For as long as I am alive, there is only one thing in my mind…

Victory

Political Law by Gorrospe Dissected

 I. The Constitution
As stated in Manila Prince Hotel vs GSIS where the Supreme court laid down the doctrine of
Constitutional Supremacy states that: The Constitution is the fundamental and paramount law
of the nation, it lays down the framework of a system of government. It is a supreme law which
all other laws must conform. All private rights must be determined, and all public authority
administered
II. The State
It is a community of person permanently occupying a territory, independent of external control
with an organized Government. For a state to become as such it must have; The people,
territory, Government, and sovereignty.

1. The People
The most important element of a state. The people must be sufficient to be self-sustaining.
There is no limit on how large the people might be, for as long as they pledge their loyalty
to their country they are the state’s people
2. Territory
A place where the people reside, as stated in Article 1 of the 1987 constitution, it includes
the terrestrial fluvial and aerial domains.
So that the world may know the extent of our domain, we expressly state it in our
constitution. We have also set guidelines to demarcate the country’s maritime zone as
stated in RA 9552. As stated in Magallona vs Ermita; RA 9552 was a statutory mechanism
for UNCLOS to optimize the location of some basepoints around the Philippine
archipelago.
Philippine Laws has absolute jurisdiction over its territory and we may use it as we see fit.
Thus, in Reagan vs CIR we only consent that the US may exercise jurisdiction in certain
cases. By no means did it became a foreign territory since the land we permitted them to
stay is still ours.

3. Government
It is an entity which exercises power to enforce and command obedience. They are tasked
to maintain and ensure peace and order, advance and protect their interest, and promote
general welfare.
A government may either be de jure; which is a rightfully and legally in possession of the
powers or de facto; who has the actual exercise of power, but it is not legally entitled.

Political Law by Gorrospe Dissected

 The government has different functions, one of which is classified as Constituent and
Ministrant. In Baccani vs NACOCO; the court defined constituent as those which are
compulsory in nature and ministrant as those means of advancing the general interest of
society. So that the government may promote the objectives set forth in the Constitution.
The government created several organizations owned or controlled by the government to
promote its economy thus, those owned and controlled by the government are not exempted
from the whims of the state such as the payment of fees of the stenographer in Baccani vs
NACOCO.
Those corporation that are created by the government are a separate entity that is tasked
with a specific function, such as developing former military base for the advancement of
the economy. As stated in Shipside Inc. vs CA; BCDA is proprietary in nature and are
tasked to promote the economic and social development of Central Luzon.
Parens Patriae – The state as the parent.
The Government has the obligation of protecting its people. The state to effectively carry
out its function, it possesses inherent and fundamental powers.
Police power
The State’s power of restraining and regulating liberty and property. But, for purposes of
providing a check on its exercise, it must have a lawful end that is accomplished through
lawful means. Its exercise must be for the interest of the public generally and that the means
employed are reasonably necessary for its accomplishment.
Eminent Domain
The authority to take what it needs for public use and that there must be just compensation
given.
Taxation
It is the lifeblood of the nation. The government has the right to collect since it is a major
source of revenue to finance its activities for public purposes.
Sovereignty
It represents, the supreme power of the state to command and enforce obedience.
Sovereignty may be classified as legal; meaning sovereignty would be based on the law or
political; which refers to the authority of the people. Internal; means that the state has the
ability to have it will be imposed and followed by those within its jurisdiction or external;
which means independence from outside authority.

III. State Immunity

As expressly stated on Article 16 section 3 of the 1987 constitution; The State may not be sued
without its consent. Also, as stated in Air Transport Office vs. Ramos that a sovereign is
Political Law by Gorrospe Dissected
exempt from suit is based on logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right as
against the authority that makes the law on which the right depends. For if a state may be sued
it will severely obstruct and the public would be endangered because of the number of suits
that the State has to defend against. The rationale behind this is that the government and its
unincorporated agencies have no independent personality, they are part and parcel of the
government itself. However, this is not true if such agencies are performing proprietary
functions. Another exception to this is the Local Governments. By virtue of their charters, they
are given a separate and distinct personality thus they are allowed to sue and be sued. However,
they must go through due process and prove their case
This principle extends to government officials sued in their official capacity. The exception to
this is that if the government official is sued for having abused their authority or is being sued
in their personal capacity.
Though this is the general rule, the government may expressly waive its immunity by a form
of a law, allowing such suit. It must strictly come from the legislature in a form of a general
law or a special law. As stated in Merrit vs Government; “The State, by virtue of such
provisions of law, is not responsible for the damages suffered by private individuals in
consequence of acts performed by its employees. By consenting to be sued a state simply
waives its immunity from suit.”
The state may impliedly waive it if the government does things that may indicate that it is
amenable to such court action against it. As stated in Us vs. Ruiz; when a government entered
into a contract, it is deemed to have descended to the level of the other contracting party.
However, distinctions must be made as to the nature of the contract, whether its function is
Sovereign, Governmental, or whether it is proprietary or for commercial activities.
The government may impliedly waive its consent when the governments files a suit against an
individual, since they exposed themselves to a countersuit. Denying a party to countersue
would be tantamount to violation of due process for it denies the other party of his defense
which may be expressed in the countersuit.
The doctrine of immunity from suit has been restricted to jure imperii; sovereign or
governmental activities and not applicable to jure gestionis; or private and proprietary acts.
A direct example of cases involving jure imperii would be the case of Municipality of San
Fernando, La Union vs Firme; where a truck driver employed by the municipality was
negligent of his action. The courts ruled that the municipality can’t be held liable for the torts
committed by its employee, who was the engaged in the discharge of governmental function.
A direct example of cases involving jure gestionis would be the case of Torio vs. Fontanilla
where a celebration of a town fiesta is an undertaking that is private or proprietary in character
thus the courts ruled the municipal corporation to be liable for damages.
If the Courts have found the government to be liable, settlements of the monetary claim are
subject to the primary jurisdiction of the COA pursuant to P.D. 1445. They can’t be compelled
to appropriate funds. It cannot be seized under writs of execution or garnishment. However,

Political Law by Gorrospe Dissected

 this does not apply when the funds are already allocated from law. Thus, in UP vs Dizon; UP
funds can’t be subject to garnishment, since the settlement of the claim is subject to the
jurisdiction of COA.
Such immunity is extended to the Foreign states and international organization. Since the
Philippines adhere to the universally recognized principles of international law, we can’t
subject other states from the judicial jurisdiction of our land. This is anchored on the principle
of the sovereign equality where no equal has power over another equal. This includes suing
any representative of a state since it is the same of suing the state itself also.
Diplomat vs International official
As stated in the dissenting opinion of Justice Puno in Liang vs People; Diplomatic immunity
are those members of the diplomatic staff appointed from among the nationals of the receiving
state. The diplomatic agent is only immune from the jurisdiction of the receiving state and not
of the sending state. The effective sanction which secures diplomatic immunity is according to
the principle of reciprocity. International immunity is important in relation to the state which
the official is a nation. There is no sending state and that it is an equivalent for the jurisdiction
of the sending state, therefore it has to be found either in waiver of the immunity or in some
international disciplinary or judicial procedure.
The function of the diplomat are those who represent his state to pursue its national interest.
Under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relation; such diplomatic envoys are immune
from criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state whether he acted in his private or official
capacity, unless it is waived by the sending state. Whilst, those of International officials does
not represent a state or the interest of any state, but his function is normally administrative.
Thus, in Liang vs People; officials and employees of the ADB are subject to the jurisdiction of
the local courts for their private acts.
IV. Separation of Powers, Checks and Balance, and Non-Delegable
As a general rule, no one should interfere with what has been entrusted to others. The legislative
enacts the laws, as well as the authority to amend or repeal them. The executive executes and
enforces the law, while the Judiciary interpret and apply the Constitution and the laws.
However, such a rule is not absolute the Constitution blends as well as separates powers in order
to create a workable government. It has a crafted system of checked and balanced power within
each Branch to secure coordination in the workings of the various departments of the
government.
Jurisprudence provided in Angara vs Electoral Commission; In cases of conflict, the judicial
department is the only constitutional organ that can determine the proper allocation of powers
between several departments and among the integral or constituent unites thereof.
The Court further adds that the framers of the Constitution adopted the American type where the
written Constitution is interpreted and given effect by the judicial department. As stated in
Endencia vs David; the interpretation of the law and the Constitution belongs exclusively to the

Political Law by Gorrospe Dissected

Judiciary, and acts of the Legislature in interpreting the Constitution is an invasion of the
established jurisdiction of the Judiciary.
As stated in Bureau of Customs Employee Association vs Teves; Bill of attainder is essentially a
usurpation of judicial power since it effects the imposition of a penalty which deprives life,
liberty, or property without the process of judicial trial.
Under the Constitution, there are those specifically enumerated powers of the president, such as
powers of appoint, control and supervision, executive clemency, and command the armed forces.
In Belgica vs Ochoa jr. The court defined that there is a violation of the principle when there is
interference with and/or assumption of another department’s function.
Executive vs Legislative Powers and Function
As reiterated before; Law making is the function of the Legislative while the execution of the
laws passed belongs to the Executive.
In David vs. Macapagal-Arroyo, the court held that while the President could validly declare the
existence of a state of national emergency even in the absence of a Congressional enactment, the
exercise of emergency powers requires delegation from Congress. Thus, without any
authorization from Congress, the President could not exercise such power.
With regards to the government’s relationship with the citizens, In Ople vs Torres; the National
ID System or AO 308 promulgated by the President is a violation of the doctrine of separation of
power since the scope of the law is so broad that it requires delicate adjustment of state policies.
However, in Kilusang Mayo Uno vs Director-General, National Economic Development
Authority; where the President promulgated EO 420 which applies only to government entities is
valid since it only affect the branches of government. To identify those which require legislation,
you must consider three aspects first; It requires a special appropriation, second; It is compulsory
on all branches of government as well as all the citizen, third; It requires the collection and
recording of personal data, since the citizen’s right to privacy is infringed.
Congress has the jurisdiction in cases of money matters such as the power of taxation and the
power to appropriate funds. The President carries out the policy decision as to who, which and
how much to tax as well as in the implementation of laws which spends money on specified
purposes. As stated in Belgica vs Ochoa Jr; The Court declared that the Pork Barrel funds was a
violation of separation of powers when members of the Congress are allowed to wield any form
of post-enactment authority in the implementation or enforcement of the budget not related to
congressional oversight function.
The US Supreme Court said that the principle of separation of powers may be violated by,
interference and assumption of another’s function

V. State Principles and Policies

Political Law by Gorrospe Dissected

The Preamble was never an essential part of the Constitution, but it serves as a guide on how the
substance of the provisions of the Constitution mean and mandate
Section 1 of Article to explicitly proclaims that we are a democratic and republican State. We are
governed by representative chosen by majority to which those representatives can only exercise
the power delegated to them. But, nevertheless it is the people who are the ultimate source of
authority.
To ensure the accountability of public officers we have written are laws to serve as a reminder that
ours is a government of laws and not of men. The state is ruled by a majority where we elect
through popular will. Sovereignty resides within the people, thus the supreme authority lies with
the civilians. We exercise sovereignty indirectly through public official and can exercise it directly
through suffrage.
It is the prime duty of the government to serve and protect the people as stated in section 4.
However, in return The Government may call upon the people to defend the State and, in the
fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by law, to render
personal, military or civil service. Meaning, when it comes to the defense of the state the people
by no means can’t it reject the call for help. One doesn’t let their home be robbed and sacked
without the owners standing for a fight.
Nonetheless, it has been reiterated in the courts stated in Cudia vs Superintendent of the PMA that
no one is above the law, and that civilian authority is at all times supreme over military.
Separation of Church and State
Section 6 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution states that; he separation of Church and State shall be
inviolable. The church cannot meddle in the internal affairs of the church and the church cannot
impose its beliefs and convictions on the state.
An example of this is in Imong vs Ochoa where the promotion of contraceptive use is contrary to
religious belief, by no means can it force the government to enhance its population control
program. As the saying goes; render to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God the things that are
God’s.
Social Order, Public Welfare and Social Justice
In Section 10 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution states that; The State shall promote social justice
in all phases of national development. Progress must come with due regard to social justice. In
Calalang vs. Williams social justice is defined as the humanization of laws and the equalization of
social and economic force. It means that the promotion of the welfare of all the people. In reality
equality is a mere concept thus it can be said that social justice is not equality but protection.
Human Dignity and Human Rights
In Section 11 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution states that; The State values the dignity of every
human person and guarantees full respect for human rights. These rights are considered to be
inherent and inalienable.

Political Law by Gorrospe Dissected

Family and Youth
As stated in Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution; The State recognizes the sanctity of family life
and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally
protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. The natural and primary
right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of
moral character shall receive the support of the Government.
Also stated in section 12 of the 1987 Constitution; he State recognizes the vital role of the youth
in nation-building…
The family as the basic social institution the State must protect and strengthen it since it is the core
institution where our nation’s child begins
Women and Gender Equality
Stated in Section 14 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution; The State recognizes the role of women in
nation-building and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men.
Right to Health and Healthful Ecology
Section 15 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution; The State shall protect and promote the right to
health of the people and instill health consciousness among them.
Section 16 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution; The State shall protect and advance the right of the
people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
Priority to Education, Science, Technology, Arts, Culture, and Sports
Section 17 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution; The State shall give priority to education, science
and technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social
progress, and promote total human liberation and development.
Labor as Primary Social Economic Force
Section 18; The State affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect the rights
of workers and promote their welfare.
Self-Reliant and Independent National Economy
Section 19 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution; The State shall develop a self-reliant and
independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos.
The country cannot be dictated upon by other. Each state must look after its own self-interest. It
must be able to stand on its own and must not become dependent on others.
Private Enterprise
Section 20 Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution states that; The State recognizes the indispensable
role of the private sector, encourages private enterprise, and provides incentives to needed
investments.

Political Law by Gorrospe Dissected

The state recognizes that they need the help of the private sector to further advance the country.
The government cannot possible undertake all conceivable projects or programs on its own.
Rural Development
Section 21. The State shall promote comprehensive rural development and agrarian reform.
Indigenous Cultural Communities
Section 22. The State recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous cultural communities
within the framework of national unity and development.
** Pls read Article 2 of the 1987 Constitution. Everything is stated there.

Political Law by Gorrospe Dissected