JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT - May issue a writ of continuing mandamus to ensure compliance with its decision

INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY JURISDICTION

1. The SC is a constitutional body. It cannot be abolished nor may its membership or the - The authority by which courts take cognizance of and decide cases
manner of its meetings be changed by mere legislation - The legal right by which judges exercise their authority
2. The members of SC may not be removed except by impeachment - Prescribed by Congress subject to constitutional limitations
3. The SC may not be deprived of its minimum original and appellate jurisdiction as
prescribed in Article 8, Sec. 5 APPOINTMENTS
4. The appellate jurisdiction of the SC may not be increased by law without its advice and 1987 A8 S9 The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower courts shall be
concurrence appointed by the President from a list of at least three nominees prepared by
5. Appointees to the judiciary are now nominated by the JBC and no longer subject to the Judicial and Bar Council for every vacancy. Such appointments need no
confirmation by COA confirmation.
6. The SC now has administrative supervision over lower courts and their personnel For the lower courts, the President shall issue the appointments within ninety
7. The SC has exclusive power to discipline judges of lower courts days from the submission of the list.
8. The members of SC and all lower courts have security of tenure, which cannot be
undermined by a law reorganizing the judiciary THREE NOMINEES
9. They shall not be designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative - To give the President enough leeway in the exercise of his discretion
functions
10. The salaries of judges may not be reduced during their continuance in office QUALIFICATIONS
11. The judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy - Natural-born citizen of the Philippines (not required for courts lower than collegiate
12. The SC alone may initiate rules of court courts)
13. Only the SC may order the temporary detail of judges - At least 40 years old
14. The SC can appoint all officials and employees of the judiciary - Must have been a judge of a lower court or engaged in practice of law in the Philippines
for 15 years
JUDICIAL POWER
1987 A8 S1 The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL
courts as may be established by law. - Council that will screen such appointments
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual - Composition:
controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, o Chief Justice as ex officio chairman (4)
and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion o Secretary of Justice (4)
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or o Representative of the Congress as ex officio members (4)
instrumentality of the Government. o Representative of the Integrated Bar (4 years)
o A professor of law (3 years)
SUPREME COURT o A retired Member of the SC (2 years)
- The only constitutional court o A representative of the Private Sector (1 year)
- Clerk of the SC will be the Secretary ex officio of the council
LOWER COURTS - Regular members of the Council shall receive emoluments determined by SC
- Created by statutes - Principal function: recommending appointees t the Judiciary
o Court of Appeals - Once appointed upon nomination of the Council, the judge does not need confirmation
o Regional Trial Courts (RTC) by the COA
o Metropolitan Trial Courts (MeTC) - In appointing any judge, the President is not bound by the seniority rule
o Municipal Trial Courts (MTC) - Judges may not be appointed in acting or temporary capacity
o Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTC) - Members of SC cannot be designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or
o Court of Tax Appeals administrative functions
o Sandiganbayan (special statutory court)
FISCAL AUTONOMY
JUDICIAL AUTHORITY 1987 A8 S3 The Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Appropriations for the Judiciary
1. To settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and may not be reduced by the legislature below the amount appropriated for
enforceable – TRADITIONAL CONCEPT OF JUDICIAL POWER the previous year and, after approval, shall be automatically and regularly
2. To determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to released.
lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the
Government – BROADENING OF JUDICIAL POWER JUDICIARY’S FISCAL AUTONOMY
- Entitles it to levy, assess, and collect fees
OTHER SCOPE OF JUDICIAL POWER
- Power to alter, modify, or set aside their decisions before they become final and COMPOSITION OF THE SUPREME COURT
unalterable 1987 A8 S4 (1) The Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice and fourteen
- Power to enforce its final decisions because of the execution of its decisions is but an Associate Justices. It may sit en banc or in its discretion, in divisions of three,
integral part of its adjudicative function
 five, or seven Members. Any vacancy shall be filled within ninety days from
the occurrence thereof.
COMPOSITION
- 15 justices
- 3 divisions with 5 members each
EN BANC CASES
1987 A8 S4 (2) All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive
agreement, or law, which shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc, and
all other cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be heard en
banc, including those involving the constitutionality, application, or operation
of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, and
other regulations, shall be decided with the concurrence of a majority of the
Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case
and voted thereon.
DIVISION CASES
1987 A8 S4 (3) Cases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with the
concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the
deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, and in no case,
without the concurrence of at least three of such Members. When the required
number is not obtained, the case shall be decided en banc: Provided, that no
doctrine or principle of law laid down by the court in a decision rendered en
banc or in division may be modified or reversed except by the court sitting en
banc.
REQUISITES OF JUDICIAL INQUIRY
1. The existence of an appropriate case
2. Interest personal and substantial by the party raising the constitutional question
3. Plea that the function be exercised at the earliest possible opportunity
4. Necessity that the constitutional question be passed upon in order to decide the case
ACTUAL CASE
- Involves a conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible of
judicial resolution
- Case must not be moot or academic or based on extra-legal or other similar
considerations not cognizable by a court of justice
- Justiciable Controversy – refers to matters which are appropriate for court review;
pertains to issues which are inherently susceptible of being decided on grounds
recognized by law
- Political Questions – concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom (versus the
legality) of a particular act or measure being assailed
PROPER PARTY
- One who has sustained or is in immediate danger of sustaining an injury as a result of
the act complained of
EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY
1. In criminal cases, the constitutional question can be raised at any time in the discretion
of the court
2. In civil cases, the constitutional question can be raised at any stage if it is necessary to
the determination of the case itself
3. In every case, except when there is estoppel, the constitutional question may be raised
at any stage if it involves the jurisdiction of the court
NECESSITY OF DECIDING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION
- Courts will avoid. Why? Separation of powers. Every law is presumed valid.
- Estoppel: a person cannot question the validity of a law under which he had previously
accepted benefits
- The Court will not pass upon a constitutional question although properly presented by
the record if the case can be disposed of on some other ground such as the application
of a statute or general law
- For reasons of public policy, the constitutionality of a law cannot be collaterally attacked
SEVEN PILLARS OF LIMITATIONS OF THE POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
1. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of legislation in a friendly, non-
adversary proceeding, declining because to decide such questions is legitimate only in
the last resort, and as a necessity in the determination of real, earnest and vital
controversy between individuals. It never was the thought that, by means of a friendly
suit, a party beaten in the legislature could transfer to the courts an inquiry as to the
constitutionality of the legislative act.
2. The Court will not anticipate a question of constitutional law in advance of the necessity
of deciding it.
3. The Court will not formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the
precise facts to which it is to be applied.
4. The Court will not pass upon a constitutional question although properly presented by
the record, if there is also present some other ground upon which the case may be
disposed of. This rule has found most varied application.
5. The Court will not pass upon the validity of a statute upon complaint of one who fails to
show that he is injured by its operation.
6. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one who
has availed himself of its benefits.
7. When the validity of an act of the Congress is drawn in question, and even if a serious
doubt of constitutionality is raised, it is a cardinal principle that this Court will first
ascertain whether a construction of the statute is fairly possible by which the question
may be avoided.
EFFECTS OF A DECLARATION OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY
ORTHODOX VIEW
- An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords
no protection; it creates no office; it is inoperative as if it had not been passed
- All persons (not only the parties) are bound by the declaration of unconstitutionality
- Total nullity
MODERN VIEW
- The court does not annul or repeal the statute if it is in conflict with the Constitution
- It simply refuses to recognize it and determines the rights of the parties just as if such
statute had no existence
- The court may give its reasons for ignoring or disregarding the law, but the decision
affects only the parties and there is no judgment against the statute
DOCTRINE OF OPERATIVE FACT
- Acts done pursuant to a law which was subsequently declared unconstitutional shall be
valid, but not when they are done after the declaration of unconstitutionality
PARTIAL UNCONSTITUTIONALITY
- Two conditions:
o The legislature is willing to retain the valid portions even if the rest of the
statute is declared illegal
o The valid portions can stand independently as a separate statute
- Separability clause will show the willingness of the legislature to retain the valid portions
- But even without the separability clause, so long as the valid portion is so far
independent from the invalid portion, it may be presumed that the legislature would have
enacted it by itself