Constitutional Law Finals

Reviewer
XI. Amendment and Revisions of our Constitution
 History of Philippine Constitutional Law
 The Biak-na-Bato Constitution (1897)
 The Malolos Constitution (1899)
 McKinley’s Instructions (1900)
 Philippine Bill of 1902
 Jones Act of 1916
 The 1935 Constitution (Original and as Amended)
 The 1973 Constitution (As Amended)
 The 1986 Freedom Constitution
 The 1987 Constitution
 The Puno Constitutional Draft
 Constitutional Provisions
 Amendment = change in some parts but not the
whole.
 Why amend?
 Mechanism to respond with changing conditions
 Safety valve of resort to revolution
 Revision = re-writing and substantially changing of
the whole text
 Amendments and revisions on the Constitution could
be done via:
 1.) The Congress, constituent assembly, with 3/4
votes of ALL members (for both)
 2.) Constitutional Convention (for both)
 A body assembled for the purpose of framing,
revising, or amending the Constitution for the
approval of the electorate
 Members are elected by qualified voters.
 Call for, 2/3 vote of ALL members
  Submit to the electorate the question, majority
vote of all members
 3.) By the people, through initiative (only for
amendment)
 Petition supported and signed by atleast 12% of
all registered voters
 Petition supported and signed by atleast 3% of
registered voters of every legislative district
 Amendment through initiative is not made
within 5 years of ratifying the present
Constitution
 Petition is for amendments and revisions are checked
by Comelec if it is sufficient. If it is then the
ratification of the people is the final act to enact the
changes.
 Ratification is done via majority vote on a
plebiscite between 60 to 90 days after certification
of comelec
 Constituent assembly -

V. Executive Department
 Constitutional Provisions
 President and Vice-President
 Article VII, Sections. 2-13
 Powers and Functions of President and VP
 Article VII, Sections 1, 13-23
 Article X, Sections 4 and 16
 Article VI, Sections 9, 23, 27, 28
 Article III, Section 13
 Article VI, Section 23 (2)
 Article XII, Section 21
 President and Vice President
 Article VII, Sections. 2-13
 Elections and Canvass(Art 7, Sec 4)
 Voted by direct vote of people
 Term of 6 years
 Term = fixed time
 Tenure = actual time
 June 30th, Noon, start of term.
  No reelection for president, and if succeeded term
for more than 4 years, no reelection still
 May be elected for a lower post.
 No two consecutive terms for vice president,
voluntary renunciation is still considered a term.
 He can still run for president or for a lower post.
 Unless provided by a contrary statute, elections
are held at 2nd Monday of May
 Canvass certificates are sent to senate president,
then at no less than 30 days, it is opened and
canvassed according to law in front of Congress in
a joint session.
 Votes are counted in City or Province from their
districts or towns.
 "Returns" show the result of the counting and
are certified by board of canvassers of the city
of province
 These certified returns are then transmitted to
Congress
 The certified returns are then summed up in
front of Congress in a joint session
 In case of tie, senate and hor votes separately,
majority wins
 Congress decides how canvassing goes, Supreme
Court acts as Electoral Tribunal
 Congress is for manner of counting, Court is the
sole judge of all contests
 Macalintal v Comelec
 Questioning of absentee voting
 Pimentel v Joint Canvassing committee
 Counting during session adjournment
 Vacancy Situations & Temporary disability(Art 7, Sec
8)
 The vice president shall act as president if the
president has had a temporary disability but
returns the power once the president does not
have temporary disability anymore.
  The vice president will be the president if the
president dies, resigned, removal from office, or
have a permanent disability.
 If vice president is unable to be president as well,
the senate president then the speaker shall act as
president until a president or vicepresident is
qualified and elected.
 If the four fails, Congress should make a law as to
whos next in line.
 Estrada v Desierto
 Joseph estrada, edsa II case.
 Prohibitions(Art 7, Sec 13)
 The President, VP, Cabinent members and their
deputies amd assisrants shall not hold any other
office.
 They cant also engage in business and have
financial interest in dealing with the government
including government owned and controlled
corporations
 Relatives of the president until fourth degree cant
be appointed as officials in burues and agencies
including government owned and controlled
corporations.
 Doromal v Sandiganbayan
 Facts: Doromal is the commissioner of PCGG,
an agency of the government. He is a
stakeholder of a family owned business which
bidded and supplied DECS with supplies amd
equipment. He argues that he does not have
signatures on the deals made by the business
with DECS.
 Issue: Is he liable for violating Article 7, Section
13 of the Constitution?
 Ruling: Yes, he is liable. The provision expressly
states that a member of the executive, much
more if an officer, cant have financial interests
in a business with government entitites. Even
 without a signature, he is a major stakeholder
of the family owned business
 Civil Liberties Union v Executive Secretary
 Facts: President Corazon Aquino signed an
executive order allowing for Cabinet positions to
hold an additional office in government
controlled or owned corporations. Petitioners
contend the constitutionality of such E.O. on the
ground of Art 7, Sec 13 of the Constitution that
states that high ranking executive positions
may not hold additional offices unless provided
by the Constitution like the VP to be able to
have Cabinet position or the CJ to be able to
hold chairmanship of JBC. Respondents contend
that the phrase unless provided in this
Constitution is a reference to art 9B, sec 7
which states that unless provided by law,
appointive officials should have only one
position, and in this case, the law or the
executive order allows for it.
 Issue: Is the E.O. constitutional?
 Ruling: No. The E.O. is unconstitutiomal
because it allows for a high ranking executive
official to hold more than one post in violation
of art 7, sec 13 of the Constitution. The
Constitution only allows for the exception as
expressly stated inside the text of it, which are
the vp in a cabinet position, the cj as chairman
of jbc, and as per article 7. Furher, it has to be
noted that this limitation does not apply to ex-
officio membership of an executive official to
another body. This is because the ex-officio
membership means "by virtue of office" or also
falls within the primary function of the said
official. As long as it is stated in the
Constitution of their ex-officio functions or by
virtue of their office, it is part of their primary
 function, then it is allowed. Though those only
incidental and inconsistent to their primary
functions are considered additional posts.
Further ex oficio membership to another body
does not allow for compensation as it is
understood that it is already part of their jobs,
like being part of their job description. It has to
be noted as well hat he 1987 Constiution was
made to prevent abuses in the marcos era,
allowing for several posts to be given to 1
executive official makes him prone to abuse and
unjustly enrich the said official.
 Bitonio v Coa
 Facts: Bitonio is questioning the decision of
COA to disallow the payment of his per diem
pay for being a board member of PEZA which
the law states that should be paid per diem per
meeting. Petitioner is a director for Labor
Relations under DOLE and was assigned as a
representative to the PEZA board on behalf of
DOLE.
 Issue: Should he be paid for his meetings in he
board?
 Ruling: No. His function as a representative to
the board is one of the primary functions of the
Secretary which was delegated to him. Since it
is an ex oficio membership, it is already
included in their pay as it is part of their job
description or their functions naturally. The
assignment came from his boss, which is a job
delegated to him and made it part of his
functions. It is thus already became part of his
primary functions and to pay him his per diem
could mean he is being paid double for a work
that is already part of his functions.
 Soliven v Makasiar
  Facts: Petitioner is questioning the libel case
being filed against him on the ground that the
president cant be a complainant to the case as
they have executive privilege from suit. Being a
complainant would mean that the president will
be under the Courts jurisdiction and be open to
countersuit which is against the separation of
powers and executive privilege
 Issue: Could the president be a complainant to
the case?
 Ruling: Yes he can. The president has the
prerogative to waive his right to be under the
Courts jurisdiction and be open to countersuit.
It is his discretion and the accused cannot
invoke executive privilege as a defense because
it is a right that can be waived. The executive
privilege is vested to the President with the
right and he is the only one who can invoke it,
not other parties, much less the accused.

 Powers and Functions of the President

 Article VII, Sections 1, 13-23
 Executive Power (Art 7, Sec 1)
 The president is the Executive.
 He is the head of the state and head of the
government.
 He is the sole power of the executive deoartment.
 Carpio v executive secretary
