
Velasco [G.R. No. 17046, February 2, 2011].
Page 135 of 214
LEGISLATIVE
Involves the discretion to
determine WHAT the law
shall be
Cannot be delegated
QUASI-LEGISLATIVE
Only involves the
discretion to determine
HOW the law shall be
enforced
Can be delegated
Tests of Delegation
1. COMPLETENESS test - The statute must be
complete in all its terms and conditions when it
leaves the legislature such that when it reaches the
delegate, the only thing he will have to do is to
enforce it.
2. SUFFICIENT STANDARD test - The statute fixes a
standard, mapping out the boundaries of the
agencys authority to which it must conform. The
law must offer a sufficient standard to specify the
limits of the delegates authority, announce the
legislative policy and specify the conditions under
which it is to be implemented.
NOTE: The two tests MUST CONCUR. If one or both are
absent, any delegation that occurs is UNDUE
DELEGATION of legislative powers.
Exceptions (To The Rule Requiring Standards; When
Not Required):
CODE: SPIRPE
1. Handling of State property or funds
2. When the law does not involve Personal or
property rights
3. Matters of Internal administration
4. Power of the board to make Recommendation
5. Matters involving Privileges (like use of property,
engaging in profession)
6. Regulation or Exercise of police power to protect
general welfare, morals and public policy
The inherent power of the Executive to adopt rules and
regulations to execute or implement the law is different
from the delegated legislative power to prescribe rules.
The inherent power of the Executive to adopt rules to
execute the law does not require any legislative
standards for its exercise while the delegated legislative
power requires sufficient legislative standards for its
exercise. Cervantes v. Auditor General, [91 Phil. 359
1952].
APPROPRIATIONSThe Administrative Code of 1987
expressly declares void a contract that fails to comply
with the two requirements, namely, 1. an appropriation
law funding the contract and 2. a certification of
appropriation and fund availability. The clear purpose
of these requirements is to insure that government
contracts are never signed unless supported by the
corresponding appropriation law and fund availability.

Philippine National Railways v. Kanlaon Construction
Enterprises Co. Inc. [G.R. No. 182967, Apr. 16, 2011].
Rules in Rule-Making (Requisites For Validity):
CODE: CURLAP
1. It must be Consistent with the law and the
constitution.
2. It must be Uniform in operation, reasonable and
not unfair or discriminatory.
3. It must have a Reasonable relationship to the
purpose of the law.
4. It must be within the Limits of the powers granted
to administrative agencies.
5. May not Amend, alter, modify, supplant, enlarge,
limit or nullify the terms of the law.
6. Must be promulgated in accordance with the
Prescribed procedure.
Note: Not all rules and regulations adopted by every
government agency are to be filed with the UP Law
Center. Only those of general or of permanent
character are to be filed. Internal rules which are meant
to regulate the personnel of the GSIS are not subject to
with the UP Law Center. Board of Trustees v. Velasco
[G.R. No. 17046, February 2, 2011].
The DOHs power under the Milk Code to control
information regarding breastmilk vis-a-vis breastmilk
substitutes is not absolute as the power to control does
not encompass the power to absolutely prohibit the
advertising, marketing, and promotion of breast milk
substitutes. Neither the Milk Code nor the Revised
Administrative Code grants the DOH the authority to fix
or impose administrative fines. Without any express
grant of power to fix or impose such fines, the DOH
cannot provide for those fines in the RIRR. The DOH
exceeded its authority by providing for such fines or
sanctions in the RIRR. Pharmaceuticals and Health Care
Association of the Philippines v. Duque [G.R. No.
173034, October 9, 2007].
The Laguna Lake Development Authority (LLDA) has
power to impose fines in the exercise of its function as
a regulatory and quasi-judicial body with respect to
pollution cases in the Laguna Lake region. Public
Hearing Committee of the Laguna Lake
Development Authority v. SM Prime Holdings
[G.R. No. 170599, September 22, 2010].
Page 136 of 214
2. QUASI-JUDICIAL (ADJUDICATORY) POWER

review
Also known as adjudicatory powers, it is the power of
administrative authorities to make determinations of
facts in the performance of their official duties and to
apply the law as they construe it to the facts so found.
It partakes of the judicial power, but is exercised by a
person other than a judge.
1. The Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET) does
not exercise quasi-judicial functions. When
the Supreme Court, as the PET, resolves a
presidential or vice-presidential election
contest, it performs what is essentially a
judicial power. Macalintal v. Presidential
Electoral Tribunal [G.R. No. 191618,
November 23, 2010].
2.
3.
4.
The classification of positions in career service

is a quasi-legislative not a quasi-judicial,
issuance. This distinction determines whether
prior notice and hearing are necessary. It was
an internal matter which did not need prior
publication. It had been issued as an incident
of the administrative bodys power to issue
guidelines for government officials to follow in
performing their duties. Abella v. CSC [G.R.
No. 152574, November 17, 2004].
The fact that the Toll Regulatory Board (TRB)
is exercising its administrative or executive
functions such as the granting of franchises or
awarding of contracts and at the same time
exercising its quasi-legislative and/or quasijudicial functions (e.g., rate-fixing), does not
support a finding of a violation of due process
or the Constitution. Francisco, Jr., et al. vs.
Toll Regulatory Board [G.R. No. 166910,
169917, 173630, 183599, October 19, 2010].
It is well settled that findings of fact of quasijudicial agencies, such as the COA, are
generally accorded respect and even finality
by this Court, if supported by substantial
evidence, in recognition of their expertise on
the specific matters under their jurisdiction. If
the prepayment scheme was in fact
authorized, petitioners should have produced
the document to prove such fact as alleged by
them in the present petition. Petitioners'
allegation of grave abuse of discretion by the
5.
COA implies such capricious and whimsical

exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of
jurisdiction or, in other words, the exercise of
the power in an arbitrary manner by reason of
passion, prejudice, or personal hostility; and it
must be so patent or gross as to amount to an
evasion of a positive duty or to a virtual
refusal to perform the duty enjoined or to act
at all in contemplation of law. Reyna v.
Commission on Audit, [G.R. No. 167219, Feb.
8, 2011].
The doctrine of separate personality of a
corporation finds no application in a
government agency such as the CDA. Also, the
law states that expenditures of government
funds or uses of government property in
violation of law or regulations shall be a
personal liability of the official or employee
found to be directly responsible therefore.
Verzosa, Jr. v. Carague [G.R. No. 157838,
March 8, 2011].
NOTE: Administrative agencies are in a better position

to determine certain controversies given their expertise
and special knowledge about particular matters.
Grant
Parties involved
Adversarial
Controversy
Notice and
Hearing
Primary J./
Exhaustion A.R.
Time
Publication
QUASILEGISLATIVE
Express or
Implied
(SIC PIP)
All/ Sectors
No
None
No
QUASI-JUDICIAL
Express
Particular
Yes
Exists
Yes
Not applicable
Applicable
Future
Depends on type
of rule (SIC PIP)
Past/ Present
No
1.
The essence of due process in administrative
proceedings is the opportunity to explain one's side or
seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling
complained of. As long as the parties are given the
opportunity to be heard before judgment is rendered,
the demands of due process are sufficiently met. What
is offensive to due process is the denial of the
opportunity to be heard. Nothing is irregular in
considering the investigation terminated and
submitting the case for resolution based on available
evidence upon failure of the respondent to file his
counter-affidavit or answer despite giving him ample
Page 137 of 214
opportunity to do so. Moreover, Section 14, Article VIII

of the 1987 Constitution need not apply to decisions
rendered in administrative proceedings. Said section
applies only to decisions rendered in judicial
proceedings. It would be error to hold or even imply
that decisions of executive departments or
administrative agencies are oblige[d] to meet the
requirements under Section 14, Article VIII. Flores v.
Montemayor [G.R. No. 170146, June 8, 2011].
2.
There is no denial of due process if any
irregularity in the premature issuance of a decision has
been remedied through an Order giving petitioners the
right to participate in the hearing of the MR. The
opportunity granted by, technically, allowing
petitioners to finally be able to file their comment in
the case, resolves the procedural irregularity previously
inflicted upon petitioners. NASECORE v. ERC [July 6,
2011]
3.
The BOM can properly admit formal offer of
evidence to prove that a persons kidneys were in their
proper anatomical locations at the time she was
operated and that the BOM shall determine the
probative value thereof, if the original documentary
evidence cannot be produced. The rules of evidence
are merely the means for ascertaining the truth
respecting a matter of fact. Rules of evidence are not
strictly applied in proceedings before administrative
bodies such as the BOM. Atienza v. Board of Medicine
[G.R. No. 177407, Feb. 9, 2011].
ENFORCEMENT OF DECISIONS - It must be in

accordance with the manner prescribed by the statute.
If there is no provision, resort to the courts is necessary
for enforcement.
Characteristics of Quasi-Judicial Proceedings
1.
2.
3.
Adversary in nature; every proceeding is

adversary in substance if it may result in an
order in favor of one person against another.
Such proceedings partake of the nature of
judicial proceedings if it involves taking and
evaluation of evidence, determination of facts
based upon evidence presented AND
rendering an order or decision supported by
the facts proved.
Particular
proceedings
before
an
administrative agency have been held civil
rather than criminal in nature.
4.
5.
Under some statutes, an administrative

proceeding is not a private one but a public
one looking to public ends.
Some administrative
proceedings
are
preventive and remedial to implement a
public policy.
Requisites: (JD)
1. Jurisdiction (defined by law/ charter)- power and
authority given by law to hear and decide a case;
consists of TWO elementsjurisdiction over
SUBJECT-MATTER and over the PERSON.
1. Without jurisdiction, acts are void
and open to collateral attack.
2. Administrative agencies are tribunals
of LIMITED JURISDICTION, which is
dependent entirely upon the validity
and the terms of the statutes
reposing power in them.
3. An administrative agency CANNOT
enlarge its own jurisdiction nor can
jurisdiction be conferred upon an
agency by parties before it.
4. When a particular statute authorizes
an administrative agency to act in a
particular situation, it necessarily
confers upon such agency authority
to determine whether the situation
is such as to authorize the agency to
act; an administrative agencys
determination as to its jurisdiction is
NOT conclusive to the courts.
5. Expiration of a statute may be held
NOT to deprive an administrative
agency of jurisdiction to enforce the
statute as to liabilities incurred while
the statute was in force, where a
general saving statute continues
such liabilities.
6. Administrative
agencies
are
creatures of the law and they have
NO general powers but only such as
conferred by law; where the law
confines in an administrative officer
the power to determine particular
questions or matters upon facts
presented, the jurisdiction of such
office shall prevail over courts.
Page 138 of 214
Doctrine of PRIMARY JURISDICTION- If the

determination requires the expertise, specialized skills
and knowledge of the proper administrative bodies
because technical matters or intricate questions of
facts are involved, then relief must first be obtained in
an administrative proceeding before remedy will be
supplied by the courts.
a.
Administrative Due Process
Ang TIbay v. Court of Industrial Relations [G.R. No. L46496, February 27, 1940]; OMB v. Reyes [G.R. No.
170512. October 5, 2011].
CODE: HIP DESK
1. The RIGHT TO A HEARING, which includes the right
to present ones case and submit evidence in
support thereof.
2. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act
on its or his own INDEPENDENT CONSIDERATION
of the law and facts of the controversy, and not
simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving
at a decision.
3. The decision must be based on the EVIDENCE
PRESENTED at the hearing or at least contained in
the record and disclosed to the parties affected.
4. The DECISION must have something to support
itself.
5. The tribunal must CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE
presented.
6. Evidence supporting the conclusion must be
SUBSTANTIAL.
7. The board or body should, in all controversial
questions, render its decision in such a manner
that the parties to the proceeding can KNOW the
various ISSUES involved and the REASONS for the
decision rendered.
NOTE:
1. For as long as the parties were given fair and
reasonable opportunity to be heard and to submit
evidence in support of their arguments before
judgment was rendered, the demands of due
process are sufficiently met. Casimiro vs. Tandog
[G.R. No. 146137, June 8, 2005].
2. Procedural due process is the constitutional
standard demanding that notice and an
opportunity to be heard be given before judgment
is rendered. As long as a party is given the
opportunity to defend his interests in due course,
he would have no reason to complain; the essence
of due process is in the opportunity to be heard. A
formal or trial-type hearing is not always

necessary. Imperial v. GSIS [G.R. No. 191224.
October 4, 2011].
3. A decision is void for lack of due process if as a
result a party is deprived of the opportunity to be
heard. A void decision may be assailed or
impugned at any time either directly or collaterally
by means of a separate action, or by resisting such
decision in any action or proceeding where it is
invoked. Uy vs. Court of Appeals [G.R. No. 109557,
November 29, 2000]
4. The rule requiring an administrative officer to
exercise his own judgment and discretion DOES
NOT preclude him from utilizing the aid of his
subordinates in the hearing and reception of
evidence.
5. When an administrative agency acts as a
COLLEGIATE BODY, its power and duties CANNOT
be exercised by the members individually.
6. Procedural due process is the necessity for notice
and an opportunity to be heard before judgment is
rendered. As long as a party is given the
opportunity to defend his interests in due course,
he would have no reason to complain, for it is this
opportunity to be heard that makes up the
essence of due process. Catmon Sales v. Yngson
[G.R. 179761, January 15, 2010].
7. The essence of due process in administrative
proceedings is the opportunity to explain ones
side or seek a reconsideration of the action or
ruling complained of. Antonio v. Villa [G.R. No.
114694, March 28, 2005].
8. There is no denial of due process just because no
cross-examination took place. What is important is
that she was given the opportunity to do so.
Vertudes v. Buenaflor [G.R. No. 153166,
December 16, 2005].
9. In administrative proceedings, the filing of charges
and giving reasonable opportunity for the person
charged to answer the accusation against him
constitute the minimum requirements of due
process. Cayago v. Lina, [G.R. No. 149539, January
19, 2005].
10. Some proceedings are instituted by simple ex
parte applications. Others are instituted by filing
of a charge or complaint by an aggrieved person.
Under other statutes, particular administrative
agencies may institute proceedings on their own
initiative, motion, or complaint.
11. As a general rule, notice and hearing are not
essential when agency exercises administrative,
executive, or legislative functions. In quasi-judicial
function, the parties are entitled to notice and
hearing.
Page 139 of 214
12. In administrative proceedings (quasi-judicial)

notice and hearing may, to a fault, be dispensed
with, but the opportunity to be heard must at all
times be afforded to the parties.
13. Due Process requirements are usually in the
statute, but if none is provided, the Constitutional
guarantee of due process of law must be upheld.
(Notice to enable a party to be heard and to
present evidence is not a mere technicality or a
trivial matter in any judicial or quasi-judicial
proceedings. The service of summons is a very vital
and indispensable ingredient of Due Process).
14. When an agency fails to afford previous notice, it
may be cured by subsequently giving the party an
opportunity to be heard. Motion for
reconsideration is a means to cure the defect of
notice. Because in a MR, a party has the
opportunity to be heard.
15. Non-filing of any administrative charge against the
accused preparatory to his dismissal and therefore
the dismissal effected without any administrative
complaint, violated the right of the accused to
substantive and procedural due process. He is
entitled to reinstatement and to payment of the
salaries, allowances, and other benefits withheld
from him by reason of his discharge from the
service. Calinisan v. Roaquin [G.R. No. 159588,
Exceptions to Requirement of Notice And Hearing:

CODE: UTOS CLAPP
1. Urgency of immediate action
2. Tentativeness of the administrative action
3. Right was previously Offered but not claimed
4. Summary abatement of a nuisance per se
5. Cancellation of a passport of a person sought for
criminal prosecution
6. Summary proceedings of Levy upon properties of a
delinquent taxpayer
7. Replacement of a temporary or Acting appointee
8. Preventive suspension of a public servant facing
administrative charges
9. Padlocking of filthy restaurants/ theaters showing
obscene movies
Elements of Right to Hearing
Code:PeK-CE
1. Present his case or defense, and submit his
evidence, oral
or documentary, in support thereof;
2. Know the claims of the opposing party and to meet
the
other party;
3. Cross-examine witnesses for a full disclosure of the
facts;
and
4. Submit rebuttal evidence.

INVESTIGATION
By government officials,
which may be held in
private are informal
proceedings to obtain
information to govern
future actions, have NO
parties, and are NOT
proceedings in which
action is taken against
anyone.
HEARING
There are parties and
issues of law and of fact to
be tried and at the
conclusion of the hearing,
action is taken which may
affect the parties rights
and parties are entitled to
be present in person and
by counsel, participate in
the hearing, and entitled to
be furnished a record of
the proceedings.
NOTES:
The filing of formal charges against the respondents
without complying with the mandated preliminary
investigation (provided by law) or at least giving the
respondents the opportunity to comment violated their
right to due process. Accordingly, the formal charges
are void ab initio and may be assailed directly or
indirectly at anytime. Garcia v. Molina [G.R. No.
157383/G.R. No. 174137, August 18, 2010].
A formal charge is a written specification of the
charge(s) against an employee. While its form may
vary, it generally embodies a brief statement of the
material and relevant facts constituting the basis of the
charge(s); a directive for the employee to answer the
charge(s) in writing and under oath, accompanied by
his/her evidence; and advice for the employee to
indicate in his/her answer whether he/she elects a
formal investigation; and a notice that he/she may
secure the assistance of a counsel of his/her own
choice. PAGCOR v. CA [G.R. No. 185668
December 13, 2011].
The cardinal precept is that where there is a violation of
basic constitutional rights, courts are ousted from their
jurisdiction. The violation of a partys right to due
process raises a serious jurisdictional issue which
cannot be glossed over or disregarded at will. This rule
is equally true in quasi-judicial and administrative
proceedings. Garcia v. Molina [G.R. No. 157383/G.R.
No. 174137, August 18, 2010].
In administrative cases, the requisite proof is
substantial evidence; that is, the amount of relevant
evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as
Page 140 of 214
adequate to justify a conclusion. In this case,

substantial evidence consisted of the uniform findings
of the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon and the
Court of Appeals that petitioner connived with his codefendants to destroy the improvements introduced by
respondent on the subject property so they could
construct their own cottages thereon. Bien v. Bo
[G.R. No. 179333, August 3, 2010].
In administrative proceedings, the quantum of proof
necessary for a finding of guilt is substantial evidence or
such evidence as a reasonable mind may accept as
adequate to support a conclusion. The complainant has
the burden of proving by substantial evidence the
allegations in the complaint. Concerned Citizen v.
Divina [A.M. No. P-07-2369 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 062444-P] : November 16, 2011].
RULES ON ADJUDICATION
(Book VII, 1987 Administrative Code)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Compromise and Arbitration- every agency shall,

in the public interest, encourage amicable
settlement, compromise and arbitration.
ALL parties shall be entitled to notice and hearing;
the notice shall be served AT LEAST 5 DAYS before
the date of hearing and shall state the DATE, TIME,
and PLACE of the hearing.
Parties shall be given opportunity to present
evidence and argument on ALL issues.
Rules on Evidence- May admit evidence commonly
accepted by reasonably prudent men.
Right to cross-examine witnesses.
Agency may make judicial notice to any technical
or scientific facts within in its specialized
knowledge.
The agency shall have the power to require the
attendance of witnesses or the production of
books, papers, documents and other pertinent
data; may invoke the aid of the RTC within whose
jurisdiction the contested case falls.
Decision- every decision rendered by the agency in
a contested case shall be in WRITING and shall
state clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on
which it is based; shall decide WITHIN 30 DAYS
following the submission.
Finality of Order- decision shall be final and
executory 15 DAYS after the receipt of a copy
thereof
Publication and Compilation of decisions- Every
agency shall publish and make available for public
inspection all decisions and final orders. It shall be
the duty of the RECORDS OFFICER of the agency to

prepare a register or compilation of those
decisions or final orders.
b. Administrative Appeal and Review

Appeal- an appeal from a final decision of the agency
may be taken to the DEPARTMENT HEAD.
Perfection of Administrative Appeals-- Appeals shall be
perfected within 15 DAYS after the receipt of a copy of
the decision complained of by the party adversely
affected.
Effect- The appeal shall stay the decision appealed from
if the appellate agency does NOT direct otherwise.
Action on Appeal- The appellate agency may review
record and receive additional evidences.
Finality of Decision of Appellate Agency- becomes final
15 DAYS after receipt of the decision by the parties.
Judicial Review- Agency decisions shall be subject to
judicial review. The action may be brought against the
AGENCY, its OFFICERS, and ALL INDISPENSABLE AND
NECESSARY PARTIES.
The appeal shall be perfected by filing with

the agency within 15 DAYS from receipt of
copy; copies shall be served upon the agency
and ALL parties of records.
A petition for review shall be perfected within
15 DAYS from receipt of the final
administrative decision; 1 ME may be allowed.
Types of Administrative Appeal And Review

1.
That which inheres in the relation of
administrative superior to administrative subordinate
2.
That embraced in statutes which provide for a
determination to be made by a particular officer or
body subject to appeal, review or redetermination by
another officer or body in the same agency or in the
same administrative system.
3.
That in which the statute makes or attempts
to make a court a part of the administrative scheme by
providing in terms or effect that the court, on review of
the action of an administrative agency.
4.
That in which the statute provides that an
order made by a division of a Commission or Board has
the same force and effect as if made by the
Commission subject to a rehearing by the Commission.
Page 141 of 214
5.
That in which the statute provides for an
appeal to an officer on an intermediate level with
subsequent appeal to the head of the department or
agency.
6.
That embraced in statutes which provide for
appeal at the highest level, namely the president.
Controversies among Government Offices and

Corporations
All disputes of government agencies and corporations
are settled administratively in the manner provided by
the Administrative Code (Book IV, Chap. 14).
QUESTIONS
OF LAW
Submitted to Sec of
Justice as AttorneyGeneral. His ruling shall
be binding on all the
parties concerned.
QUESTIONS
OF FACT AND LAW
1. Solicitor-General-if the
dispute, claim or
controversy involves only
departments, bureaus,
offices, and other agencies
of the National
Government as well as the
GOCCs.
2. Secretary of Justice, in
all other cases not
mentioned above.
Notes:
1.
The determination of factual issues
may be made by arbitration panel composed of
representatives from each parties, presided over
by Secretary of Justice.
2.
As a rule, the decision of Sol-Gen and
Secretary of Justice is binding and final
Exception: When the claim involves 1
million pesos, in which case, the dispute
is appealed to the Office of the
President.
c. Administrative res judicata

Decisions and orders of administrative agencies have
upon their finality, the force and effect of a final
judgment within the purview of the doctrine of res
judicata.
The extent of whether an administrative decision

operates as res judicata also depends on the
interpretation of the enabling statute.
The application of the doctrine of res judicata is
dependent upon the type of determination and
proceedings. It is applicable in administrative actions
that have been characterized as adjudicatory,
judicial, or quasi-judicial. On the other hand, it is
inapplicable in administrative determinations which are
of administrative, executive, legislative, or
ministerial nature.
Example: The principle of res judicata is applicable in
labor relations proceedings which are non-litigious and
summary in nature without regard to legal
technicalities obtaining in courts of law.Sec. 5, Rule
XIII, Book v of the Rules and Regulations Implementing
the Labor Code.That in which the statute makes or
attempts to make a court a part of the administrative
scheme by providing in terms or effect that the court,
on review of the action of an administrative agency.
NOT APPLICABLE IN:
1.
When the question of citizenship is resolved
by a court or an administrative body as a material issue
in the controversy after a full-blown hearing. Zita Ngo
Burca vs. Republic & United Pepsi Cola v. Laguesma,
[288 SCRA 15]
2.
When WCC Referee awards the employee less
than what the law provides BF Goodrich v. WCC, [G.R.
No. L-42319, July 31, 1978].
NOTE: Verily, the principle of res judicata in the mode
of "conclusiveness of judgment" applies when the NLRC
ruling was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. It was a
judicial affirmation through a decision duly
promulgated and rendered final and executory when
no appeal was undertaken within the reglementary
period. The jurisdiction of the NLRC, which is a quasijudicial body, was undisputed. Neither can the
jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals over the NLRC
decision be the subject of a dispute. The NLRC case was
clearly decided on its merits; likewise on the merits was
the affirmance of the NLRC by the Court of Appeals.
With respect to the fourth element of identity of
parties, we hold that there is substantial compliance.
The parties in SSC and NLRC cases are not strictly
identical. Jurisprudence however does not dictate
absolute identity but only substantial identity. There is
substantial identity of parties when there is a
community of interest between a party in the first case
and a party in the second case, even if the latter was
not impleaded in the first case. Social Security
Page 142 of 214
5. Impose
coercive
measures
Commission v. Rizal Poultry and Livestock Association

[G.R. No. 167050, June 1, 2011].
Determinative Powers
DIRECTING powers - The power of assessment,
make awards and corrective powers.
2. ENABLING powers - Those that permit the doing of
an act which the law undertakes to regulate and
would be unlawful without government approval.
e.g. Issuance of licenses to engage in a particular
business
3. EQUITABLE powers - Those that pertain to the
power to determine the law upon a particular
state of facts. It refers to the right to make proper
application of the rules of equity.
e.g. Power to appoint a receiver, power to issue
injunctions
4. DISPENSING powers - Exemplified by the authority
to exempt from or relax a general prohibition, or
authority to relieve from an affirmative duty. It
differs from licensing power since dispensing
power sanctions a deviation from a standard.
5. SUMMARY powers - Those that apply compulsion
or force against person or property to effectuate a
legal purpose without a judicial warrant
authorizing such action; usually without notice and
hearing.
e.g. Abatement of nuisance, summary restraint,
levy of property of delinquent taxpayers
1.
3.
FACT-FINDING,
INVESTIGATIVE,
LICENSING AND RATE-FIXING POWERS
Investigatory Powers
(Although some authors include this as part of quasijudicial power, De Leon is of the opinion that it is
separate and distinct, not merely incidental)
INVESTIGATORY POWER - The power to inspect,
secure, or require the disclosure of information by
means of accounts, records, reports, statements and
testimony of witnesses. This power is implied and not
inherent in administrative agencies.
INHERENT
IMPLIED
1. Require
disclosure of
books, etc.
1. Fact-finding
2. Visitorial
powers
3. Ocular
inspection
Notes:
1.
2.
3.
The rule is that findings of fact of

administrative bodies, if based on substantial
evidence, are controlling on the reviewing
authority. Reyna v.
COA [G.R. No.
167219, February 8, 2011].
The SEC Hearing Officer had the optimum
opportunity to review the pieces of evidence
presented before him and to observe the
demeanor of the witnesses. Administrative
decisions on matters within his jurisdiction are
entitled to respect and can only be set aside
on proof of grave abuse of discretion, fraud,
or error of law, which has not been shown by
petitioner in this case. Queensland-Tokyo
Commodities, Inc v. George [G.R. No.
172727, September 8, 2010].
The right to counsel under Section 12 of the
Bill of Rights is meant to protect a suspect
during custodial investigation.
While
investigations conducted by an administrative
body may at times be akin to a criminal
proceeding, the rule under existing laws is
that a party in an administrative inquiry may
or may not be assisted by counsel,
irrespective of the nature of the charges and
of petitioners capacity to represent herself,
and no duty rests on such body to furnish the
person being investigated with counsel. As
such, the admissions made by petitioner
during the investigation may be used as
evidence to justify her dismissal. Carbonel v.
CSC [G.R. No. 187689, September 7, 2010].
LICENSING
LICENSING
Licensing is a QUASIJUDICIAL function.
1.
EXPRESSED
1. Issue a
subpoena
2. Cite a person in
contempt
3. Search and
Seizure
4. Adjudicate
2.
RATE FIXING
QUASI-LEGISLATIVE - If
the rules and rates are
meant to apply to all
enterprises of a given
kind throughout the
country, prior notice
and hearing is NOT
required. (General
Application)
QUASI-JUDICIAL - If
the rules and rates
imposed apply
exclusively to a
Page 143 of 214
particular party, based

upon a finding of fact,
prior notice and
hearing is REQUIRED.
(Particular
Application)
A license may not be withdrawn except for a

violation of pertinent laws, rules and regulation, or
when public health and safety requires. An existing
license shall not expire if the licensee makes a
timely application for the renewal.
======================================
D. JUDICIAL RECOURSE AND REVIEW
jurisdiction
2. Doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies
action
=============================================
D. JUDICIAL REVIEW
GENERAL RULE: The courts accord great weight and
respect to factual findings of administrative bodies.
EXCEPTIONS:
CODE: FIG-SEC
1. The findings are vitiated by Fraud, mistake,
illegality, collusion or imposition;
2. Where the procedure which led to the factual
findings is Irregular;
3. When Grave abuse of discretion, arbitrariness or
capriciousness is manifest and
4. The findings are not supported by Substantial
evidence;
5. Where palpable Errors are committed;
6. When there is a Conflict in the factual findings.
The determination of where, as between two possible
routes, to construct a road extension is obviously not
within the province of the Court. Such determination
belongs to the Executive branch. There can be no
judicial review of a question of Executive policy.

Torrecampo v. MWSS [G. R. No. 188296, May 30,
2011].
DOCTRINES ON JUDICIAL REVIEW
1. Finality of Administrative Action - The decision of
the tribunal must be final first before it may be
reviewed by the courts.
2. Primary Jurisdiction - Not concerned with judicial
review but determines in some circumstances
whether initial action should be taken by a court or
by an administrative agency
3. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies - Designed
primarily to control the timing of judicial relief
from adjudicative action of an agency. It is
customarily applied to adjudication and not to
rule-making.
4. Ripeness for Review - The same as that of
exhaustion of administrative remedies, except that
it applies to the rule making and to administrative
action which is embodied neither in rules or
regulations nor in adjudication or final order.
1. DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION OR PRIOR

RESORT:
1.
Courts cannot determine a controversy, which

requires the expertise, specialized skills and
knowledge of the proper administrative bodies
because technical matters of intricate questions of
fact are involved.
2. Relief must first be obtained in an administrative
proceeding before a remedy will be supplied by
the court, even if the matter is within the
jurisdiction of a court.
NOTE: Prior resort would be required where elements
of
administrative
discretion
are
important
considerations.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Congress does not intend that the issues be left
solely to the administrative agency for initial
determination;
2. When issues involve questions of law; and
3. When courts and administrative agencies have
concurrent jurisdiction.
The Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction does not apply

in a case seeking to enjoin the Senate Committee
of the Whole from conducting further hearings
against Senator Villar on the alleged double
insertion of P200 million for the C-5 Road
Extension Project in the 2008 General
Appropriations Act. The issues presented here do
Page 144 of 214
not require the expertise, specialized skills and

knowledge of respondent for their resolution. On
the contrary, the issues here are purely legal
questions which are within the competence and
jurisdiction of the Court, and not an administrative
agency or the Senate to resolve. Pimentel v.
Senate [G.R. No. 187714, March 08, 2011].
The Supreme Court may defer to the competence
and expertise of the Securities and Exchange
Commission if there are supervening events which
could have substantially changed the factual
backdrop of the case while it was pending before
the Court. Nestle v. Uniwide, [G.R. No. 174674,
October 20, 2010].
The courts cannot compel a public prosecutor to
file the corresponding information, upon a
complaint, where he finds the evidence before him
insufficient to warrant the filing of an action in
court. The findings of the prosecutor on the
existence of probable cause are not subject to
review by the courts, unless these are patently
shown to have been made with grave abuse of
discretion. Baviera v. Paglinawan [G.R. No.
168380, February 8, 2007].
The court may raise the issue of primary
jurisdiction motu propio and its invocation cannot
be waived by the failure of the parties to argue it,
as the doctrine exists for the proper distribution of
power between judicial and administrative bodies
and not for the convenience of the parties. In such
a case, the court may (1) suspend the judicial
process pending referral of such issues to the
administrative body for its view, or (2) if the
parties would not be unfairly disadvantaged,
dismiss the case w/o prejudice. Euro-Med
Laboratories Phil. v. Province of Batangas [G.R.
No. 148106, July 17, 2006].
2. DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE

REMEDIES
GENERAL RULE: An administrative decision must first
be appealed to the administrative superiors up to the
highest level before it may be elevated to a court of
justice for review.
NOTE:
The premature invocation of a courts
intervention is fatal to ones cause of action. Exhaustion
of administrative remedies is a prerequisite for judicial
review. It is a condition precedent which must be
complied with.
Reasons:
1. To enable the administrative superiors to correct
the errors committed by their subordinates;
2. Courts should refrain from disturbing the findings
of administrative bodies in deference to the
doctrine of separation of powers;
3. Courts should not be saddled with the review of
administrative cases;
4. Judicial review of administrative cases is usually
done through special civil actions which are
available only if there is no other plain, speedy and
adequate remedy.
5. Availment of administrative remedy entails lesser
expenses and provides for a speedier disposition of
controversies
EXCEPTIONS:
CODE: DARNN JP LICD DRIED LPS Quo
1. If it should appear that an IRREPARABLE DAMAGE
will be suffered by a party unless resort to the
court is immediately made.
2. When the respondent is the ALTER EGO of the
President
3. When no administrative REVIEW is provided as a
condition precedent for court action
4. Where insistence on its observance would result in
the NULLIFICATION of the claim asserted
5. When there was NO DECISION rendered
6. When there are special circumstances demanding
immediate JUDICIAL INTERVENTION
7. When the administrative remedy is PERMISSIVE or
concurrent
8. When the question raised is ESSENTIALLY AND
PURELY LEGAL
9. When strong PUBLIC INTEREST is involved
10. Where the issue raised is the CONSTITUTIONALITY
of the statute, rule or regulation
11. Where it is a civil action for DAMAGES
12. Where the officer acted in utter DISREGARD OF
DUE PROCESS
13. When there is NO OTHER plain, speedy, adequate
REMEDY
14. When act complained of is PATENTLY ILLEGAL
15. When the administrative body or the person
invoking the doctrine is in ESTOPPEL
16. When there is long-continued and UNREASONABLE
DELAY
17. When the subject of controversy is PRIVATE LAND
18. When the controversy involves POSSESSORY
ACTION involving public lands
19. When the claim involved is SMALL so that to
require exhaustion would be oppressive and
unreasonable
20. In QUO WARRANTO proceedings
Page 145 of 214
The rule on the exhaustion of administrative

remedies is intended to preclude a court from
arrogating unto itself the authority to resolve a
controversy, the jurisdiction over which is initially
lodged with an administrative body of special
competence. Thus, a case where the issue raised is
a purely legal question, well within the
competence and the jurisdiction of the court and
not the administrative agency, would clearly
constitute an exception. Resolving questions of
law, which involve the interpretation and
application of laws, constitutes essentially an
exercise of judicial power that is exclusively
allocated to the Supreme Court and such lower
courts the Legislature may establish. Ongsuco vs.
Malones, [G.R. No. 182065, October 27, 2009]
Petitioners filing of a petition for mandamus and
prohibition with the CA was premature. It bears
stressing that the remedies of mandamus and
prohibition may be availed of only when there is
no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law. Moreover,
being extraordinary remedies, resort may be had
only in cases of extreme necessity where the
ordinary forms of procedure are powerless to
afford relief. Thus, instead of immediately filing a
petition with the CA, petitioners should have first
brought the matter to the CSC which has primary
jurisdiction over the case.
Cabungcal vs.
Lorenzo [G.R. No. 160367, December 18, 2009]
The special civil actions against administrative
officers should not be entertained if there are
superior administrative officers who could grant
relief. Dimson v. Local Water Utilities
Administration [G.R. No. 168656, September
22, 2010]
The validity and the enforceability of the Contract
of Agreement entered into by the parties are
questions purely of law and clearly beyond the
expertise of the Commission on Audit or the
DPWH. Vigilar v. Aquino [G.R. No. 180388,
January 18, 2011].
3. DOCTRINE OF FINALITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE

ACTION - Courts are reluctant to interfere with actions
of an administrative agency prior to its completion or
finality. Absent a final order or decision, power has not
been fully and finally exercised, and there can usually
be no irreparable harm.
EXCEPTIONS:
CODE: SPA DIVE
1. To grant relief to preserve STATUS QUO pending
further action by the administrative agency;
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Essential to the PROTECTION OF RIGHTS asserted;

When ALLOWED by law;
When the order is NOT REVIEWABLE and the
complainant will suffer great and obvious DAMAGE
if the order is carried out;
An INTERLOCUTORY ORDER affecting the merits of
a controversy;
An administrative officers acts in VIOLATION of
constitution and other laws and
To an order made in EXCESS of power, contrary to
specific prohibitions in the statute.
Appeal to the CA is allowed because a quasi-judicial

agency is equivalent in rank with the RTC (Rule 43,
Rules of Court). CA has the discretion on whether to
allow the appeal or not.
EXCEPTIONS to RULE 43:
1.
Rule 65:
FROM
APPEAL TO
DOJ SECRETARY (due to

manifest error or Grave
Abuse of Discretion)
Ombudsman (nonadministrative cases)
Ombudsman
(administrative cases
ONLY)
COA/ COMELEC
Court of Appeals
CSC
Court of Appeals via Rule

43
2.
Supreme Court
43
Supreme Court
Rule 45:
FROM
CTA en banc (from CTA

division)
NLRC (from Labor Arbiter)
APPEAL TO
Supreme Court
65 then Supreme Court
via Rule 45
DOCTRINE OF RIPENESS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW - This

determines the point at which courts may review an
administrative action. The judicial machinery should be
conserved for problems which are real and present or
imminent, and should not be squandered on problems
which are future, imaginary or remote.
Page 146 of 214
7.
APPLICATION:
1. When the interest of the plaintiff is subjected to or
imminently threatened with SUBSTANTIAL INJURY;
2. If the statute is SELF-EXECUTING;
3. When a party is immediately confronted with the
problem of complying or violating a statute and
there is a RISK OF CRIMINAL PENALTIES and
4. When plaintiff is harmed by the VAGUENESS of the
statute
Reviewable Questions
1. QUESTIONS OF FACT
GENERAL RULE: Courts will not disturb the findings
of administrative agencies acting within the
parameters of their own competence, special
knowledge, expertise, and experience. The courts
ordinarily accord respect, if not finality, to factual
findings of administrative tribunals.
EXCEPTION: If findings are not supported by
substantial evidence.
2.
3.
QUESTIONS OF LAW - Administrative decisions

may be appealed to the courts independently of
legislative permission. It may be appealed even
against legislative prohibition because the judiciary
cannot be deprived of its inherent power to review
all decisions on questions of law.
MIXED (LAW AND FACT) - Where there is a mixed
question of law and fact and the court cannot
separate the elements to see clearly what and
where the mistake of law is, such question is
treated as a question of fact for purposes of review
and the courts will not ordinarily review the
decision of the administrative tribunal.
Grounds for Reversal of Administrative Findings

CODE: AIMS PICS
1. Grave Abuse of discretion
2. Inferences made are manifestly mistaken or
impossible
3. Misapprehension of facts, or the agency
overlooked certain facts of substance or value
which if considered would affect the result of the
case
4. Finding is grounded on Speculations or conjectures
5. Rights of a party were Prejudiced because the
findings were in violation of the constitution, or in
excess of statutory authority, vitiated by fraud,
mistake
6. Irregular procedures or violations of due process
8.
Agency went beyond the issues of the case and the

same are Contrary to the admissions of the parties
or the evidence presented
Findings not supported by Substantial evidence
EXHAUSTION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE
REMEDIES
Applies where the claim or
matter is cognizable in the
first instance by an
administrative agency alone
PRIMARY JURISDICTION
Applies where both the court

and administrative agency
have jurisdiction to pass on a
question which a particular
case is presented as an
original matter, rather than
as a matter of review
RIPENESS FOR JUDICIAL

REVIEW
Focus on the nature of the
judicial process, i.e., the
types and functions the
court should perform
EXHAUSTION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
Focus on the question of
whether a party should be
required to pursue an
administrative remedy
before going to court
Applied to rule-making and

adjudication
Applied to adjudicative action

of an administrative agency
RIPENESS FOR JUDICIAL

REVIEW
Determines at what stage a
party may secure judicial
review of administrative
action
PRIMARY JURISDICTION
Arises whenever judicial

review of administrative
action is available
Determines whether the

court or agency should make
the initial decision
Arises whenever
administrative and judicial
jurisdictions are concurrent
for the initial decision of
some questions

Page 147 of 214
==============================
XI. ELECTION LAW
==============================
A. Suffrage
B. Qualification and disqualification of voters
C. Registration of voters
D. Inclusion and exclusion proceedings
E. Political parties
1. Jurisdiction of the COMELEC over
political parties
2. Registration
F. Candidacy
a) Effect of filing
c) Ministerial duty of COMELEC
to receive certificate
e) Petition to deny or cancel
certificates of candidacy
G. Campaign
propaganda
5. Statement of contributions and
expenses
H. Board of Election Inspectors and Board of
Canvassers
1. Composition
2. Powers
I. Remedies and jurisdiction in election law
2. Petition to declare failure of

elections
3. Pre-proclamation controversy
4. Election protest
5. Quo warranto
J. Prosecution of election offenses
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
A. Suffrage
=======================================
A. SUFFRAGE
SUFFRAGE - The right to vote in the elections.
1. As a RIGHT - The expression of the sovereign will
of the people.
2. As a PRIVILEGE - Not granted to everybody but to
such persons as are most likely to exercise it for
the purpose of the public good. It is subject to
substantive and procedural requirements.
NOTE: The right to vote is different from the right to
register. A person may register even before he is 18
years old, but must be at least 18 years old on the day
of the election.
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
B. Qualification and Disqualification of Voters
=======================================
B. QUALIFICATION AND DISQUALIFICATION OF
VOTERS
Qualifications:
CODE: CD R2 18
1. CITIZEN of the Philippines
2. Not DISQUALIFIED by law
3. RESIDENT of the Philippines for at least 1 YEAR
4. RESIDENT of the place wherein he proposes to
vote for at least 6 MONTHS immediately preceding
the election
5. At least 18 years old
NOTE: No literacy, property or other substantive
requirement can be imposed on the exercise of
suffrage.
Page 148 of 214
Grounds for Disqualification to Vote:

1. Sentenced by FINAL JUDGMENT to suffer
IMPRISONMENT NOT LESS THAN 1 YEAR
2. Adjudged by final judgment by a competent court
of having committed any crime involving
DISLOYALTY to the duly constituted government
(e.g. rebellion or crimes against national security)
NOTE: For (1) and (2):
a. Disqualification may be removed by plenary
pardon or amnesty
b. Reacquire the right to vote upon expiration of
5 years after service of sentence
3. INSANE or INCOMPETENT persons as declared by
competent authority
NOTE:
1. These qualifications are continuing requirements.
2. Congress may not add qualifications but can
provide for procedural requirements and
disqualifications. However, the disqualifications
must not amount to qualifications.
DUAL CITIZENSHIP LAW - Former NATURAL-BORN

Filipino citizens who acquired foreign citizenship
through naturalization are deemed not to have lost
their Philippine citizenship under conditions provided in
this act.
DERIVATIVE CITIZENSHIP - The unmarried child,
whether legitimate, illegitimate, or adopted, under 18
years of age, of those who re-acquire Philippine
citizenship under the Dual Citizenship Law shall be
deemed citizens of the Philippines.
Requirement for Naturalized Citizens:
1. TO VOTE - Swear an oath of allegiance
2. TO BE ELECTED TO PUBLIC OFFICE - Renounce
foreign citizenship
3. TO BE APPOINTED TO PUBLIC OFFICE - Swear an
oath of allegiance to the AND renounce foreign
citizenship
OVERSEAS ABSENTEE VOTING ACT (RA 9189)

RESIDENCE - Ones domicile or legal residence. It is
where a party actually or constructively has his
permanent home, or where he, no matter where he
may be found, eventually intends to return and remain.
Residency Requirement:
1. DOMICILE - This is in reference to the 1-year
residency requirement in the Philippines. The
elements of domicile (1) physical presence in the
country 2) intention to remain; 3) intention to
abandon the old domicile; and 4) it must be
voluntary- must concur.
2. TEMPORARY RESIDENCE - This is in reference to
the 6- month residency requirement in the place
where one wants to vote. In this case, residence
can either mean domicile or temporary residence.
To successfully effect a transfer of domicile, one must
demonstrate: (1) an actual removal or change of
domicile; (2) a bona fide intention of abandoning the
former place of residence and establishing a new one;
and (3) acts which correspond with that purpose. There
must be animus manendi coupled with animus non
revertendi. Asistio has always been a resident of
Caloocan City since his birth for more than 72 years. In
all of these occasions, Asistio cast his vote in the same
city. There is no showing that he has established
domicile elsewhere, or that he had consciously and
voluntarily abandoned his residence in Caloocan City.
Asistio v. Canlas [G.R. No. 191124, April 27, 2010].
OVERSEAS ABSENTEE VOTING ACT (RA 9189) - Ensures

equal opportunity to all qualified citizens of the
Philippines abroad to exercise their right to vote in the
national elections.
1.
2.
DOMESTIC ABSENTEE VOTING - Public officials

stationed in places other than the place where he
is a registered voter are allowed to vote in the
place of their work. (e.g. police officers, military
personnel, schoolteachers)
OVERSEAS ABSENTEE VOTING - Qualified Filipinos
abroad may be allowed to vote under a system
congress will provide.
Qualifications under RA 9189:

1. Filipino citizen
2. At least 18 years of age
3. Free from disqualifications
4. Must file an affidavit expressly declaring:
a. Intention to resume actual, physical,
permanent residence within 3 years from
approval of registration
b. Has not applied for citizenship in another
country
5. Registered overseas absentee voters
6. Has an approved application to vote in absentia
NOTE: The requirement of actual residency is dispensed
with.
Grounds for Disqualification under RA 9189:
Page 149 of 214
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Sentenced by FINAL JUDGMENT TO SUFFER

IMPRISONMENT NOT LESS THAN 1 YEAR
Adjudged by final judgment by a competent court
of having committed any crime involving
DISLOYALTY to the duly constituted government
e.g. rebellion or crimes against national security
NOTE [For (1) and (2)]:
a. Disqualification may be removed by plenary
pardon or amnesty
b. Reacquire the right to vote upon expiration of
5 years after service of sentence
INSANE or INCOMPETENT persons as declared by
competent authority
Those who have LOST their Filipino citizenship
Those who have EXPRESSLY RENOUNCED expressly
renounced their Philippine citizenship and who
have pledged allegiance to a foreign country
An IMMIGRANT or PERMANENT RESIDENT, unless
he executes an affidavit stating expressly
declaring:
a. Intention to resume actual, physical,
permanent residence within 3 years from
approval of registration
b. Has not applied for citizenship in another
country
ACT
Failure to undertake
affidavit
Failure to undertake
affidavit yet voted
Failure to resume
residency
Failure to resume
residency yet voted
EFFECT
Removal of name from
the list and permanent
disqualification
Imprisonment of not less
than 1 year
Removal of name from list
Imprisonment of not less
than 1 year
To Whom Absentee Voting Applies:

1. Persons who have the qualifications of a voter but
who happen to be TEMPORARILY ABROAD.
2. Qualified voters who are IN THE PHILIPPINES but
are TEMPORARILY ABSENT from their voting
places.
A former natural-born Filipino Citizen who has

reacquired Filipino citizenship under the Dual
Citizenship law may vote even without the
required (six month) residence, provided the
person files the affidavit as required in the
Absentee Voting Law as authorized by the
Constitution. Lewis v COMELEC [G.R. No. 162759,
August 4. 2006].
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
C. Registration of Voters
=======================================
C. REGISTRATION OF VOTERS
Registration - It does not confer the right to vote; it is
just a condition precedent to the exercise of the right.
NEW SYSTEM OF REGISTRATION - Continuing
registration of voters whereby application for
registration of voters shall be conducted daily in the
office of the Election Officer during regular office hours
and all applications for registration shall be heard and
processed on a quarterly basis by the ERB.
When registration not allowed:
1. 120 days before regular election
2. 90 days before special election
NOTE:
1. Each precinct shall have no more than 200 voters
and shall comprise contiguous and compact
territories except when precincts are clustered.
2. No Election Officer shall hold office in a particular
city/ municipality for more than 4 years. COMELEC
has the authority to effect transfer.
3. No registration shall be conducted during the
period starting 120 days before a regular election
and 90 days before a special election.
BOOK OF VOTERS - Classified as permanent whereby
each precinct shall have a permanent list of all
registered voters residing within the territorial
jurisdiction of that precinct.
Alteration of Book Of Voters
Code: DECANT
1. DEACTIVATION/ Reactivation
2. EXCLUSION/ Inclusion
3. CANCELLATION of registration in case of death
4. ANNULMENT of book of voters
5. NEW VOTERS
6. TRANSFER of residence
DEACTIVATION - Removal from the registration records
of persons from the precinct book of voters and place
the same, properly marked and dated in indelible ink, in
the inactive file after entering the cause of
deactivation.
Page 150 of 214
Grounds for Deactivation:

1. Those which would disqualify you as a voter:
1. Convicted by final judgment to suffer
imprisonment not less than 1 year
2. Disloyalty
3. Insanity
2. Others:
1. Loss of citizenship
2. Failed to vote for 2 successive preceding
regular elections
3. Registration was ordered excluded by the
court
Post-Approval Remedies [PAP]:
1. Petition for Inclusion
2. Annulment of Book of Voters
3. Petition for Exclusion
Annulment of book of voters - A voter, election officer,
or PP may file a verified petition for the annulment of a
book of voters with the COMELEC. Last day for filing is
within 90 days before an election.
Grounds for Annulment of Book of Voters:
1. Not prepared in accordance with law
Prepared through [F3I2BS2]:
1. FRAUD
2. FORGERY
3. FORCE
4. INTIMIDATION
5. IMPERSONATION
6. BRIBERY
7. SIMILAR irregularity
8. Contains data that are STATISTICALLY
improbable
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
D. Inclusion and Exclusion Proceedings
=======================================
D. INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION PROCEEDINGS
1.
2.
3.
4.
The municipal and metropolitan trial courts shall have

original and exclusive jurisdiction over all matters of
inclusion and exclusion of voters from the list in their
respective municipalities or cities.
Decisions may be appealed to the RTC within 5 days
from receipt of notice of decision.
RTC will decide the appeal within 10 days. Decision is
final and executory.
Any voter, candidate or political party may affected
by the proceedings may intervene.
INCLUSION CASES
May be filed any time
EXCEPT 105 days before
regular elections or 75 days
before special elections
Grounds:
1. Application for
registration has been
disapproved by the
board
2. Name has been stricken
out
EXCLUSION CASES
May be filed any time
EXCEPT 100 days before
regular elections or 65 days
before special elections
Grounds:
1. Not qualified or
possessing
disqualification
2. Flying voters
3. Ghost voters
Requires a sworn petition
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
E.Political Parties
1. Jurisdiction of the COMELEC over
political parties
2. Registration
=======================================
E. POLITICAL PARTIES
PARTY-LIST SYSTEM - A social justice tool designed not
only to give more law to the great masses of our people
who have less in life, but also to enable them to
become veritable lawmakers empowered to participate
directly in the enactment of laws designed to benefit
them
Aim and Purpose:
1. Broaden the base of candidates
2. Encourage multi-party system
3. Ensure party loyalty
4. Promote proportional representation
NOTE: Congress cannot provide for a two-party system
because:
1. This violates the freedom of association as
provided in the Bill of Rights.
2. The Constitution mandates that the Philippine
party system shall be multi-party, open and free.
POLITICAL PARTY - An organized group of persons
pursuing the same ideology, political ideas or platforms
of government including its branches and divisions.
Criteria to Determine Type of Political Party: (Sec. 26,
RA 7166)
Page 151 of 214
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Established record of said parties showing in past

elections
Number of incumbent elective officials
Identifiable political organizations and strengths
Ability to fill and complete slate of candidates
Other analogous circumstances
TYPES:
1. Non-Registered Parties
2. Registered Parties
1. Dominant Majority - Entitled to a copy of ER
2. Dominant Minority - Entitled to a copy of ER
3. Top 3 - Entitled to appoint a principal watcher
and a copy of the COC
4. Bottom 3 - Entitled to appoint a principal
watcher
No. of Party-List Reps = (No. of District Reps/ 0.80) X

0.20
3. TWO VOTES
1st vote - For the district representative
2nd vote - For the party-list representative
NOTE: The name of the party and not the nominee
of the party should be indicated as 2nd vote.
4.
NATIONAL PARTY - Its constituency is spread over the

geographical territory of at least a majority of the
regions.
REGIONAL PARTY - Its constituency is spread over the
geographical territory of at least a majority of the cities
and provinces comprising a region
SECTORAL PARTY - An organized group of citizens
whose principal advocacy pertains to the special
interests and concerns of the following sectors:
1. Labor
2. Fisher folk
3. Peasant
4. Urban poor
5. Indigenous
6. Cultural communities
7. Youth
8. Women
9. Handicapped
10. Elderly
11. Overseas workers
12. Veterans
13. Professional workers
Unique Characteristics of the Philippine Party-List
System:
1. ONLY IN HOUSE
1. The proportional representation or party-list
system is only available in the House of
Representatives.
2. Plurality formula is used for other elective
officials.
2.
THE 20% ALLOCATION - Prescribes only a ceiling

and is not considered mandatory.
THE 2% THRESHOLD AND 3-SEAT LIMIT

1. To be entitled to 1 qualifying seat, a party
must obtain 2% of the total ballots cast for
qualified party-list candidates.
2. Votes cast for a party which is not entitled to
be voted for should not be counted. The votes
they obtained shall be deducted from the
canvass of the total votes for the party-list.
3. Rounding-off is not allowed.
4. Each party is entitled to a maximum of 3
seats.
5. Parties other than the 1st party (the party that
obtained the highest # of votes based on
plurality) may be entitled to additional seats
based on the ff. formula:
No. of votes of party

No. of votes of 1st party x number of seats of 1st party
5.
The two percent threshold in computing for the

additional seats is unconstitutional. The continued
application of the two percent threshold in the
application of additional seats in proportion to
their total number of votes until all the additional
seats will frustrate the attainment of the
permissive ceiling that twenty percent of the
members of the house of representatives shall
consist of party-list representatives. BANAT v.
Comelec [G.R. No. 179271, April 21, 2009].
Section 6(8) of RA 7941 provides for two separate
grounds for delisting; these grounds cannot be
mixed or combined to support delisting; and the
disqualification for failure to garner 2% party-list
votes in two preceding elections should now be
understood, in light of the Banat ruling, to mean
failure to qualify for a party-list seat in two
preceding elections for the constituency in which it
has registered. Philippine Guardians v.
COMELEC [G.R. No. 190529, April 29, 2010].
EXCLUSIVE TO THE MARGINALIZED
1. Only parties and organizations that actually
and truly represent the underrepresented and
marginalized constituencies can participate
under the party-list system.
Page 152 of 214
2.
3.
4.
5.
At least a majority of its members should

belong to the marginalized.
The party must not be an adjunct of, or a
project organized or entity funded or assisted
by the government.
The nominee must be able to contribute to
the formulation of appropriate legislation that
will benefit the whole nation.
NOTE: Must be ORGANIC MEMBER not
SYNTHETIC MEMBER
General averments that an organization
represents the marginalized sectors must be
substantiated and shown through its
constitution, history, platform, and track
record. It must demonstrate that in case of
conflict of interests, it is likely to choose the
interest of the sectors.
Qualifications of a Party-List Nominee:

1. A natural-born citizen of the Philippines
2. A registered voter
3. A resident of the Philippines for a period of not
less than 1 year immediately preceding the
election day
4. Able to read and write
5. A bona fide member of the party he seeks to
represent for at least 90 days preceding election
day
6. At least 25 years of age on election day.
NOTE:
1. In case of the youth sector, he must be at least 25
but not more than 30 years of age on the day of
the election.
2. Any youth sectoral representative who reaches the
age of thirty 30 during his term shall be allowed to
continue in office until the expiration of his term.
3. A list with 5 names should be submitted to
COMELEC as to who will represent the party in the
Congress. Ranking in the list submitted determines
who shall represent party or organization.
Disqualification of Party-Lists:
CODE: F2V2R COPS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
FOREIGN party or organization

Receives FOREIGN support
Advocates VIOLENCE
VIOLATES election laws
RELIGIOUS sect, denomination, organization
CEASED to exist for at least 1 year
Failed to OBTAIN at least 2% of the votes cast
under the party-list system in the 2 preceding
elections
8.
9.
Failed to PARTICIPATE in the last 2 preceding

elections
Untruthful STATEMENTS in its petition
NOTE:
1. Cancellation of registration of a party list may be
done by the COMELEC motu propio or upon
verified complaint of any interested party after
due notice and hearing.
2. COMELEC may not, through a resolution setting
the deadline for registration of political parties,
differentiate between political parties, on the one
hand, and political organizations and coalitions, on
the other. There is no substantial distinction
among these entities germane to the act of
registration that would justify creating distinctions
among them in terms of deadlines. A petition for
registration as a political coalition filed beyond
that deadline is time-barred, and the COMELEC
resolution granting that petition constitutes grave
abuse of discretion. Liberal Party v. COMELEC
[G.R. No. 191771, May 6, 2010].
3. Section 15 of RA 7941 provides that a nominee of a
sectoral party who changes his sectoral affiliation
within the same party is not eligible for nomination
under the new sectoral affiliation unless such
change occurred at least six months before the
elections. Section 15 clearly covers changes in both
political party and sectoral affiliation within the
same party. Amores v. HRET [G.R. No. 189600,
June 29, 2010].
4. Moral disapproval is not a sufficient governmental
interest to justify exclusion of homosexuals from
participation in the party-list system. Ang Ladlad
LGBT Party v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 190582,
April 8, 2010].
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
F. Candidacy
a) Effect of filing
c) Ministerial duty of COMELEC to
received certificate
e) Petition to deny or cancel certificates of
candidacy
Page 153 of 214
=======================================
F. CANDIDACY
1.QUALIFICATIONS AND DISQUALIFICATIONS
There is no constitutional right to run for or hold public
office. What is recognized is merely a privilege subject
to limitations imposed by law.
The right to run for public office is not inextricably
intertwined with the rights of expression and
association. Ones interest in seeking office, by itself, is
not entitled to constitutional protection. One cannot
bring ones action under the rubric of freedom of
association, absent any allegation that, by running for
an elective position, one is advancing the political ideas
of a particular set of voters. Quinto v. COMELEC [G.R.
No. 189698, February 22, 2010].
NOTE: Congress may not add to the qualifications for
elective officials provided in the Constitution. However,
they may do so for elective officials not provided in the
Constitution.
CONDITIONS FOR THE 3-TERM BAN:
1. The official has been elected for 3 consecutive
terms in the same local government post
2. Fully served 3 consecutive terms
3. Elected in a regular election
NOTE: The 3-term ban applies only for elective local
officials.
Service of Full Term:
1. When a municipality has been converted to a city,
and the area and inhabitants of the locality are the
same, and the 3-term municipal mayor continued
to hold office until such time as city elections are
held
2. Where an incumbent mayor loses in election
protest but the decision of the RTC was
promulgated AFTER the service of the term.
Not Service of Full Term:
1. Fills up a higher office (by succession or operation
of law)
2. Suspended from office (failed to serve full term)
3. Unseated, in order to vacate by reason of
declaration of failure of election or an election
protest
4. Served unexpired term after winning in the recall
elections
5.
Assuming a local government post (even if served

for 3 consecutive terms) after winning a recall
election (since not considered an immediate reelection)
HOLD OVER PRINCIPLE - The term of all local officials is

3 years, but Sec. 5 of R.A. 9164 authorizes the holdover of incumbent barangay officials until their
successors are elected.
GENERAL RULE: In the Philippines all elective officials
are elected by plurality vote.
EXCEPTION: Party-list representatives are elected
through proportional representation.
Grounds for Substitution [DWD]:
1. Death
2. Withdrawal
3. Disqualification
GENERAL RULE: No substitution is allowed for an
independent candidate. Only candidates who are
members of and are nominated by a party can be
substituted.
EXCEPTION: A candidate for a barangay elective office
notwithstanding the policy that barangay elections are
non-partisan can be substituted by his/her spouse.
Rulloda v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 154198, January 20,
2003].
Rules on Substitution:
1. Any candidate may withdraw his candidacy
anytime before election day.
2. A person without a valid certificate of candidacy
cannot be considered a candidate and therefore
cannot be substituted.
3. Substitute candidate may file his certificate of
candidacy no later than mid-day of election day.
4. No person who has withdrawn his candidacy for a
position shall be eligible as a substitute candidate
for any other position.
5. The substitute candidate must be qualified to hold
office and must be a member of and nominated by
the same political party.
6. A public office is personal to the public officer and
not a property transmissible to the heirs upon
death. The Court has allowed substitution and
intervention but only by a real party in interest.
The Protestants widow is not a real party in
interest to the election protest.
7. The filing of the withdrawal shall not affect the
civil, criminal or administrative liabilities the
substituted candidate may have already incurred.
Page 154 of 214
8.
In case of valid substitutions, votes cast for

substituted candidates are considered stray,
except if the substitute candidate has the same
surname.
CANDIDATE - A person aspiring for or seeking an

elective public office who has filed by himself or
through an accredited political party a certificate of
candidacy at the start of the campaign period (RA 9369,
January 23, 2007)
2. RULES ON FILING CERTIFICATES OF CANDIDACY:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
No person shall be elected into public office unless

he files his COC within the prescribed period.
No person shall be eligible for more than one
office. If he files more than 1 position, he shall not
be eligible for all unless he cancels all and retains
one.
The COC shall be filed by the candidate personally
or by his duly authorized representative. No COC
shall be accepted if filed by mail telegram or
facsimile.
Upon filing, an individual becomes a candidate.
Thus, he is already covered by rules, restrictions
and processes involving candidates.
The receiving officers shall have the ministerial
duty to receive and acknowledge receipt of the
COC.
A COC will not be cancelled even if it failed to
specify the position sought if the information
omitted is supplied in the certificate of
nomination and amended COC.
General Effect of Filing of CoC: Upon filing, such person

becomes a candidate. He/she is already covered by
rules and regulations, and process involving candidates.
officials would have unfair advantage over their rivals

because they might use their office resources for their
campaign.
ELECTIVE - Continue to hold office, whether they run
for the same or different position.
Independent Candidates:
1. NOT A MEMBER of a registered political party
2. MEMBER of an UNREGISTERED political party
3. MEMBER of a registered political party but NOT
OFFICIALLY NOMINATED as candidate by said party
4. NOMINATED by a person who is NOT the duly
AUTHORIZED representative of a registered
political party
5. NOMINATED by a registered political party but
such was NOT SUBMITTED to the COMELEC or
where such nomination was submitted AFTER the
last day of filing of the certificate of candidacy
6. NOMINATED by a party that nominated IN EXCESS
of the number of persons to be voted for an
election position
7. A candidate ACCEPTS NOMINATIONS from more
than 1 registered political party
Aspects of Disqualification Cases:
1. ELECTORAL ASPECT
a. Whether or not the offender should be
disqualified from being a candidate or from
holding office
b. Proceedings are summary in character and
require only a clear preponderance of
evidence
c. An erring candidate may be disqualified even
without prior determination of probable
cause in a preliminary investigation
2.
EFFECT ON INCUMBENTS OF FILING OF CoC:

The former rule stating that any person holding a public
appointive office or position, including active members
of the armed forces, and officers and employees in
government-owned or -controlled corporations are
considered ipso facto resigned from his/her office and
must vacate the same at the start of the day of the
filing of his/her certificate of candidacy has already
been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
Quinto v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 189698, December 1,
2009].
HOWEVER, such decision was reversed by the SC in a
motion for reconsideration on February 23, 2010
voting 10-5 and upheld the argument that appointed
CRIMINAL ASPECT
a. Whether or not there is probable cause to
charge a candidate for an election offense
b. The prosecutor is the COMELEC, through its
Law Department which determines whether
or not probable cause exists
c. If there is probable cause, the COMELECs Law
Department files the criminal information
before the proper court
d. Proceedings before the proper court demand
a full blown hearing and require proof beyond
reasonable doubt to convict
e. A criminal conviction shall result in the
disqualification of the offender, which may
even include disqualification from holding a
future public office
Page 155 of 214
Grounds for Disqualification [LFFD-NEEDS]:

1. Lacking qualifications
2. Filing a COC for more than 1 office
3. False and material representation in the COC
4. Disqualifications under the LGC
5. Nuisance candidate
6. Election offenses enumerated under Sec. 68 of the
Omnibus Election Code
7. Declared insane or incompetent by competent
authority
8. Sentenced by final judgment for subversion,
insurrection, rebellion or an offense which he has
been sentenced to a penalty of more than 18
months, or a crime involving moral turpitude,
unless given plenary pardon/ amnesty
The grounds in Section 68 may be categorized into two.
First, those comprising "prohibited" acts of candidates;
and second, the fact of their permanent residency in
another country when that fact affects the residency
requirement of a candidate according to the law.
Munder v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 194076, October 19,
2011].
False and Material Representation [FMD]

1. Must be FALSE
2. Must be MATERIAL (goes into your qualifications)
3. Must be DELIBERATE and there is an intention to
defraud the electorate
No False Material Representation:
1. When a candidate uses the name of her long-time
live-in partner OR states a false profession
2. When the candidate is actually qualified even if the
entries in the COC as filled up by the candidate will
show that he is not
3. When the candidate, supported by a
preponderance of evidence, believed that he was
qualified since there was no intention to deceive
the electorate as to ones qualifications for public
office
place in relation to the stature of the candidate. Mitra

v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 191938, July 2, 2010].
Disqualifications under the Lgc: SeReC-FuD-P
1. SENTENCED BY FINAL JUDGMENT for an offense
involving moral turpitude or for an offense
punishable by 1 year or more of imprisonment
within 2 years after serving sentence
2. REMOVED FROM OFFICE as a result of an
administrative case
3. CONVICTED BY FINAL JUDGMENT for violating the
oath of allegiance to the Republic
4. FUGITIVES FROM JUSTICE in criminal or nonpolitical cases here or abroad
5. DUAL ALLEGIANCE
6. PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY
or those who have acquired the right to reside
abroad and continue to avail of the same right
NUISANCE CANDIDATE - One who has no bona fide
intention to run for the office and would thus prevent a
faithful determination of the true will of the people.
Factors to Consider [CROP5-PIPES-IQ]:
1. Capability to wage nationwide campaign
2. Running under a slate
3. Organization and machinery
4. Performance in previous elections
5. Platform of government
6. Political party affiliation and support
7. Popularity
8. Properties
9. Political exposure
10. Intention to run for office
11. Profession
12. Educational attainment
13. Similarity in name causes confusion
14. Income
15. Qualifications and disqualifications
PETITION TO DENY OR CANCEL CERTIFICATES OF
CANDIDACY
Who can file: any party
The COMELEC must determine whether or not the

candidate deliberately attempted to mislead,
misinform or hide a fact about his or her residency that
would otherwise render him or her ineligible for the
position sought. The COMELEC gravely abused its
discretion in this case when, in considering the
residency issue, it based its decision solely on very
personal and subjective assessment standards, such as
the nature or design and furnishings of the dwelling
How: petition to deny due course or cancel certificate

of candidacy under oath
When: any time not later than 25 days from filing of
Where: COMELEC must decide the case not later than
15 days before election (period is not mandatory
however)
Page 156 of 214
Exclusive Ground: material misrepresentation

A false representation under section 78 must consist of
a "deliberate attempt to mislead, misinform, or hide a
fact which would otherwise render a candidate
ineligible." It must be made with an intention to
deceive the electorate as to one's qualifications for
public office. The use of a surname, when not intended
to mislead or deceive the public as to one's identity, is
not within the scope of the provision. Salcedo II vs.
Comelec [G.R. No. 135886, August 16, 1999].
Election Offenses Under Sec. 68 of The Omnibus
Election Code (Grounds for DISQUALIFICATION):
1. Giving money and other material consideration to
influence, induce, or corrupt the voters or public
officials performing electoral functions
2. Committing acts of terrorism to enhance his
candidacy
3. Spending in his election campaign an amount in
excess of that allowed
4. Soliciting,
receiving,
making
prohibited
contributions
5. Campaigning outside campaign period
6. To remove, destroy, obliterate or in any manner
deface or tamper with or prevent the distribution
of lawful election propaganda
7. Using prohibited forms of election propaganda
8. Coercing ones subordinates to aid, campaign or
vote for or against any candidate
9. Using threat, intimidation terrorism, fraudulent
devices or other forms of coercion
10. To solicit votes or undertake any propaganda on
the day of registration before the BEI and on the
day of election, for or against any candidate or any
political party within the polling place and within a
radius of 30 meters
11. Any public official/ employee who releases,
disburses or expends any public fund during 45
days before a regular election and 30 days before a
special election
12. Any political party which holds political
conventions or meetings to nominate it official
candidates earlier than the period fixed
13. Any person who abstracts, destroys, cancels any
COC duly filed which has not been cancelled upon
order of the Commission
14. Any person who misleads the BEI by submitting
any false or spurious COC/ document to the
prejudice of a candidate
15. Any person who, being authorized to receive COCs,
receives any COC outside the period for filing the
same and makes it appear that said COC was filed
on time; or any person who by means of fraud,

threat, intimidation, terrorism or coercion, cause/
compels the commission of said act
16. Any person who by any device or means, jams,
obstructs or interferes with radio or TV broadcast
of any lawful political program
17. Soliciting votes on election day
Any election offense that may be committed by a

candidate under any election law cannot be
committed before the start of the campaign
period. In ruling that Penera is liable for
premature campaigning for partisan political acts
before the start of the campaigning, the assailed
Decision ignores the clear and express provision of
the law. Penera v. COMELEC [G.R. 181613,
November 25, 2009].
An improperly sworn COC is not a ground for
disqualification. Nowhere therein does it specify
that a defective notarization is a ground for the
disqualification of a candidate. Amora v.
COMELEC [G.R. No. 192280, January 25,
2011].
Prescription of Election Offenses:

1. Election offenses prescribe after 5 years from the
date of their commission.
2. If the discovery of the offense is made in an
election contest proceeding, the period of
prescription shall commence on the date which
the judgment in such proceedings becomes final
and executory.
Other Election Offenses Under RA 6646:
1. Causing the printing of official ballots and election
returns by printing establishments not on contract
with COMELEC and printing establishments which
undertakes unauthorized printing
2. Tampering, increasing or decreasing the votes
received by a candidate or refusing after proper
verification and hearing to credit the correct votes
or deduct the tampered votes (committed by a
member of the board of election inspectors)
3. Refusing to issue the certificate of voters to the
duly accredited watchers (committed by a member
of the BEI)
4. Person who violated provisions against prohibited
forms of election propaganda
5. Failure to give notice of meetings to other
members of the board, candidate or political party
(committed by the Chairman of the board of
canvassers)
6. A person who has been declared a nuisance
candidate or is otherwise disqualified who
Page 157 of 214
7.
continues to misrepresent himself as a candidate

and any public officer or private individual who
knowingly induces or abets such misrepresentation
by commission or omission.
If the chairman of the BEI fails to affix his signature
at the back of the official ballot, in the presence of
the voter, before delivering the ballot to the voter.
Effects of Disqualification
1. Any candidate who has been declared by final
judgment to be disqualified shall NOT be voted for
2. If the candidate is not disqualified by final
judgment before the election and receives the
highest number of votes in the election the court
or COMELEC will continue with the trial and
hearing of the action or protest. Upon motion of
the complainant or intervenor, the court or
COMELEC may order suspension of the
proclamation whenever the evidence of his guilt is
strong.
Note:
1. The COMELEC may suspend the proclamation of a
candidate who gets the majority votes, if he has been
disqualified before the election but the decision has not
yet become final. He will not be proclaimed except
where the judgment of disqualification is finally
reversed.
2. The COMELEC cannot proclaim as winner the
candidate who obtains the second highest number of
votes in case the winning candidate is ineligible or
disqualified. Bautista vs. COMELEC [G.R. Nos. 15479697, October 23, 2003].
Exception to non-proclamation of candidate with 2nd
highest number of votes:
1.
The one who obtained the highest number of
votes is disqualified; AND
2.
The electorate is fully aware in fact and in law
of a candidates disqualification so as to bring such
awareness within the realm of notoriety but would
nonetheless cast their votes in favor of the ineligible
candidate. Grego vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 125955, June
19, 1997].
Withdrawal of Candidates
Nothing in Section 73 of BP 881 mandates that the
affidavit of withdrawal must be filed with the same
office where the certificate of candidacy to be
withdrawn was filed. Thus, it can be filed directly with
the main office of the COMELEC, the office of the
regional election director concerned, the office of the
provincial election supervisor of the province to which
the municipality involved belongs, or the office of the
municipal election officer of the said municipality. Go

vs. COMELEC [G.R. No. 147741, May 10, 2001].
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
G. CAMPAIGN
propaganda
5. Statement of Contributions and
Expenses
=====================================
G. CAMPAIGN
ELECTION CAMPAIGN - An act designed to promote the
election or defeat of a particular candidate to a public
office.
CAMPAIGN PERIOD - 90 days before the day of the
election and shall end 30 days thereafter.
1.PREMATURE CAMPAIGNING
A candidate is liable for an election offense only for acts
done during the campaign period, not before. The law
is clear as daylight any election offense that may be
committed by a candidate under any election law
cannot be committed before the start of the campaign
period. The act of engaging in an election campaign or
partisan political activity to promote the election or
defeat of a particular candidate or candidates, before
the start of the campaign period, is what was
commonly known as premature campaigning.
Because premature campaigning requires the existence
of a candidate and because there is no candidate to
speak of until the start of the campaign period, there is
no more premature campaigning. Penera vs. COMELEC
[G.R. No. 181613, September 11, 2009].
VALID FORMS OF CAMPAIGNING:
1. Forming organizations, associations, clubs,
committees or other groups of persons for the
purpose of soliciting votes and/ or undertaking any
campaign for or against a candidate.
2. Holding political caucuses, conferences, meetings,
rallies, parades or other similar assemblies for the
purpose of soliciting votes and/ or undertaking any
campaign or propaganda for or against a
candidate.
Page 158 of 214
3.
4.
5.
6.
Making
speeches,
announcements
or
commentaries or holding interviews for or against
the election of any candidate for public office.
Publishing or distributing campaign literature or
materials designed to support/ oppose the
election of any candidate.
Directly or indirectly soliciting votes, pledges or
support for or against a candidate.
Advertisements.
2. PROHIBITED CONTRIBUTIONS:
CODE: UF2 PLAC2E
1. PUBLIC UTILITIES or those exploiting natural
resources of the nation
2. Public or private FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, except
loans to a candidate or political party
3. FOREIGNERS and foreign corporations
4. Grantees of franchises, incentives, exemptions,
allocations or similar PRIVILEGES or concessions by
the government
5. Persons who, within 1 year prior to the date of the
election, have been granted LOANS or other
accommodations in excess of P100,000 by the
government
6. Members of the ARMED FORCES of the Philippines
7. Officials or employees in the CIVIL SERVICE
8. Persons with CONTRACTS TO SUPPLY the
government with goods or services or TO
PERFORM CONSTRUCTION or other works
9. EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS which have received
grants of public funds not less than P100,000 by
the government
Prohibited Means of Raising Funds:
CODE: C2LB3ED/ CCLBBBED
1. Cinematographic, theatrical or other performances
2. Cockfights
3. Lotteries
4. Boxing bouts
5. Bingo
6. Beauty contests
7. Entertainment and games
8. Dances
3.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
LAWFUL ELECTION PROPAGANDA (FAIR

ELECTION ACT)
Letters
Written and printed materials (8.5 in. x 14 in.)
Posters (2 ft. x 3 ft.) in common-private poster
areas
Rally streamers (3 ft. x 8 ft.)
Use of gadgets and billboards
Public Rallies:
1. The candidate or party must notify election registrar
that they intend to organize and hold within the
city/municipality
2. Submit to election registrar a statement of expenses
in connection therewith
FREE SPACE AND AIRTIME
1. SPACE
3 National newspapers - National candidates
1 National newspaper - Local candidates
2. AIRTIME
3 National TV and Radio Networks - National
candidates
1 Major Broadcasting station - Local candidates
NOTE: There shall be equal allocation for all candidates
for 3 calendar days.
Paid Advertisements
1. PRINT
page in broadsheet, 3x a week
page in tabloid, 3x a week
2. RADIO (per network)
180 mins. for National candidates
90 mins. for Local candidates
3. TV (per network)
120 mins. for National candidates
60 mins. for Local candidates
GENERAL RULE: It shall be unlawful for any person or
organization to solicit and/ or accept any gift,
contribution, food, transportation or donation in cash
or in kind from the commencement of the election
period up to and including election day.
EXCEPTION: Normal and customary religious stipends,
tithes or collections.
Rules on Election Propaganda:
1. All registered parties and bona fide candidates
shall have the right to reply to charges published
against them.
2. No
movie,
cinematograph,
documentary
portraying the life or biography of a candidate shall
be publicly exhibited in a theatre, TV station, or
any public forum during the campaign period.
3. No movie, cinematograph, documentary portrayed
by an actor or media personality who is himself a
candidate shall be publicly exhibited in a theatre,
TV station or any public form during the campaign
period.
4. All mass media entities shall furnish the COMELEC
with copies of all contracts for advertising,
Page 159 of 214
5.
promoting, or opposing any political party or the

candidacy of any person for public office within 5
days after its signing.
Any media personality who is a candidate or is a
campaign volunteer for or employed or retained in
any capacity by any candidate or political party
shall be deemed resigned, if so required by their
employer, or shall take a LOA from his work as
such during the campaign period.
Invalid Forms of Campaigning:

1. Display of campaign materials outside authorized
common poster areas in public places or private
places without the consent of the owner
2. Non-removal of premature campaign materials
within 3 days from notice
NOTE: Failure to remove raises presumption that
said candidate was engaged in premature
campaigning
3. Print, publish or broadcast election propaganda
donated to a candidate without the written
acceptances of the candidate
4. Foreign intervention
5. Campaigning outside campaign periods
6. Removal or destruction of lawful propaganda
7. Removal, confiscation or destruction of prohibited
propaganda other than by COMELEC or its
deputized officers
8. Written or broadcast materials that do not bear
the inscription: political advertisement paid for
and name/ address of benefiting candidate or
party
9. Advertisements beyond the allotted time and
space
10. Transportation, food and drinks during and 5 hours
before and after public meetings
11. Movie or video on candidate
12. Cinematography or documentary portraying life or
biography of candidate
4. LIMITATION ON EXPENSE
AUTHORIZED EXPENSES - Multiplied with the total
number of registered voters:
P10 - President and Vice President
P3 - Other candidates
P5 - Independent candidates
P5 - Political parties
Lawful Expenditures
1. Traveling expenses
2. Compensation
of
campaigners,
clerks,
stenographers, messengers and other persons
actually employed in the campaign
3.
Telegraph and telephone tolls, postage, freight and

express delivery charges
4. Stationary, printing and distribution of printed
matters relative to candidacy
5. Employment of watchers at the polls
6. Rent, maintenance and furnishing of campaign HQ,
office, or place of meetings
7. Political meetings and rallies
8. Advertisements
9. Employment of counsel
10. Printing sample ballots
11. Copying and classifying list of voters, investigating
and challenging the right to vote of persons
registered in the lists
NOTE: The cost of (9) (10) (11) shall not be taken into
account in determining the amount of expenses which
a candidate or political party may have incurred.
5.STATEMENT OF CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENSES

Every candidate and treasurer of the political
party shall, within thirty (30) days after the day of the
election, file in duplicate with the offices of the
Commission the full, true and itemized statement of all
contributions and expenditures in connection with the
election.
No person elected to any public office shall enter upon
the duties of his office until he has filed the statement
of contributions and expenditures herein required.
The same prohibition shall apply if the political party
which nominated the winning candidate fails to file the
statement required herein within the period prescribed
by this Act.
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
H. BOARD OF ELECTION INSPECTORS AND
BOARD OF CANVASSERS
1. Composition
2. Powers
====================================
H. BOARD OF ELECTION INSPECTORS AND BOARD
OF CANVASSERS
1.
2.
BOARD OF CANVASSERS COMPOSITION

POWERS
Page 160 of 214
1. Provincial
a. Provincial election supervisor or lawyer in
the regional office of the COMELEC (chair)
b. Provincial fiscal (vice)
c. Provincial superintendent of schools
(member)
d. Substitute members (in order)
i. Provincial auditor
ii. Register of Deeds
iii. Clerk of Court nominated by
executive judge
iv. Other available appointive
provincial officer
2. City:
a. City election supervisor or lawyer of
COMELEC (chair)
b. City fiscal (vice)
c. City superintendent of schools (member)
d. Substitute members same as provincial
3. Municipal
a.
Election
registrar
or
COMELEC
representative (chair)
b. Municipal treasurer (vice)
c. Most senior district school supervisor
(member)
d. Or principal of the school, if absent
e. Substitute members:
i. Municipal administrator
ii. Municipal assessor
iii. Clerk of Court nominated by
executive judge
iv. Other available appointive
municipal officers
Board of Canvassers for President and Vice-President:
Congress to determine the authenticity and due
execution of certificates of canvass. Must prove:
1. Each certificate of canvass was executed, signed,
thumb-marked by the Chair and transmitted to
Congress
2. Each certificate contains the names of all candidates
and votes in words and figures
3. No discrepancy in authentic copies
Board of Canvassers for Senators: COMELEC en banc,
and not the provincial board.
Duty of Board of Canvassers:
Purely ministerial: to compile and add results as
appearing in the results transmitted to it.
Grounds To Challenge An Illegal Voter:
1. Not registered
2. Using the name of another
3.
Suffering from existing disqualification
GENERAL RULE: No voter shall be required to present

his voters affidavit on election day.
EXCEPTION: His identity is challenged.
NOTE: Failure to produce voters affidavit shall not
preclude him from voting if:
1. His identity be shown from the photograph,
fingerprints or specimen signatures in his approved
application in the book of voters
2. He is identified under oath by a member of the BEI
and such identification shall be reflected in the
minutes of the board
Grounds To Challenge Based On Illegal Acts:

1. Vote buying
2. Vote selling
3. Vote betting
NOTE: The challenged person shall take a prescribed
oath before the BEI that he has not committed any of
the acts alleged in the challenge, after which he will be
allowed to vote.
Buildings Not Valid As A Polling Place:
1. Public or private building owned, leased or
occupied by any candidate of any person who is
related to any candidate within the 4th civil degree
of consanguinity or affinity, or any officer of the
government or leader of any political party
2. Building or surrounding premises under the actual
control of a private entity
3. Those located within the perimeter of or inside a
military or police camp or reservation or within a
prison compound
NOTE: Where no suitable public building is available,
private school buildings may be used as polling places.
Transfer of Venue Of Counting:
1. Imminent threat of violence
2. Nearest School
3. Unanimous vote of Board of Inspectors
4. Majority of Watchers
Failure to comply with requisites results in failure of
elections
GENERAL RULE: Voting by proxy is not allowed
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Illiterate
2. Handicapped
Page 161 of 214
GENERAL RULE: No ballots other than official ballots

shall be used or counted
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Failure to receive the official ballots on time
2. There are no sufficient ballots for all registered
voters
3. The official ballots are destroyed at such time as
shall render it impossible to provide other official
ballots
NOTE: In the given abovementioned exceptions, the
remedy is to use emergency ballots to be provided by
the city or municipal treasurer.
Features of Canvassing:
1. The Board of Canvassers (BOC) is a collegial body.
2. The BOC exercises ministerial duty.
3. The BOC exercises quasi-judicial functions.
4. Proceedings before BOC are summary
5. The BOC convenes at 6pm.
6. Canvassing shall be in public.
7. Proceedings are continuous from day to day,
without interruption except to adjourn.
8. No police, army or security officer allowed within
50 meters from canvassing room unless called in
writing by the BOC to stay outside the room.
9. After proclamation, BOC becomes functus officio.
NOTE: The proviso designating Smartmatic as the joint
venture partner in charge of the technical aspect of the
counting and canvassing wares does not translate to
ceding control of the electoral process to Smartmatic.
Roque v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 188456, September 10,
2009].
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
I. REMEDIES AND JURISDICTION IN ELECTION
LAW
2. Petition to declare failure of elections
3. Pre-proclamation controversy
4. Election protest
5. Quo warranto
=======================================
I. REMEDIES AND JURISDICTION IN ELECTION LAW

1.PETITION TO DENY DUE COURSE/ PETITION FOR
DISQUALIFICATION- COMELEC may MOTU PROPIO or
upon VERIFIED PETITION of any interested party refuse
to give due course or cancel a COC when:
1.
2.
3.
The COC has been filed to put the election process

in mockery or disrepute
Causes confusion among the voters by the
similarity of the names of the registered
candidates
Other circumstances which clearly demonstrate
that the candidate has no bona fide intention to
run for the office
PETITION FOR
DISQUALIFICATION
Premised on Section 12 or
68 of the Omnibus
Election Code, or Section
40 of the Local
Government Code
A person who is
disqualified under Section
68 is merely prohibited to
continue as a candidate.
Thus, a candidate who is

disqualified under Section
68 can validly be
substituted under Section
77 of the OEC because
he/she remains a
candidate until
disqualified.
PETITION TO DENY DUE
COURSE/ CANCEL CoC
(BEFORE ELECTIONS)
1. the qualifications for
elective office are
misrepresented in the
2.the proceedings must be
initiated before the
elections.
PETITION TO DENY DUE

COURSE/ CANCEL CoC
Grounded on a statement
of a material
representation in the said
certificate that is false.
The person whose
certificate is cancelled or
denied due course under
Section 78 is not treated as
a candidate at all, as if
he/she never filed a CoC.
A person whose CoC has
been denied due course or
cancelled under Section 78
cannot be substituted
because he/she is never
considered a candidate.
PETITION FOR QUO

WARRANTO
(AFTER ELECTION
RESULTS)
1. may be brought on the
basis of two grounds - (1)
ineligibility or (2) disloyalty
to the Republic of the
Philippines
2. must be initiated within
ten days after the
proclamation of the
election results.
3. A candidate is ineligible
if he is disqualified to be
elected to office, and he is
Page 162 of 214
disqualified if he lacks any

of the qualifications for
elective office.
Note:
A petition seeking to cancel a COC on the ground of
false representation should have been filed within
twenty-five (25) days from the filing of the COC,
pursuant to Section 78 of the OEC.
A COMELEC resolution declaring a candidate
disqualified for the said position is not yet final if a
motion for reconsideration has been timely filed. At
that point, he still remains qualified and his
proclamation thereafter is valid. As a result, COMELEC's
jurisdiction to contest his citizenship ends, and the
HRET's own jurisdiction begins. Gonzales v. COMELEC
[G.R. No. 192856, March 08, 2011]
A party aggrieved by an interlocutory order issued by a
Division of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) in
an election protest may not directly assail the order in
this Court through a special civil action for certiorari.
The remedy is to seek the review of the interlocutory
order during the appeal of the decision of the Division
in due course. The court may have the power to review
any decision, order or ruling of the COMELEC, limits
such power to a final decision or resolution of the
COMELEC en banc, and does not extend to an
interlocutory order issued by a Division of the
COMELEC. Otherwise stated, the Court has no power to
review on certiorari an interlocutory order or even a
final resolution issued by a Division of the COMELEC.
Where the Commission in division committed grave
abuse of discretion or acted without or in excess of
jurisdiction in issuing interlocutory orders relative to an
action pending before it and the controversy did not
fall under any of the instances mentioned in Section 2,
Rule 3 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, the remedy
of the aggrieved party is not to refer the controversy to
the Commission en banc as this is not permissible
under its present rules but to elevate it to this Court via
a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of
Court. Cagas v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 194139
January 24, 2012].
2.PETITION TO DECLARE FAILURE OF ELECTIONSThere is a FAILURE TO ELECT when nobody can be

declared as a winner because the will of the majority
has been defiled and cannot be ascertained. Declared
by the COMELEC en banc.
When Failure of Elections May Be Declared [SNR]:

1. Election was SUSPENDED before the HOUR fixed
by law for the CLOSING of the voting (3 P.M.)
2. Election in any polling place was NOT HELD on the
date fixed
3. Elections RESULTS in a failure to elect (after the
voting and during the preparation and
transmission of the election returns or in the
custody or canvass thereof)
Usual Grounds:
1. Force majeure
2. Violence
3. Terrorism
4. Loss or destruction of election paraphernalia
5. Analogous circumstances
Conditions to Annul An Election [WIG]:
1. WINNER cannot be determined
2. ILLEGALITY must affect more than 50% of the votes
cast
3. GOOD VOTES cannot be distinguished from the
bad votes
Grounds
Extent of
Cause
Conditions
Authority
Procedural
Requirements
POSTPONEMENT
FAILURE
OF ELECTIONS
OF ELECTIONS
Any SERIOUS cause
of:
1. Force majeure
1. Force majeure
2. Violence
2. Violence
3. Terrorism
3. Terrorism
4. LOSS OR
4. LOSS OR
DESTRUCTION OF
DESTRUCTION
ELECTION
OF ELECTION
PARAPHERNALIA
PARAPHERNALIA 5. Analogous
5. Analogous
Serious and
Failure to elect and
impossibility to
affects results of
have free and
elections
orderly elections
Grounds must
Grounds may occur
exist BEFORE
anytime BEFORE
VOTING
PROCLAMATION
Majority vote of COMELEC EN BANC
1. Verified petition 1. Verified petition
by any
by any interested
interested
person (may not
person OR motu
be done motu
propio by
propio)
COMELEC en
2. Due notice
banc
3. Hearing
2. Due notice
3. Hearing
Page 163 of 214
Effect if
Petition
Granted
1. Election is
postponed
2. Conduct
elections
reasonably close
to elections not
held, but not
later than 30
days from
cessation of
cause
1. Declaration of
failure of
elections
2. Holding or
continuation of
elections
reasonably close
to elections not
held, but not
later than 30
days from
cessation of
cause
3.PREPROCLAMATION CONTROVERSIES
PRE-PROCLAMATION CONTROVERSY - Any question
pertaining to or affecting the proceedings of the Board
of Canvassers which may be raised by any candidate or
registered political party, or coalition.
Grounds in Pre-Proclamation Controversies:
1. Illegal composition or proceedings of the board of
canvassers
a. Filed with the BOC or with COMELEC
b. Within 3 days from a ruling (if based on illegal
proceedings), or as soon as the Board begins
to act.
2. Irregularities in relation to the preparation,
transmission, receipt, custody, and appreciation of
election returns and certificates of canvass:
a. ERs are delayed, lost or destroyed
b. Material defects in the ERs
c. ERs appear to be tampered with or falsified
d. Discrepancies in the ERs
3. Canvassed returns are incomplete, contain material
defects
a. ERs are delayed, lost, destroyed
- In this case, the Board can use any of the
authentic copies
- Or terminate canvass if the missing returns
will not affect the results anyway
b. Missing requisites
- Board calls for members of the BEI to
complete or correct the return. DONT EXCLUDE, if
correctable
d. ERs are tampered, falsified, altered after these
left the hands of BEI, not authentic, prepared under
duress, force, intimidation, etc.
- Resort to other ERs
- If all are tampered, can have ballot boxes
reopened and counted
d. Discrepancies in other authentic copies of the
returns or discrepancies in the votes of any
candidate in words/figures and these would affect

results of the election
- Order opening of ballot boxes for recount
4. ERs prepared under duress, threats, coercion,
intimidation, obviously manufactured
obviously manufactured - According to the SC, when
it follows the doctrine of statistical improbabilities
(Statistically improbable data).
5. Substitute or fraudulent returns in controverted
polling places are canvassed, and the results materially
affect the standing of candidates
NOTE: Grounds for pre-proclamation controversies are

EXCLUSIVE.
NOTE: FOR NATIONAL OFFICIALS, the ONLY GROUNDS
AVAILABLE ARE:
1.Illegal composition or proceedings of the board of
canvassers
2.Manifest Errors
Matters regarding the preparation, transmission,

receipt, custody, and appreciation election returns
shall be brought, in the first instance, before the
boards of canvassers, not the COMELEC.
Fernandez vs. COMELEC [504 SCRA 116]
GENERAL RULE: COMELEC cannot go behind the face of

an election return. It is beyond the jurisdiction of
COMELEC to go beyond the face of the returns or
investigate election irregularities.
EXCEPTION: When there is prima facie showing that
the ER is not genuine.
E.g. As when several entries have been omitted. Lee vs.
COMELEC [405 SCRA 363].
Grounds For Material Defects:
1. Omission of name of candidates
2. Omission of votes for candidates
MATERIAL DEFECT
IN THE ERs
BOC needs authority
from COMELEC to get
copies of the other ERs
ERs HAVE BEEN FALSIFIED/

TAMPERED
BOC needs no prior
permission from the
COMELEC to get copies of
the other ERs
Jurisdiction:
1. Contested composition/ proceedings of the board
- May be initiated in the Board of canvassers or
COMELEC
Page 164 of 214
2.
Contested ERs - Should be brought in the 1st

instance before the board of canvassers only
GENERAL RULE: When the Electoral Tribunal obtains

jurisdiction, it precludes the COMELEC from exercising
powers over pre-proclamation controversies.
Exceptions:
1. BOC was improperly constituted
2. Proclamation was null and void
3. Quo warranto is not the proper remedy
4. What was filed was a petition to annul a
proclamation, and not Quo Warranto or Election
Protest
5. Election contest expressly made without prejudice to
PPC or it was made ad cautelam (cautionary)
In exercising its powers and jurisdiction, as defined by

its mandate to protect the integrity of elections, the
COMELEC must not be straitjacketed by procedural
rules in resolving election disputes. VIolago v.
COMELEC [G.R. No. 194143. October 4, 2011].
TWO OBJECTION RULE - Submit oral objection and
written objection SIMULTANEOUSLY to BOC
chairperson before ERs have been canvassed. There is
SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE even if the oral objection is
filed first, then the written objection with evidence is
submitted within 24 hours.
HOWEVER, in Marabur vs. COMELEC [516 SCRA 696],
the Court held that there is substantial compliance if
despite the absence of a written objection, an offer of
evidence is made within the 24-hour period.
Summary Nature:
1. Pre-proclamation controversies shall be heard
summarily by the COMELEC.
2. Its decision shall be executory after 5 days from
receipt by the losing party of the decision, unless
restrained by the SC
GENERAL RULE: Pre-proclamation cases are deemed
terminated:
1. At the beginning of the term of the office involved
and the rulings of the BOC concerned deemed
affirmed.
2. This is without prejudice to the filing of a regular
election protest by the aggrieved party.
EXCEPTIONS: Proceedings may continue if:
1. COMELEC determines that the petition is
meritorious and issues an order for the
proceedings to continue
2.
The SC issues an order for the proceedings to

continue in a petition for certiorari
NOTE:
A proclamation made pending the appeal of the ruling
of the board of canvassers or when the COMELEC has
yet to resolve the petition for special election (in
precincts where no elections were conducted) is void.
Note that this rule applies only where the objection
deals with a pre-proclamation controversy.
But the remedy of filing a pre-proclamation case is still
available after proclamation if the proclamation should
have been suspended because of contested election
returns Jainal vs. Comelec [517 SCRA 799].
Grounds For Recount:
1. Material defects in the ERs
2. ERs are tampered or falsified
3. Discrepancies in the ERs
When Recount Is Possible:
1. COMELEC order BEI to conduct recount
2. Integrity and identity of ballot box is not violated
3. BEI ascertains that integrity of ballots in box
preserved
4. BEI recounts and complete/correct returns
Note: In regular election contests, the general
averment of fraud or irregularities in the counting of
votes justifies the examination of the ballots and
recounting of votes. This process of examination is the
revision of the ballots pursuant to Section 6, Rule 20 of
the 1993 COMELEC Rules of Procedure. The protests
involved herein assailed the authenticity of the election
returns and the veracity of the counting of the ballots.
In that regard, the ballots themselves are the best
evidence. The only means to overcome the
presumption of legitimacy of the election returns is to
examine and determine first whether the ballot boxes
have been substantially preserved in the manner
mandated by law. Hence, the necessity to issue the
order of revision. (The COMELEC did not commit grave
abuse of discretion when it order the revision of 44
ballots with the Senate Electoral Tribunal without first
resolving whether 16 of those 44 ballots should be
included in the revision). Tolentino vs. COMELEC
[G.R. Nos. 187958, G.R. No. 187961 & 187962/G.R. No.
187966, G.R. No. 187967 & 187968, April 7, 2010].
STATISTICALLY IMPROBABLE DATA
1. Uniformity of tally in favor of candidates belonging
to 1 party.
Page 165 of 214
2.
Systematic blanking out of candidates belonging to

another party.
GENERAL RULE: Pre-proclamation cases are NOT

allowed in elections for the President, Vice President,
Senator and members of the House of Representatives:
EXCEPTION:
1. Manifest Errors in the ERs or COCs may be
corrected motu propio or upon written complaint
of any interested person.
2. Questions affecting the composition or
proceedings of the board of canvassers may
be initiated in the board or directly with the
Commission in accordance with Section 19 (RA
7166).
MANIFEST ERRORS:
1. Mistake in adding
2. Mistake in copying of figures from ER or Statement
of Votes
3. ERs from non-existent precinct canvassed
4. Copy of ER tabulated more than twice
5. 2 or more copies of ER and COC in 1 precinct
counted separately
NOTE:
1. The grounds for manifest errors are inclusive.
2. The allowable margin of error is 60%.
3. It suspends the running of the period within which
to file an election protest or quo warranto
proceeding.
4. Notwithstanding the pendency of any preproclamation controversy, the Commission may
summarily order the proclamation of other
winning candidates whose election will not be
affected by the outcome of the controversy.
5. An aggrieved party may file a petition for certiorari
with the COMELEC whenever a judge hearing an
election case has acted without or in excess of his
jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion and
there is no appeal, nor any plain, speedy, and
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
Bulilis v. Nuez [G.R. No. 195953, August 9, 2011].
ELECTION CONTESTS
Withdrawal of nomination and substitution by another

nominee is neither an election protest nor an action for
quo warranto. Petitioner correctly brought before the
Supreme Court this special civil action for certiorari
under Section 7 of Article IX-A of the 1987 Constitution,
notwithstanding the proclamation of, and assumption
of office by, the substitute nominee. Lokin, Jr. v.
COMELEC [G.R. Nos. 179431-32/G.R. No. 180443, June
22, 2010].
QUO WARRANTO
Strictly speaking, it is not
a contest. It is a
proceeding to unseat an
ineligible person from
office
Any voter
GROUNDS:
1. Disloyalty
2. Ineligibility
The respondent may be

unseated, but the
petitioner may or may not
be installed into the office
vacated.
ELECTION PROTEST
It is a contest between the
winning candidate and the
defeated candidate
Only by a candidate who

has duly filed a COC to the
same office and has been
voted for
GROUNDS:
1. Election fraud
2. Irregularities in the
casting and counting of
votes or in the
preparation of the ER
The protestee may be
unseated and the
protestant may be
installed into the office
vacated.
COMELEC Jurisdiction Over Election Contests:

1. ORIGINAL Jurisdiction over contests relating to
elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective:
1. Regional
2. Provincial
3. City officials
2.
APPELLATE Jurisdiction over contests involving:

1. Elective Municipal officials decided by trial
courts of GENERAL jurisdiction
2. Elective Barangay officials decided by trial
courts of LIMITED jurisdiction
3. COMELEC may issue extraordinary writs of
certiorari, prohibition and mandamus
KINDS OF ELECTION CONTESTS:

1. Election Protest
2. Quo Warranto
OBJECT: To dislodge the winning candidate from office
and determine the true winner.
Page 166 of 214
PRE-PROCLAMATION
CONTROVERSY
Before proclamation of
candidate
Jurisdiction of COMELEC is
administrative or quasijudicial
1.
ELECTION CONTEST
After proclamation of
candidate
Jurisdiction of COMELEC
is quasi-judicial
Only real parties in interest can file and pursue

election protests.
NOTE: A real party in interest is the party who would

be benefited or injured by the judgment and the party
who is entitled to the avails of the suit. e.g. candidate
of the same position
2.
Even if it was the 2nd placer who filed the election

protest, the 3rd placer may still possibly win.
NOTE: In the case of presidential protest cases, only

two persons, the 2nd and 3rd placers, may contest the
election. Poe vs. Macapagal-Arroyo [PET Case No. 003,
March 29, 2005].
4. ELECTION PROTEST
Requisites For An Election Protest
1. Filed by candidate who has filed a COC and has been
voted upon for the same office
Special rule for PET: Only the 2nd or 3rd
placer may file the protest
2. Filed within 10 days from proclamation of results
a. Period to file EP is suspended during
pendency of PPC
b. A counter-protest must also comply with
the reglementary period
3. On grounds of:
a. election fraud/terrorism, and
b. irregularities or illegal acts before, during,
or after casting and counting of votes
Additional Requirements:
1. Payment of docket fee
Failure to pay is ground to dismiss the case
Exception: estoppel by the other party, by
raising it too late
2. Certificate of Non-Forum Shopping
Grounds For Election Protest:
1. Misappreciation
2. Violence
3. Intimidation
4. No padlock
5. Padding of votes
House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal

Jurisdiction Over Election Contests
The House of Representatives has the jurisdiction to
question the qualification of the nominees of party-list
organizations. Although party list organizations are
voted for in the elections, still it is not the organizations
which sit and become members of the House of
Representatives but their nominees. Under Section 5,
Article VI of the Constitution, there are two kinds of
members of the House: those who are elected from
legislative districts and those who are elected under
the party-list system. Also, the Party List Act itself
recognizes party-list nominees as members of the
House under Declaration of Policy in Section 2.
Subsequently, Section 17, Article VI of the Constitution
provides that the HRET shall be the sole judge of all
contests relating, among others, to the qualifications of
the members of the House. Thus, since party list
nominees are considered as elected members of the
House, the HRET has jurisdiction to hear and pass upon
their qualifications. Abayon v. HRET [G.R. No. 189466,
February 11, 2012]; Palparan v. HRET [G.R. No.
189506, February 11, 2010].
GENERAL RULE: Ballots are the best and most
conclusive evidence in an election contest where the
correctness of the number of votes of each candidate is
involved. Delos Reyes v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 170070,
February 28, 2007].
EXCEPTION: Election returns are the best evidence
when the ballots are lost, destroyed, tampered or fake
Execution Pending Appeal:
1. Public interest is involved or will of the electorate
2. Length of time that the election contest has been
pending
3. Shortness of the remaining portion of the term of
the contested office. Pecson vs. COMELEC [G.R.
No. 182865, December 24, 2008].
NOTE: A combination of 2 or more will suffice to allow
execution pending appeal, but shortness of the
remaining period alone is not a ground for execution
pending appeal.
GENERAL RULE: The COMELEC cannot proclaim as
winner the candidate who obtains the 2nd highest
number of votes in case the winning candidate is
ineligible or disqualified. When a winner is declared
ineligible, the candidate who finished 2nd cannot
assume the position. Quizon vs. COMELEC [545 SCRA
23, February 15, 2008]
Page 167 of 214
Election Offenses
EXCEPTION:
1. The one who obtained the highest number of
votes is disqualified, and
2. The electorate is fully aware in fact and in law of a
candidates disqualification so as to bring such
awareness within the realm of notoriety but would
nonetheless cast their votes in favor of the
ineligible candidate. Pundao-daya vs. COMELEC
[G.R. No. 179313, September 17, 2009].
ABANDONMENT: A protestant who runs for another
office is deemed to have abandoned his protest. This is
especially true in a case where the protestant pending
the election protest, ran, won, assumed the post and
discharged the duties as such. Idulza vs. COMELEC [427
SCRA 701, April 14, 2004]
5. QUO WARRANTO
Requisites of Quo Warranto:
1. Filed by any registered voter in the constituency
2. Grounds:
a) Ineligibility
b) Disloyalty to the RP (ex. Having a
greencard)
3. Within 10 days from proclamation of results
GENERAL RULE: When proclaimed officer was
disqualified by quo warranto, second placer cannot be
proclaimed winner.
Exception: When the one who got highest votes has
been DQ and the electorate is fully aware of this fact
but they still voted for him.
Execution pending appeal is allowed: must be for
urgent reasons.
Allowable reasons:
1. Public interest involved
2. Shortness of remaining term
3. Length of time that the contest is pending
=======================================
XI. ELECTION LAW
J. PROSECUTION OF ELECTION OFFENSES
=====================================
J. PROSECUTION OF ELECTION OFFENSES
Committed only as soon as campaign period starts. Any

supposed premature campaigning cannot be
prosecuted before start of campaign period.
Some Prohibited Acts:
1. Vote-buying or vote-selling
2. Wagering upon result of the election
3. Threats, intimidation, terrorism, use of fraudulent
devise, forms of coercion
4. Appointment of new employee
Except when there is urgent need; Notice given
to COMELEC within 3 days from appointment,
creation of new positions, promotion, or
granting salary increase
5. Carrying deadly weapon within radius of 100 meters
from precinct
6. Transfer or detail of government official or employee
without COMELEC approval
Not penalized if done to promote efficiency in
government service.
Elements:
a. Fact of transfer or detail within election
period
b. Transfer or detail made without prior
approval of COMELEC
Full List of Election Offenses Under Sec. 68 of the OEC
(Same grounds for disqualification):
1. Vote-buying
2. Acts of terrorism
3. Spending in excess of allowable limit
4. Soliciting, receiving, or making prohibited
contributions
5. Campaigning outside period
6. Tamper with election propaganda
o
7. Prohibited election propaganda
8. Coercing subordinates to aid, campaign, or vote for a
candidate
9. Using threat, intimidation, terrorism, fraudulent,
devises
10. Soliciting votes or electioneering during registration
day and election day within polling place or within 30 m
radius
11. Public official or employee who releases, disburses,
or expends public funds 45 days before election or 30
days before special election
12. PP holds political conventions or meetings to
nominate official candidates earlier than allowed
period
13. Destroying or cancelling a COC which has not been
cancelled
Page 168 of 214
14. Misleading BEI by submitting false or spurious COC

to detriment of a candidate
15. Receiving COC out of allowed time and making it
appear it was filed on time; or coercing the officer to
perform this act
16. Interference with radio or TV broadcast of lawful
political program
17. Soliciting votes on election day
The task of the Comelec as investigator and prosecutor,
acting upon any election offenses complaint, is not the
physical searching and gathering of proof in support of
a complaint for an alleged commission of an election
offense. A complainant, has the burden, as it is his
responsibility, to follow through his accusation and
prove his complaint. Kilosbayan v. Comelec [G.R No.
128054, October 16, 1997].
Under Article IX, Section 2(b) of the Constitution, the
Comelec is empowered to investigate and, when
appropriate, prosecute election offenses. Under
Section 265 of the Omnibus Election Code, the
Comelec, through its duly authorized legal officers, has
the exclusive power to conduct preliminary
investigation of all election offenses punishable under
the Omnibus Election Code, and to prosecute the same.
Comelec v. Espaol [417 SCRA 554, December 10,
2003].

XI. ELECTION LAW
=======================================
XII. LOCAL GOVERNMENT

==============================
A. Public corporations
1. Concept
a)
Distinguished
from
government-owned
or
2. Classifications
B. Municipal corporations
1. Elements
C. Principles of local autonomy

D. Powers of local government units (LGUs)
1. Police power (general welfare
clause)
2. Eminent domain
3. Taxing power
a)
Requisites
for
valid
ordinance
b)
Local
initiative
and
referendum
6. Corporate powers
(i) Requisites
(ii) Ultra vires contracts
(i) Grounds
(ii) Jurisdiction
(iii) Preventive
suspension
(iv) Removal
(v) Administrative
appeal
(vi) Doctrine of
condonation
11. Recall
12. Term limits
=======================================
A. Public Corporations
1. Concept
a)
Distinguished
from
government-owned
or
2. Classifications
Page 169 of 214
=======================================
Congress clearly intended to exempt the local
government units covered by the Cityhood Laws from
the coverage of RA 9009, which imposes a higher
income requirement of PhP100 million for the creation
of cities. The exemption clauses ultimately
incorporated in the Cityhood Laws are but the express
articulations of the clear legislative intent to exempt
the respondents, without exception, from the coverage
of RA No. 9009. Thereby, RA 9009, and, by necessity,
the LCG, were amended, not by repeal but by way of
the express exemptions being embodied in the
exemption clauses. League of Cities of the Philippines
(LCP) v. COMELEC, et. al., [G.R. No. 176951, November
18, 2008] (which declared that the Cityhood Laws are
UNCONSTITUTIONAL) and the February 15, 2011
Decisions (affirmed in the April and June 2011 Decisions
which upheld the CONSTITUTIONALITY of the Cityhood
Laws).
A. PUBLIC CORPORATIONS
1.
CONCEPT
PUBLIC CORPORATION Juridical entities or agencies

formed or organized for the government of a portion of
the State.
Not all corporations, which are not government owned
or controlled, are ipso facto to be considered private
corporations as there exists another distinct class of
corporations or chartered institutions which are
otherwise known as public corporations. These
corporations are treated by law as agencies or
instrumentalities of the government which are not
subject to the tests of ownership or control and
economic viability but to a different criteria relating to
their public purposes/interests or constitutional
policies and objectives and their administrative
relationship to the government or any of its
departments or offices. As presently constituted, the
BOY SCOUTS OF THE PHILIPPINES is a public
corporation created by law for a public purpose,
attached to the Department of Education Culture and
Sports pursuant to its Charter and the Administrative
Code of 1987. It is not a private corporation which is
required to be owned or controlled by the government
and be economically viable to justify its existence under
a special law. The economic viability test would only
apply if the corporation is engaged in some economic
activity or business function for the government, which
is not the case for BSP. Therefore, being a public

corporation, the funds of the BSP fall under the
jurisdiction of the Commission on Audit. Boy Scouts of
the Philippines (BSP) v. COA [G.R. No. 177131, June 7,
2011].
PUBLIC
Created by the
State through
the Congress,
the President or
the Judiciary
PRIVATE
Private
corporations
that are
required by law
to render public
service or supply
wants
QUASI-PUBLIC
Created by will
of incorporators
with the
recognition of
the State.
GOVERNMENT-OWNED
OR
CONTROLLED
CORPORATIONS - refer to any agency organized as a
stock or non-stock corporation, vested with functions
relating to public needs whether governmental or
proprietary in nature and owned directly by the
government or through its instrumentalities.
NOTE: Both GOCC and Quasi Corporations are Public
Corporations. However, properly speaking, a GOCC is a
type of Quasi Corporation which is organized either
through a special charter or under the Corporation
Code. An example of GOCC is a local water district.
Feliciano v. COA, [G.R. No. 147402, Jan. 14, 2004].
Notes:
1. May be further categorized by the DBM, CSC, and the
COA for purposes of the exercise and discharge of their
respective powers and functions.
2. They shall be attached to the appropriate
department with which they have allied functions or as
may be provided by executive order.
3. At least 1/3 of the members of the Boards of such
corporations should either be a Secretary,
Undersecretary or Assistant Secretary.
A local water district is a government-owned and
controlled corporation with special charter since it is
created pursuant to a special law. PD 198 constitutes
the special charter by virtue of which local water
districts exist. Unlike private corporations that derive
their legal existence and power from the Corporation
Code, water districts derive their legal existence and
power from P.D. No. 198. Feliciano v. Gison [G.R.
No. 165641, August 25, 2010].
As a rule, the government and its attached agencies are
exempted from appeal bonds because it is presumed
that the State is always solvent. This exemption
Page 170 of 214
however does not apply to GOCCs. Thus, while a

GOCCs majority stockholder, the State, will always be
presumed solvent, the presumption does not
necessarily extend to the GOCC itself. However, when
a GOCC performs a governmental function there is the
assurance that the government will necessarily fund its
primary functions. Thus, a GOCC that is sued in relation
to its governmental functions may be, under
appropriate circumstances, exempted from the
payment of appeal fees. In this case, BBC is a GOCC
performing not a governmental function but a
proprietary function which is to engage in commercial
television broadcasting. As such, it is not exempted
from
appeal
bonds.
Banahaw
Broadcasting
Corporation (BBC) v Pacana, [G. R. No. 171673, May
30, 2011].
1.
RPN is not a GOCC. Under the Administrative
Code of 1987, a GOCC is that which refers to any
agency organized as a stock or non-stock corporation
vested with functions relating to public needs whether
governmental or proprietary in nature, and owned by
the government directly or indirectly through its
instrumentalities either wholly, or where applicable as
in the case of stock corporations, to the extent of at
least 51% of its capital stock. Although there is a
controversy as to the amount of shares transferred to
the government, administrative agencies such as the
PCGG and Office of the President agree that RPN is not
a GOCC. Considering that the construction of a statute
given by administrative agencies deserves respect, the
uniform administrative constructions of the relevant
aforequoted laws defining what are governmentowned or -controlled corporations as applied to RPN is
highly persuasive. Carandang v Desierto [G.R. No.
148076, Jan. 12, 2011].
2.
CLASSIFICATIONS
a. PUBLIC CORPORATIONS
1. Quasi-Corporations
(i)
Government
Owned
and
Controlled Corporation
(ii) Government Instrumentality
2. Municipal Corporations
(i) Municipal Corporation Proper
(ii) Quasi-Municipal Corporation
b. PRIVATE CORPORATIONS
1. Private Corporations
2. Quasi-Public Corporations
QUASI-CORPORATIONS Public corporations created

by law as agencies of the State for a narrow and limited
purpose.
Such quasi-corporations are described as bodies of

citizens who have no personal nor private interests to
be subserved, but are simply required by the state to
do some public work. The state merely clothes one of
its agencies or instrumentalities with such corporate
powers. It is neither a private corporation but a class of
artificial entity. Fontanilla v. Maliaman, J. Padilla
Dissent, [G.R. No. L-55963 & 61045, Feb. 27, 1991].
NOTE: Quasi-corporations are NOT the same as quasipublic corporations. Quasi-corporations are classified as
public corporations created by the State for a limited
purpose, while quasi-public corporations are private
corporations that render public service. Quasi-Public
Corporations, on the other hand, is a private
corporation which obtained a franchise to supply
public needs. An example of a Quasi-Public Corporation
is PLDT.14
=======================================
B. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS
1. Elements
====================================
B. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Public corporation
established by law partly as an agent of the State to
assist in civil government but chiefly to regulate and
administer the local affairs of the city, town or district
which is incorporated.
1.ELEMENTS OF A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

(LICT):
1. A LEGAL creation or incorporation
2. A CORPORATE NAME by which the artificial
personality or legal entity is known and in which all
corporate acts are done
3. INHABITANTS constituting the population
4. TERRITORY
2.NATURE AND STATUS
1. Subordinate branch of the government of the state
2. Instrumentality of the state administration
14
Lecture by Justice Agra
Page 171 of 214
3.
Exercises delegated powers of government
3.REQUISITES OF A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BY

PRESCRIPTION
Code: CAWL
1. Community claimed and exercised corporate
functions
2. With knowledge and acquiescence of the
Legislature
3. Without interruption or objection
4. For a period long enough to afford it title by
prescription
administration and capability to deliver basic services

to constituents. The criteria prescribed by the LGC
(income, population, and land area) are all designed to
accomplish these results. The primordial consideration
in the creation of local government units, particularly a
province is economic viability. Navarro v. Ermita, [G.R.
No. 180050, April 12, 2011].
NOTE: Creation, division, merger, abolition, or
substantial alteration of boundaries of LGU should be
APPROVED by a MAJORITY of the votes cast in a
PLEBISCITE called for the purpose in the political unit or
units directly affected.
NOTE: Concurrence of requisites raises the

presumption of existence of the municipal corporation.
Requisites of A De Facto Municipal Corporation
1. Valid law authorizing incorporation
2. Attempt in good faith to organize under it
3. Colorable compliance with law
4. Assumption of corporate powers
DE JURE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION - Its valid
incorporation makes it impregnable to any attack,
direct or otherwise
ATTACK AGAINST THE VALIDITY OF INCORPORATION The validity of the incorporation and corporate
existence of a municipal corporation may not be
attacked collaterally. It may only be challenged by the
STATE in direct proceedings such as QUO WARRANTO,
which has a prescriptive period of 5 years from the time
the act complained of was committed.
Authority to Create LGUs (Sec. 6, LGC)
1. By LAW enacted by Congress
1. Province
2. City
3. Municipality
4. Any other political subdivision
5. A barangay may also be created by law (Sec.
386)
2. By an ORDINANCE passed by the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan /Panlungsod - Applicable for
barangay located within its territorial jurisdiction
Indicators For Creation/ Conversion Of LGU:
CODE: LIP
1. LAND AREA
2. INCOME
3. POPULATION
The central policy considerations in the creation of local
government units are economic viability, efficient
Division and Merger Of LGUS (Sec. 8, LGC)

Division shall not reduce the income, population, land
area of the LGU to less than the minimum requirement
prescribed. Income classification should not fall below
the current income classification prior to division.
Abolition of LGU (Sec. 9, LGC)
When income, population, or land areas is irreversibly
reduced to less than the MINIMUM STANDARDS
PRESCRIBED FOR CREATION as certified by the national
agencies concerned. The LAW or ORDINANCE
abolishing LGU shall specify the province, city,
municipality or barangay with which the LGU sought to
be abolished will be incorporated or merged.
CORPORATE EXISTENCE - Commences UPON THE
ELECTION AND QUALIFICATION of its chief executive
and a majority of members of the Sanggunian UNLESS
some other time is fixed by the law or ordinance
creating it.
Dissolution of Municipal Coprorations
Municipal corporations are dissolved by Congress by:
1. A repeal of the charter
2. As a result of annexation, merger, consolidation,
division
=======================================
C. PRINCIPLES OF LOCAL AUTONOMY
=======================================
C. PRINCIPLES OF LOCAL AUTONOMY
Section 2, Art. X provides that LGUS shall enjoy local
autonomyAs explained by Limbona v. Conte Mangelin,
Page 172 of 214
February 28, 1989, this is decentralization

administration and not decentralization of power.
of
LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT - A political subdivision

constituted by law and possessed of substantial control
over its own affairs.
LOCAL
AUTONOMY
Local
autonomy can
be considered
a measure of
decentralizatio
n of the
functions of
government.
DECENTRALIZATION
DEVOLUTION
It is the devolution
of national
administration, not
power, to the local
levels, in which local
officials remain
accountable to the
central government
in the manner the
law may provide.
It refers to the act

by which the
national
government
confers power
upon the various
LGUs to perform
specific functions.
It is mandatory
under the LGC.
DEVOLUTION / DECENTRALIZATION
Political
Both are
Administrative
decentralization decentralization decentralization
Transfer of
Both involve
Transfer of
personnel,
transfer from
powers/functions
funds/assets,
national
only
delivery of basic government to
services,
LGU
regulatory
powers
Recipients of
Both have its
Recipients of
powers: LGU
source of power powers: field
from the
offices/regional
national
offices of the
government
same agencies
powers are
there must be a no enumeration
specific; LGC
law for both
of powers
enumeration is
needed in the
exclusive
LGC
LGU cannot
both have a
President or
assume a
deadline for
department itself
national
effectivity
determines what
government
(6mos.)
powers will be
power not given
delegated
to it. It may
only do so
when power is
delegated
(devolved
power)
Levels of Decentralization
1. ADMINISTRATIVE AUTONOMY - The central
government delegates administrative powers to
the political subdivisions.
PURPOSES:
1. To broaden the local power base
2. To make the units more responsive and
accountable
3. To ensure the full development of LGUs into
self-reliant communities
4. To break the monopoly of the national
government over managing local affairs
5. To relieve the national government from the
burden of managing local affairs
2.
POLITICAL AUTONOMY - involves the abdication of

political power in favor of LGUs declared to be
autonomous
NOTE: It would amount to self-immolation
because the autonomous government would
become accountable to its constituency, not to the
central government.
SUPERVISION
The overseeing or the
power of an officer to see
that the subordinate
officers perform their
duties
CONTROL
Power of an officer to
alter, modify, nullify or set
aside what a subordinate
officer has done in the
performance of his duties
and to substitute the
judgment of the former
for that of the latter
NOTE:
1. National government agencies exercise only
supervisory powers over LGUs. The power of
review is part of supervision; if there no enabling
law, no such power of review will be granted to
national government agencies.
2. The power of supervision carries with it the power
to investigate and discipline to see to it that laws
are effectively carried out.
3. President only has the power of supervision over
LGUS. He cannot interfere with the local
governments as long as they act within the scope
of their authority.
4. The President exercises DIRECT SUPERVISION over
provinces, highly urbanized cities and independent
component cities.
5. He exercises INDIRECT SUPERVISION over
component cities and municipalities through the
provinces.
He
also
exercises
INDIRECT
Page 173 of 214
SUPERVISION over barangays through the city or

municipality concerned.
AUTONOMOUS REGIONS Created by an organic act
and through voting in a plebiscite. Currently the 1987
Philippine Constitution allows for 2 Autonomous
Regions. The President has general supervision over
autonomous regions.
Powers Retained By the National Government:
1. National Defense and Security
2. Foreign Relations
3. Monetary Affairs
NOTES: Ordinary statute cannot amend an organic act.
It must be by plebiscite. Pandi v. CA, [G.R. No. 116850,
April 11, 2002]. Only Congress can create provinces and
cities, because creation of such will lead to creation of
legislative districts too. The ARMM Regional Assembly
cannot create provinces and cities. Sema v. COMELEC,
[G.R. No. 177597 & 178628, July 16, 2008].
=======================================
D. POWERS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS
(LGUS)
1. Police power (general welfare
clause)
2. Eminent domain
3. Taxing power
a)
Requisites
for
valid
ordinance
b)
Local
initiative
and
referendum
6. Corporate powers
(i) Requisites
(ii) Ultra vires contracts
(i) Grounds
(ii) Jurisdiction
(iii)
Preventive
suspension
(iv) Removal
(v)
Administrative
appeal
(vi)
Doctrine
of
condonation
11. Recall
12. Term limits
=======================================
D. POWERS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS (LGUS)
Sources:
1. CONSTITUTION
2. STATUTE
1. Those APPLICABLE TO ALL municipal
corporations or to the class to which it belongs
2. SPECIAL ACTS of the legislature
3. CHARTER
1.POLICE POWER
Not inherent in municipal corporations. Under the LGC,
LGUs exercise police power under the general welfare
clause; refers to the power of REGULATION.
Requisites For Valid Exercise of Police Power
1. Lawful subject: public interest requires
interference
2. Lawful means: means is necessary to
accomplish the purpose and not unduly
oppressive upon individuals.
GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE it is the statutory
delegation of police power of the state to LGUs
Branches of the General Welfare Clause:
1. GENERAL LEGISLATIVE POWER authority to
enact ordinances and regulations as may be
necessary to carry into effect and discharge the
powers and duties conferred upon the
municipal council by law.
2. POLICE POWER PROPER authority to enact
ordinances as are necessary and proper to
provide for the health and safety, promote
prosperity, improve morals, peace, good order
etc.
Page 174 of 214
An ordinance extending burial assistance of P500 to a

bereaved family whose gross income does not exceed
P2,000 a month, has been upheld by the Supreme
Court as a valid exercise of police power. Binay v.
Domingo [G.R. No. 92389, September 11, 1991].
2.EMINENT DOMAIN
Requisites:
Code: POJO
1. Expropriation should be for a PUBLIC USE or
PURPOSE or for the WELFARE of the POOR or
LANDLESS.
2. ORDINANCE authorizing the local chief executive
to subject a certain property to expropriation
3. Payment of JUST COMPENSATION
4. Valid and definite OFFER TO PAY which was NOT
accepted.
Note:
1. The local government unit may immediately take
possession of the property upon the filing of the
expropriation proceedings and upon making a
deposit with the proper court of at least fifteen
percent (15%) of the fair market value of the
property based on the current tax declaration of
the property to be expropriated.
2. The amount to be paid for the expropriated
property shall be determined by the proper court,
based on the fair market value at the time of the
taking of the property.
ROLE OF SUPERVISING LGU - It can only declare the
ordinance invalid on the sole ground that it is beyond
the power of the lower LGU to issue. Hence, it cannot
declare the ordinance invalid on the ground that it is
unnecessary.
ROLE OF NATIONAL GOVERNMENT - The approval of
the national government is NOT required of local
governments to exercise the power of eminent domain.
complaint for
expropriation sufficient in
form and substance; and
(2) the deposit of the
amount equivalent to 15
percent of the fair
market value of the
property to be
expropriated based on its
current tax declaration.
Iloilo v. Legaspi [G.R. No.
154614, 25 November
2004].
Powers to Generate and Apply Resources

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
PROCEDURE
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
(Rule 67 and the Robern
Development Corporation
case).
(2) the making of a deposit

equivalent to the assessed
value of the property
subject to expropriation.
Upon compliance with the
requirements the issuance
of the writ of possession
becomes ministerial.
Biglang-awa vs. Bacalla
[G.R. Nos. 139927 and
139936, November 22,
2000]
3.TAXING POWER
ROLE OF JUDICIARY - It can inquire into the LEGALITY of

the exercise of the right and determine whether there
was a GENUINE NECESSITY.
LGUS
(Section 19 of the Local
Government Code).
(1) the filing of a complaint

for expropriation sufficient
in form and substance;
and
to establish an organization that shall be

responsible for the efficient and effective
implementation of their development plans,
program objectives and priorities
to create their own sources of revenues and to
levy taxes, fees, and charges which shall accrue
exclusively for their use and disposition and which
shall be retained by them
to have a just share in national taxes which shall be
automatically and directly released to them
without need of any further action
to have an equitable share in the proceeds from
the utilization and development of the national
wealth and resources within their respective
territorial jurisdictions including sharing the same
with the inhabitants by way of direct benefits
to acquire, develop, lease, encumber, alienate, or
otherwise dispose of real or personal property
held by them in their proprietary capacity and to
apply their resources and assets for productive,
developmental, or welfare purposes, in the
exercise or furtherance of their governmental or
proprietary powers and functions and thereby
ensure their development into self-reliant
communities and active participants in the
attainment of national goals.
LGU has no inherent power to tax. Power to tax of
LGUs is now pursuant to direct authority conferred
by the 1987 Constitution.
(1) the filing of a
Page 175 of 214
Requisites of A Tax Ordinance

1.
Notice
2.
Actual conduct of public hearing
FISCAL AUTONOMY means that local government
units have the power to create their own sources of
revenue in addiction to their equitable share in the tax
collection released by the government and the power
to allocate resources in accordance with their own
priorities. Pimentel vs. Aguirre [G.R. No. 132988, July 19,
Reclassification of Lands
Grounds:
1. The land CEASES to be economically feasible and
sound for agricultural purposes as determined by
the Department of Agriculture.
2. The land shall have SUBSTANTIALLY GREATER
economic value for residential, commercial or
industrial purposes as determined by the
Sanggunian concerned.
2000].
NOTE: The COA is endowed with enough latitude to

determine, prevent and disallow irregular, unnecessary,
excessive, extravagant or unconscionable expenditures
of government funds. The Court had therefore
previously upheld the authority of COA to disapprove
payments which it finds excessive and disadvantageous
to the government; to determine the meaning of
public bidding and when there is failure in the
bidding; to disallow expenditures which it finds
unnecessary according to its rules even if disallowance
will mean discontinuance of foreign aid; to disallow a
contract even after it has been executed and goods
have been delivered. Thus, LGUs, though granted local
fiscal autonomy, are still within the audit jurisdiction of
the COA. It is only when the COA has acted without or
in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction,
that this Court entertains a petition questioning its
rulings. Velsos v. COA, [G.R. No. 193677, Sept. 6,
2011].
Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) Share OF LGUs (Secs.
284, 285, LGC) - The current sharing is 40% local, 60%
national. The share of LGUs cannot be reduced except if
there is an unmanageable public sector deficit. The
Congress can neither impose a limitation on the
manner in which IRA is released for the Constitution
provides for automatic release.
Note: The BIR has no authority to determine the
applicability of local ordinances. Besides, even the
Bureau itself states that the exemption shall not apply
if the sand and gravel were to be disposed of
commercially. An exemption from the requirements of
the provincial government should have a clear basis,
whether in law, ordinance, or even from the contract
itself. Lepanto Consolidated Mining Company v.
Ambanloc [G.R. No. 180639, June 29, 2010].
NOTE:
1. ONLY cities and municipalities can reclassify
agricultural lands through the proper ordinance
after conducting public hearings for the purpose.
2. Such reclassification shall be limited to the
following percentage of the total agricultural land
area at the time of the passage of the ordinance:
(For highly urbanized and independent component
cities, fifteen percent (15%); For component cities
and first to the third class municipalities, ten
percent (10%); For fourth to sixth class
municipalities, five percent (5%).
EXCEPT:
i.
Agricultural lands distributed to agrarian
reform beneficiaries shall not be affected by
the said reclassification.
ii.
The President may, when public interest so
requires and upon recommendation of the
National Economic and Development
Authority, authorize a city or municipality to
reclassify lands in excess of the limits set in
the next preceding paragraph.
4.CLOSURE AND OPENING OF ROADS

A local government unit may, pursuant to an ordinance,
permanently or temporarily close or open any local
road, alley, park, or square falling within its jurisdiction.
PERMANENT CLOSURE
1. Ordinance must
be approved by
at least twothirds (2/3) of
all the members
of the
sanggunian
2. When
necessary, an
adequate
TEMPORARY CLOSURE
1. Should be a
National or local
road, alley, park,
or square
2. Temporarily
closure during an
actual
emergency, or
fiesta
celebrations,
Page 176 of 214
3.
substitute for
the public
facility that is
subject to
closure is
provided.
Provisions for
the
maintenance of
public safety
shall be made.
Note: A property
permanently withdrawn
from public use may be
used or conveyed for any
purpose for which other
real property belonging
to the local government
unit concerned may be
lawfully used or
conveyed.
Except: No freedom park
shall be closed
permanently without
provision for its transfer
or relocation to a new
site.
3.
public rallies,
agricultural or
industrial fairs, or
an undertaking of
public works and
highways,
telecommunicati
ons, and
waterworks
projects.
The duration of
which shall be
specified by the
local chief
executive
concerned in a
written order
Notes:
It should NOT be
temporarily closed for
athletic, cultural, or civic
activities not officially
sponsored, recognized, or
approved by the local
government unit
concerned.
Any city, municipality, or
barangay may, by a duly
enacted ordinance,
temporarily close and
regulate the use of any
local street, road,
thoroughfare, or any other
public place where
shopping malls, Sunday,
flea or night markets, or
shopping areas may be
established and where
goods, merchandise,
foodstuffs, commodities,
or articles of commerce
may be sold and dispensed
to the general public.
The passage of an ordinance by a local government unit

to effect the opening of a local road, can have no
applicability to the if the subdivision road lots sought to
be opened to decongest traffic in the area -have
already been donated to, and the titles thereto already
issued in the name of, the City Government of. Having
been already donated or turned over to the City
Government, the road lots in question have since then
taken the nature of public roads which are withdrawn
from the commerce of man. New Sun Valley vs.
Sangguniang Barangay [G.R. No. 156686, July 27,
2011].
4.LEGISLATIVE POWER
Requisites of A Valid Ordinance:
1.Must not CONTRAVENE the Constitution or any
statute
2.Must not be UNFAIR or oppressive
3.Must not be PARTIAL or discriminatory
policy
The power to enact or repeal an ordinance or to issue a
resolution
1. Local Chief Executive has to approve the ordinance
enacted by the council.
EXCEPT: Punong barangay because he is already a
member of the Sangguniang barangay
2. VETO POWER of local chief executive.
GROUNDS:
1. Ultra vires
2. Prejudicial to public welfare
3. ITEM VETO
1. Appropriations ordinance
2. Ordinance/resolution
adopting
local
development plan and public investment
program
3. Ordinance directing the payment of money or
creating liability.
NOTE:
1. Veto communicated to Sanggunian within
15 days for province and 10 days for city or
municipality.
2. A municipal resolution correcting an alleged
typographical error in a zoning ordinance
does not have to comply with the
requirements of notice and hearing, which
are required for the validity and
effectiveness of zoning ordinances. The
Page 177 of 214
Learning Child, Inc.v. Ayala Alabang

Village
Association
[G.R.
No.
134269/G.R. No. 134440/G.R. No.
144518, July 7, 2010].
ORDINANCE
has the force and effect of
law
has general application;
more or less permanent in
character
third reading required
RESOLUTION
mere opinion
temporary in nature
5. Date for initiative SET by COMELEC if required

number of signatures has been obtained.
Effectivity of Proposition
1. If proposition is approved by a majority of the
votes cast, it will take effect 15 days after
certification by the COMELEC as if the Sanggunian
and the local chief executive had taken affirmative
action.
2. If it fails to obtain required number of votes, it is
considered defeated
third reading not required
4. The
higher
council
can
declare
the
ordinance/resolution invalid if it is beyond the
scope of the power conferred upon the lower
Sanggunian. For barangay ordinances, the higher
council can also rule that it is inconsistent with law
or city/municipal ordinances.
Presumptions Regarding Local Legislation
Code: CRV
1. Constitutionality
2. Regularity
3. Validity
LOCAL INITIATIVE - The legal process whereby the
registered voters of a LGU may directly propose, enact
or amend any ordinance. It may be exercised by all
registered voters of the provinces, cities, municipalities,
and barangays.
NOTE: A resolution can also be the proper subject of a
local initiative. SBMA v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 25416,
Procedure:
1. NUMBER of voters who should file petition with
Sanggunian concerned:
a. Provinces and cities - at least 1000
registered voters
b.
Municipality - at least 100 registered
voters
c.
Barangay - at least 50 registered voters
2. Sanggunian concerned has 30 days to act on the
petition. If the Sanggunian does not take any
favorable action, the proponents may invoke the
power of initiative, giving notice to Sanggunian.
3. Proponents will have the following number of days
to COLLECT required number of signatures
1. Provinces and cities - 90 days
2. Municipalities - 60 days
3. Barangays -30 days
4. SIGNING of petition
Limits on Propositions:
1. It should NOT be exercised more than once a year.
2. It can only extend to subjects or matters which are
within the legal powers of the Sanggunians to
enact.
3. If the Sanggunian adopts in toto the proposition
presented and the local chief executive approves
the same, the initiative shall be cancelled.
Limits Upon Sanggunians
1. The Sanggunian CANNOT repeal, modify or amend
any proposition or ordinance approved through
system of initiative/ referendum within 6 months
from the date of approval thereof.
2. The Sanggunian can amend, modify or repeal the
proposition/ordinance within 3 years thereafter by
a vote of of all its members.
3. For barangays, the applicable period is 18 months.
REFERENDUM - The legal process whereby the
registered voters of the local government units may
approve, amend or reject any ordinance enacted by the
Sanggunian.
NOTE: The proper courts can still declare void any
proposition adopted pursuant to an initiative or
referendum on the following grounds:
1. Violation of the Constitution
2. Want of capacity of the Sanggunian concerned to
enact the measure
4.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
CORPORATE POWERS
CODE: CSC-PC
Have CONTINUOUS SUCCESSION in its corporate

name
SUE and BE SUED
Have and use a CORPORATE SEAL
Acquire and convey real or personal PROPERTY
Enter into CONTRACTS
Page 178 of 214
Requisites of Valid Municipal Contracts:

Code: ID-FOLS
1. LGU has express, implied or INHERENT power
to ENTER into a particular contract
2. It must be entered into by proper
DEPARTMENT, board, committee, or agent
3. It must comply with
SUBSTANTIVE
requirements
4. It must comply with FORMAL requirements
5. In case entered into by LOCAL chief executive
on behalf of LGU, prior authorization by
Sanggunian concerned is needed.
6. Exercise such OTHER POWERS granted to
corporations, subject to limitations in the LGC
and other laws.
The doctrine of separate personality of a corporation
finds no application in the Cooperative Development
Authority which was created by virtue of Republic Act
No. 6939 since it is not a private entity but a
government agency. Verzosa v. Carague [G.R. No.
157838, March 08, 2011].
5.
LIABILITY OF LGUS
MUNICIPAL LIABILITY - Local Government units and

their officials are not exempt from liability for death or
injury to persons or damage to property.
LIABILITY ON CONTRACTS - Municipal corporations are
liable on contracts entered into in their behalf by their
duly authorized agents acting within the scope of their
authority, PROVIDED that the municipal corporations
are authorized to enter into said contracts by their
charter.
DOCTRINE OF IMPLIED MUNICIPAL LIABILITY - A
municipality may become obligated upon an implied
contract to pay the reasonable value of the benefits
accepted or appropriated by it as to which it has the
general power to contract. The doctrine applies to all
cases where money or other property of a party is
received under such circumstances that the general
law, independent of an express contract, implies an
obligation to do justice with respect to the same
(Nachura, Reviewer in Political Law, p. 499)
1. The doctrine of estoppel cannot be applied as against
a municipal corporation to validate a contract which it
has no power to make, or which it is authorized to
make only under prescribed conditions, within
prescribed limitations, or in a prescribed mode or
manner, although the corporation has accepted the
benefits thereof and the other party has fully

performed his part of the agreement, or has expanded
large sums in preparation for performance. A reason
frequently assigned for this rule is that to apply the
doctrine of estoppel against a municipality in such case
would be to enable it to do indirectly what it cannot do
directly. Also, where a contract is violative of public
policy, the municipality executing it cannot be estopped
to assert the invalidity on this ground; nor can it be
estopped to assert the invalidity of a contract which has
ceded away, controlled, or embarrassed its legislative
or government powers. San Diego v. Municipality of
Naujan [G.R. No. L-9920, February 29, 1960].
2. The government is justified to decline payment of
the purchase price of illegally cut lumber delivered by a
contractor who won a public bidding for the
construction of the Navotas Bridge. All contracts,
including Government contracts, are subject to the
police power of the State. Being an inherent attribute
of sovereignty, such power is deemed incorporated
into the laws of the land, which are part of all contracts,
thereby qualifying the obligations arising therefrom.
Thus, it is an implied condition in the subject contract
for the procurement of materials needed in the repair
and construction of the Navotas Bridge that petitioner
as private contractor would comply with pertinent
forestry laws and regulations on the cutting and
gathering of the lumber she undertook to supply the
provincial government. Guadines v. Sandiganbayan
[G.R. No. 164891, June 6, 2011].
3. The doctrine of separate personality of a corporation
finds no application in the Cooperative Development
Authority which was created by virtue of Republic Act
No. 6939 since it is not a private entity but a
government agency. Verzosa v. Carague [G.R. No.
157838, March 8, 2011].
LIABILITY
LGUs and local officials
are liable in case of:
1. Death
2. Injury, or
3. Damage to
property (Sec.
24, LGC)
UNDER THE NCC, the
State is responsible in like
manner when it acts
through a special agent;
DEFENSE
General immunity from suit
(follows from State
immunity)
LGUs generally can be sued
based on their
charters/lawspower to
sue and be sued
Generally limited to
proprietary functions
Page 179 of 214
but not when the damage

has been caused by the
official to whom the task
done properly pertains.
Par. 6 of Art. 2180, NCC.
State/LGUs liable for
death or injuries suffered
by reason of defective
roads, bridges or other
public works under their
supervision Provinces,
cities and municipalities
shall be liable for
damages for the death of,
or injuries suffered by any
person by reason of the
defective condition of
roads, streets, bridges,
public buildings, and
other public works under
their control or
supervision. (Art. 2189,
NCC.)
6.
SETTLEMENT OF BOUNDARY DISPUTES
SITUATION
Boundary disputes
involving two (2) or more
barangays in the same
city or municipality
Boundary disputes
involving two (2) or more
municipalities within the
same province
Boundary disputes
involving municipalities or
component cities of
different provinces
Boundary disputes
involving a component
city or municipality on
the one hand and a highly
urbanized city on the
other, or two (2) or more
highly urbanized cities
WHERE TO SETTLE
The sangguniang
panlungsod or
sangguniang bayan
concerned.
The sangguniang
panlalawigan concerned.
Jointly referred for

settlement to the
sanggunians of the
province concerned.
Jointly referred for
settlement to the
respective sanggunians of
the parties
Notes:
SPECIAL AGENTOne who receives a definite and fixed
order or commission, foreign to the exercise of the
duties of his office, so that in representation of the
state and being bound to act as agent thereof, he
executes the trust confided to him. Merritt v. Govt of
the Philippine Islands, [34 Phil. 323].
NOTES:
1. In the current case of West Tower Condominium in
Makati, through Atty. Lorna Kapunan, the residents
successfully obtained a Writ of Kalikasan and TEPO
from the Supreme Court. After a joint ocular inspection,
the SC clarified that the TEPO only covers the WOPL
and not the BOPL of FPIC15
2. In the case where a stage collapsed during a zarzuela,
municipal corporations will be liable for the injury
sustained by the victims. Under Philippine law,
municipalities are political bodies corporate. They are
endowed with the faculties of municipal corporations.
In their proper corporate name, they may sue, be sued,
contract and be contracted with. Torio v. Fontanilla
[G.R. No. L-29993, Oct. 23, 1978].
15
In the event the sanggunian fails to effect an amicable

settlement within sixty (60) days from the date the
dispute was referred thereto, it shall issue a
certification to that effect.
Thereafter, the dispute shall be formally tried by the
sanggunian concerned which shall decide the issue
within sixty (60) days from the date of the certification
referred to above.
Within the time and manner prescribed by the Rules of
Court, any party may elevate the decision of the
sanggunian concerned to the proper Regional Trial
Court having jurisdiction over the area in dispute. The
Regional Trial Court shall decide the appeal within one
(1) year from the filing thereof. Pending final resolution
of the disputed area prior to the dispute shall be
maintained and continued for all legal purposes.
7.
SUCCESSION OF ELECTIVE OFFICIALS
Qualifications:
1. FILIPINO CITIZEN
2. REGISTERED VOTER in:
1. the barangay, municipality, city or province
where he intends to be elected
Atty. Noel Ostrea, Constitutional Law Review
Page 180 of 214
2. the district where he intends to be elected in

case of a member of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan, Sangguniang Panlungsod or
Sangguniang banyan
3. RESIDENT therein for at least 1 year immediately
preceding the day of the election.
4. Able to READ AND WRITE Filipino / any other local
language or dialect
5. AGE requirement
POSITION
Governor, Vice Governor,
Mayor, Vice Mayor,
member of Sangguniang
Panlungsod in highly
urbanized cities
Mayor, Vice Mayor of
independent component
cities or municipalities
Member of Sangguniang
Panlungsod, Member of
Sangguniang Bayan,
Punong Barangay,
Member of Sangguniang
Barangay
AGE REQUIREMENT
At least 23 years old on
election day
At least 21 years old
7.
Filling of Vacancy:
1. Automatic succession
2. Appointment
NOTE: The general rule is that the successor (by
appointment) should come from the same political
party as the Sanggunian member whose position has
become vacant. The exception would be in the case of
vacancy in the Sangguniang barangay.
RANKING - Determined on the basis of proportion of
votes obtained by each winning candidate to the total
number of registered voters in each district in the
immediately preceding local election.
2.
At least 18 years old
Disqualifications For Local Elective Officials:

Code:SCRIP-DF
1. Those SENTENCED by final judgment for an offense
involving MORAL TURPITUDE, or for an OFFENSE
PUNISHABLE BY 1 YEAR OR MORE of imprisonment
within 2 years after serving sentence
2. Those REMOVED from office as a result of an
administrative case.
3. Those CONVICTED by final judgment for violating
the oath of allegiance to the Republic
4. Those with DUAL CITIZENSHIP
5. FUGITIVES FROM JUSTICE in criminal or nonpolitical cases here or abroad
6. PERMANENT RESIDENTS in a foreign country or
those who have acquired the right to reside
abroad and continue to avail of the same right
after the effectivity of this Code
7. The INSANE OR FEEBLE MINDED
Vacancy
1. PERMANENT VACANCY (F2R2 DVP)
GROUNDS:
1. Elective local official fills a higher vacant office
2. Refuses to assume office
3. Fails to qualify
4. Dies
5. Removed from office
6. Voluntarily resigns
Permanently incapacitated to discharge the

functions of his office
Temporary Vacancy
Non-Exclusive GROUNDS:
1. Leave of absence
2. Travel abroad
3. Suspension from office
GENERAL RULE: If the positions of governor, mayor or

punong barangay become temporarily vacant, the vicegovernor, vice-mayor or highest ranking Sanggunian
member will AUTOMATICALLY exercise the powers and
perform the duties and functions of the local chief
executive concerned.
EXCEPTION: He cannot exercise the power to appoint,
suspend or dismiss employees.
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: If the period of
temporary incapacity exceeds 30 working days.
Termination of Temporary Incapacity
1. Upon submission to the appropriate Sanggunian of
a WRITTEN DECLARATION by the local chief that he
has reported back to office
2. If the temporary incapacity was due to LEGAL
REASON, the local chief executive should also
submit NECESSARY DOCUMENTS showing that the
legal causes no longer exist.
APPOINTMENT OF OIC - The local chief executive can
designate IN WRITING an OIC if he is traveling within
the country but outside his territorial jurisdiction for a
period NOT EXCEEDING 3 consecutive days. The OIC
CANNOT exercise the power to appoint, suspend or
dismiss employees.
Page 181 of 214
VACANCY
Governor, Mayor
Governor, Vice-governor,
Mayor or Vice-mayor
Highest ranking
Sanggunian member (who
was supposed to fill the
vacant position of
governor etc.)
In the office of the
Punong Barangay
8.
SUCCESSOR
Vice-Governor, ViceMayor
Highest ranking
Sanggunian member
Second highest ranking
Sanggunian member
WHO MAY
PREVENTIVELY
SUSPEND
Highest ranking
Sangguniang Barangay
member OR the 2nd
highest ranking
Sanggunian member
DISCIPLINE OF LOCAL OFFICIALS
GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION:

CODE: MA3C D2O
1. Commission of any offense involving MORAL
TURPITUDE or an offense punishable by at least
prison mayor
2. APPLICATION or acquisition of foreign citizenship
or residence or the status of an immigrant of
another country
3. ABUSE of authority
4. UNAUTHORIZED ABSENCE for 15 consecutive
working days, except in the case of members of the
Sanggunian
panlalawigan,
Sangguniang
Panlungsod, Sangguniang Bayan, Sangguniang
Barangay.
5. Culpable VIOLATION of the CONSTITUTION
6. DISLOYALTY to the Republic of the Philippines
7. DISHONESTY, oppression, misconduct in office,
gross negligence, dereliction of duty
8. OTHER GROUNDS as may be provided by the Code
or other laws.
NOTE: If the incident complained of occurred in
another barangay over which a barangay official has no
authority and jurisdiction, the Supreme Court ruled that
he is liable for abuse of authority on the basis that he
participated in the unlawful act as a higher authority
that gave a semblance of legality over that act and
influenced the actions of his co-defendants. Here,
petitioner was president of the organization of
barangay officials in his municipality and sat as exofficio member of the Sangguniang Bayan, which has
power to review barangay ordinances and authority to
discipline barangay officials. His co-defendants were
officials in the barangay where the incident occurred.
Bien v. Bo [G.R. No. 179333, August 3, 2010].
DURATION OF
PREVENTIVE
SUSPENSION
WHEN TO
PREVENTIVELY
SUSPEND
ELECTIVE
1. President Elective official
of a province,
highly
urbanized or
Independent
component
city
3. Governor
Elective
official of a
component
city or
municipality.
4. Mayor-Elective
official of a
barangay
Any single
preventive
suspension shall
not extend beyond
60 days; if
multiple, cannot
be suspended for
more than 90 days
within a single year
for the same
ground or grounds
existing.
Any of the grounds
provided under RA
7160, after the
issues are joined,
when the evidence
of guilt is strong
and there is great
probability that
the continuance in
office could
influence the
witnesses or pose
a threat to the
safety and
integrity of the
records and other
evidence.
GOVERNING
LAW
Governed by RA
7160 (LGC)
WHERE TO FILE
A verified
APPOINTED
The local chief
executive to any
subordinate
official or
employee under
his authority
pending
investigation.
A period not
exceeding 60
days
Charges for
preventive
suspension
must involve
dishonesty,
oppression or
grave
misconduct or
neglect in the
performance of
duty, or if there
is reason to
believe that the
respondent is
guilty of the
charges which
would warrant
his removal
from service.
Administrative
Discipline
Governed by the
Civil Service
Law.
The local chief
Page 182 of 214
(DISCIPLINARY
CASES)
DISCIPLINARY
JURISDICTION
(DISCIPLINARY
CASES)
APPEALS
(DISCIPLINARY
CASES)
complaint to:
1. OPfor
provincial,
highly urbanized
city pr
independent
component city
elective official.
2. S.Panlalawigan
elective
municipal
officials.
4. Penalty of
suspension
shall not
exceed his
unexpired
term, or a
period of 6
months for
every
administrative
offense. Nor
shall said
penalty be a
bar to the
candidacy of
the respondent
as long as he is
qualified.
5. Removal can
only be done
by a court of
law; the
penalty of
removal from
office shall be
a bar to the
candidacy from
any elective
office.
executive
Decisions may,
within 30 days
from receipt be
appealable to:
1. S.Panlalawig
an
decisions of
component
cities
S.Panglunso
d and the
S.Bayan
2. OP
decisions of
the
S.Panlalawig
If the penalty
imposed is
suspension
without pay for
not more than
30 days, his
decision shall be
final; if the
penalty imposed
is heavier, the
decision shall be
appealable to
the Civil Service
Commission
which shall
decide the
Except as
otherwise
provided by law,
the local chief
executive may
impose the
penalty of:
1.Removal from
service
2. Demotion in
rank
3.Suspension
for not more
than 1 year
without pay
an and
S.Panglungs
od of Highly
irbanized
cities and
independen
t
component
cities.
Decisions of
OP are final
and
executor.
appeal within 30
days from
receipt thereof.
PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION merely a protective or

preliminary measure; not a penalty and not considered
part of the actual penalty if found guilty.
Purpose: to prevent the accused from using his position
and powers/prerogatives to influence potential
witnesses or tamper with records that may be vital in
the prosecution of the case against him
When:
1. After the issues are joined
2. When the evidence of guilt is strong
3. There is great probability that the continuance in
office could influence the witnesses or pose a
threat to the safety and integrity of the records and
other evidence
4. Fine in an
amount not
exceeding 6
months salary
IMPOSED BY
President
5. Reprimand
Governor
Mayor
RESPONDENT LOCAL OFFICIAL

Elective official of a province,
highly urbanized
or Independent component city
Elective official of a component
city or municipality
Elective official of a barangay
Duration:
1. SINGLE preventive suspension should not exceed
60 DAYS.
2. If SEVERAL administrative cases are filed against an
elective official, he cannot be preventively
suspended for more than 90 DAYS within a single
year on the same ground/s existing and known at
the time of the first suspension.
SUSPENSION - Should not exceed the unexpired term
of the respondent or a period of 6 months for every
administrative offense.
NOTES:
1. PENALTY is NOT a bar to the candidacy of the
respondent suspended as long as he meets
Page 183 of 214
2.
3.
the qualifications for the office. However,

REMOVAL AS A RESULT OF ADMINISTRATIVE
INVESTIGATION serves as a BAR to the
candidacy of the respondent for any elective
position.
Preventive suspension imposed upon a public
officer facing administrative charges CANNOT
be credited against the penalty of suspension
imposed upon him.
Preventive suspension is not a penalty. Not
being a penalty, the period within which one
is under preventive suspension is not
considered part of the actual penalty of
suspension. Quimbo v. Gervacio [G.R. No.
155620, Aug. 9, 2005].
Civil Liability of Public Officials

For Public Acts
GENERAL RULE: a public officer is not liable for
damages which a person may suffer arising from the
just performance of his official duties and within the
scope of his assigned tasks.
EXCEPTION: when the governmental acts are
done in bad faith, being outside the scope of
authority, such public officer is liable for
damages in his/her personal capacity.
Doctrine of Condonation
The electorates condonation of the previous
administrative infractions of the reelected official
cannot be extended to that of the reappointed
coterminous employees, the underlying basis of the
rule being to uphold the will of the people expressed
through the ballot. In other words, there is neither
subversion
of
the
sovereign
will
nor
disenfranchisement of the electorate to speak of, in the
case of reappointed coterminous employees.
Salumbides v. Ombudsman [G.R. No. 180917, April
23, 2010].
9.
RECALL
RECALL - The power of the electorate (registered

voters) to remove a local elected official for loss of
confidence through the holding of a special/recall
election, before the end of term of office.
1. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION by the Preparatory

Recall Assembly (composed of local officials of the
lower/ supervised local government unit)
LEVEL
Provincial
City
Legislative district
Municipal
COMPOSITION OF PRA
Mayors, vice-mayors, Sanggunian
members of the municipalities and
component cities
Punong barangay and Sangguniang
barangay members in the city
Elective municipal/ barangay officials
Punong barangay and Sangguniang
barangay members in the
municipality
PROCEDURE:
1. Session in a public place to initiate recall
proceeding
2. Resolution adopted by a majority of all the
members of the PRA during the session called
for the purpose of initiating recall proceedings
2. PETITION by at least 25% of the registered voters.
PROCEDURE:
1. PETITION of at least 25% of the total number
of registered voters in the LGU concerned
during the election in which the local official
sought to be recalled was elected.
2. The written petition for recall should be DULY
SIGNED BEFORE the election registrar or his
representative and in the presence of the
representative of the petitioner and the
official sought to be recalled.
3. It should be SIGNED IN A PUBLIC PLACE.
4. Petition should be FILED WITH COMELEC
through its office in the LGU concerned
5. PUBLICATION of petition for 10-20 days in
order to verify the authenticity and
genuineness of the petition and the required
% of voters.
Conduct of Recall Election:

1. The official sought to be recalled are
AUTOMATICALLY considered as duly registered
candidates.
2. The date set for the recall election should not be
less than 30 days after filing of resolution/ petition
in the case of barangay, city or municipal officials
and 45 days in the case of provincial officials
Modes of Initiating A Recall:
Page 184 of 214
Effectivity of Recall
1. Recall will ONLY be effective upon the election and
proclamation of a successor.
2. If the official sought to be recalled receives the
highest number of votes, confidence in him is
affirmed and he shall continue in office.
Limits on Recall
1. Elective local official can be the subject of a recall
election only ONCE during his term of office.
2. NO recall shall take place WITHIN 1 year from the
date of the officials assumption to office or 1 year
immediately preceding a regular local election.
10. TERM LIMITS

1.
2.
3.
4.
Term of office: 3 years

NO local elective official shall serve for MORE
THAN 3 CONSECUTIVE TERMS in the same position.
EXCEPT: the term of barangay officials and
members of the Sanggunian kabataan shall be
for 5 years [Sec 43(c) of LGC]
Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length
of time shall be not considered an interruption in
the continuity of service for the full term for which
the elective official concerned was elected.
For the 3-term rule to apply, the local official must
have:
1. fully served the term
2. been elected through a REGULAR ELECTION
The Following are Not Considered as Interuptions in

Term:
1. Voluntary renunciation of a term.
A councilor assuming the office of vice-mayor through
succession is not considered a voluntary renunciation
of his position as councilor. It is clear therefore that
voluntary renunciation of a term does not cancel the
renounced term in the computation of the three term
limit; conversely, involuntary severance from office for
any length of time short of the full term provided by
law amounts to an interruption of continuity of service.
Montebon v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 180444, April 09,
2008].
voluntary renunciation. Bolos v. COMELEC [G.R. No.

184082, March 17, 2009].
3.
Municipality merged with another municipality to

form a new political unit. Laceda, Sr. v. Limena
[G.R. No. 182867, November 25, 2008].

===========================================
XIII. NATIONAL ECONOMY AND

PATRIMONY
==============================
A. Regalian doctrine
B. Nationalist and citizenship requirement
provisions
C. Exploration, development and utilization of
natural resources
D. Franchises, authority and certificates for
public utilities
E. Acquisition, ownership and transfer of
public and private lands
F. Organization and regulation of corporations,
private and public
G. Monopolies, restraint of trade and unfair
competition
====================================
XIII. NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY
A. REGALIAN DOCTRINE
====================================
A. REGALIAN DOCTRINE
2.
Sandiganbayan preventively suspended the

officer for 90 days in relation with a criminal case.
Aldovino Jr. v. COMELEC [GR No. 184836,
December 23, 2009].
The relinquishment of the office of Punong Barangay

during the third term, as a consequence of ones
assumption to office as Sangguniang Bayan, is a
IMPERIUM
Government authority
possessed by the State
which is appropriately
embraced in sovereignty.
DOMINIUM
The capacity of the State to
own and acquire property.
It refers to lands held by the
government in a proprietary
character.
Page 185 of 214
State Owned:
1. Lands of the public domain
2. Waters
3. Minerals, coals, petroleum, and other mineral oils
4. All sources of potential energy
5. Fisheries
6. Forests or timber
7. Wildlife
8. Flora and fauna
9. Other natural resources
GENERAL RULE: All natural resources CANNOT be
alienated
EXCEPTION: Agricultural lands
NOTE:
1. Native title: When as far back as testimony or
memory goes, the land has been held by individuals
under a claim of private ownership, it will be
presumed that to have been held in the same way
before the Spanish conquest, and never to have
been public land. Carino v. Insular Government,
[41 Phil 1935, 1909].
2. PP 310, distributing 670 hectares of CMUs property,
to the indigenous peoples is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The
lands by their character have become inalienable from
the moment President Garcia dedicated them for
CMUs use in scientific and technological research in
the field of agriculture. They have ceased to be
alienable public lands. Besides, when Congress enacted
the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) or Republic
Act 8371 in 1997, it provided in Section 56 that
"property rights within the ancestral domains already
existing and/or vested" upon its effectivity "shall be
recognized and respected." In this case, ownership over
the subject lands had been vested in CMU as early as
1958. Consequently, transferring the lands in 2003 to
the indigenous peoples around the area is not in accord
with the IPRA. CMU v. Executive Secretary [G.R. No.
184869, Sept. 21, 2010].
=====================================
B.
NATIONALIST
AND
CITIZENSHIP
REQUIREMENT PROVISIONS
====================================
B. NATIONALIST AND CITIZENSHIP REQUIREMENT
PROVISIONS
1.
2.
Filipino citizens
Corporations or associations incorporated in the
Philippines, at least 60% of whose capital is owned
by Filipino citizens
EXCEPTIONS:
1. In INTESTATE SUCCESSION, where an alien heir of a
Filipino is the transferee of private land.
2. A NATURAL-BORN citizen of the Philippines who
has LOST his Philippine citizenship may be a
transferee of PRIVATE LAND, subject to limitation
provided by law. Hence, land can be used only for
residential purposes. In this case, he only acquires
derivative title.
3. Foreign states may acquire land but only for
EMBASSY and STAFF RESIDENCE purposes.
NOTE:
1. Filipino citizenship is only required at the time the
land is acquired. Thus, loss of citizenship after
acquiring the land does not deprive ownership.
2. Restriction against aliens only applies to
acquisition of ownership. Therefore:
1. Aliens may be lessees or usufructuaries of
private lands
2. Aliens may be mortgagees of land, as long as
they do not obtain possession thereof and do
not bid in the foreclosure sale.
3. Land tenure is not indispensable to the free
exercise of religious profession and worship. A
religious corporation controlled by nonFilipinos cannot acquire and own land, even
for religious purposes.
3. When a couple buys land, where one is an alien
and one is Filipino, the property does not become
part of the conjugal property. It will only be owned
by the Filipino spouse. Cheeseman v. IAC, [193
SCRA 93 (1991)]
4. An alien cannot challenge any act of
administration, enjoyment, or alienation
of
his/her Filipino spouse over a piece of land his/ her
spouse
acquired. Matthews v. Taylor
Spouses, [G.R. 154584, June 22, 2009].
Remedies to Recover Private Lands from Disqualified
Aliens:
Code: ER2
1.
2.
3.
Escheat proceedings
Action for reversion under the Public Land Act
An action by the former Filipino owner to recover
the land
GENERAL RULE: Private lands CAN only be conveyed to:
Page 186 of 214
Although the sale of a lot to an alien violated the

constitutional prohibition on aliens acquiring land, the
acquisition by succession by Filipino citizens qualified to
acquire lands, can no longer be impugned on the basis
of the invalidity of the initial transfer. The flaw in the
original transaction is considered cured and the title of
the transferee is deemed valid considering that the
objective of the constitutional proscription against alien
ownership of lands, that is to keep our lands in Filipino
hands, has been achieved. Republic v. Register of
Deeds [G.R. No. 158230, July 16, 2008].
Considering that the rights and liabilities of the
parties under the Contract to Sell is covered by the
Condominium Act wherein petitioner as unit owner
was simply a member of the Condominium Corporation
and the land remained owned by respondent, then the
constitutional proscription against aliens owning real
property does not apply to the present case. There
being no circumvention of the constitutional
prohibition, the Court's pronouncements on the
invalidity of the Contract of Sale should be set
aside. Hulst v. PR Builders [G.R. No. 156364,
National Economy and Patrimony Investments

Powers of Congress:
1. RESERVE to Filipino citizens or to corporations or
associations at least 60% of whose capital is owned
by such citizens, or such higher percentage as
Congress may prescribe, CERTAIN AREAS OF
INVESTMENT. This may be done when the national
interest dictates.
2. Enact measures to ENCOURAGE the formation and
operation of ENTERPRISES whose capital is wholly
owned by FILIPINOS.
NOTE: In the grant of rights, privileges and
concessions covering the national economy and
patrimony, the State shall give preference to QUALIFIED
Filipinos. This provision is self executory. The Supreme
Court banked on this to uphold the decision of GSIS to
grant the Manila Hotel project to a Filipino corporation,
even though a Malaysian firm turned out to be the
highest bidder, Manla Prince Hotel v. GSIS, [G.R. No.
122156, February 3, 1997].
However, the GATT treaty (which placed aliens on the
same footing as Filipinos) was upheld by the Supreme
Court. It reasoned that the provision which mandates
preference to Filipinos is only enforceable with respect
to grant of rights, privileges and concessions covering
national economy and patrimony, and not all aspects

of trade and commerce. Tanada v. Angara, [G.R. No.
118295, May 2, 1997].
The Retail Trade Liberalization Act of 2000 is

CONSTITUTIONAL. It allowed foreign nationals to
engage in retail trade business in the Philippines. It also
allowed natural-born Filipino citizens, who had lost
their citizenship and now reside in the Philippines, to
engage in the retail trade business with the same rights
as Filipino citizens.
The mandate for the State to develop a selfreliant and independent national economy effectively
controlled by Filipinos is not self-executory. The
control and regulation of trade in the interest of the
public welfare is of course an exercise of the police
power of the State. A persons right to property,
whether he is a Filipino citizen or foreign national,
cannot be taken from him without due process of law.
The Court is not convinced that the implementation of
R.A. 8762 would eventually lead to alien control of the
retail trade business. Petitioners have not mustered
any concrete and strong argument to support its thesis.
The law itself has provided strict safeguards on foreign
participation in that business. Espina v. Zamora, [G.R.
No. 143855, Sept. 21, 2010].
ACTIVITY
Exploitation
of natural
resources
Operation of
Public
Utilities
Acquisition of
alienable
lands of the
public domain
Practice
of
ALL
professions
Mass media
Advertising
CITIZENSHIP AND/OR EQUITY

REQUIREMENTS
1. Filipino citizens
2. Domestic Corporations (60%
Filipino owned)
Filipino owned)
Filipino owned)
3. Former natural-born citizens of
RP (as transferees with certain
legal restrictions)
4. Alien heirs (as transferees in case
of intestate succession)
1. Filipino citizens only (natural
persons)
2. Congress may, by law, otherwise
prescribe
Filipino owned)
Page 187 of 214

Filipino owned)
Educational
Institution
Other
economic
activities
Filipino owned)
EXCEPTION: Schools established by
religious groups and mission boards.
Congress may, by law, increase
Filipino requirements for ALL
educational institutions
Congress may, by law, reserve to
Filipino citizens or to Domestic
Corporations (60% Filipino owned or
higher) certain investment areas.
=====================================
C. EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT AND
UTILIZATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES
====================================
C. EXPLORATION, DEVELOPMENT AND UTILIZATION
OF NATURAL RESOURCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Shall be under the full control and supervision of

the State
MEANS:
a. The state may DIRECTLY UNDERTAKE such
activities
b. The state may enter into CO-PRODUCTION,
JOINT VENTURE OR PRODUCTION-SHARING
arrangements with Filipino citizen or
Corporation or association at least 60% of
whose capital is owned by such citizens
LIMITATIONS:
a. Period: It should not exceed 25 years,
renewable for not more than 25 years
b. Under terms and conditions as may be
provided by law.
In case of water rights, water supply, fisheries,
industrial uses other than the development of
water power
The beneficial use may be the measure and limit of
the grant.
NOTE:
1.
Under the 1987 Constitution, the state must

always be involved in the control and supervision
of the exploration, development and utilization of
2.
inalienable natural resources, even if the person

engaged is Filipino. But, this rule is not retroactive.
EO 211 of President Aquino authorized the
Secretary of Natural Resources to authorize such
EDU agreements entered into under the 1987
constitution.
Small-scale Utilization of Natural Resources

1.
2.
Congress may, by law, authorize small-scale

utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizens
Congress may also authorize cooperative fish
farming with priority given to subsistence
fishermen and fish workers in the rivers, lakes,
bays and lagoons.
Large-scale
Exploration, Development,
and
Utilization of Minerals, Petroleum, and Other
Mineral Oils
1.
The President may enter into agreements with

foreign owned corporations involving TECHNICAL
or FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE for large-scale
exploration etc. of minerals, petroleum, and other
mineral oils. These agreements should be in
accordance with the general terms and conditions
provided by law.
2. They should be based on the real contributions to
economic growth and general welfare of the
country.
3. In the agreements, the State should promote the
development and use of LOCAL scientific and
technical resources.
4. The President should notify Congress of every
contract under this provision within 30 days from
its execution.
5. Management and service contracts are not
allowed under this rule.
NOTE:
1. Under the 1987 Constitution, the Philippine
Government may still enter into service
contracts; but only for financial and technical
agreements with respect to large scale
development of minerals, petroleum, and
other mineral resources
2. Management powers may be given to a
completely foreign corporation with whom
the State enters a service contract. But, such
power will
Page 188 of 214
Protection of Marine Wealth

1. The State shall protect its marine wealth in its
archipelagic waters, territorial sea & EEZ
2. The State shall reserve its use and enjoyment
exclusively to Filipino citizens.
3. A license agreement is defined as "a privilege
granted by the State to a person to utilize forest
resources within any forest land with the right of
possession and occupation thereof to the exclusion
of others, except the government, but with the
corresponding obligation to develop, protect and
rehabilitate the same in accordance with the terms
and conditions set forth in said agreement."
4. Private rights must yield when they come in
conflict with this public policy and common
interest. They must give way to the police or
regulatory power of the State, in this case through
the DENR, to ensure that the terms and conditions
of existing laws, rules and regulations, and the
IFMA itself are strictly and faithfully complied with.
Republic v. Pagadian City Timber [G.R. No.
159308, September 16, 2008].
=====================================
D.
FRANCHISES,
AUTHORITY
AND
CERTIFICATES FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES
====================================
D. FRANCHISES, AUTHORITY AND CERTIFICATES FOR
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Power To Grant:
1. Congress may directly grant a legislative franchise
2. Power to grant franchises may be delegated to
appropriate regulatory agencies and/ or Local
Government Units
PUBLIC UTILITY - The undertaking must involve dealing
directly with the public.
Primary Franchise
Invests a body of men
with corporate
existence
Secondary Franchise
The privilege to operate as a
public utility after the
corporation has already come
into being
NOTE: The Constitution does not prohibit the mere

formation of a public utility corporation without the
required formation of Filipino capital. What it does
prohibit is the granting of a franchise or other form of
authorization for the operation of a public utility to a
corporation already in existence but without the

requisite proportion of Filipino capital.
Operation
of a Public Utility
May exist
independently and
separately from the
ownership of the
facilities
One can own said
facilities without
operating them as a
public utility, or
conversely, one may
operate a public utility
without owning the
facilities used to serve
the public.
Ownership
of Public Utility
Relation in law by virtue
of which a thing
pertaining to one person
is completely subjected
to his will in everything
not prohibited by law or
the concurrence with
the rights of another
The exercise of the rights
encompassed in
ownership is limited by
law so that a property
cannot be operated and
used to serve the public
as a public utility unless
the operator has a
franchise.
NOTE: A Build-Operate-Transfer grantee is NOT a

PUBLIC UTILITY. The grantee merely constructs the
utility, and it leases the same to the government. It is
the government which operates the public utility
(operation separate from ownership).
To Whom Granted:
1. Filipino citizens or
2. Corporations or associations incorporated in the
Philippines and at least 60% of the capital is
owned by Filipino citizens.
NOTE: A foreigner/ foreign company may own assets of
a public utility corporation. What is not allowed is the
grant of the franchise to non-citizens of the Philippines.
Terms and Conditions:

1. Duration: Not more than 50 years
2. Franchise is NOT exclusive in character
3. Franchise is granted under the condition that it is
subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by
Congress when the common good so requires.
Participation of Foreign Investors:
1. Shall be limited to their proportionate share in its
capital.
2. Foreigners cannot be appointed as the executive
and managing officers because
Page 189 of 214
3.
These positions are reserved for Filipino citizens.
Administrative agencies may be empowered by the

Legislature by means of a law to grant franchises or
similar authorizations. In this case, the Court ruled that
the Toll Regulatory Board (TRB) is empowered to grant
a franchise for toll road projects. Presidential Decree
No. 1112 provided further that the TRB has the power
to amend or modify a Toll Operation Certificate that it
issued when public interest so requires. Accordingly,
there is nothing infirm, much less questionable, about
the provision in the MNTC (Manila North Tollways
Corp.) Supplemental Toll Operation Agreement
allowing the substitution of MNTC in case it defaults in
its loans.
While the TRB is vested by law with the power to
extend the administrative franchise or authority that it
granted, it cannot do so for an accumulated period
exceeding 50 years. Otherwise, it would violate the
proscription under Article XII, Section 11 of the 1987
Constitution, which provides that no public utility
franchise shall be for a longer period than 50 years.
Francisco v. TRB [633 SCRA 470].
While the Republic of the Philippines appointed

petitioner as the exclusive party to conduct petroleum
operations in the Camago-Malampayo area under the
States full control and supervision, it does not follow
that petitioner has become the States agent within
the meaning of the law. An agents ultimate
undertaking is to execute juridical acts that would
create, modify or extinguish relations between his
principal and third persons. It is this power to affect
the principals contractual relations with third persons
that differentiates the agent from a service contractor.
Shell Philippines Exploration B. V. v. Efren Jalos,
et al., [G.R. No. 179918, September 8, 2010].
PAGCOR is NO LONGER EXEMPT from corporate
income tax. Under Section 11, Article XII of the
Constitution, PAGCOR's franchise is subject to
amendment, alteration or repeal by Congress. A
franchise partakes the nature of a grant, which is
beyond the purview of the non-impairment clause of
the Constitution. Also, Article XII, Section 11, of the
1987 Constitution, is explicit that no franchise for the
operation of a public utility shall be granted except
under the condition that such privilege shall be subject
to amendment, alteration or repeal by Congress as and
when the common good so requires. PAGCOR v. BIR,
[G.R. No. 172087, March 15, 2011].
Franchises can be granted to companies whose capital

is at least 60% Filipino-owned. However, capital here
should be interpreted to include only voting shares.
Hence, in the computation for capital, only common
stock will be considered and not preferred shares.
Wilson Gamboa, et.al. v. Finance Secretary, G.R. No.
176579, June 28, 2011.
Police Power and Expropriation over Public Utilities

1. Police Power - When public interest requires, under
reasonable terms, the State may temporarily take over
the operation of any privately owned public utility or
those with public interest.
NOTE:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The nature and extent of the emergency is

the measure of the duration and the terms of
the takeover
.Merely a practice of police power; just
compensation is not required.
This power is activated only when Congress
declares a state of national emergency.
'Businesses affected with public interest'
includes businesses which are quite similar
public utilities, such as those having massbased consumers.
2. Expropriation - The State may, upon payment of just

compensation, transfer to public ownership utilities
and private enterprises to be operated by the
government, in the interest of national welfare or
defense.
=====================================
E. Acquisition, Ownership and Transfer of
Public and Private Lands
====================================
E. ACQUISITION, OWNERSHIP AND TRANSFER OF
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LANDS
Lands of the public domain are classified into:
Code: MAN-F
1. Agricultural
2. Forest or timber
3. Mineral lands
4. National Parks
Page 190 of 214
Reclassification:
1. PUBLIC (MINERAL AND AGRICULTURAL) lands Exclusive prerogative of the EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT. But this is only a delegated power.
2. FOREST AND NATIONAL PARKS - CONGRESS has
the sole power to reclassify.
NOTE:
1. Classification is descriptive of the legal nature of the
land and NOT what it looks like. Thus, the fact that
forest land is denuded does not mean it is no longer
forest land.
2. Only the President, upon recommendation of the
DENR secretary, may now classify lands of public
domain. This prerogative has been delegated to it by
Congress under CA 141.Director of lands v. Court of
Appeals, [129 SCRA 689, June 22, 1984]
3. Classification should be categorical; a land cannot
have a mixed classification. For example: an owner of
an agricultural land in which minerals are discovered
has no right to utilize such minerals. The state may
discontinue his/her ownership after just compensation
in order to extract such minerals. Republic v Court of
Appeals,[ 160 SCRA 228, 1988]
public lands.
Means by which Land of Public Dominion Becomes
Private Land:
1. Acquired from government by purchase or grant
2. Uninterrupted possession by the occupant and his
predecessors-in-interest since time immemorial
3. Open, exclusive, and undisputed possession of
ALIENABLE (agricultural) public land for a period of
30 years.
1. Upon completion of the requisite period, the
land becomes private property ipso jure
without need of any judicial or other sanction.
2. Possession since time immemorial leads to
the presumption that the land was never part
of public domain.
3. In computing 30 years, start from when land
was converted to alienable land, not when it
was still forest land
4. Presumption is always that land belongs to
the State.
. Reclassification from forest reserves into non-forest

reserves now exclusively a DENR prerogative; no need to
wait for Congressional concurrence Apex Mining v.
Southeast Mindanao Gold, [G.R. No. 152613 & No.

152628, November 20, 2009].
Limitations Regarding Alienable Lands of Public

Dominion:
1.
2.
3.
PRIVATE
CORPORATIONS
They can only hold
alienable lands of the
public domain BY
LEASE.
Period: Cannot
exceed 25 years,
renewable for not
more than 25 years
Area: Lease cannot
exceed 1,000
hectares.
FILIPINO CITIZENS
1.
2.
Can lease up to 500

hectares
Can ACQUIRE not more
than 12 hectares by
purchase, homestead or
grant
NOTE: A corporation sole

is treated like other
private corporations for
the purpose of acquiring
A forested area classified as forest land of the

public domain does not lose such classification
simply because loggers or settlers have stripped it
of its forest cover. "Forest lands" do not have to be
on mountains or in out of the way places. The
classification is merely descriptive of its legal
nature or status and does not have to be
descriptive of what the land actually looks like.
Republic v. Naguiat [G.R. No. 134209, January 24,
2006].
NHA is an end-user agency authorized by law to
administer and dispose of reclaimed lands. The
moment titles over reclaimed lands based on the
special patents are transferred to the NHA by the
Register of Deeds, they are automatically
converted to patrimonial properties of the State
which can be sold to Filipino citizens and private
corporations, 60% of which are owned by
Filipinos. Chavez v. NHA [G.R. No. 164527, August
15, 2007].
Reclaimed foreshore and submerged lands are
lands of public domain, and can only be alienated
as private property if it is classified by competent
authority as alienable. Republic v Enciso, [G.R. No.
160145, November 11, 2005].
Perfected mining claims under the Old Mining Law
do not entitle claimant to private ownership.
Director of Lands v. Kalahi Investments Inc., [G.R.
48066, January 31, 1989].
Protection of Indigenous Cultural Communities:
Page 191 of 214
1.
2.
The State protects the rights of indigenous cultural

communities to their ancestral land subject to:
1. Constitutional provisions
2. Subject to national development policies and
programs
In determining ownership and extent of ancestral
domain, Congress may use customary laws on
property rights and relations.
ANCESTRAL DOMAIN - It refers to lands which are

considered as pertaining to a cultural region. This
includes lands not yet occupied, such as deep forests.
=======================================
F. Practice of Profession
G.
Organization
and
Regulation
of
Corporations, Private and Public
H. Monopolies, Restraint of Trade and Unfair
Competition
=======================================
F.
PRACTICE OF PROFESSION
The practice of all profession in the Philippines shall

be limited to Filipino citizens save in cases
prescribed by law.
G. ORGANIZATION AND REGULATION
CORPORATIONS, PRIVATE AND PUBLIC
1.
2.
2.
3.
PRIVATE CORPORATIONS - Congress can only

provide for the formation of private corporations
through a GENERAL corporation law.
GOCCs - May be created through SPECIAL
CHARTERS or a GENERAL corporation law.
The Constitution does NOT prohibit the existence

of monopolies.
The State may either regulate or prohibit
monopolies, when public interest so requires.
What are prohibited are combinations in restraint
of trade and unfair competition
Restrictions upon trade may be upheld when not
contrary to public welfare and not greater than is
necessary to afford a fair and reasonable
protection to the party in whose favor it is
imposed
Even contracts which prohibit an employee from
engaging in business in competition with the

XIII. NATIONAL ECONOMY AND
PATRIMONY
=======================================
XIV. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN

RIGHTS
==============================
A. Concept of Social Justice
B. Commission on Human Right
=======================================
A. CONCEPT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE
OF
H. MONOPOLIES, RESTRAINT OF TRADE AND

UNFAIR COMPETITION
1.
employer are not necessarily void for being in

restraint of trade. In sum, contracts requiring
exclusivity are not per se void. Each contract must
be viewed vis--vis all the circumstances
surrounding such agreement in deciding whether a
restrictive practice should be prohibited as
imposing
an
unreasonable
restraint
on
competition. Avon v. Luna [G.R. No. 153674,
December 20, 2006]
SOCIAL JUSTICE - Embodiment of the principle that

those who have less in life should have more in law.
Social Justice is neither communism nor despotism, nor
atomism, nor anarchy, but the humanization of laws
and the equalization of social and economic forces by
the State so that justice in its rational and objectively
secular conception may at least be approximated.
Calalang v. Williams [No. 47800, December 2, 1940].
These provisions have to be implemented by Congress.
NOTE: The 1987 Constitution advances beyond what
was in previous Constitutions in that it seeks not only
economic social justice but also political social justice.
Principal Activities
1. Creation of more economic opportunities and
more wealth
2. Closer regulation of the acquisition,
ownership, use and disposition of property in
order to achieve a more equitable distribution
of wealth and political power
3. Creation of economic opportunities based on
freedom of initiative and self-reliance.
Page 192 of 214
LABOR - Section 3 of Article XIII elaborates on the

provision in Article II by specifying who are protected
by the Constitution, what rights are guaranteed, and
what positive measures the state should take in order
to enhance the welfare of labor.
NOTE:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The right to organize is given to all kinds of

workers BOTH in the PRIVATE and PUBLIC
sectors.
The workers have a right to hold peaceful
concerted activities EXCEPT the right to strike,
which is subject to limitation by law. e.g.
Policemen, firemen, and public school
teachers are prohibited from striking.
The workers have the right to participate on
matters affecting their rights and benefits, as
may be provided by law.
Participation can be through:
a. Collective bargaining agreements
b. Grievance machineries
c. Voluntary modes of settling disputes
d. Conciliation proceedings mediated by the
government
NAMA-MCCH-NFL had not registered as a labor

organization. Not being a legitimate labor organization,
NAMA-MCCH-NFL is not entitled to those rights granted
to a legitimate labor organization under Art. 242,
specifically: 1) To act as the representative of its
members for the purpose of collective bargaining ; 2)
To be certified as the exclusive representative of all the
employees in an appropriate collective bargaining unit
for purposes of collective bargaining. Visayas
Community Medical Center v. Erma Yballe, et al. [G.R.
No. 196156].
AGRARIAN REFORM - Must aim at:
1. Efficient production
2. Equitable distribution of land which
recognizes the right of farmers and regular
farm workers who are landless to own the
land they till
3. A just share of other or seasonal farm workers
in the fruits of the land
NOTE:
The CARL is an exercise of police power and power of
eminent domain. To the extent that the CARL
prescribes retention limits for landowners, there is an
exercise of POLICE POWER. Where it becomes
necessary to deprive owners of their land in excess of
the maximum allowed, there is compensable taking and
therefore the exercise of EMINENT DOMAIN. Just

compensation involves not just value of loss to the
owner, but prompt payment. Ownership is transferred
upon full payment, and such payment need not be in
cash.
Scope of Agrarian Reform - Extends not only to private
agricultural lands, but also to other natural resources,
even including the use and enjoyment of communal
marine and fishing resources and offshore fishing
grounds.
Agricultural land held by the Church in trust may be
subject to land reform. The land reform law does not
make a distinction between the various forms of
ownership, whether in trust or absolute title.
Urban or rural poor dwellers cannot be evicted except
according to law.
Who Can Be Evicted:
Code: DIC
1. Persons occupying dangerous areas
2. When government infrastructure projects with
allocated funding are going to be implemented
3. When there is court order for eviction and
demolition
NHA has authority to order relocation of persons and
demolition of their property as part of its mandate to
improve blighted areas.
Lands acquired by the National Housing Authority for
resettlement purposes or housing development are
exempt from the coverage of agrarian reform laws.
Such acquisition converts the land by operation of law
from agricultural to residential. The National Housing
Authority
is
not bound to
pay
disturbance
compensation to any tenant in possession of the
purchased
land. National
Housing
Authority
v. Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board,
et al., [G.R. No. 175200, May 4, 2010].
B. COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

Composition: (5)
1. Chairman and
2. 4 members
Qualifications:
1. NATURAL-BORN citizens of the Philippines
2. MAJORITY of the Commission must be
members of the Philippine BAR
Page 193 of 214
NOTE:
Term of office, other qualifications and disabilities shall
be provided by law.
The appointment of the CHR members is NOT subject
to CA confirmation; and The CHR is not of the same
level as the COMELEC, CSC, or COA.
Powers:
Code: IAC-PE2RM-IRAO
1. INVESTIGATE all forms of human rights violations
involving civil or political rights, and RECOMMEND
NOTE:
1. Violations may be committed by public
officers or by civilians or rebels.
2. CHR cannot investigate violations of social
rights.
3. CHR has NO adjudicatory powers over cases
involving human rights violations.
4. They cannot investigate cases where no rights
are violated.
e.g. There is no right to occupy government
land (squat). Therefore, eviction therefrom is
NOT a human rights violation.
2. ADOPT operational guidelines and rules of
procedure.
3. CITE FOR CONTEMPT for violations of its rules, in
accordance with the Rules of Court.
4. PROVIDE APPROPRIATE LEGAL MEASURES for the
protection of the human rights of all persons, within
the Philippines, as well as Filipinos residing abroad, and
provide for preventive measures and legal aid services
to the underprivileged whose human rights have been
violated or need protection.
NOTE:
1. The CHR CAN INITIATE COURT PROCEEDINGS
on behalf of victims of human rights
violations.
2. The
CHR
CAN
RECOMMEND
THE
PROSECUTION of human rights violators, but
it cannot itself prosecute these cases.
3. The CHR CANNOT ISSUE RESTRAINING
ORDERS OR INJUNCTIONS against alleged
human rights violators. These must be
obtained from the regular courts.
5. EXERCISE VISITORIAL POWERS over jails, prisons and
other detention facilities.
6. ESTABLISH CONTINUING PROGRAMS FOR RESEARCH,
education and information in order to enhance respect
for the primacy of human rights.
7. RECOMMEND TO CONGRESS EFFECTIVE MEASURES

to promote human rights and to provide compensation
to victims of human rights violations or their families.
8. MONITOR COMPLIANCE BY THE GOVERNMENT with
international treaty obligations on human rights.
9. GRANT IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION to any
person whose testimony or whose possession of
documents or other evidence is necessary or
convenient to determine the truth in any CHR
investigation.
10. REQUEST ASSISTANCE from any department,
bureau, office, or agency in the performance of its
functions.
11. APPOINT ITS OFFICERS and employers in
accordance with law.
12. Perform such OTHER FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES as
may be provided for by law.
The CHR does not enjoy fiscal autonomy as the
Constitution grants fiscal autonomy only to the
Constitutional Commissions under Art. IX, the Judiciary,
and the Ombudsman. [CHREA v CHR, G.R. No. 1, July
21, 2006]
A retirement plan imposing automatic retirement after
35 years of service before the statutory retirement age
of 65 is valid if voluntarily entered into by the
employee. Jaculbe v. Silliman University [G.R. No.
156934, March 16, 2007].
The due process guarantee cannot be invoked when no
vested right has been acquired. Espinocilla et al. v.
Bagong Homeowners [G.R. No. 151019, August 9,
2007].
Note: Jurisdiction is limited to human rights, not
economic rights, although, this can be expanded by
law.

N. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
======================================
XV. EDUCATION, SCIENCE,

TECHNOLOGY, ARTS, CULTURE
AND SPORTS
==============================
A. ACADEMIC FREEDOM
Page 194 of 214
=======================================
A. ACADEMIC FREEDOM
Power To Dismiss Students
Schools have the power to dismiss students, after due
process, for disciplinary reasons.
Acts committed outside the school may also be a
ground for disciplinary action if:
1. It involves violations of school policies
connected to school-sponsored activities.
2. The misconduct affects the students status,
or the good name or reputation of the school.
NOTE: The right to education in particular fields may be
regulated by the State in the exercise of its police
power. For example, the State may limit the right to
enter medical school by requiring the applicants to take
the NMAT.
Academic Freedom
Schools have the freedom to determine:
1. Who may teach
2. What may be taught
3. How it shall be taught
4. Who may be admitted to study
Faculty Members Have:
1. Full freedom in research and in the
publication of the results, subject to the
adequate performance of their other
academic duties.
2. Freedom in the classroom in discussing their
subjects, but they should be careful not to
introduce into their teaching controversial
matter which has no relation to their subjects.
3. Freedom from institutional censorship or
discipline, when faculty members speak or
write in their capacity as citizens.
Students - They have the right to enjoy in school the
guarantees of the Bill of Rights.
Limitations:
1. Dominant police power of the State
2. Social interest of the community
Budgetary Priority - Education must be assigned the
highest budgetary priority.
NOTE: This command is NOT absolute. Congress is
free to determine what should be given budgetary
priority in order to enable it to respond to the
imperatives of national interest and for the

attainment of other state policies or objectives.
Integrated System of Education
1. Free movement from one school to
another; or public to private and back. So
this means there is the same program
2. Free public education in elementary and
HS levels
a. Elementary
education
is
compulsory
b. But cannot be subject to penal
sanction; it is a moral, not legal
compulsion
Free education:
1. Elementary
2. High School
All educational institutions must include study of
Constitution in its curriculum
FILIPINIZATION - Educational schools must be owned
solely by citizens of Philippines or corporations with at
least 60% Filipino capital, subject to change by
Congress.
EXCEPTION: those established by religious groups and
mission boards
1. Control and administration vested in
Philippine citizens
NOTE: This covers line positions
e.g. the President and the Dean.
However, the faculty members may
be foreigners
2. No school established exclusively for
aliens and aliens cannot be more than
1/3 of enrolment in any school.
EXCEPTIONS: For schools for foreign
diplomats and their dependents, and
other foreign temporary residents.
NOTE: Religion may be taught in public schools subject
to the following requisites:
1. Express written option by parents and
guardians;
2. Taught within regular class hours;
3. Instructors are designated and approved by
the proper religious authorities; and
4. WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COST TO THE
GOVERNMENT.
Page 195 of 214

XV. EDUCATION, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY,
CULTURE, ARTS, AND SPORTS
=======================================
XVI. PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

A. Concepts
2. Jus cogens
B. International and national law
C. Sources
D. Subjects
1. States
2. International organizations
3. Individuals
E. Diplomatic and consular law
F. Treaties
G. Nationality and statelessness
H. Treatment of aliens
1. Extradition
a. Fundamental principles
b. Procedure
c. Distinguished from
deportation
1. Universal Declaration of Human
Rights
2. International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights
3.
International
Covenant
on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
J. International Humanitarian Law and
neutrality
1. Categories of armed conflicts
a. International armed conflicts
b. Internal or non-international
armed conflict
c. War of national liberation

2. Core international obligations of
states in International Humanitarian
Law
3.
Principles
of
International
Humanitarian Law
a. Treatment of civilians
b. Prisoners of war
K. Law of the sea
1. Baselines
2. Archipelagic states
a.
Straight
archipelagic
baselines
b. Archipelagic waters
c. Archipelagic sea lanes
passage
3. Internal waters
4. Territorial sea
5. Exclusive economic zone
6. Continental shelf
a. Extended continental shelf
7. International Tribunal for the Law of
the Sea
L. International environment law
1. Principle 21 of the Stockholm
Declaration
=====================================

A. Concepts
2. Jus cogens
a. Elements of Jus Cogens
b. Jus Dispositivum v Jus Cogens
=====================================
A. CONCEPTS
1. OBLIGATION ERGA OMNES
OBLIGATION ERGA OMNES: The term erga omnes (in
relation to everyone) in international law has been
used as a legal term describing obligations owed by
Page 196 of 214
States towards the community of states as a whole.

Romulo v Vinuya [G.R. 162230, April 29, 2010]
Such obligations derive, for example, in contemporary
international law, from the outlawing of acts of
aggression, and of genocide, as also from the principles
and rules concerning the basic rights of the human
person, including protection from slavery and racial
discrimination. Some of the corresponding rights of
protection have entered into the body of general
international law others are conferred by
international instruments of a universal or quasiuniversal character. Romulo v Vinuya [G.R. 162230,
April 29, 2010]
2.
JUS COGENS
JUS COGENS: In international law, the term "jus

cogens" (literally, "compelling law") refers to norms
that command peremptory authority, superseding
conflicting treaties and custom. Jus cogens norms are
considered peremptory in the sense that they are
mandatory, do not admit derogation, and can be
modified only by general international norms of
equivalent authority. Romulo v Vinuya [G.R. 162230,
April 29, 2010]
Though there was a consensus that certain
international norms had attained the status of jus
cogens, the ILC was unable to reach a consensus on the
proper criteria for identifying peremptory norms.
Romulo v Vinuya [G.R. 162230, April 29, 2010]
a.
1.
2.
3.
4.
Elements Of Jus Cogens
A norm accepted and RECOGNIZED by

The INTERNATIONAL community of states as a
whole
NO derogation is permitted
Which can only be modified by a subsequent
norm having the SAME CHARACTER
If a treaty, at the time of its conclusion, conflicts with

jus cogens, it is void.
The Philippines is NOT under a non derogable
obligation to prosecute international crimes committed
against its citizens. Romulo v Vinuya [G.R. 162230,
April 29, 2010]
b.
Jus Dispositivum v Jus Cogens
JUS DISPOSITIVUM
Refer to norms of ordinary
Customary International Law
which are derived from the
consent of states
3.
JUS COGENS
Refers to duties which
every state owes to the
international
community as a whole
as a norm from which
no derogation is
permitted and can be
modified only by a
subsequent norm of
general Internal law
having the same
character
EX AEQUO ET BONO
EX AEQUO ET BONO: It is to rule in justice and fairness;

equity overrides all other rules of law. The ICJ has no
power to decide a case ex aequo et bono, unless all
parties agree thereto.
=====================================

B. International and National Law
1. Division of International Law
2. Monism v Dualism
3. Incorporation v Transformation
a. Types of Transformation
i. Hard Transformation Theory
ii. Soft Transformation Theory
4. Conflict Between International And
a. International Rule
b. International Rule
c. Fitzmaurice Compromise
5. Municipal Law
=====================================
B. INTERNATIONALL LAW
INTERNATIONAL LAW - Set of rules and principles that
govern the relationships between States and other
international actors which under Modern International
Law include International Organizations, Transnational
Corporations and Individuals.
1.
DIVISIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
1.LAWS OF PEACE - governs the normal relations of

States
2.LAWS OF WAR - rules during periods of hostility
3.LAWS OF NEUTRALITY - rules governing States not
involved in the hostilities
Page 197 of 214
2.
MONISM V DUALISM
Only legislation can transform International Law into

domestic law. Courts may apply International Law only
when authorized by legislation
ii. Soft Transformation Theory
MONISM
Monists have a unitary
concept of law and see all
laws (both international
and municipal law) as an
integral part of the SAME
SYSTEM. If conflict exists
between international law
and municipal law,
international law must
prevail.
DUALISM
Domestic and
international law are
INDEPENDENT of each
other, as they regulate
different subject
matters. International
law regulates the
relations of sovereign
states, while municipal
law regulates the
internal affairs of a
state.
Under DUALISM, no conflict can ever arise between

international and municipal law, because the two systems
are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. If International law is applied
within a state, it is only because it has been expressly
incorporated by municipal law. The PHILIPPINES is a
DUALIST state.
3.
INCORPORATION V TRANSFORMATION
DOCTRINE OF
INCORPORATION
Rules of international law
form part of the law of the
land and no further
legislative action is needed
to make such rules
applicable in the domestic
sphere.
Incorporation is
recognized by the
Constitution (Art. 2, Sec.2,
The Philippines adopts the
generally accepted
principles of international
law as part of the law of
the land)
a.
DOCTRINE OF
TRANSFORMATION
The generally accepted
rules of international law
are not per se binding
upon the State but must
first be embodied in
legislation enacted by the
lawmaking body and so
transformed into
municipal law.Only when
so transformed will they
become binding upon the
State as part of its
municipal law.
Types Of Transformation Theories

i.
Hard Transformation Theory
Either a judicial or legislative act of a state can

transform International Law into domestic law.
4. CONFLICT BETWEEN
MUNICIPAL LAW
INTERNATIONAL
AND
a. International Rule
Before an international tribunal, a state may not plead
its own law as an excuse for failure to comply with
international law. The state must modify its laws to
ensure fulfillment of its obligations under the treaty,
unless the constitutional violation is manifest and
concerns a rule of internal law of fundamental
importance.
b. Municipal Rule
When the conflict comes before a domestic court,
domestic courts are bound to apply the domestic law.
Should a conflict arise between an international
agreement and the Constitution, the treaty would not
be valid and operative as domestic law. It does not,
however, lose its character as international law.
c.
Fitzmaurice Compromise
Assumes that since the two systems, international and

national law, do not operate in common field, they can
never come into conflict. Each one of them is supreme
in its own domain, thereby any apparent conflict in the
domestic field is automatically settled by the domestic
conflict rules of the forum and any conflict in the
international field would be resolved by International
Law.
=====================================

C. Sources
1. Primary Sources
a. Treaty
b. Customs
i. Elements of Custom
1. State Practice
a. Duration
Page 198 of 214
b. Uniformity
c. Generality
ii. Instant Custom
2. Secondary Sources
a. Judicial Decisions
b. Teaching of Highly Qualified
Publicist
i.Requisites for a Highly
Qualified Publicist
=====================================
C. SOURCES
1.
PRIMARY SOURCES
a.
Treaty
It is an International Agreement in written form

concluded between States that may be embodied in
one or more instrument, and is governed by
International Law. (Art. 2, Vienna Convention on the
Law of Treaties).
b. Custom
General and consistent practice of states followed by
them from a sense of legal obligation.
i.
Elements of Custom
1. STATE PRACTICE - A consistent and uniform external

conduct of States. Generally, both what states SAY and
what they DO are considered state practice.
a.
b.
c.
DURATION
UNIFORMITY
GENERALITY
2. OPINIO JURIS - State practice must be accompanied

with the conviction that the State is LEGALLY
OBLIGATED to do so by international law, and not
through mere courtesy or comity, or because of
humanitarian considerations.
i.
Instant Custom
Customary law may emerge even within a relatively

short period of time, if within that period, State
Practice has been uniform and extensive. It comes
about as a spontaneous activity of a great number of
states supporting a specific line of action.
c.
Generally Accepted Principles Of

International Law
Principles based on natural justice common to most

national systems of law.
e.g. good faith, estoppel, exhaustion of local remedies,
unjust enrichment
While the Philippines is not yet formally bound by the
terms of the Convention on enforced disappearance
and has not formally declared enforced disappearance
as a specific crime, the above recital shows that
enforced disappearance as a State practice has been
repudiated by the international community, so that the
ban on it is now a generally accepted principle of
international law, which we should consider a part of
the law of the land, and which we should act upon to
the extent already allowed under our laws and the
international conventions that bind us. Razon v. Tagitis
[G.R. No. 182498, December 3, 2009]
The Yogyakarta Principles (the Application of
International Human Rights Law In Relation to Sexual
Orientation and Gender Identity) has not yet evinced an
obligatory norm in the Philippines. There are
declarations and obligations outlined in said Principles
which are not reflective of the current state of
international law, and do not find basis in any of the
sources of international law enumerated under Article
38(1) of the Statute of the International Court of
Justice. Petitioner has not undertaken any objective
and rigorous analysis of these alleged principles of
international law to ascertain their true status. Ang
Ladlad LGBT Party v. COMELEC [G.R. No. 190582,
April 8, 2010].
SECONDARY SOURCES
1. JUDICIAL DECISIONS
2. TEACHINGS OF MOST HIGHLY QUALIFIED PUBLICISTS
2.
SECONDARY SOURCES
a.
Judicial Decisions
A subsidiary means for the determination of rules of

law that is acceptable so long as they correctly
interpret and apply international law.
Decisions of national courts,
international law, are acceptable.
when
applying
Page 199 of 214
b. Teachings Of The Most Highly

Qualified Publicis
the right to have their claims respected internationally.

States have ABSOLUTE personality.
The word 'publicist' means 'learned writer.' Learned

writings, like judicial decisions, can be evidence of
customary law, and can also play a subsidiary role in
developing new rules of law.
Statehood is objective, not subjective. Recognition does

not bestow statehood. A state is a state under
international law if it meets certain basic criteria.
i.
Requisites For A
Qualified Publicist
Highly
1. Fair and impartial representation of law.

2. Acknowledged authority in the field.
=====================================

D. Subjects: Subject v Object
1. States
a. Elements of a State
b. Sovereignty v Independence
c. The Concept of Association of States
2. International Organizations
a. National Societies
3. Individuals
4. Corporations
4. Incomplete Subjects
a. Protectorates
b. Federal State
c. Mandated and Trust Territories
=====================================
D. SUBJECTS: SUBJECT v OBJECT
SUBJECT
Has rights and duties
under international law
Directly governed by the

It can be a proper party
in transactions involving
the application of
international law among
members of the
international community
1.
OBJECT
Does not have rights and
duties but are merely the
object of subjects rights
and duties
Indirectly governed by the
Its rights are received and
its obligations imposed ,
indirectly through the
instrumentality of an
international agency
STATE
States, as a subject of international law, have

international personality which means that they have
a.
Elements Of A State
Code: GSPT
1. GOVERNMENT
2. SOVEREIGNTY or the capacity to enter into relations
with other States
3. POPULATION
4. TERRITORY
b. Sovereignty v Independence
Sovereignty and Independence are different.
Sovereignty refers to to the supreme and
uncontrollable power inherent in the state by which
the state is governed. Independence refers to the
power of a state to manage its EXTERNAL affairs
without direction or interference from another state
c.
The Concept Of Association Of

States
An association is formed when two states of unequal

power voluntarily establish durable links. In the basic
model, one state, the associate, delegates certain
responsibilities to the other, the principal, while
maintaining its international status as a state. However,
this concept is not recognized under the present
Constitution. The Constitution, does not contemplate
any state in this jurisdiction other than the Philippine
State, much less does it provide for a transitory status
that aims to prepare any part of Philippine territory for
independence. The Province of North Cotabato v. GRP
Panel on Ancestral Domains [G.R. No. 183591, October
14, 2008].
2.
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Created by sovereign states and whose functioning is

regulated by international law, not the law of any
given country. They have FUNCTIONAL personality
which is limited to what is necessary to carry out
their functions as found in the instruments of the
organization.
a.
National Societies
Page 200 of 214
National Societies such as the Philippine National Red

Cross act as auxiliaries to the public authorities of
their own countries in the humanitarian field and
provide a range of services including disaster relief and
health and social programmes. National societies were
held to be organizations that are directly regulated by
international humanitarian law, in contrast to other
ordinary private entities, including NGOs. The auxiliary
status of a Red Cross Society means that it is at one and
the same time a private institution and a public service
organization because the very nature of its work
implies cooperation with the authorities, a link with the
State. The PNRC, as a National Society of the
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement,
can neither be classified as an instrumentality of the
State, so as not to lose its character of neutrality as
well as its independence, nor strictly as a private
corporation since it is regulated by international
humanitarian law and is treated as an auxiliary of the
State. Liban v. Gordon [G.R. No. 175352, January
18, 2011].
3.
INDIVIDUALS
Under modern international law, man has LIMITED

personality.
=====================================

E. Diplomatic and Consular Laws and
Immunities
1. Diplomatic and Consular Relations
a. Right of Legation
i. Types
b. Diplomatic And Consular Immunities
c. Diplomatic v Consular Immunities
2. State and Diplomatic Immunity
a. Immunity, In General
b. State Immunity
i. Scope of State Immunity
1. Absolute
2. Qualified
c. Act of State Doctrine
d. Process of Suggestion
e. Immunity Of Foreign Armed Forces
=====================================
E. DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR LAWS AND
IMMUNITIES
1.
4.
DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR RELATIONS
CORPORATIONS
a.
Internationalized Contracts between a foreign

corporation and a state gives the corporation LIMITED
personality by invoking in international law the rights
that may be derived from the contract.
Right Of Legation
The right of a state to maintain diplomatic relations

with other states.
i.
5.
Types
INCOMPLETE SUBJECTS
a.
Protectorates
1. ACTIVE - Right to send diplomatic representatives

2. PASSIVE - Right to receive diplomatic representatives
Dependent states which have control over their

internal affairs but whose external affairs are controlled
by another state.
b. Federal State
Union of previously autonomous entities. The central
organ will have personality in international law, but the
extent of the international personality of the
component entities can be a problem.
c.
b. Diplomatic
Immunities
And
Consular
1.
2.
3.
4.
Personal
Inviolability of Immunity of premises
Right of protection
Immunity from local jurisdiction on the basis of
international custom
5. Exemption from taxes and personal services
6. Inviolability of means of communication
7. Immunity from search of bag
Mandated And Trust Territories
Territories placed by the League of Nations under one

or other of the victorious allies of WWI.
Page 201 of 214
c.
Authorities may
request that the bag be
opened in their
presence by an
AUTHORIZED
representative of the
sending state if they
have SERIOUS REASON
to believe that the bag
contains objects other
than articles,
documents,
correspondence or
articles.
Diplomatic v Consular Immunity
DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY
(Vienna Convention on
Diplomatic Relations)
CONSULAR IMMUNITY
(Vienna Convention on
Consular Relations)
Premises of the mission

- Include the BUILDINGS
or parts of buildings and
the LAND irrespective of
ownership used for the
purpose of the mission
including the RESIDENCE
of the head of mission.
Consular premises Include the BUILDINGS or

parts of buildings and the
LAND irrespective of
ownership used
exclusively for the
purposes of consular post.
The consular premises,

their furnishings, the
property of the consular
post and its means of
transport shall be immune
from any form of
requisition for purposes
of national defense or
public utility. If
expropriation is necessary
for such purposes, all
possible steps shall be
taken to avoid impeding
the performance of
consular functions, and
prompt, adequate and
effective compensation
shall be paid to the
sending State.
The agents of the
receiving state may
NOT ENTER the
premises except with
the CONSENT of the
head of the mission.
The agents of the

receiving state may
NOT ENTER the
premises except with
the CONSENT of the
head of consular post.
The consent may be
ASSUMED in case of
fire or other disaster
requiring prompt
protective action
The diplomatic bag shall

not be opened or
detained.
The consular bag shall

not be opened or
detained.
A diplomatic agent shall

enjoy immunity from
the jurisdiction of the
receiving state except in
case of:
1.
2.
3.
REAL ACTION relating

to private immovable
property
EXCEPTION: He holds
it on behalf of the
sending state for the
purpose of the
mission
Actions for
SUCCESSION
Professional or
commercial activity
A diplomatic agent is
NOT obliged to give
evidence as a WITNESS.
Members of the
consular post shall
enjoy immunity from
the jurisdiction of the
receiving state in
respect of acts
performed in the
EXERCISE OF
CONSULAR FUNCTION
except in case of:
1.
Civil action arising

out of a contract
concluded by a
person who DID NOT
CONTRACT expressly
or impliedly as an
AGENT of the sending
state
2. Civil action by a third
party for damage
arising from an
ACCIDENT in the
receiving state
caused by a VEHICLE,
VESSEL or AIRCRAFT
Members of the
consular post MAY be
called upon to attend
as WITNESSES.
If a consular officer
should decline to do so,
NO COERCIVE
MEASURE or PENALTY
may be applied.
Page 202 of 214
2. STATE AND DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY

d.
a.
Immunity
GENERAL RULE: The jurisdiction of a state within its

territory is complete and absolute
Immunity from jurisdiction is enjoyed by both the head

of state and by the state itself.
e.
EXCEPTIONS: Sovereign immunity and diplomatic

immunity
b.
State Immunity
The state may not be sued without its consent. This is

based on the principle of par in parem non habet
imperium (an equal has no power over an equal).
i.
Process Of Suggestion
A process where the foreign state or the international

organization sued in an American court requests the
Secretary of State to make a determination as to
whether it is entitled to immunity. If the Secretary of
State finds that the defendant is immune from suit, he,
in turn, asks the Attorney General to submit to the
court a "suggestion" that the defendant is entitled to
immunity.
Scope Of State Immunity
1. ABSOLUTE
2. QUALIFIED IMMUNITY/RESTRICTIVE APPLICATION OF
STATE IMMUNITY
State immunity now extends only to acts jure imperii,
when the proceedings arise out of commercial
transactions of the foreign sovereign, its commercial
activities or economic affairs. However, it does not
apply where the contract relates to the exercise of its
sovereign functions. USA v Guinto [G.R. No. 76607
February 26, 1990

c.
Doctrine Of Sovereign Immunity
Act Of State Doctrine
Courts of one country will not sit in judgment on the

acts of the government of another in due deference to
the independence of sovereignty of every sovereign
state. PCGG V Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 124772 August
14, 2007]
The act of state doctrine is one of the methods by
which States prevent their national courts from
deciding disputes which relate to the internal affairs of
another State, the other two being immunity and nonjusticiability. It is an avoidance technique that is directly
related to a States obligation to respect the
independence and equality of other States by not
requiring them to submit to adjudication in a national
court or to settlement of their disputes without their
consent.40 It requires the forum court to exercise
restraint in the adjudication of disputes relating to
legislative or other governmental acts which a foreign
State has performed within its territorial limits. PCGG V
Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 124772 August 14, 2007]
In the Philippines, the practice is for the foreign

government or the international organization to first
secure an executive endorsement of its claim of
sovereign or diplomatic immunity. The DFA has made
the endorsement through the following:
1. A LETTER that the defendant cannot be sued
because it has diplomatic immunity. International
Catholic Migration Commission v. Calleja [, 190 SCRA
130 (1990)].
2.A Manifestation in Court and Memorandum as
amicus curiae. Baer v. Tizon[ 57 SCRA 1 (1974)]
The fact that the Solicitor General has endorsed claim
of States immunity from suit does NOT sufficiently
substitute for the DFA certification. GTZ v. CA[GR No.
152318), April 16, 2009]
The determination by the department is considered a
political question that is conclusive upon Philippine
Courts.
f.
Immunity
Forces
Of
Foreign
Armed
The rule in international law is that foreign armed

forces allowed to enter ones territory are immune
from local jurisdiction, except to the extent agreed
upon. The Status of Forces Agreements involving
foreign military units around the world vary in terms
and conditions, according to the situation of the parties
involved, and reflect their bargaining power. But the
principle remains, i.e., the receiving State can exercise
jurisdiction over the forces of the sending State only to
Page 203 of 214
the extent agreed upon by the parties. Nicolas v.

Romulo [G.R. No. 175888, February 11, 2009].
=====================================

F. Treaty
1. Treaty v Executive Agreement
2.Power To Negotiate And Senat Concurrence
3. Pacta Sunt Servanda
4. Rebus Sic Stantibus
a. Exceptions
b. Exceptions to the Exceptions
5. Procedures in Treaty Making
6. Treaty Reservation
7. Grounds for Invalidity of Treaties
8. Termination of Treaties
9. Clean Slate Rule
a. Exceptions
====================================
F. TREATY
It is an International Agreement in written form
concluded between States that may be embodied in
one or more instrument, and is governed by
International Law. (Art. 2, Vienna Convention on the
Law of Treaties).
1.
TREATY V. EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT
TREATY
SUBJECT MATTER:
CODE: PNP
1. POLITICAL Issues
2. Changes in
NATIONAL Policy
3. International
arrangements of a
PERMANENT
character
Must be ratified by 2/3

of the Senate to become
valid and effective (Art.7,
Sec 21)
EXECUTIVE AGREEMENT
SUBJECT MATTER:
CODE: TITA
1. Arrangements of
TEMPORARY nature
2. IMPLEMENTATION of
treaties and statutes
3. TRANSITORY
effectivity
4. ADJUSTMENT of
details carrying out
established national
policies and traditions
Does not need to be
ratified by the Senate
There are no hard and fast rules on the propriety of

entering, on a given subject, into a treaty or an
executive agreement as an instrument of international
relations. The primary consideration in the choice of
the form of agreement is the parties intent and desire
to craft an international agreement in the form they so
wish to further their respective interests. The matter of
form takes a back seat when it comes to effectiveness
and binding effect of the enforcement of a treaty or an
executive agreement, as the parties in either
international agreement each labor under the pacta
sunt servanda principle. Bayan Muna v. Romulo
[G.R. No. 159618, February 1, 2011].
2.
POWER TO NEGOTIATE
CONCURRENCE
AND
SENATE
In the realm of treaty-making, the President has the

sole authority to negotiate with other states. It follows
that Congress, while possessing vast legislative powers,
may not interfere in the field of treaty negotiations.
While Article VII, Section 21 provides for Senate
concurrence, such pertains only to the validity of the
treaty under consideration, not to the conduct of
negotiations attendant to its conclusion. Moreover, it is
not even Congress as a whole that has been given the
authority to concur as a means of checking the treatymaking power of the President, but only the Senate.
AKBAYAN v. AQUINO [G.R. No. 170516, July 16, 2008]
The signing of a treaty is composed of two separate and
distinct processes to which each requires the exclusive
prerogative and act of the executive and legislative.
One is the signing of the treaty which is handled by the
executive DEPARTMENT during the NEGOTIATION
stage. The other is the RATIFICATION stage where the
PRESIDENT ratifies a treaty but with the concurrence of
2/3 of the Senate.
It is within the power of the President to refuse to
submit a treaty to the Senate or, having refused its
consent for ratification, refuse to ratify it. The Senates
role is LIMITED only to giving or withholding its
concurrence to the ratification. The Senate cannot, by
mandamus, compel the executive to transmit a treaty
for concurrence. Pimentel v. Executive Secretary [G.R.
No. 158088, July 6, 2005]
3.
PACTA SUNT SERVANDA
All parties to a Treaty must comply with their treaty

obligation in good faith.
Page 204 of 214
A state CAN AVOID PERFORMANCE if the treaty collides

with its Constitution, but it CANNOT ESCAPE LIABILITY
that it may incur as a result of such non-performance.
From the perspective of public international law, a
treaty is favored over municipal law pursuant to the
principle of pacta sunt servanda. A party to a treaty is
not allowed to invoke the provisions of its internal law
as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.
Nevertheless, as far as the Court is concerned, a treaty
is always subject to qualification or amendment by a
subsequent law, or that it is subject to the police power
of the State. Lim v. Executive Secretary [G.R. No.
151445, April 11, 2002].
4.
REBUS SIC STANTIBUS
The general rule is that a FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE of

circumstances is NOT A GROUND for a treaty to be
suspended or terminated.
a.
Exceptions
1. The circumstance is the ESSENTIAL BASIS of consent.

2. The obligation is TRANSFORMED RADICALLY that it
becomes burdensome or unreasonable.
b. Exceptions To The Exceptions

1. If the treaty establishes a BOUNDARY
2. If the 'fundamental change' is the result of a BREACH
by the party invoking it of an obligation under the
treaty or of any other obligation owed to any other
party to the treaty.
7.
GROUNDS FOR INVALIDITY OF A TREATY

Code: DJ-FEC
1. Duress
2. Jus cogens
3. Fraud
4. Error of fact
5. Corruption
8.
GROUNDS FOR TERMINATION

Code: RAIN-DOVE-EL
1. Rebus sic stantibus

2. Accomplishment of purpose
3. Impossibility of performance
4. Novation
5. Extinction of one of parties, if treaty is bipartite
6. Desistance of parties
7. Voidance of treaty.
8. Outbreak of war
9. Loss of subject matter
10. Expiration of Term
9.
CLEAN SLATE RULE
When one state ceases to exist and is succeeded by

another on the same territory, the newly independent
state is NOT BOUND to maintain in force, or become a
party to, any treaty made by its predecessor although
at the date of succession of States the treaty was in
force with respect to the territory to which the
succession of State relates. (Art. 16, Vienna Convention
on the Succession of States with Respect to Treaties)
a.
Rebus sic stantibus is an exception to the rule of pacta

sunt servanda.
5.
PROCEDURES IN TREATY-MAKING
1.Negotiation
2.Signature
3.Ratification
4.Exchange of Instruments of Ratification
5.Registration with UN
6.
TREATY RESERVATION
It is a unilateral statement made by a State when

signing, ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to a
treaty, whereby it purports to exclude or to modify the
legal effects of certain provisions of the treaty in their
application to that State.
Exceptions
1.When the new state agrees to be bound by the

treaties made by its predecessor
2.Treaties affecting boundary regime (uti possidetis)
3.Customary International Law
=====================================

G. Nationality and Statelessness
1. Nationality Principle
2. Stateless Persons
a. De Jure Stateless
b. De Facto Stateless
====================================
G. NATIONALITY AND STATELESSNESS
Page 205 of 214
1.
NATIONALITY PRINCIPLE
Every state has jurisdiction over its nationals even

when those nationals are outside the state.
2.
STATELESS PERSONS
Those who do not have a nationality, they are either

de jure or de facto stateless.
a.
De Jure Stateless Persons
Those who have lost their nationality if they had one,

and have not acquired a new one.
b. De Facto Stateless Persons

Those who have a nationality but to whom protection
is denied by their state when out of the state. This is
the situation of many refugees.
=====================================

H. Treatment of Aliens
1. Protection of Aliens
a. Standards of Protection
2. Extradition
a. General Rule on the Existence of
Extradition
i. Exception
ii. Exception to the Exception
b. Principle of Specialty
c. Principle of Double Criminality
d. Notice and Hearing
e. Right to Bail
f. Procedure
c. Distinguished from deportation
3. Jurisdiction
a. Territoriality Principle
b. Nationality Principle
c. Protective Principle
d. Universality Principle
e. Passive Personality Principle
====================================
H. TREATMENT OF ALIENS
As an aspect of sovereignty, no state is obliged to admit

aliens into its territory unless a treaty requires it.
However, practically speaking, it is difficult to deny
admission to all. Therefore, what a state does is to
impose legal standards for admission.
Once an alien is admitted into a state, he/she cannot be
expelled without due process.
They are considered nationals abroad and remain
under its own states protection.
Practice of proper treatment of aliens is based on the
commonality of interests between states, in the
expectation that a States own nationals will be
protected when residing or sojourning abroad.
Various forms of ill-treatment: Mistreatment by judicial
or police authorities, unlawful expropriation of
property, failure to prosecute those who attack foreign
nationals, or a denial of justice (denial of due process of
the law).
a.
Standards For The Protection Of

Aliens
NATIONAL TREATMENT/
EQUALITY OF
TREATMENT
Aliens are treated in the
same manner as nationals
of the state where they
reside. The disadvantage
to this is that a state may
treat its own nationals
oppressively, which
would make aliens
subject to harsh laws as
well.
2.
MINIMUM
INTERNATIONAL
STANDARD
However harsh municipal
law may be, aliens should
be protected by certain
minimum standards of
humane protection. This is
the widely accepted
standard.
EXTRADITION
EXTRADITION - The removal of an accused from the

Philippines with the object of placing him at the
disposal of foreign authorities to enable the requesting
state or government to hold him in connection with any
criminal investigation directed against him or the
execution of a penalty imposed on him under the penal
or criminal law of the requesting state or government.
a.
General Rule:
PROTECTION OF ALIENS
There can only be extradition if there is a TREATY

between the states.
Page 206 of 214
1.
Outside a treaty, there is no rule in international law

compelling a State to extradite anyone. Such may be
done, however, as a gesture of comity.
i.
Exception
Even with a treaty, crimes with POLITICAL AND

RELIGIOUS complexion are exempted.
ii.
Exception
Exception
To
The
The assassination of the head of state or any member

of his family is not regarded as political offense for
purposes of extradition. It also applies for the crime of
genocide. This is also known as the ATTENTANT
CLAUSE.
b.
Principle Of Specialty
The general rule is a fugitive who is extradited may be

tried only for the crime specified in the request for
extradition and such crime is included in the list of
extraditable offenses in the treaty.
c.
Principle Of Double Criminality
According to this principle, a person may be extradited

only when his/her actions constitute an offense in both
the requesting and requested states. This principle is
now commonly accepted by States and is embodied in
Extradition Treaties. A party to an extradition treaty
may ask the other party to extradite a person for a
crime committed before the effectivity of a treaty. It
does not violate the prohibition against ex post facto
laws. The constitutional prohibition applies to penal
laws only. The extradition treaty is not a penal law.
Wright v. CA [G.R. No. 113213, April 15, 1994]
d.
Notice and Hearing
A person does not have the right to notice and hearing

during the evaluation stage of the extradition process.
Extradition is a proceeding sui generis. It is not a
criminal proceeding which will call into operation all the
rights of an accused guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
The process of extradition does not involve the
determination of the guilt or innocence of an accused.
There is no deprivation of the right to due process.
Secretary of Justice v. Hon. Lantion and Mark Jimenez
[G.R. No. 139465, October 17, 2000]
e.
Right to Bail
An extraditee should not be deprived of his right to

apply for bail, provided that a certain standard for the
grant is satisfactorily met. The standard of proof
required in granting or denying bail in extradition cases
is clear and convincing evidence. Government of Hong
Kong v. Olalia, Jr. [G.R. No.153675, April 19, 2007]
If bail can be granted in deportation proceedings, there
is no justification not to allow it for extradition because
both are administrative proceedings where the
innocence or guilt of the parties is not in issue.
f.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Procedure For Extradition (P.D.

1069):
Foreign diplomat of the requesting state or

government REQUESTS for extradition with
Secretary of Foreign Affairs
DFA FORWARDS request to DOJ
DOJ FILES petition for extradition with RTC
RTC issues SUMMONS or WARRANT OF ARREST to
compel the appearance of the individual
HEARING (provide counsel de officio if necessary)
APPEAL to CA within 10 days whose decision shall
be final and executory
Decision FORWARDED to DFA through the DOJ
Individual PLACED at the disposal of the authorities
of requesting state-costs and expenses to be
shouldered by requesting state.
3.
JURISDICTION
a.
Territoriality Principle
The fundamental source of jurisdiction is

sovereignty over territory. A state has absolute,
though not necessarily exclusive, power to
prescribe, adjudicate, and enforce rules for
conduct within its territory.
b. Nationality Principle
Every state has jurisdiction over its nationals even
when those nationals are outside the state.
c.
Protective Principle
A state may exercise jurisdiction over conduct outside

its territory that threatens its security, as long as that
conduct is generally recognized as criminal by the
states in the international community.
Page 207 of 214
I. INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

d. Universality Principle
1.
Recognizes that certain offenses are so heinous and so

widely condemned that any state, if it captures the
offender, may prosecute and punish that person on
behalf of the world community regardless of the
nationality of the offender or victim or where the crime
was committed.
e.
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN

RIGHTS (UDHR)
The UDHR is the basic international statement of the
inalienable and inviolable rights of human beings. It is
the first comprehensive international human rights
instrument.
a.
Passive Personality Principle
A state may apply law - particularly criminal law - to an

act committed outside its territory by a person not its
national where the victim of the act was its national.
This principle has not been ordinarily accepted for
ordinary torts or crimes, but is increasingly accepted as
applied to terrorist and other organized attacks on a
states nationals by reason of their nationality, or to
assassination of a states diplomatic representatives of
other officials.
=====================================

1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights
a. Rights Covered
b. UDHR as Customary International
Law
2. International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights
a. Rights Covered
b. Nature of the Obligations
c. Non Derogable Rights
d. Lawful Derogation
3. International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights
a. Rights Guaranteed
b. Nature of State Parties Obligations
i. General Duties / Obligations
of States
ii. Specific Obligations under
Article 2
====================================
Rights Covered
1. Civil and political rights

2. Economic, social, and cultural rights
b.
UDHR as Customary International

Law
Rights covered by UDHR are customary international

law, hence, even during the times when the bill of
rights under the Constitution are inoperative, rights
under UDHR remained in effect. Republic v.
Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 104768. July 21, 2003]
2.
INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND

POLITICAL RIGHTS (ICCPR)
a.
Rights Guaranteed:
1.Right of the peoples to self-determination

2.Right to an effective remedy
3.Equal rights of men and women in the enjoyment of
civil and political rights/ non-discrimination on the basis
of sex
4.Right to life
5.Freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading
punishment
6.Freedom from slavery
7.Right to liberty and security of person
8.Right to be treated with humanity in cases of
deprivation of liberty
9.Freedom from imprisonment for failure to fulfill a
contractual obligation
10.Freedom of movement and the right to travel
11.Right to a fair, impartial and public trial
12.Freedom from ex post fact laws
13.Right of recognition everywhere as a person before
the law
14.Right to privacy
15.Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion
16.Freedom of expression
17.Freedom of peaceful assembly
18.Freedom of association
19.Right to marry and found a family
Page 208 of 214
20.Right of a child to protection, a name and nationality

21.Right to participation, suffrage, and access to public
service
22.Right to equal protection before the law
23.Right of minorities to enjoy their own culture, to
profess and practice their religion and to use their own
language.
b.
Nature of the Obligations under

ICCPR
Obligations under the ICCPR are both POSITIVE and

NEGATIVE OBLIGATIONS. Positive Obligation to perform
acts to protect rights of an individual and Negative
Obligation to prevent acts violative of rights.
c.
1.
2.
Non-Derogable Rights
Right to life
Freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or
degrading punishment
Freedom from slavery
Freedom from imprisonment for failure to fulfill a
contractual obligation
Freedom from ex post fact laws
Right of recognition everywhere as a person
before the law
Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Even in times of national emergency, no derogation can

be made.
d.
Lawful Derogation Under ICCPR
A state party to the ICCPR MAY DEROGATE from the

treaty in times of PUBLIC EMERGENCY which threatens
the life of the nation. Such measures required by the
exigencies should NOT be INCONSISTENT with their
other obligations under INTERNATIONAL LAW and must
not involve DISCRIMINATION solely on the ground of
race, sex, religion etc.
3.
INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC,

SOCIAL, AND CULTURAL RIGHTS (ICESCR)
a.
Rights Guaranteed
1.Right of self-determination
2.Right to work and accompanying rights thereto
3.Right to Social Security and other social rights
4.Adequate standard of living including:
5.Right to adequate housing
6.Right to adequate food

7.Right to adequate clothing
8.Right to health
9.Right to education
10.Cultural rights
b.
State Parties
ICESCR
i.
Obligations
In
General Duties/ Obligations Of

States
1. RESPECT - Refrain from interfering with enjoyment of

rights. Thus, there is violation if it engages in forced
eviction.
2.PROTECT (negative obligation) - Prevent violations by
third parties. Thus, failure to ensure compliance by
private employers with basic labor standards violates
the right to work.
3.FULFILL (positive obligation) - Take appropriate
measures (legislative, judicial etc.) towards the full
realization of the rights. Thus, the states failure to
provide essential primary health care to the needy
amounts to a violation.
ii.
Specific
Article 2
Obligations
Under
1. Take steps to the maximum available resources,

towards the progressive realization of the rights in the
covenant.
2.Non-discrimination - States guarantee the exercise of
the rights without discrimination.
=====================================

XVI. Public International Law
J. International Humanitarian Law And
Neutrality
1. Armed conflicts
a. International armed conflicts
i. Jus Ad Bellum
1. General Rule on the Use of
Force
a. Exceptions: Self Defense
b. Authorized Military Action
i. Jus In Bello
1. Military Necessity
2. Proportionality
Page 209 of 214
3. Distinction
4. Perfidy
b. Internal or non-international armed
conflict
c. War of national liberation
2. Core International obligations of states in
3. Principles of International Humanitarian Law
a. Requisites for Humanitarian
Intervention
b. Treatment of civilians
c. International Human Rights Law v
d. Combatants v Non Combatants
e. Prisoners of war
5. International Terrorism
====================================
J. INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW AND
NEUTRALITY
COLLECTIVE SELF DEFENSE: Before a state can be

justified in assisting another by way of collective self defense:
1. The second state must bea victim of an armed
attack
2. The second state must request from the first state
military assistance
SELF DEFENSE v. JUST WAR
SELF-DEFENSE
Permits only the use of
force to put an end to an
armed attack and to any
occupation of territory or
other forcible violation of
rights which may have
been committed.
JUST WAR THEORY

Once a state has a valid
reason for resorting to
force, there is no limit on
the extent of force which
could be employed.
Armed attacks include not only action by regular

armed forces across an international border but also
sending by or on behalf of the State of armed groups,
bands, irregulars or mercenaries.
1. ARMED CONFLICTS
ARMED CONFLICT exists if one party used force of arms
against another party.
FOR an armed conflict to be considered a war,
hostilities must be preceded by a declaration of war or
an ultimatum with a fixed limit. This is rarely followed.
Usually, it is the victim of the first attack which will be
the ones declaring war. In the Philippines, the power to
declare war is in the legislature while the power to
make war is in the executive.
a.
International Armed Conflicts

i.
Jus Ad Bellum- use of armed

force
1. GENERAL RULE: Under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter,

all member States are bound to refrain from the
THREAT or USE of force against the territorial integrity
or political independence of a State.
a.
Exception: SELF-DEFENSE
b. AUTHORIZED MILITARY ACTIONS by the

UN or competent Regional organizations
(such as NATO)
ii. Jus In Bello- Regulation of the
conduct of armed conflict
1.MILITARY NECESSITY- The only legitimate object
which states should endeavour to accomplish during
the war is to weaken enemy forces.
2.PROPORTIONALITY - Belligerents may employ any
amount and kind of force to compel complete
submission of enemy with least possible loss of lives,
time, and money.
3.PRINCIPLE OF DISTINCTION- Requires states to
distinguish between combatants and military objectives
on the one hand, and non-combatants and civilian
objects on the other and to direct their attacks only
against the former
4.PERFIDY This principle prohibits the use of any
treacherous means and methods of warfare.
ANTICIPATORY SELF DEFENSE: Article 51 of the UN

Charter recognizes the inherent right of states to selfdefense if an armed attack occurs.
Page 210 of 214
Internal or Non-International
Armed Conflict
It is forbidden to kill or injure an enemy who surrenders

or is hors de combat.
They are armed conflicts that take place in the territory

of a High Contracting Party between its armed forces
and dissident armed forces or other organizes armed
groups which, under responsible command exercise
such control over a part of its territory as to enable
them to carry out sustained and concerted military
operations. (Protocol II Definition Of Internal Armed
Conflict)
Collateral damage to a certain extent is allowed but it

should not be excessive.
c.
HOWEVER, it does not include internal situations such

as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence, other
acts of similar nature.
PROTOCOL II requires control over territory. For this
reason, the Philippine-NDF conflict is not governed by
Protocol II but the GENEVA CONVENTION COMMON
ARTICLE III which requires only minimum humanitarian
protection (Bernas, PIL, p. 317).
Journalists are protected as civilians provided that they

take no action adversely affecting their status as
civilians.
Combatants are not entitled to the rights afforded to
civilians.
c.International
Human Rights Law v.

International Human
Rights Law
Aimed at protecting the individual
d. War of National Liberation

Armed conflicts in which people are fighting against
colonial domination and alien occupation and against
racist regimes in the exercise of their right of selfdetermination. Those engaged in such a conflict receive
combatant status and are entitled to combatant rights
and duties. (PROTOCOL I)
2.
PRINCIPLES ON INTERNATIONAL
HUMANITARIAN LAW
a.
Requirement
Intervention
for
Humanitarian
1. There are grave and massive human rights violations

2. The other state is incapable or unwilling to meet the
redress
3. There is no other practical alternative than to
intervene
4. The action should be limited in time and scope.
International Humanitarian
Law
Non-discriminatory
treatment to everybody at
all times (peacetime or
war/upheaval)
Wider personal, temporal &

material fields of
applicability
Ensuring a minimum
protection of victims if
armed conflicts by
outlawing excessive human
suffering & material
destruction in the light of
military necessity
Less egalitarian in nature,
although non-discrimination
is guaranteed with regard to
the enjoyment of the rights
afforded by this law
Both will apply

simultaneously in times of
international & noninternational armed
conflicts
d.Combatants v Non Combatants

COMBATANTS
NON-COMBATANTS
b. Treatment of Civilians
Parties to a conflict shall at all times distinguish
between the civilian population and combatants in
order to spare civilian population and property. Neither
the civilian population as such nor civilian persons shall
be the object of attack. Attacks shall be directed only
against military objectives.
1) Armed Forces- all its

organized armed forces
groups and units
Note: Children below
the age of 15 shall not
take direct part in
With POW Status

No Combat Mission
Judges
Blue-Collar Worker
Government Officials
Prosecutors
Page 211 of 214
hostilities
Engineers
2) Paramilitary/ Armed
Law Enforcement
Agencies- e.g. when
civilian police
transforms as part of
armed forces
No POW Status
Medical and Religious
Personnel
3) Levee en masseinhabitants of a
territory which has not
yet been occupied who,
on the approach of the
enemy, spontaneously
take up arms to resist
the invading troops
4) Spies- no POW status
5) Reconnaissance
Forces
e.
Prisoners Of War (POW)
Prisoners of war are captured for security reasons and

not for punishment
General Rule: A prisoner of war shall not be liable to
judicial prosecution even if he has committed to
facilitate escape (e.g., theft, drawing of false papers)
Except: when the escapee has used violence against life
and limb during his escape
i. Rights of Prisoners of War
1. To be treated HUMANELY
2. Not subject to TORTURE
3. Allowed to COMMUNICATE with their families
4. Receive FOOD, clothing, religious articles, medicine
5. Bare minimum of INFORMATION
6. Keep PERSONAL belongings
7. Proper BURIAL
8. Group according to NATIONALITY
9. Establishment of an INFORMED BUREAU
10. REPATRIATION for sick and wounded
The wounded and the sick shall be collected and cared
for by the party to the conflict which has them in its
power. Protection also covers medical personnel,
establishments, transports and equipment. (RED

CROSS, RED CRESCENT, RED CRYSTAL).
4.
NEUTRALITY
In a conflict there are some who wish to stay out of the

way and adopt an attitude
of impartiality. Such an
1) N
attitude must be recognized Oby the opposing partyStates and creates both rights and duties in the neutral
states. The decision to employ
C a neutral stance is
dictated by political/internal mechanisms and not PIL.
Neutral states must not engage in activities which
interfere with the activities of the belligerents while the
latter respect the formers rights.
5.
INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM
In international law, it is difficult to criminalize

terrorism because of the difficulty in defining the
prohibited act. The draft definition (at the International
Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of
Terrorism is as follows:
An act done by any person intended to cause (a) death
or serious bodily injury to any person, or (b) serious
damage to a State or Government facility with intent to
cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or
system, or where such destruction results or is likely to
result in major economic loss, when the purpose of
such an act is to intimidate a population or to compel a
Government or an international organization to do or
abstain from doing any act.
=====================================

K. Law Of The Sea
1. Baselines
2. Archipelagic States
a. Straight Archipelagic Baselines
b. Archipelagic Waters
c. Archipelagic Sea Lanes Passage
i. Right of Innocent Passage
1. Definition
2. Rules on Innocent Passage
3. Internal Waters
4. Territorial Sea
5. Exclusive Economic Zone
6. Continental Shelf
a. Extended Continental Shelf
7. Contiguous Zone
Page 212 of 214
8. High Seas
a. Allowable Acts at the High Seas
9. Bays
10. International Tribunal for the Law Of The
Sea
ii.
Hot Pursuit
1. Involves a foreign vessel and where there is good

reason to believe that the ship has violated laws or
regulations of a coastal state.
====================================
2.Rules:
K. LAW OF THE SEA
1.
a.The pursuit must commence when the foreign vessel

is within the:
BASELINES
a.
Normal Baseline Method
The territorial sea is drawn from the low-water mark of

the coast to the breadth claimed, following its
curvatures but excluding the internal waters in bays
and gulfs.
b.
b. It may continue into the HIGH SEAS if the pursuit has

NOT been INTERRUPTED.
Straight Baseline Method
Straight lines are made to connect appropriate points

on the coast without departing radically from its
general direction. The waters inside the lines are
considered internal. This is the method used by the
Philippines in drawing baselines.
2.
1. CONTIGUOUS zone
2. INTERNAL waters
3. TERRITORIAL sea
4. ARCHIPELAGIC waters of the pursuing state
c. If the foreign ship is in the CONTIGUOUS zone, it may

be pursued only for violations of the rights of the
coastal state in the contiguous zone (customs, fiscal,
immigration, or sanitary).
d.Hot pursuit must STOP as soon as the ship pursued
enters the territorial waters of its OWN state or of a
THIRD state.
ARCHIPELAGIC STATES
a.
Straight Archipelagic Baseline
Straight lines are made to connect appropriate points

on the coast without departing radically from its
general direction. The waters inside the lines are
considered internal. This is the method used by the
Philippines in drawing baselines.
b.
Archipelagic Water
Waters covered by the straight baseline which are

areas which had not previously been considered as
such. This has a right of innocent passage.
c.
Archipelagic Sea Lanes Passage

i.
Right of Innocent Passage
Innocent passage is passage that is not prejudicial to

the peace, good order or security of the coastal state.
The rule on innocent passage applies to ships and
aircrafts. Submarines must surface.
e.It may be carried out only by WARSHIPS or MILITARY

AIRCRAFT, or any other ship or aircraft properly
MARKED for that purpose.
3. INTERNAL WATERS
All waters (part of the sea, rivers, lakes, etc.) landwards
from the baseline of the territory. Sovereignty over
these waters is the same in extent as sovereignty over
land, and there is no right of innocent passage.
Where the establishment of a straight baseline in
accordance with the method set forth in article 7 has
the effect of enclosing as internal waters areas which
had not previously been considered as such, a right of
innocent passage as provided in this Convention shall
exist in those waters. (Article 8, UNCLOS)
4.
TERRITORIAL SEA
Belt of sea outwards from the baseline and up to 12

nautical miles beyond. Sovereignty over these waters
(including the airspace above it and the seabed under
it) is the same extent as its sovereignty over land, there
is no right of innocent passage.
Page 213 of 214
5.
EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE

a.
An area extending not more than 200 nautical miles

beyond the baseline. The coastal State has rights over
the economic resources of the sea, seabed and subsoil but the right does not affect the right of navigation and
overflight of other states.
The primary obligations of coastal states are:
1.Proper conservation and management measures that
the living resources of the EEZ are not subjected to
overexploitation;
2.Promote the objective of optimum utilization of the
living resources.
6.
CONTINENTAL SHELF
Also known as the archipelagic or insular shelf which

refers to:
1.The seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas
adjacent to the coastal state but outside the territorial
sea, to a depth of 200 meters, or beyond that limit, to
where the depth allows exploitation, and
2.The seabed and subsoil of areas adjacent to islands
a.
Extended Continental Shelf
It is part of the Continental Shelf that lies beyond

the 200 nautical miles from the coastal baselines
Allowable Acts In The High Seas
1. Freedom of NAVIGATION
2. Freedom of OVERFLIGHT
3. Freedom of scientific RESEARCH
4. Freedom to construct artificial ISLANDS and
structures
5. Freedom of FISHING
6. Freedom to LAY submarine cables and pipelines
9.
BAYS
Well-marked indentation whose penetration is in such

proportion to the width of its mouth as to contain
landlocked areas and constitute more than a mere
curvature of the coast. An indentation shall not be
regarded as a bay unless its area is as large as, or larger
than, that of the semi-circle whose diameter is a line
drawn across the mouth of that indentation.
10. INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE LAW

OF THE SEA
The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea is an
independent judicial body to adjudicate disputes arising
out of the interpretation and application of the
UNCLOS. It is the proper venue to resolve the issue on
the RP Baselines Law.
=====================================
7.
CONTIGUOUS ZONE
Area of water not exceeding 24 nautical miles from the

baseline. It thus extends 12 nautical miles from the
edge of the territorial sea.
In the contiguous zone, the coastal State may exercise
the control necessary to:
1. Prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal,
immigration, or sanitary laws and regulations within its
territory or territorial sea;
2. Punish infringement of the above laws and
regulations committed within its territory or territorial
sea.
8.
HIGH SEAS
All parts of the sea that are not included in the

territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State (Art. 1,
Geneva Convention).

L. International Environment Law
1. Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration
====================================
L. INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENT LAW
1.
STOCKHOLM DECLARATION
Principle 21: States have the sovereign right to exploit

their own resources pursuant to their own
environmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure
that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not
cause damage to the environment of other states or of
areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

=======================================
Page 214 of 214

2012 Political Law Summer Reviewer - FINAL - Printversion

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2012 Political Law Summer Reviewer - FINAL - Printversion

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POLITICAL LAW

DEAN SEDFREY CANDELARIA

PIERRE MARTIN REYES

ATENEO CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2012

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

G. Electoral tribunals and the commission on

II. General Considerations11

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

A. Privileges, inhibitions and disqualifications.38

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

V. Excessive fines and cruel and inhuman

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

c) To enter into contracts

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

TOPIC UNDER THE SYLLABUS:

TOPIC UNDER THE SYLLABUS:

A. DEFINITION, NATURE AND SCOPE

i. Philippine Constitution and Effectivity Dates

ii. Other Constitution and Effectivity Dates

NOTE: Constitutionalists recognize only the first group

The 1987 Constitution is composed of the following

TOPIC UNDER THE SYLLABUS:

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

C. AMENDMENTS AND REVISIONS (Art. XVII)

a. Amendment versus Revision

An alteration of one or a few specific provisions of the

Proposal of amendments or revisions by the

Constituent Assembly (CAss)

Congress, acting as a CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY, by a

The power of Congress to propose amendments is NOT

Two-part test in determining whether a proposal

QUANTITATIVE TEST- WON the proposed

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

ii. Constitutional Convention (ConCon)

If Congress, acting as a CAss, calls for a ConCon but

f. Ratification of Proposal if made through

g. Requisites for Valid Ratification:

Held in a plebiscite conducted under the election

For a valid Peoples Initiative, there must be:

The Constitution does not require that amendments

While the substance of the proposals made by each

The determination of the conditions under which

By Congress, upon a vote of 3/4 of its members OR

EXCEPTION: The proposed amendments/ revisions so

e. Ratification of Proposal if made through

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

TOPIC UNDER THE SYLLABUS:

General Rule - The provisions of the Constitution are

TOPIC UNDER THE SYLLABUS:

PROHIBITIONS AND DISQUALIFICATIONS: Military men

END OF DISCUSSION ON TOPIC

II. General Considerations

The Philippine Flag

Red, white, and blue with a sun and 3 stars

Congress may, by law, adopt a new:

1. Name for the country

b. The Armed Forces of the Philippines

POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER

TOPIC UNDER THE SYLLABUS:

A. THE NATIONAL TERRITORY (ARTICLE I)

1. That body of water studded with islands which is