CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

Atty. Galeon 1
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes

Article VI: The Legislative Department Representatives, the first being considered as the
upper house and the second, the lower house.
Section 1: The legislative power shall be vested in the
Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Nature of Legislative Power
Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the
Legislative power is the authority to make laws and
extent reserved to the people by the provision on
alter and repeal them. It is a derivative and vested
initiative and referendum.
power given to the legislature by the Constitution.
Bicameral Body – The Jones Law called for a According to American jurisprudence, “the
bicameral Congress, but the 1935 and 1973 Constitution fixes limits to the exercise of legislative
Constitutions both originally called for a unicameral authority, and prescribes the limits within it must
Congress. However, the 1935 Constitution was later move. This also provides the basis for non-
amended to provide for a Bicameral legislature. delegability and the prohibition against the passage
of irrepealable laws.
The arguments for a unicameral body as
contemplated in the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions Unlike the United States Constitution, the 1987 (like
are: the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions) gives a grant of
- Simplicity of organization resulting in economy and plenary legislative power to the Philippine
efficiency. legislature. This means that “any power, deemed to
- Facility in pinpointing responsibility for legislation; be legislative by usage and tradition, is necessarily
avoidance in duplication. possessed by Congress, unless the organic act has
- Strengthening of the legislature in relation to the lodged it elsewhere.”
executive.
Separation of Powers
The debate resurfaced in the deliberations for the
A basic corollary of the presidential system of
1987 Constitution. A bicameral legislature was
government is the principle of separation of powers.
adopted, by a vote of 23-22, because:
Separation of powers means that legislation belongs
- An upper house has the capacity to look at
to Congress, Execution to the executive, and
problems from a national perspective, and this
settlement of controversies to the judiciary. This
national perspective serves as a check on the
principle is an implicit limitation on legislative
parochial tendency of a body elected by districts.
power. However, the separation is not absolute
- A bicameral legislature allows for a more careful
because it allows for checks and balances because
study of legislation.
no one department is able to act without the
- Bicameralism is less vulnerable to attempts by the
cooperation of at least one of the other
executive and manipulation.
departments. The purpose of these checks and
Q: What are the classes of legislative powers? balances is to avoid power being concentrated in
one department. The danger in the concentration of
A: ODeCO
power was realized in the dark days of the martial
1. Original: Possessed by the people in their
law.
sovereign capacity i.e. initiative and
referendum Limits on Legislative Power
2. Delegated: Possessed by Congress and
Legislative power is subject to substantive
other legislative bodies by virtue of the
limitations which circumscribe both the exercise of
Constitution.
the power itself and the allowable subject of
3. Constituent: The power to amend or
legislation. The substantive limitations are chiefly
revise the Constitution.
found in the Bill of Rights, and there exist procedural
4. Ordinary: The power to pass ordinary
limitations prescribing the manner of passing bills
laws.
and the forms that these bills should take.
Q: What are the limitations on the legislative power
Initiative and Referendum
of Congress?
In republican constitutional theory, the original
A: 1. Substantive: limitations on the content
legislative power belongs to the people who,
of laws.
through the Constitution, confer derivative
2. Procedural: limitations on the manner of
legislative power on the legislature. However, under
passing laws.
the 1987 Constitution, the grant of legislative power
3. Congress cannot pass irrepealable laws.
to Congress is not exclusive. The Constitution
4. Congress, as a general rule, cannot
provides for initiative and referendum as a direct
delegate its legislative power.
means for the people to create law.
Note: The Congress of the Philippines is a bicameral
body composed of a Senate and a House of

1

The power of initiative and referendum is this the
power of the people directly to propose and enact
laws or approve or reject any act or law or part
thereof passed by the Congress or local legislative
body. The purpose of the provisions for initiative and
referendum (Sections 1 and 32) is to institutionalize
People Power.
The operationalization of initiative and referendum
has been left by the Constitution to Congress.
Although the legislative power that is given to the
people by initiative and referendum is limited to
whatever exceptions that Congress may impose.
Legislative Powers of Marcos and Aquino
The 1973 Constitution provided for two concurrent
legislative agencies: the Batasang Pambanse and the
President. The legislative power of the Batasan was
ordinary, while the legislative power of the President
was extraordinary. The extraordinariness of the
President’s power, however, did not lie solely in that
it was a tool for coping with emergency; it also lay in
the distinct advantage it gave to the President over
the legislature. It not only enabled him to supply for
the legislature when the latter, in the judgement of
the President, “fail[ed] or [was] unable to act on any
matter” that may need immediate action, but it also
enabled the President to undo what the legislature
might have done not to his satisfaction. Moreover,
he could legislate, or repeal or amend old legislation
unhampered by any need for debate or three
readings or by the other formal limitations that are
imposed on the legislative body.
Immediately after the February 1986 revolution,
President Corazon C. Aquino assumed revolutionary
legislative power and, on March 25, 1986, issued
Proclamation No. 3, the Provisional Freedom
Constitution, whose Article I, Section 3, abolished
the Batasang Pambansa and whose Article II, Section
1, vested legislative power in the President “until a
legislature is elected and convened under a new
Constitution.” Section VI of the 1987 Transitory
Provisions in turn said: “The incumbent President
[Corazon Aquino] shall continue to exercise
legislative powers until the first Congress is
convened.” Thus the only difference between the
scope of the legislative powers of President Aquino
and that of President Marcos was that, whereas
Marcos exercised the power concurrently first with
the interim Batasang Pambansa and subsequently
with the regular Batasang Pambansa, President
Aquino exercised it alone. She lost it on July 26, 1987
– But she lost it with a bang signing a batch of forty-
two legislative acts on the eve of the convening of
the First Congress.
Non-delegability of Legislative Power
These are three theories that advance the non-
delegability of legislative power:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 2
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
1. Separtaion of Powers keeps the responsibility for
the creation of statutes to the legislative branch.
2. Due Process – the process by which the powers
are separated and safeguarded demand that
legislation come from the legislative.
3. Delegata potestas non potest delegari, which
means that which has been delegated to you cannot
be further delegated by you.
Furthermore, legislative power is delegated to local
government by constitutional tradition (as defined
as a practice that has existed since time
immemorial). Congress may, by law, grant the
President Powers necessary to carry out declared
national policy in times of war or other national
emergency. Congress may also, by law, subject to
limitations that it may impose, tariff rates, import
and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and
other duties or imposts.
Other Exceptions to Non-delegability
Local governments may be allowed to legislate on
purely local matters. On the local level, the principle
of separation of powers does not apply strictly
between the executive and the law-making body.
Hence, the local law-making agency may be given
executive functions. When what is given is an
executive power, the rules applicable to the
empowerment of administrative agencies also
becomes applicable to the local law-making body.
There are two other exceptions given to the
President, one in times of war and national
emergency, where the President has the powers
necessary and proper to carry out a declared
national policy, and where the President is delegated
to fix tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage
and wharfage dues, and other duties and imposts.
Section 2. The Senate shall be composed of twenty-
four Senators who shall be elected at large by the
qualified voters, of the Philippines as may be
provided by law.
The number of senators is pegged at twenty four
because the drafters envisioned a small Senate
which was supposed to ensure that the quality of the
people elected to the Senate remained at a high
standard.
Section 3. No person shall be a Senator unless he is a
natural-born citizen of the Philippines and, on the
day of the election, is at least thirty-five years of age,
able to read and write, a registered voter, and a
resident of the Philippines for not less than two years
immediately preceding the day of the election.
The residence requirement is satisfied if one is
domiciled in the Philippines, even though not
physically present within the two-year period, and
the age qualification must be possessed on the day
2

the votes are cast and not on the day of the
proclamation.
Section 4. The term of office of the Senators shall be
six years and shall commence, unless otherwise
provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June
next following their election.
No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive
terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any
length of time shall not be considered as an
interruption in the continuity of his service for the full
term of which he was elected.
The term of office of Senators is six years, and unless
otherwise provided by law, commences at noon on
the thirtieth day of June next following their
election. The term follows that found in the 1935
Constitution. There is a two consecutive term limit.
Section 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be
composed of not more than two hundred and fifty
members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be
elected from legislative districts apportioned among
the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila
area in accordance with the number of their
respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform
and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by
law, shall be elected through a party-list system of
registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or
organizations.
(2) The party-list representatives shall constitute
twenty per centum of the total number of
representatives including those under the party list.
For three consecutive terms after the ratification of
this Constitution, 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.
(3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as
practicable, contiguous, compact, and adjacent
territory. Each city with a population of at least two
hundred fifty thousand, or each province, shall have
at least one representative.
(4) Within three years following the return of every
census, the Congress shall make a reapportionment
of legislative districts based on the standards
provided in this section.
I. Kinds of Representatives
District representatives—elected by districts Sec 5(1)
CASE: Macias v. COMELEC
The underlying principle behind this rule of
apportionment is the concept of equality of
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 3
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
representation, which is the basic principle of
republicanism.
Party Representatives (Permanent Proportional
Regime) — elected by party-list system Sec 5(1)/ RA
7941
Sectoral Representative (Temporary Regime)—
extinct; lasted only for three consecutive terms after
the ratification of the Constitution. Sec 5(2)
II. House Membership/Reapportionment/
Apportionment Membership
Membership of the House of Representative is fixed
at 250, BUT may be raised from time-to-time by
statute following the clause “unless otherwise fixed
by law.”
Raising the membership of the House may be done
by reapportionment
Reapportionment results in the creation of new
districts or through the creation of new provinces.
This must be done by Congress within 3 years after
the return of the census in order to ensure that
proportional representation is preserved.
Reason— Sec 5 (3): Reapportionment merits/creates
(1) legislative body.
Each province is entitled to at least one district or
the creation of new provinces since 1 province
entitled to 1 district or the creation of new cities
CASE: Tobias v. Abalos / Mariano, Jr. V. COMELEC
San Juan & Mandaluyong being recognized as
separate legislative districts.
The incidental effect of converting a municipality of
a congressional district into a city large enough to
have its own legislative district is the splitting of a
district into two (2). Moreover, this incidental effect
is deemed implicitly contained in the title
announcing the creation of the new city thus
satisfying the requirement that the content if the bill
be announced in the title.
CASE: Montejo v. COMELEC
Imbalances in the remaining legislative districts of
the mother provinces cannot be corrected by the
COMELEC as it has no authority to do so. Correction
of the imbalance must await the enactment of a
reapportionment law.
Apportionment
Rules in dividing provinces, cities and the
Metropolitan Manila Areas
Sec 5 (1): Apportionment in accordance with their
number of inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform
and progressive ratio
3

Sec 5(2): “Each legislative district shall comprise, as
far as practicable, contiguous, compact and adjacent
territory” (Prohibits gerrymandering—creation of
representative districts out of separate portions of
territory in orer to favor a candidate.”
Sec 5 (3): Each city or province with a population of
at least 250,000 is entitled to have at least one
representative.
EXCEPTION to PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION
RULE: A province is always entitled to one
representative no matter what its population size.
SEC 5(4): Reapportionment of legislative districts
within 3 years following the return of the census.
Allows for correction of imbalances in
representation due to the increase in population.
CASE: Tobias v. Abalos
(see notes on Reapportionment)
CASE: Sema vs. COMELEC
Only Congress can create provinces and cities
because their creation necessarily includes the
creation of legislative districts, which is a power
solely exercised by Congress.
III. Party-list System (RA 7941)
Party-list seats= 20% of total number of
representatives including those under the party list
2% threshold requirement to qualify for
representation
3-limit seat
Additional seats in proportion to their total number
of votes.
CASE: Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC
Inviolable parameters of RA7941 (1) 20% allocation
(2) 2% threshold to qualify (3) 3-limit seat (4)
proportional representation.
Questioned the constitutionality of the 2% threshold
and 3-limit seat requirement
According to Art6 Sec 5, Congress is vested with the
broad power to define and prescribe the mechanics
of the party-list system of representation.
20% prescription is merely a maximum limit to the
number of party-list representatives but the
maximum need not be filled.
2% threshold is to ensure that only parties,
coalitions, and organizations having a sufficient
number of constituents deserving for representation
were actually represented in Congress.
CASE: Ang Bagong Bayani, et. al V. COMELEC
(CONTROVERSIAL)
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 4
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
SC ruled that associations are not allowed to
participate indiscriminately in the part-list system.
Participation is limited to parties or organizations
representing the “marginalized and underprivileged.
SC laid down guidelines for COMELEC to apply in
deciding which organizations are qualified.
Parties and organizations must represent the
marginalized and underrepresented sector
Political parties may join provided that they fit the
aforementioned requirement.
Nominees must comply with the qualitative
requirement.
SC saw the party-list system not as a proportional
system of representation designed to strengthen
democracy but a “sectoral representation” meant to
promote social justice, which is contrary to the
intent of the Constitutional Commissioners.
Constitutional Commissions meant to reserve 25
seats for the marginalized sectors for the 1st 3 terms
after the ratification of the Constitution only.
However, SC still ruled that all 50 seats are reserved
for the marginalized sector and not just for 3
consecutive terms but forever and that party- list
nominees “must represent marginalized and
underrepresented sectors.” – Departure from the
Constitution and RA 7941
CASE: Banat v. COMELEC
Revisited the (4) inviolable parameters of RA7941,
but made special attention to mathematical
interpretation of the term “proportional
representation”
The application of the 2% threshold in relation to the
distribution of the additional seats was strike down
because such application would not allow all the
seats for the party-list to be filled.
It also discussed that political parties are allowed to
run under the party-list system provided that they
field sectoral candidates.
Q: Discuss the Party‐List System.
A: Party‐list representatives shall constitute 20% of
the total number of representatives in the House of
Representatives. (Sec. 5 [2], Art. VI, 1987
Constitution)
Party‐list system is a mechanism of proportional
representation in the election of representatives to
the HoR from national, regional and sectoral parties
or organizations or coalitions thereof registered with
the COMELEC.
A free and open party system shall be allowed to
evolve according to the free choice of the people.
4

(Sec. 2 [5], Art. IX‐C, 1987 Constitution) Political
parties registered under the party‐list system shall
be entitled to appoint poll watchers in accordance
with law. (Sec. 8, Art. IX‐C, 1987 Constitution)
Q: Discuss the different parties under the party‐ list
system
A: No votes cast in favor of political party,
organization or coalition shall be valid except for
those registered under the party‐list system.
1. Political party – organized group of
citizens advocating ideology or platform,
principles and policies for the general
conduct of government and which, as the
most immediate means of securing their
adoption, regularly nominates and supports
certain of its leaders and members as
candidate in public office (Bayan Muna v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 147612, June 28, 2001)
2. National party – its constituency is
spread over the geographical territory of at
least a majority of regions
3. Regional party – its constituency is
spread over the geographical territory of at
least a majority of the cities and provinces
comprising the region
4. Sectoral party – organized group of
citizens belonging to any of the following
sectors: labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban
poor, indigenous, cultural communities,
elderly, handicapped, women, youth,
veterans, overseas workers and
professionals, whose principal advocacy
pertains to the special interest and
concerns of their sectors.
5. Sectoral Organization – refers to a group
of citizens who share similar physical
attributes or characteristics, employment,
interest or concerns.
6. Coalition – refers to an aggregation of
duly registered national, regional, sectoral
parties or organizations for political and/or
election purposes.
Q: What groups are disqualified for registration?
A: 1. Religious denominations or sects.
2. Those who seek to achieve their goals
through violence or unlawful means.
3. Those who refuse to uphold and adhere
to the Constitution; and
4. Those supported by foreign governments
(Ang Bagong Bayani‐OFW Labor Party, v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 147589, June 25, 2003)
Q: In sum, what are the requirements for a group to
qualify for sectoral party accreditation?
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 5
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
A: 1. The applying party must show that it
represents the "marginalized and
underrepresented," exemplified by the
working class, the service class, the
economically deprived, the social outcasts,
the vulnerable, the work impaired, or some
such similar class of persons.
2. The applying party should be
characterized by a shared advocacy for
genuine issues affecting basic human rights
as these apply to the sector it represents.
3. The applying party must share the cause
of their sector, narrowly defined as shown
above. If such party is a sub‐ group within
that sector, it must compete with other
sub‐groups for the seat allocated to their
sector.
4. The members of the party seeking
accreditation must have an inherent
regional or national presence.
5. Except for matters the COMELEC can take
judicial notice of, the party applying for
accreditation must prove its claims by clear
and convincing evidence. (Separate Opinion
of Justice Abad, Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 190582, Apr. 8, 2010)
Q: Has the Ang Ladlad Party‐List amply proved that it
meets the requirements for sectoral party
accreditation?
A: Yes. Their members are in the vulnerable class like
the women and the youth. Ang Ladlad represents a
narrow definition of its class (LGBTs) rather than a
concrete and specific definition of a sub‐group
within the class (group of gay beauticians, for
example). The people that Ang Ladlad seeks to
represent have a national presence. (Separate
Opinion of Justice Abad, Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 190582, Apr. 8, 2010)
Q: What are the grounds for the cancellation of
registration?
A: 1. Accepting financial contributions from
foreign governments or agencies; and
2. Failure to obtain at least 10% of the votes
casts in the constituency where the party
fielded candidates. (Ang Bagong Bayani‐
OFW Labor Party, v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
147589, June 25, 2003)
Q: Can major political parties participate in the
party‐list elections?
A: No. It is not open to all but only to the
marginalized and the underrepresented. Allowing all
individuals and groups, including those which now
dominate district elections, to have the same
opportunity to participate in the party‐list elections
would desecrate this lofty objective and mongrelize
the social justice mechanism into an atrocious
5

veneer for traditional politics. (Ang Bagong Bayani‐
OFW Labor Party v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 147589, June
26, 2001)
Q: Who shall be voted?
A: The registered national, regional or sectoral party‐
list groups or organizations and not their candidates.
Q: Who are elected into office?
A: It is the party‐list representatives who are elected
into office, not their parties or organizations. These
representatives are elected, however, through that
peculiar party‐list system that the Constitution
authorized and that Congress by law established
where the voters cast their votes for the
organizations or parties to which such party‐list
representatives belong. (Abayon v. HRET, G.R. No.
189466, Feb. 11, 2010)
Q: What are the qualifications of party‐list
nominees?
A: 1. Natural‐ born citizen of the
Philippines
2. Registered voter
3. Resident of the Philippines for at
least 1 year immediately preceding the
day of the election
4. Able to read and write
5. Bona fide member of the party or
organization which he seeks to
represent at least 90 days preceding
Election Day 6. At least 25 years of age.
(Not more than 30 years old for
nominees for youth sector)
Note: There is absolutely nothing in R.A. 7941 that
prohibits COMELEC from disclosing or even
publishing through mediums other than the
“Certified List” the names of the party‐list nominees.
As may be noted, no national security or like
concerns is involved in the disclosure of the names
of the party‐list groups in question (Bantay RA 7941
v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 177271; G.R. No. 177314, May
4, 2007)
Q: What is the effect of change of affiliation any
party‐list representative?
A: Any elected party‐list representative who changes
his political party or sectoral affiliation during his
term of office shall forfeit his seat; provided that if
he changes his political party or sectoral affiliation
within 6 months before an election, he shall not be
eligible for nomination as party‐list representative
under his new party or organization (Amores v.
HRET, G.R. No. 189600, June 29, 2010).
Note: In case of vacancy in the seat reserved for
party‐list representatives, the vacancy shall be
automatically filled by the next representative from
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 6
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
the list of nominees in the order submitted to the
COMELEC by the same party, organization or
coalition, who shall serve for the unexpired term. If
the list is exhausted, the party, organization or
coalition concerned shall submit additional
nominees.
Q: Does the Constitution preclude Congress from
increasing its membership?
A: The Constitution does not preclude Congress from
increasing its membership by passing a law, other
than a general re‐apportionment law. Thus, a law
converting a municipality into a highly urbanized city
automatically creates a new legislative district, and
consequently increases the membership of the HoR
(Mariano v. COMELEC, G.R No. 118577, Mar. 7,
1995).
Q: What is the formula mandated by the
Constitution in determining the number of party‐list
representatives?
A: The House of Representatives shall be composed
of not more than 250 members, unless otherwise
fixed by law. (Section 5 [1], Article VI of the 1987
Constitution).
The number of seats available to party‐list
representatives is based on the: Ratio of party‐list
representatives to the total number of
representatives.
Accordingly, we compute the number of seats
available to party‐list representatives from the
number of legislative districts.
This formula allows for the corresponding increase in
the number of seats available for party‐list
representatives whenever a legislative district is
created by law.
After prescribing the ratio of the number of party‐
list representatives to the total number of
representatives, the Constitution left the manner of
allocating the seats available to party‐list
representatives to the wisdom of the legislature.
(BANAT v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 179271, April 21,
2009)
Q: How shall the party‐list representative seats be
allocated?
A: In determining the allocation of seats for party‐
list representatives under Section 11 of R.A. No.
7941, the following procedure shall be observed:
6

1. The parties, organizations, and
coalitions shall be ranked from the
highest to the lowest based on the
number of votes they garnered during
the elections.
2. The parties, organizations, and
coalitions receiving at least 2% of the
total votes cast for the party‐list system
shall be entitled to one guaranteed seat
each.
3. Those garnering sufficient number of
votes, according to the ranking in
paragraph 1, shall be entitled to
additional seats in proportion to their
total number of votes until all the
additional seats are allocated.
4. Each party, organization, or coalition
shall be entitled to not more than 3
seats.
Note: In computing the additional seats, the
guaranteed seats shall no longer be included
because they have already been allocated, at one
seat each, to every two percent. Thus, the remaining
available seats for allocation as “additional seats”
are the maximum seats reserved under the party‐list
system less the guaranteed seats. Fractional seats
are disregarded in the absence of a provision in R.A.
7941 allowing for a rounding off of fractional seats.
(BANAT v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 179271, April 21,
2009)
Section 6. No person shall be a Member of the House
of Representatives unless he is a natural-born citizen
of the Philippines and, on the day of the election, is
at least twenty-five years of age, able to read and
write, and, except the party-list representatives, a
registered voter in the district in which he shall be
elected, and a resident thereof for a period of not
less than one year immediately preceding the day of
the election.
Requirements for District/ Party-list/ Sectoral
Representatives:
1. Natural-Born Citizens
2. At least 25 years old on the day of
elections.
3. Able to read and write
4. A registered voter in the district where he
is to be elected (except for party-list
representatives as they do not represent
a district)
5. A resident thereof for a period of not less
than one year immediately preceding the
day of elections.
Residence—a place of abode, whether permanent or
temporary
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 7
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
Domicile—a permanent residence to which one,
when absent, has the intention to return.
CASE: Gallego vs. Verra
It is the intent of the law in fixing a residence
qualification is to exclude a stranger or newcomer,
unacquainted with the conditions and needs of the
community and not identified with the latter, from
an elective office to serve the community.
In order to acquire domicile by choice the following
must concur:
Residence or bodily presence in the new locality
An intention to remain there indefinitely (animus
manendi)
An intention to abandon the old domicile voluntarily
(animus non reverendi)
CASE: Romualdez-Marcos v. COMELEC
If a person retains his domicile of origin, then the
one-year period is irrelevant because by legal fiction,
wherever he may be, he is a resident of his domicile
of origin. When Ferdinand Marcos died, Imelda’s
domicile reverts back to domicile of origin. Thus, she
is qualified to run in Leyte.
CASE: Aquino v. COMELEC
SC viewed that wither domicile or residence would
suffice provided that the one year physical presence
is satisfied.
CASE: Domino v. COMELEC
A bona fide intention of abandoning the former
place of residence and establishing a new one and
definite acts which correspond with the purpose.
There must be animus manendi coupled with animus
non reverendi.
CASE: Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drugs
Board
The requirements of Sec. 6 are exclusive; Congress
cannot add anything to it. Mandatory drug testing
for national officials is unconstitutional.
Section 7. The Members of the House of
Representatives shall be elected for a term of three
years which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by
law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next
following their election.
No member of the House of Representatives shall
serve for more than three consecutive terms.
Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of
time shall not be considered as an interruption in the
continuity of his service for the full term for which he
was elected.
7

Term of Representatives: 3 year term
CASE: Dimaporo v. Mitra
The case involves Sec. 67, Art. 9 of the Omnibus
Election Code, BP881. Rep. Dimaporo challenged the
law as it unconstitutionally shortens his term.
The court held that the statutory provision is
consonant with the constitutional edict that public
officials must serve with utmost loyalty and not trifle
with the mandate which they have received from
the people.
The law did not shorten Dimaporo’s term; it merely
shortened his tenure.
CASE: Farinas et. al. Vs. Executive Secretary
Superseded Dimaporo by virtue of the Fair Election
Law. National elective office does not terminate his
tenure by the mere fact of having filed for candidacy
to a position different from what he is holding.
Counted from June 13th next following their election
NOTE: Starting date may be changed by law.
Reason for the term of Representatives: To facilitate
synchronization with the 6-year term of the
President, Vice- President and Senators.
Section 8. Unless otherwise provided by law, the
regular election of the Senators and the Members of
the House of Representatives shall be held on the
second Monday of May.
Elections for Senators and House of Representatives
shall be held on the second Monday of May.
CASE: Codilla v. De Venecia
In a democracy, the first self-evident principle is that
he who has been rejected by the people cannot
represent the people. Also, the enforcement of the
sovereign will of the people is not subject to the
discretion of any official of the land.
Rep. Codilla clearly won the district representative
position, thus he is entitled to be sworn into office
and his name be registered in the Roll of Members
of the House of Representatives.
Section 9. 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 Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives thus elected shall serve only for the
unexpired term.
Q: In the occurrence of vacancy in the Senate or
House of Representatives, how is such vacancy filled
up?
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 8
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
A: Through special elections. R.A. 6645, as amended
by R.A. 7166: •When such vacancy occurs in the
Senate, the special election shall be held
simultaneously with the succeeding Senatorial
elections.
•When such vacancy occurs in the House of
Representatives at least one (1) year prior to the
next Congressional elections, the Commission shall
call and hold a special election for that purpose.
Otherwise, there is no need to conduct special
elections.
Q: Why the difference?
A: Because District representatives are elected only
per legislative district. It would prove to be unfair to
deprive a particular legislative district a
representation in the House of Representatives.
Section 10. The salaries of Senators and Members of
the House of Representatives shall be determined by
law. No increase in said compensation shall take
effect until after the expiration of the full term of all
the Members of the Senate and the House of
Representatives approving such increase.
The salaries of Senators and Members of the House
of Representatives can be granted an increase,
however, such increase shall only take effect after
the expiration of their full term. This is so they
cannot profit from their own acts, otherwise that
would be a self-serving legislation. Also in Section
10, Article VI, there is nothing there that prohibits
diminution of salaries.
Section 11. A Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by
not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged
from arrest while the Congress is in session. No
Member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any
other place for any speech or debate in the Congress
or in any committee thereof.
If for example, a Senator is facing a criminal case and
the penalty imposable does not exceed six years
imprisonment, then he enjoys this “immunity from
arrest” – this immunity subsists all throughout the
session of Congress (“Session” – refers to the initial
ordaining of Congress for its regular session up to its
adjournment while awaiting for the next regular
session (example: July 2015 – February 2016)).
Conversely, if Congress is already in recess or there is
a break in between regular sessions of Congress,
then immunity from arrest will no longer be
available during that period.
Note: (1) When penalty imposable is six years and
one day or more, immunity from arrest does not
apply. (2) What is granted is “immunity of arrest”
and not “immunity from suit” (provided in the first
sentence of Section 11, Article VI
However, second privilege provided by Section 11,
Article VI is “immunity against suit” but only in cases
8

of libel or civil liabilities arising from libel. Second
sentence provides “No Member shall be questioned
nor be held liable in any other place for any speech
or debate in the Congress or in any committee
thereof.”
Note: Privilege of Speech and Debate – they are
shielded from possible criminal prosecution for libel.
This is to encourage their participation during the
deliberation in Congress. But this shall only apply
when Congress is in session.
Jimenez v Cabangbang
(G.R. No. L-15905)
FACTS: Defendant Cabangbang was a member of the
House of Representatives and Chairman of its
Committee on National Defense. He wrote an open
letter to the President and caused its publication in
several newspapers of general circulation exposing
the allegedly operational plans by some ambitious
AFP officers regarding a massive political build-up of
then Secretary of National Defense, Jesus Vargas, to
prepare him to become a candidate for President in
1961.
ISSUE: WoN Cabangbang can invoke “privileged
communication” as a defense.
HELD: Cabangbang’s contention wasn’t given due
course because according to the Supreme Court,
such publication was done by Cabangabang in his
own personal capacity and not as a member of the
House of Representatives, more so that Congress
was not in session.
Note: During a Senator’s privilege speech, he cannot
be prosecuted for libel before the Courts of Law, but
he can be disciplined within the Congress itself for
“disorderly behavior” (Sec. 16, par. 3, Art. VI –
empowering both houses to establish rules of order)
Osmena v Pendatun
(G.R. No. L-17144)
FACTS: Congressman Osmena petitioned for
declaratory relief, certiorari and prohibition with
preliminary injunction against Congressman
Pendatun and 14 others in their capacity as member
of the Special Committee created by House
Resolution# 59. Specifically, petitioner asked for the
annulment of the resolution on the ground of
infringement of his parliamentary immunity; and
asked the member of the Special Committee be
enjoined from proceeding, as provided by
Resolution# 59, requiring the petitioner to
substantiate his charges against the President during
his privilege speech entitled “A Message to Garcia”
wherein he spoke of derogatory remarks of the
President’s administration selling pardons. For
refusing to provide evidence as the basis of his
allegations, Osmena was suspended for 15 months
for the serious disorderly behavior.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 9
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
ISSUE: WoN petitioner’s words constitute disorderly
conduct.
HELD: What constitutes disorderly conduct is within
the interpretation of the legislative body and not the
judiciary, because it is a matter that depends mainly
on the factual circumstances of which the House
knows best. Anything to the contrary will amount to
encroachment of power. It is a “political question”
rendering the Supreme Court powerless over such
matter. Furthermore, Sec. 16, Par.3, Art. VI provides
that suspension shall not exceed six (6) months.
Santiago v Sandiganbayan
(G.R. No. 128055)
FACTS: A group of employees of the Commission of
Immigration and Deportation (CID) filed a complaint
for violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
against then CID Commissioner Miriam Defensor-
Santiago. It was alleged that petitioner, with evident
bad faith and manifest partiality in the exercise of
her official functions, approved the application for
legalization of the stay of several disqualified aliens.
The Sandiganbayan then issued an order for her
suspension effective for 90 days.
ISSUE: WoN the Sandiganbayan has authority to
decree a 90-day preventive suspension against a
Senator of the Republic of the Philippines
HELD: The suspension order was implemented. Sec.
16, Par. 3, Art 6 should not be interpreted in a way
that only Congress and only the Senate could
suspend any of its members.
Section 12. 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.
Furthermore, Sec. 17, Article XI mandates “A public
officer or employee shall, upon assumption of office
and as often thereafter as may be required by law,
submit a declaration under oath of his assets,
liabilities, and net worth. In the case of the
President, the Vice-President, the Members of the
Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court, the
Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional
offices, and officers of the armed forces with general
or flag rank, the declaration shall be disclosed to the
public in the manner provided by law.”
Sec. 20, Article VI provides “The records and books
of accounts of the Congress shall be preserved and
be open to the public in accordance with law, and
such books shall be audited by the Commission on
Audit which shall publish annually an itemized list of
amounts paid to and expenses incurred for each
Member.”
9

Note: Senators and Congressmen are not however
prohibited from engaging in business, but are still
required to disclose their financial reports. But as for
the President, the Vice-President, the Cabinet
Members, the Secretaries are totally/absolutely
prohibited from engaging in business.
Section 13. 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 nor the emoluments
thereof increased during the term for which he was
elected.
Note: First sentence of Section 13, Article VI is a
prohibition known as “incompatible offices.” As a
rule, when a Senator or Congressman holds another
office in the government, he can hold that second
office, but in the process, he forfeits his seat in the
Senate or in the House of Representatives.
(Exception: when such office is only a mere
extension of being a Senator or a member of the
House of Representatives, especially if the other
position is only held in an ex-officio capacity)
Second sentence of Section 13, Article VI is an
absolute prohibition. This prohibition only applies
during the term such body is created.
First Illustration:
Assuming that Professor “T” assumed position as
Senator in 1998 and held office until 2004. During
this period, a law was passed by Congress creating
CHW (Commission on Human Wrong). Under that
law, it is provided therein, that the Chairman under
such would have to be appointed. Assume further,
Senator “T” was indeed interested in such position.
Q: Can the President validly appoint him to be the
chairman of CHW?
A: No. (Sec. 13, Art VI)
Q: If through election and he won?
A: Yes (but he has to forfeit his seat in the Senate).
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 10
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
Second Illustration:
Assuming that “T” assumed position as Senator in
1998 and held office until 2004. He ran for the 2004
election and won, to serve office until 2010. CHW
was created in 1999.
During his first term, Senator “T” did not seem
interested in the position as chairman of CHW. But
during his second term, Senator “T” signified his
interest to be chairman of said body.
Q: May he be appointed as chairman of CHW during
his second term by the President?
A: Yes (but he has to forfeit his membership in
Congress).
Section 14. No Senator or Member of the House of
Representatives may personally appear as counsel
before any court of justice or before the Electoral
Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative
bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be
interested financially in any contract with, or in any
franchise or special privilege granted by the
Government, or any subdivision, agency, or
instrumentality thereof, including any government-
owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary,
during his term of office. He shall not intervene in any
matter before any office of the Government for his
pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to
act on account of his office.
Note: what this provision implies is that if a person,
say a Senator or a member of the House of
Representatives, he can still practice his profession
as a lawyer, only that he is prohibited from
personally appearing as a lawyer in a case before the
Courts of Law – Reason for this is to prevent the
Judge to be influenced by his/her presence.
Puyat v De Guzman
(113 SCRA 31)
FACTS: In May 1979, Eugenio Puyat and his group
were elected as directors of the International Pipe
Industries. The election was subsequently
questioned by Eustaquio Acero (Puyat’s rival)
claiming that the votes were not properly counted –
hence he filed a quo warranto case before the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on May
25, 1979. Prior to Acero’s filing of the case,
Estanislao Fernandez, then a member of the Interim
Batasang Pambansa purchased ten shares of stock of
IPI from a member of Acero’s group. And during a
conference held by SEC Commissioner Sixto de
Guzman, Jr. (from May 25-31, 1979) to have the
parties confer with each other, Estanislao Fernandez
entered his appearance as counsel for Acero. Puyat
10

objected as he argued that it is unconstitutional for
an assemblyman to appear as counsel (to anyone)
before any administrative body (such as the SEC).
This being cleared, Fernandez inhibited himself from
appearing as counsel for Acero. He instead filed an
Urgent Motion for Intervention in the said SEC case
for him to intervene, not as a counsel, but as a legal
owner of IPI shares and as a person who has a legal
interest in the matter in litigation. The SEC
Commissioner granted the motion and in effect
granting Fernandez leave to intervene.
ISSUE: Whether or not Assemblyman Fernandez, as
a stockholder of IPI, may intervene in the SEC case
without violating Sec. 11, Art. VIII (now Sec. 14, Art.
VI) of the Constitution.
HELD: No, Fernandez cannot appear before the SEC
body under the guise that he is not appearing as a
counsel. Even though he is a stockholder and that he
has a legal interest in the matter in litigation he is
still barred from appearing. He bought the stocks
before the litigation took place. During the
conference he presented himself as counsel but
because it is clearly stated that he cannot do so
under the constitution he instead presented himself
as a party of interest – which is clearly a work
around and is clearly an act after the fact. A mere
work around to get himself involved in the litigation.
What could not be done directly could not likewise
be done indirectly.
Section 15. The Congress shall convene once every
year on the fourth Monday of July for its regular
session, unless a different date is fixed by law, and
shall continue to be in session for such number of
days as it may determine until thirty days before the
opening of its next regular session, exclusive of
Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. The President
may call a special session at any time.”
1. Sessions of Congress
1935: lasts only for 100 days; special session: limited
to thirty days
1973, sec 15: may last for as long as Congress wishes
but only until thirty days before the opening of its
next regular session, exclusive of Saturdays,
Sundays, and legal holidays. Howevery, the
president may call congress to a special session at
any time; special session: no fixed limit. Can last as
long as the congress wants
May the president limit the subjects which
may be considered during a special session called
by him?
1935: the president could - sec 9 art. 6 said that pres.
could call a special session to consider general
legislation or only such subjects as he may designate.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 11
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
1987: "The president may call a special session at
any time." The language is not exclusive. The pres. is
given the power to call a session and to specify
subjects he wants considered, but it does not
empower him to prohibit consideration of other
subjects.
Section 16. (1) The Senate shall elect its President
and the House of Representatives its Speaker, by a
majority vote of all its respective Members. Each
House shall choose such other officers as it may
deem necessary. (2) A majority of each House shall
constitute a quorum to do business, but a smaller
number may adjourn from day to day and may
compel the attendance of absent Members in such
manner, and under such penalties, as such House
may provide. (3) Each House may determine the
rules of its proceedings, punish its Members for
disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of
two-thirds of all its Members, suspend or expel a
Member. A penalty of suspension, when imposed,
shall not exceed sixty days. (4) Each House shall keep
a Journal of its proceedings, and from time to time
publish the same, excepting such parts as may, in its
judgment, affect national security; and the yeas and
nays on any question shall, at the request of one-fifth
of the Members present, be entered in the Journal.
Each House shall also keep a Record of its
proceedings. (5) Neither House during the sessions of
the Congress shall, without the consent of the other,
adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other
place than that in which the two Houses shall be
sitting.
Note: Paragraph 4 requires the Senate and the
House of Representatives to maintain a journal and a
record of its proceeding. The journal shall be
published, with the exceptions to those that have no
relation to public interest (Journal: merely contains a
summary of the proceedings; Records of
Proceedings is more detailed). Mandated to be
recorded in the journal (1) regarding any question, at
the request of one-fifth of the members present (2)
the number of Yes and No during the final reading
upon the passage of a bill (3) If such bill is vetoed by
the President (4) the overriding of President’s veto
by Congress. (In case of conflict between the entries
in the Journal and the enrolled bill, the latter shall
prevail.)
Casco v Gimenez
(G.R. No. L-17931)
FACTS: Casco Chemical Co., which is engaged in the
manufacture of synthetic resin glues used in bonding
lumber and veneer by plywood and hardwood
producers, bought foreign exchange for the
importation of urea and formaldehyde which are the
main raw materials in the production of the said
glues. They paid P33,765.42 in November and
December 1949 and P6345.72 in May 1960. Prior
thereto, the petitioner sought the refund of the first
and second sum relying upon Resolution No. 1529 of
the Monetary Board of said bank, dated November
11

3, 1959, declaring that the separate importation of
urea and formaldehyde is exempt from said fee. The
Auditor of the Bank, Pedro Gimenez, refused to pass
in audit and approve the said refund on the ground
that the exemption granted by the board in not in
accord with the provision of section 2 of RA 2609.
ISSUE: WoN Urea and Formaldehyde are exempt by
law from the payment of the margin fee.
HELD: No, it is not exempt from payment of the
marginal fee. Urea formaldehyde is clearly a finished
product which is distinct from urea and
formaldehyde. The petitioner’s contends that the bill
approved in Congress contained the conjunction
“and” between the terms “urea” and
“formaldehyde” separately as essential elements in
the manufacture of “urea formaldehyde” and not
the latter. But this is not reflective of the view of the
Senate and the intent of the House of
Representatives in passing the bill. If there has been
any mistake in the printing of the bill before it was
passed the only remedy is by amendment or curative
legislation, not by judicial decree.
Section 17. The Senate and the House of
Representatives shall each have an Electoral
Tribunal, which shall be the sole judge of all contests
relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of
their respective Members. Each Electoral Tribunal
shall be composed of nine Members, three of whom
shall be Justices of the Supreme Court to be
designated by the Chief Justice, and the remaining
six shall be Members of the Senate or the House of
Representatives, as the case may be, who shall be
chosen on the basis of proportional representation
from the political parties and the parties or
organizations registered under the party-list system
represented therein. The senior Justice in the
Electoral Tribunal shall be its Chairman.
Note: Electoral Tribunal – It is the sole judge of
election contests relating to election, returns and
qualification of members of Congress.
KINDS
There are two electoral tribunals:
1. SET – Senate Electoral Tribunal
2. HRET – House of Representatives Electoral
Tribunal
Note: Both consist of 9 members each. 3 of whom
are Justices of Supreme Court, 6 others are coming
from political parties by “proportionate
representation.” The basis of the election to the
electoral tribunal to represent a political party is by
proportional representation from political parties
including the party list – you cannot just choose
them from one political party. They have to be
proportionate. You go by the number of members
consisting a political party and then divide that by
the number of the member of the house and
multiply it by 6 allocated for the political party.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 12
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
Example: You have two senators from the political
party of liberal party:
2 x 6 = number of representation in the tribunal
24
Q: What about representative coming from the party
list, will there be a chance for one sectoral
organization to be elected in the electoral tribunal?
A: SC said, for as long as they qualify the
qualification of proportionate representation, it is
for Congress to determine how they can go about it.
1. Composition - mixture of members of Congress
and of the Supreme Court
2. Jurisdiction of the Electoral Tribunals.- original
provision in sec 7 par. 5 of the Act of the United
States Congress of July 1, 1902 - "the assembly shall
be the judge of the elections, returns, and
qualifications of its members.
-the provision was taken from sec 5 Art 1 of the
Constitution of US providing that "each house shall
be the judge of the elections, returns, and
qualifications of its own members."
-the Act of the US Congress of Aug 29, 1916 sec 18
par. 1, modified the provision to read: "that senate
and house of rep, respectively, shall be the SOLE
judges of the elections, returns and qualifications of
their elective members." This exclusive grant of
jurisdiction at once effectively barred either House
from interference with the judgment of the other
House and also completely removed the subject
matter from the jurisdiction of the courts in
language that was full, clear, and complete.
-under the 1987 Constitution, COMELEC decides who
the winner is in the election.
-in election contest, the jurisdiction of the COMELEC
ends once a candidate has been proclaimed and has
taken his oath of office as a Member of Congress.
Jurisdiction then passes to the Electoral Tribunal of
either the House or the Senate.
3. Independence of the Electoral Tribunals. -
Although six members of the electoral tribunals are
members of Congress, the tribunals themselves are
not part of either House of Congress. They are
independent constitutional creations which have
power to create their own rules and are not under
the supervision or control of Congress.
-electoral are independent of the COMELEC hence
governed by the tribunal's own rules but they have
not jurisdiction over pre-proclamation controversies
which come under the jurisdiction of the COMELEC
-ET decisions are not subject to appeal to the SC.
However, SC is not totally excluded. Under Art VIII
Sec. 1, judicial power includes the authority to
determine whether or not there has been a grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
12

jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the government.
Section 18. There shall be a Commission on
Appointments consisting of the President of the
Senate, as ex officio Chairman, twelve Senators, and
twelve Members of the House of Representatives,
elected by each House on the basis of proportional
representation from the political parties or
organizations registered under the party-list system
represented therein. The Chairman of the
Commission shall not vote, except in case of a tie.
The Commission shall act on all appointments
submitted to it within thirty session days of the
Congress from their submission. The Commission
shall rule by a majority vote of all the Members.
Composition
- The Senate President – ex-officio chairman
- 12 Senators
- 12 Members of the HoR
^elected by each house on the basis of proportional
representation from the political parties and parties
and organizations registered under the party list
system therein
Coseteng vs. Mitra, Jr.
Coseteng- only member of KAIBA political party
ISSUE: Can she be entitled to one of the 12 seats?
HELD: No. HOR-202 members, 1 seat for CA must
have 16.8 members in the HOR or 8.4% of the total
membership. KAIBA was short of required number
even if she had the support if members not
belonging to her party.
Guingona, Jr. Vs. Gonzales
• Senatorial elections of 1992 yielded 15 LDP
senators, 5 NPC, 3 LAKAS, and 1 LP-PDP- Laban
• Proportional Representation: 7.5 LDP, 2.5 NPC, 1.5
LAKAS, .5 LP-PDP-Laban
• The Senate rounded up LDP and LP PDP Laban
while NPC and LAKAS were not rounded up.
ISSUE: Is this constitutional? HELD: No
RATIO: Deprived the other parties of their
representation
(NPC and LAKAS). 11 members only during that
time. 12 is nor mandatory.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 13
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
Daza vs. Singson
The composition is proportional to the size of the
political parties and organizations in the congress,
periodic reorganization may be necessary in order to
reflect changes in the proportion within congress. It
is understood that these changes in party affiliation
are permanent and not merely temporary.
Nature
Legislative check on the appointing authority of the
president
Independent of congress – Cunanan vs. Tan Powers
emanate directly from the Constitution Functions
are purely executive in Nature
Can promulgate its own rules
Supreme Court cannot pass upon the correctness of
the interpretation placed by the Commission of its
own rules
Shall act on all appointments submitted it within 30
session days of the congress from the submission
Ad interim appointments not acted upon are
deemed passed under Sec 16, Art 7.
Section 19. The Electoral Tribunals and the
Commission on Appointments shall be constituted
within thirty days after the Senate and the House of
Representatives shall have been organized with
the election of the President and the Speaker. The
Commission on Appointments shall meet only while
the Congress is in session, at the call of its
Chairman or a majority of all its Members, to
discharge such powers and functions as are herein
conferred upon it.
Shall be constituted within 30 days after the Senate
and HOR shall have been organized with the election
of the President and the Speaker.
Commission on Appointments
-may meet only while the congress is in session, at
the call of its chairman or a majority of its members
consent to or confirm the nominations pursuant to
Section 16, Article VII
Section 20. The records and books of accounts of the
Congress shall be preserved and be open to the
public in accordance with law, and such books shall
be audited by the Commission on Audit which shall
publish annually an itemized list of amounts paid to
and expenses incurred for each Member.
13

- Open to the public in accordance with the law
- Audited by the Commission on Audit
- COA- published an annually itemized list of
amounts paid and expenses incurred by each
member
Section 21. The Senate or the House of
Representatives or any of its respective committees
may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in
accordance with its duly published rules of
procedure. The rights of persons appearing in or
affected by such inquiries shall be respected.
Power of inquiry—with process to enforce it—is an
essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative
function. A legislative body cannot legislate wisely or
effectively in the absence of information respecting
the conditions which the legislation is intended to
effect of change. (Aurnault vs. Nazareno)
Limitations of Legislative Investigation
It must be in aid of legislation. In accordance with
the duly published rules of procedure. The rights of
the person appearing in or affected by such inquiries
shall be respected
Bill of rights
Right against self-incrimination Unreasonable
searches and seizures Right to demand
No person shall be punished for contumacy as a
witness unless his testimony is required in a matter
into which legislature or any of its committees has
jurisdiction to inquire.
Not necessary that every question must be
material to a proposed legislation
Materiality of the question is determined if
germane to subject of inquiry and not by its indirect
relation to any proposed or possible legislation
Investigations can also be conducted by Congress
Committees
Punishment ceases when House of Representatives
reaches final adjournment.
This power may be looked into by the Supreme
Court by virtue of Sec 1, Article 8.
Osmena Jr. vs. Pendatun
Congress has suspended the operation of a House
rule which could have protected Congressman
Osmena
Parliamentary rules may be waived or disregarded
by the legislative body—when private rights are not
affected
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 14
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
Section 22. The heads of departments may upon
their own initiative, with the consent of the
President, or upon the request of either House, as
the rules of each House shall provide, appear before
and be heard by such House on any matter
pertaining to their departments. Written questions
shall be submitted to the President of the Senate or
the Speaker of the House of Representatives at least
three days before their scheduled appearance.
Interpellations shall not be limited to written
questions, but may cover matters related thereto.
When the security of the State or the public
interest so requires and the President so states in
writing, the appearance shall be conducted in
executive session. Oversight functions of
congress. Intended to enable congress to
determine how laws it has passed are being
implemented.
Enable the department heads to be heard by the
legislature and thereby achieve cooperation
between the executive and legislative departments
Appearance of department heads is not mandatory
but directory. Own initiative or upon the request of
the house. It will be done as the rules of each house
prescribe.
President may or may not consent the appearance of
the department head. He may require the
appearance be in executive session.
Congress may refuse the initiative taken by the
department secretary.
Section 23. (1) The Congress, by a vote of two-thirds
of both Houses in joint session assembled, voting
separately, shall have the sole power to declare the
existence of a state of war.
(2) In times of war or other national emergency, the
Congress may, by law, authorize the President, for a
limited period and subject to such restrictions as it
may prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and
proper to carry out a declared national policy. Unless
sooner withdrawn by resolution of the Congress,
such powers shall cease upon the next adjournment
thereof.
Congress has the sole power to declare the existence
of a state of war – renouncing aggressive war
Section 2, Article 2. By a vote of 2/3 of both houses
in joint session assembled, voting separately.
Does not prohibit the waging of defensive war even
in the absence of a declaration of war or a
declaration of the existence of a state of war
Actual power to make war is an executive power-
sword of war
14

Congress may authorize the President to exercise
powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared
national policy.
Section 24. All appropriation, revenue or tariff bills,
bills authorizing increase of public debt, bills of local
application, and private bills shall originate
exclusively in the House of Representatives, but the
Senate may propose or concur with amendments.
Bills that originates from the HOR:
• Appropriation Bill –to set aside a sum of money
public use
• Revenue or Tariff Bills –for raising revenues
• Bills of local application –reach is limited to specific
localities, such as creation of a town
• Private bill –affect a private person, such as
granting citizenship to a foreigner
Presumed that district representatives are closer to
the pulse of the people than senators are and are
therefore better in the position to determine both
the extent of the legal burden they are capable of
bearing and the benefits that they need.
Tolentino vs. Secretary of Finance
-involves RA 7716 or the Value Added Tax Law
-After the House version was sent to the Senate, the
Senate introduced a substitute bill which apparently
it had prepared in anticipation of the House bill.
Later the President certified to the urgency of
passing the Senate version of the bill. After the 2
versions had gone to the Conference Committee, the
House approved the Conference Committee report
which for all practical purposes was the senate bill.
ISSUE: was there a violation of the rule on
origination?
HELD: No.
RATIO: Bill must originate from the House; but the
law itself
which is the product of the total bicameral
legislative process originates not just from the House
but from both Senate and House.
Section 25. (1) The Congress may not increase the
appropriations recommended by the President for
the operation of the Government as specified in the
budget. The form, content, and manner of
preparation of the budget shall be prescribed by law.
(2) No provision or enactment shall be embraced in
the general appropriations bill unless it relates
specifically to some particular appropriation therein.
Any such provision or enactment shall be limited in
its operation to the appropriation to which it relates.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 15
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
(3) The procedure in approving appropriations for
the Congress shall strictly follow the procedure for
approving appropriations for other departments and
agencies.
(4) A special appropriations bill shall specify the
purpose for which it is intended, and shall be
supported by funds actually available as certified by
the National Treasurer, or to be raised by a
corresponding revenue proposed therein.
(5) No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of
appropriations; however, the President, the
President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of
Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions
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.
(6) Discretionary funds appropriated for particular
officials shall be disbursed only for public purposes to
be supported by appropriate vouchers and subject to
such guidelines as may be prescribed by law.
(7) If, by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall
have failed to pass the general appropriations bill for
the ensuing fiscal year, the general appropriations
law for the preceding fiscal year shall be deemed
reenacted and shall remain in force and effect until
the general appropriations bill is passed by the
Congress.
No money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in
pursuance of an appropriation made by law is a limit
not on the power of Congress but on the disbursing
authority of the executive department
Section 26. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall
embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in
the title thereof.
(2) No bill passed by either House shall become a law
unless it has passed three readings on separate days,
and printed copies thereof in its final form have been
distributed to its Members three days before its
passage, except when the President certifies to the
necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a
public calamity or emergency. Upon the last reading
of a bill, no amendment thereto shall be allowed,
and the vote thereon shall be taken immediately
thereafter, and the yeas and nays entered in the
Journal.
Every bill shall embrace only one subject which shall
be expressed in the title thereof is mandatory and
not directory. Compliance with it is essential to the
validity of the legislation.
It should not cripple or impede proper legislation.
Giving the constitutional requirement a liberal
Interpretation (Sumulong vs. Comelec)
Sufficient compliance: Title expresses the general
subject and all the provisions of the statute are
germane to that general subject. Nature, scope and
15

consequences of the proposed laws and its
operation.
PASSAGE OF THE BILL
3 readings on 3 separate days. Printed copies of the
bill in its final form should be distributed 3 days
before its passage except when the President
certifies to the necessity of its immediate
enactment. The certification by the president is to
dispense from the requirement that the readings be
on separate days and that the bill be printed in its
final form and distributed there days before third
reading (Tolentino vs. Secretary of Finance).
Section 27. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress
shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the
President. If he approves the same, he shall sign it;
otherwise, he shall veto it and return the same with
his objections to the House where it originated,
which shall enter the objections at large in its Journal
and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such
reconsideration, two-thirds 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 two-thirds of all the Members of
that House, it shall become a law. In all such cases,
the votes of each House shall be determined by
yeas or nays, and the names of the Members
voting for or against shall be entered in its Journal.
The President shall communicate his veto of any bill
to the House where it originated within thirty days
after the date of receipt thereof; otherwise, it shall
become a law as if he had signed it.
(2) The President shall have the power to veto any
particular item or items in an appropriation, revenue,
or tariff bill, but the veto shall not affect the item or
items to which he does not object.
It must be approved by Congress. The legislative
action requires of Congress is a positive act-so not
enactment of law by legislative inaction (Miller v.
Mardo)
It must be approved by the President. Approval by
the President may be by positive act/ inaction. If the
Pres. doesn’t act on the bill within 30 days after the
receipt of the bill, the bill automatically becomes
law.
Final approval of a bill doesn’t make it immediately
effective. Laws only become effective after adequate
publication. (Tanada v. Tuvera)
Veto Power and Item-veto
- Bill vetoed by the Pres. may still become a law =
2/3 of all members of such House shall agree to pass
the bill. + Approval of the other House by vote of 2/3
of all its members.
Their yeas/ nays will be recorded in its Journal.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 16
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes
General rule: President can only veto entire bill, not
allowed to veto separate items.
Exception: appropriation, revenue and tariff bills-
He can item-veto.
Appropriation bill= purpose is to set apart a certain
amount from the public revenue for a specific
purpose.
Revenue bill= intended to levy taxes.
Tariff bill= imposes duties/ imposts whether for
revenue/ regulation.
Section 28. (1) The rule of taxation shall be uniform
and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a
progressive system of taxation.
(2) The 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.
(3) Charitable institutions, churches and parsonages
or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-
profit cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and
improvements, actually, directly, and exclusively
used for religious, charitable, or educational
purposes shall be exempt from taxation.
(4) No law granting any tax exemption shall be
passed without the concurrence of a majority of all
the Members of the Congress.
Power of taxation: Scope and Purpose
Purpose of the power to tax:
1. Raise revenue
2. Instrument of national and economic and social
policy
3. used as an instrument for the extermination of
undesirable activities and enterprises. It involves the
power to destroy
4. Tool for regulation
5. Power to keep alive. The foundation for the
imposition of tariffs designed for the
encouragement and protection of locally produced
goods against competition of imports (Hampton and
Co. v. US)
General limit:
Exists for the general welfare
16
 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I
Atty. Galeon 17
by: Ybarita, Julius Reyes

Limitation: exercised only for a public purpose an

attribute of sovereignty

-Strongest of all of the powers of the government

Adversely affecting as it does property rights, both

due process and equal protection clauses of the
Constitution may properly be invoked to invalidate
in appropriate cases a revenue measure

Section 29. (1) No money shall be paid out of the

Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation
made by law.

(2) No public money or property shall be

appropriated, applied, paid, or employed, directly or
indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect,
church, denomination, sectarian institution, or
system of religion, or of any priest, preacher,
minister, or other religious teacher, or dignitary as
such, except when such priest, preacher, minister, or
dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or to any
penal institution, or government orphanage or
leprosarium.

(3) All money collected on any tax levied for a special

purpose shall be treated as a special fund and paid
out for such purpose only. If the purpose for which a
special fund was created has been fulfilled or
abandoned, the balance, if any, shall be transferred
to the general funds of the Government.

Section 30. No law shall be passed increasing the

appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as
provided in this Constitution without its advice and
concurrence.

Section 31. No law granting a title of royalty or

nobility shall be enacted.

Section 32. The Congress shall, as early as possible,

provide for a system of initiative and referendum,
and the exceptions therefrom, whereby the people
can directly propose and enact laws or approve
or reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the
Congress or local legislative body after the
registration of a petition therefor signed by at least
ten per centum of the total number of registered
voters, of which every legislative district must be
represented by at least three per centum of the
registered voters thereof.

17