INTRODUCTION TO POLITICS

MEANING OF POLITICS
Politics in General
1. The word “politics” comes from the Greek word “polis” which means “city-state.” In the ancient world, city-states are small countries
regarded as centers of culture and civilization where people interact under a unified government. What transpires in the polisis politics. The
origin of the word therefore suggests that politics is a term encompassing the totality of human activities transpiring within the city-state. As
it is applied now, it denotes everything that transpires in the state as well as among states.
2. Politics denotes a social activity. It is in essence the interaction of individuals. As the Greek philosopher Aristotle explains, it is the master
science through which individuals collectively set structure, purpose, and ideals in their lives. Politics, therefore, does not emerge from the
activities of a single individual but from that of many.
3. Politics is about conflict and cooperation. On the one hand, conflict is caused by the diversity among individuals. People differ in the way they
perceive things, and disagree in almost every conceivable aspect of life. On the other hand, cooperation is motivated by men’s common goal
of achieving a happy life. While it is true that men argue and fight, it is also undeniable that they desire for peace. The process of overcoming
conflict to attain order and thereafter maintain that order is politics. In other words, politics is essentially conflict resolution.
4. Politics is the creation, maintenance, and amendment of societal norms or rules. While politics as conflict resolution aims at establishing order
in the society, the basis of order today is law. Undeniably, religion and other archaic institutions have already lost their central role as
sources of order. It is law now that serves as the undisputed order-establishing institution. Modern states and international organizations
rely on the adequacy and efficacy of their laws to meet the demands of the people to attain domestic and international peace. Politics
therefore, in its broad sense means conflict resolution through the creation, maintenance, and amendment of societal norms or rules.
Definition of Politics
1. It must first be pointed out that politics is a vague term. As a matter of fact, scholars and authorities in the field cannot agree on a common
definition of politics. The term includes so many concepts that it could mean almost anything (or everything). The descriptions above, for
example, are overly broad and may overlap with the meaning of other sciences. Even worse, its vagueness made it readily associable to
“deception, manipulation and corruption” so that its modern day connotation is simply everything that is “dirty.” From this perspective, the
definition of politics will always be contestable. The following definitions therefore will only serve as starting points, and the meaning of
politics will eventually be understood in the details of later discussions.
2. Politics is the science of government. As a science, it is a systematic body of knowledge (for the most part, practical) that deals with the
government and regulation, maintenance and development, and defense and augmentation of the state. It also deals with the protection of
the rights of its citizens, safeguarding and enhancement of morals, and harmony and peace of human relations.
3. However, other political scientists prefer to define politics as the art, rather than the science, of government. It is an art because it involves
the exercise of control or authority within the society through the creation and enforcement of consensus arrived at by the leaders. It
involves the process through which the government skillfully addresses the needs of the society by carefully allocating benefits, rewards,
and penalties. This is what David Easton means when he defined politics as the “authoritative allocation of values.” Under this definition,
politics takes place only within the polity or the machinery of the government. In other words, only the processes and events that happen in
the government bureaus, departments, and offices are said to be “political” while those outside, like businesses, religion, and family, are
“non-political.” It is in this sense also that politicians and political parties are said to be “political” while civil society is said to be non-
political.
4. Politics is the realm of public affairs or the state. Traditionally, “public” refers to the institution of the state which is funded by the people at
large through their taxes to satisfy their common interest. This is contrasted to “private” which refers to the civil society that is privately
funded to support their own interest. As the Greek used the term, state transactions (public) characterize the term political. When the Greek
philosopher Aristotle said “man by nature is a political animal,” he means that man is naturally inclined to live in a society. Aside from his
private life, man must have a public life, for this perfects his essence and gives him the “good life.” In addition, the social theorists even
argued that the common good could only be attained through the active participation of the citizens. Education as well as moral and
intellectual enlightenment, are among the few things that result from the public life. It must be noted that while there is a dichotomy of
public life and private life, these two are intimately connected in that they mutually depend on each other. And under this traditional sense,
politics (realm of the public/state) is intertwined with ethics (realm of the private/individual).
5. Politics is who gets what, when, and how. This is the famous definition of Harold Lasswell. The definition underscores the reality of “scarcity”
in the society. While human needs and wants are so diverse and numerous, the resources are always limited. The struggle involved in
allocating the scarce resources, and determining what to produce, how to distribute, and use them is said to be politics. Modern political
theories conform to this definition as it establishes the unique connection of politics and power. Power creates structures and explains the
struggle among individuals or groups of individuals. It is in this sense that politics deviates from ethics inasmuch as any means could be used
to get whatever is desired and whenever it is desired for as long as it serves the purpose.
6. According to Ponton and Gill, politics is the way in which social affairs are understood and ordered, and by which people acquire greater
control over the situation. The definition puts to light the different political ideologies and philosophies that underlie societal structures.
“Order” and the “understanding of reality” are shaped by the political orientation of the people. That by which people view and organize the
world is said to be politics. Without politics, there is anarchy and a state of constant war. But its existence establishes order in various forms.
It gives rise to different kinds of governments: monarchy, aristocracy and democracy. That the society should be ruled by a single individual,
by a selected few, or by all is a matter of preference that depends on the temperament of the affected group of people. What is important is
that politics helps the people acquire greater control over the vagaries of their existence.
7. From the foregoing definitions, it could be seen that politics could be defined in either of two senses: first, as associated to an “arena” or
place, and second, as a “process.” In the first sense, something is said to be political if it transpires in any of the apparatuses of the
 government. Definitions in paragraphs 2 to 4 fall under this. In the second sense, something is political because it entails distinctive qualities
that make it indeed political, regardless of the place it is performed. Definitions in paragraphs 5 and 6 fall under this.
BASIC CONCEPTS: ORDER, POWER, AND JUSTICE
To explain further the meaning of politics it is very helpful to dwell on political concepts, models, and theories.
Concepts are general or universal ideas shared by people. Models refer to networks of ideas that seek to explain
political realities. And theories refer to series of models which aim to systemically and empirically explain political
realities. These are intimately connected because one leads to another – concepts lead to the formation of models,
and models to theories.
The present section deals with three basic concepts: order, power, and justice.[1]
Order
1. Order is central to the study of politics because it shows the different components of human societies. Politics after all exists in diverse forms
or levels of societal structures. These structures or orders are community, government, and state:
(a) Community is one kind of social order which refers to an association of individuals who share a common identity.
This identity is formed by the unique circumstances surrounding the group of individuals like geography, history,
philosophy, religion, ideology, language, race, and allegiance. The cause of its existence is primarily protection of
individuals. Economic prosperity, cultural enrichment and other social functions are only offshoots of the same.
(b) Government is a higher level of social order that exists primarily for the maintenance and perpetuation of the
community. It is said to possess “sovereignty” if it can successfully assert its claim to rule. And it is said to
“legitimate” if its claim to rule (authority) is willingly accepted. It has the following forms: Monarchy, Aristocracy,
and Democracy. Monarchy is a kind of government in which one man (king) noted for his noble lineage and honor is
vested with the right to rule and control the society. If this man pursues his own selfish interest instead of the
common good, this form of government may turn into a “Tyranny.” Aristocracy is another kind of government in
which a selected few who are known for their wealth and education have the right to rule. If this selected few pursue
their own personal interests, it becomes an “Oligarchy.” And lastly, democracy is the rule by the people, for the
people, and of the people. If this form of government downgrades into the rule of people’s passions instead of reason
and law, it becomes “Demagoguery” or “Mobocracy.” Philippines has a democratic government.
(c) State is the largest social order today and in which the term politics is originally derived. It refers to a community
of persons more or less numerous, permanently occupying a definite portion of territory, having a government of
their own to which the great body of inhabitants render obedience, and enjoying freedom from external control.[2] It
could be seen in the definition that government is an element of the state. As a political concept, it has undergone
many developments and its discussion still occupies the very heart of the study of politics. A separate chapter will be
devoted for its discussion.
Power
1. The different social orders cannot be maintained without power. Their creation and perpetuation are brought about by the exercise of
power and the concomitant establishment of structures.
2. It is elementary to know that power has many sources aside from physical force. These include wealth, culture, diplomatic relations and
intelligence, to name a few. The basic rule is that the more abundant the power source, the greater the capabilities of the government.[3] In a
narrower sense, power implies “power over” people rather than the “power or ability to” do something. This includes influence over the
behavior of others, making them do things which they would not otherwise have done. Under such meaning of power, politics involves
manipulation through the popular methods of reward and punishment.
3. Political scientists and philosophers, like Niccolo Machiavelli and Friedrich Nietzsche, grounded their political treatises on the concept of
power. They explained the nature of politics by studying the essence of power.
Justice
1. It is said that the correct exercise of power produces justice. If in the exercise of its power and authority, the government gives what the
people need, protect and respect their rights, and put the common good over and above the personal interest of the leaders, then there is
said to be justice.
2. It must be highlighted that the embodiment of order and power in this modern times is law, whether written or customary. Thus, law is said
to be the approximation of justice.Justice is that on which law is anchored.
3. However, since law is a mere “approximation” of the ideal concept of justice, it is never perfect. Sometimes the law becomes unjust because it
can no longer capture perfect justice. An innocent person, for instance, may be convicted, or a perpetrator may be acquitted of a crime
 because of the technicalities and restrictions of the law on evidence. Nevertheless, law must still be upheld since it is still the best medium of
justice and by which power may be exercised correctly for the promotion of societal order.

APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF POLITICS

1. There are two basic approaches to study politics: political philosophy and political science. On the one hand, political philosophy is the
traditional approach in which the primary goal is to understand the essence or truth about politics. This approach aims to establish what
politics ought to be. As such, it is normative or prescriptive, analytical, speculative, and essentially ethical. It is normative or prescriptive
because it prescribes standards or rules of conduct; it establishes what “ought to be” the nature of politics and not “what it simply is.”
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle are among the proponents of this approach. It is analytical because the approach is to a large extent an
examination and literary analysis of the various classic writings of intellectuals and philosophers such as Confucius, Lao tzu, Plato, Aristotle,
St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and Marx, to name some. It is speculative because it entails
abstract, theoretical and not scientific explanations of the varied subjects of politics. And it is essentially ethical because the approach
basically presumes that ethics is the foundation of politics; the ethical formation of the individual is a condition precedent the society’s
political formation. The questions raised under this approach are “what is the essence of politics?”, “what is the ideal type of government?”,
“who should be and what are the attributes of a ruler?”, “what are the limits of the government?”, and “what are rights and limits of
individual freedom?”
2. On the other hand, political science is the empirical approach in which it places little emphasis on abstract and normative questions, and
concentrates on a dispassionate and objective description of the realities of politics. As such, it is descriptive, empirical, objective, and it
avoids ethics. It is descriptive because it simply establishes “what politics is” and not “what it ought to be;” it describes the political
phenomenon but does not prescribe standards or rules of conduct. It is empirical because it studies only observable facts, and not abstract
values and concepts. It is objective because it adheres strictly to the methods of the natural sciences; it considers only the observable
(quantifiable) facts that can be measured through the scientific method. It avoids ethics, in that values are not within its scope; only directly
observable facts are studied.
3. It is nevertheless wrong to ask which of the two approaches is better. They complement each other. While political philosophy provides the
aim, purpose, and guidelines of politics, political science gives a realistic account of what is actually happening in politics. Political science
concretizes the abstract concepts of political philosophy, while political philosophy provides a basis or direction to political science. As one
writer aptly puts it, political philosophy without political science is lame, and political science without political philosophy is blind.[4]

Guide Questions
1. What does politics have to do with conflict and cooperation?
2. Should politics be defined as a process or an arena?
3. Discuss briefly and distinguish from each other the basic concepts of politics.
4. What is the relation of justice and law?
5. How do political philosophy and political science as approaches in studying politics differ?

WHAT IS GOVERNANCE?
MEANING OF GOVERNANCE
Governance in General
1. The word “governance” came from the Latin verb “gubernare,” or more originally from the Greek word “kubernaein,” which means “to steer.”
Basing on its etymology, governance refers to the manner of steering or governing, or of directing and controlling, a group of people or a
state.
2. Governance is essentially related to politics, in that politics is often defined as the art of governance. Just as politics talks about governments,
institutions, power, order, and the ideals of justice, governance also deals with the public sector, power structures, equity, and ideals of
public administration. Nevertheless, they are distinct from each other in the sense that politics is broader than governance. Traditionally, the
study of politics entails the concept of the “good life” and the “ideal society,” which are so broad they include a web of subjects and every
possible form of government. The study of governance, on the contrary, is generally attuned to the concept of democracy, and on how the
government and the civil society arrive at a decision in meeting their needs.
Definition of Governance
Governance is commonly defined as the exercise of power or authority by political leaders for the well-being of their
country’s citizens or subjects. It is the complex process whereby some sectors of the society wield power, and enact and
promulgate public policies which directly affect human and institutional interactions, and economic and social
development. The power exercised by the participating sectors of the society is always for the common good, as it is
 essential for demanding respect and cooperation from the citizens and the state. As such, a great deal about
governance is the proper and effective utilization of resources.
Governance and Government
1. Governance is traditionally associated with government. In literatures, they are often used interchangeably. But in the 1980s, political
scientists broadened the meaning of governance as including, not just government actors, but also civil-society actors.[1]Today, governance
includes three sectors: the public sector (state actors and institutions), the private sector (households and companies), and the civil society
(non-governmental organizations). These three sectors are said to work hand in hand in the process of governance. This new use of the term
focuses on the role of “networks” in the achievement of the common good, whether these networks are intergovernmental, transnational, or
international.[2] In other words governance is broader than government in that other sectors are included in it.
2. Many authors also distinguish the two by associating government with “control and domination,” and governance with “decentralization and
relational management.” On the one hand, government refers to a central institution which wields power over its subjects. It is the
instrument patterned after the model of “command and control,” the government being in command over the affairs of the people. On the
other hand, governance is closely associated with the concept of decentralization of power and the need for inter-sectoral management.
Governance is based on the realization that the government cannot do everything for the people, so that in order to survive the state should
not only rely on government but also on the other sectors of the society.
3. Thus, under the current trend, there is a need to move from the “traditional hierarchical exercise of power by the government” to the new
notion of a “dispersed and relational power in governance” – from government to governance. To govern should now mean
to facilitate or regulate, not to dominate or command.
Importance of Studying Governance

From the information learned in the discussion of governance, the people, most especially the citizens, will be aware
of the need for good governance. Consequently, such awareness should move them to action. For their continued
empowerment and sustainable development, they have to know how to fight for their rights by knowing what to
expect from Philippine governance. Thus, what will follow is an exposition of the basic concepts of governance, the
ideal type of governance, and the status of the Philippines vis-à-vis the indicators of good governance.

PROCESSES AND ACTORS IN GOVERNANCE

Decision-Making and Implementation
Governance entails two processes: decision-making and implementation of the decision. In broad terms, decision-
making refers the process by which a person or group of persons, guided by socio-political structures, arrive at a
decision involving their individual and communal needs and wants. Implementation is the process that logically
follows the decision; it entails the actualization or materialization of the plan or decision. Governance is not just
decision-making because decision without implementation is self-defeating. Neither is it just implementation
because there is nothing to implement without a decision or plan. Thus, the two processes necessarily go hand-in-
hand in, and are constitutive of, governance.
Actors and Structures
1. Understanding the two processes requires an analysis of the “actors” involved and “structures” established for making and implementing a
decision. An actor is a sector or group or institution that participates in the process of decision-making and implementation. A structure
refers to an organization or mechanism that formally or informally guides the decision-making process and sets into motion the different
actors and apparatuses in the implementation process.
2. Having such a broad scope, governance has different facets and may be applied in different contexts, such as corporate governance,
international governance, and national and local governance.[3] In each context, governance has different actors and structures. Depending
on the kind of decision made and the structure implementing it, governance may be good or bad governance.
3. The government is almost always the main actor in governance, whether it is in the corporate, international, national or local level. The
government is called the “public sector.” While it is the biggest actor in governance, it is not the only actor. Modern complex societies, in
order to meet the growing demands of development, are managed in different levels by various actors. Even communist governments work
with other sectors, especially with international organizations and multi-national corporations, in meeting their communist ends. The main
role of the public sector is to provide an enabling environment for the other actors of governance to participate and respond to the mandate
of the common good.
4. All actors other than the government are called the “civil society.” The civil society includes non-governmental organizations, and other
community-based and sectoral organizations, such as association of farmers, charitable institutions, cooperatives, religious communities,
political parties, and research institutes. These organizations are private in nature but have public functions or objectives. The Philippine
Red Cross, for instance, is a non-governmental organization. It is a private charitable institution the serves the community especially during
disasters and emergencies by providing medical assistance and disaster support services.
5. The study of Philippine governance, however, includes the business or private sector as an indispensable partner in development. To cope
with the ever growing demands of development, the public sector must necessarily tie-up with the private sector most especially in the
financial
6. In the national and international level, decision-making is greatly influenced by actors like the media, international organizations, multi-
national corporations, and international donors. Thus, from the foregoing, it should be clear that governance involves several actors in multi-
level structures.
Informal Actors and Bad Governance
1. Other informal actors also exist, such as organized crime syndicates and powerful families. Their influence is felt more clearly in local
governments, and in rural and urban areas. Most often than not, these actors are the cause of corruption, in that legitimate government
objectives are distorted by their illegal and private interests. Worse, they manipulate government officials and agencies, and cause
widespread yet organized violence in the community. In urban and rural areas, for example, the rich and powerful families control the
economy by controlling the local government officials. They bring about a controlled environment so that decisions must always favor them.
Allegedly, even government officials, both local and national, are not just influenced but themselves members of organized crime syndicates
with the purpose of using public office and, consequently, public funds for personal aggrandizement.
2. When these actors and informal structures disrupt, corrupt and upset the legitimate objectives and ideals of the society, bad governance will
result which is considered as the chief problem of the society. Problems deepen and multiply because of bad governance. Inasmuch as
economics and politics are interrelated, poor economy is caused by bad governance. International aids and loans, for instance, are scarce in a
badly governed country. International donors and financial institutions are increasingly basing their aid and loans on the condition that
reforms that ensure “good governance” are undertaken.[4]Recognizing these realities, current economic and political goals of countries all
over the world are aimed at “good governance.” It is an ideal so broad and elusive the realization of which is yet to be achieved. More so, the
contemporary meaning of “development” is good governance, or more specifically a reform from faulty governance to good governance.
What good governance is will therefore be discussed next.

INDICATORS OF GOOD GOVERNANCE

Eight Indicators of Good Governance
1. Good governance is understood through its eight indicators or characteristics: (1) Participatory; (2) Rule of Law; (3) Effective and Efficient;
(4) Transparent; (5) Responsive; (6) Equitable and Inclusive; (7) Consensus Oriented; and (8) Accountability. They are inextricably related
to each other. For instance, without active participation among the various actors in governance, there would be a concomitant lack of
responsiveness. Likewise, if decision-making is not transparent, then inevitably there would be no participation, accountability, and
decisions are not consensus oriented. These indicators should, however, be understood in the context of good “democratic” governance.
Some of the indicators cannot be applied in other forms of government. For example, good communist governance could never be consensus
oriented or genuinely participatory.
2. It must also be emphasized that good governance and development should not be based exclusively on economic growth. Through global
persuasion, good governance and development signify a broader spectrum of things, such as protection of human rights, equitable
distribution of wealth, enhancement of individual capabilities and creation of an enabling environment to foster participation and growth of
human potentials. As it evolved today, sustainable development necessitates “people empowerment” and “respect for human
rights.”[5] After all, economic prosperity or the minimization of poverty and unemployment depends on how the state unleashes the full
potential of its human resource by recognizing their vital roles and according full respect for human rights.
Participation
1. Good governance essentially requires participation of different sectors of the society. Participation means active involvement of all affected
and interested parties in the decision-making process. It requires an enabling environment wherein pertinent information is effectively
disseminated and people could respond in an unconstrained and truthful manner. It also means gender equality, recognizing the vital roles
of both men and women in decision-making.
2. More fundamentally, the need for participation is a recognition of the limits of a “verticalized system” of governance. A verticalized system,
or the top-down approach, refers to a state or government monopoly both of powers and responsibilities. While the government is still the
most potent actor in the process of governance, the participation of other sectors is already a necessity because of the always evolving
complexity and ever growing needs of the societies, especially in the financial sphere. What should now be utilized is the so-called
“horizontal system” where the government works hand in hand with other sectors of the society. The different sectors are
considered partners of the government in attaining development goals. Governance should no longer be government monopoly but
government management or inter-sectoral participation.
3. Participation in representative democracies may either be direct or indirect, and recommendatory or actual. It could be indirect and
recommendatory because in principle the form of government is based on delegation of powers. In the Philippines, which possesses features
of both direct and indirect democracy, indirect participation is done through public consultations or hearings, while direct participation is
through elections, initiatives and referendums.
4. The management of highly complex societies and of their ever growing needs requires a participatory form of governance by diffusing
power. The move for decentralization is a response to this as it widens the base of participation and allows local government units to
exercise governmental powers directly within their respective districts. Service delivery is enhanced because of the proximity of local
government units to their constituents, and because of the linking which happens between the national government and regional concerns.
5. Participation is one of the strengths of Philippine governance. The 1987 Philippine Constitution is replete of provisions dealing with
relational and inter-sectoral governance. The Local Government Act of 1989 was borne out of the need for decentralization in Philippine
governance. As such, these and other related legislations may be considered as normative standards for good governance.
Rule of Law
1. Democracy is essentially the rule of law. It is through the law that people express their will and exercise their sovereignty. That the
government is of law and not of men is an underlying democratic principle which puts no one, however rich and powerful, above the law.
 Not even the government can arbitrarily act in contravention of the law. Thus, good democratic governance is fundamentally adherence to
the rule of law.
2. Rule of law demands that the people and the civil society render habitual obedience to the law. It also demands that the government acts
within the limits of the powers and functions prescribed by the law. The absence of rule of law is anarchy. Anarchy happens when people act
in utter disregard of law and when the government act whimsically or arbitrarily beyond their powers. In more concrete terms, rule of law
means “peace and order,” “absence of corruption,” “impartial and effective justice system,” “observance and protection of human rights,” and
“clear, publicized, and stable laws.”
3. What the law seeks to promote is justice. When there is dearth of legislation for curbing social evils, or even if there is, but the same is
ineffectual or unresponsive, and when there is no faithful execution of the law, then justice is not attained. When the justice system is biased
and discriminatory, when it favors the rich and the influential over the poor and lowly, or when the legal processes are long, arduous,
unavailable or full of delays, then justice is not attained. Then when the actors of governance can minimize, if not eliminate, these injustices,
then there is said to be rule of law.
4. Rule of law also requires that laws are responsive to the needs of the society. Archaic or irrelevant laws must be amended or repealed to
cater to modern demands.
5. The Philippines does not fare well in this aspect of good governance. In spite of being one of the oldest democracies in the region, the
Philippines ranked as last among seven indexed Asian countries according to the World Justice Project Rule of Law Index. Generally, the
reasons for ranking last are “lack of respect for law,” “pervasive and systemic corruption in the government,” and “circumvention of the law.”
Lack of respect for law is generally caused by distrust on the integrity of law enforcement agencies. Order and security are compromised and
criminal justice is rendered ineffectual.

Systemic corruption has long been a problem in the Philippines that like a malignant tumor it keeps on sucking the
life out of the country. Allegedly, it is the key officials in the government who direct the perpetration of this crime.
What became clear from a long string of corruption and plunder cases is the true motive of many aspiring politicians
– money. The huge amount of money spent during election campaigns are but mere investments for a more
profitable return during their term in office.

In addition, the justice system is flooded by legal practitioners who are experts at circumventing the law.
Circumvention happens when there is compliance with the letter of the law but violation of its spirit and purpose.
Due to technicalities, for instance, highly paid lawyers can find ways for their rich and powerful clients to evade the
law. Although apparently there is observance of law, it is only superficial as the real end of the law is forfeited. As
such, there is a concomitant violation of fundamental rights of the people and ineffective administration of justice.
6. Nevertheless, the Philippines has exerted efforts in promoting the rule of law. The series of cases filed against high ranking officials, previous
Presidents, members of the judiciary, and high profile persons for graft and corrupt practices prove one thing clearly: the honest drive of the
current administration to clean the government from corrupt traditional politicians. In addition, legislations were made to hasten the legal
process. The “Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004” (R.A. 9285), for instance, seeks to unclog the court dockets by promoting a speedy,
efficient, and less expensive resolution of disputes. The “Judicial Affidavit Rule” issued by the Supreme Court in 2013 also lessened to a great
extent the time and expenses of litigation.
Effectiveness and Efficiency
1. Good governance requires that the institutions, processes, and actors could deliver and meet the necessities of the society in a way that
available resources are utilized well. That the different actors meet the needs of the society means that there is effective governance. That the
valuable resources are utilized, without wasting or underutilizing any of them, means that there is efficient governance. Effectiveness
(meeting the needs) and efficiency (proper utilization of resources) must necessarily go together to ensure the best possible results for the
community.
2. Concretely, effectiveness and efficiency demands “enhancement and standardization of the quality of public service delivery consistent with
international standards,” “professionalization of bureaucracy,” “focusing of government efforts on its vital functions, and elimination of
redundancies or overlaps in functions and operations,” “a citizen-centered government,” and “an improved financial management system of
the government.”[6]
3. Public service delivery, especially of front-line agencies, must promptly and adequately cater the needs of the citizens. Doing so requires
simplified government procedures and inexpensive transaction costs. Cumbersome procedures and expensive costs trigger corruption and
red tape. “Red Tape” refers to the disregard for timeframes in procedures by government agencies through procrastination in public service
delivery or under-the-table or unofficial transactions.[7] To further curb such possibilities, the government agencies must comply with their
citizen’s charter and use up-to-date information and communications technology to reduce processing time. There must also be coordination
among various government agencies to eliminate redundant information requirements.
4. Professionalism in Philippine bureaucracy requires competence and integrity in civil service. Appointments to civil service must be
depoliticized and must be based solely on merits. Effectiveness and efficiency also demands that the programs and objectives of the various
government agencies are aligned with individual performance goals. The increases in compensation are likewise necessary for the economic
well-being, sustained competence and boosted morale of the civil servants.
5. Although still insufficient, efforts were made to attain effectiveness and efficiency in Philippine governance. The Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007
(ARTA), for instance, was passed to require the setting up of Citizen’s Charter for a simplified procedure and to facilitate governmental
transactions. Also, many government departments and agencies pursued a rationalization program to check excessive and redundant
staffing.
 Transparency
1. Transparency, as an indicator of good governance, means that people are open to information regarding decision-making process and the
implementation of the same. In legal terms, it means that information on matters of public concern are made available to the citizens or
those who will be directly affected. It also means that transactions involving public interests must be fully disclosed and made accessible to
the people. It is anchored on the democratic right to information and right to access of the same. Transparency is necessary not just from
government transactions but also in those transactions of the civil society and private sector imbued with public interests.
2. The reason why there should be transparency is to promote and protect democratic ideals. When there is transparency, people are placed in
a better position to know and protect their rights as well as denounce corrupt or fraudulent practices in the public sector and in the private
sector.
3. Although again insufficient, efforts were made in pursuit of transparency in Philippine governance. As far as the government sector is
concerned, the current administration, consistent with its drive of curbing corruption, promotes honesty and integrity in public service. It is
currently pursuing the passage of the Freedom of Information Bill and other related legislations, as well as intensifying people’s engagement
in local governance. Transparency in budget and disbursements are, however, still far from being substantially implemented.
Responsiveness
1. Responsiveness means that institutions and processes serve all stakeholders in a timelyand appropriate manner. It also means that actors
and structures of governance easily give genuine expression to the will or desire of the people. In other words, the interests of all citizens
must be well protected in a prompt and appropriate manner so that each of them can appreciate and take part in the process of governance.
While responsiveness is also a characteristic sought from the private sector and civil society, more is demanded from the government or the
public sector.
2. Gender equality is engrained in the egalitarian principles of democracy. Gender concerns that respond to the women and their community
must always be part of the agenda of public sector and civil society. Thus, emerging as important areas in the study of democratic
governance are “Gender and Development” and “Gender Responsiveness.” The participation of women in governance within the context of
“gendered socialization” rests on how responsive the structures and processes are to their roles and needs.
3. Some of the important efforts made to attain responsive governance in the Philippines are decentralization, creation of citizen’s charter in all
frontline agencies (as required by ARTA), and gender sensitivity programs. First, through decentralization, local governments, which are
more proximate to their constituents, serve more promptly the people, who in turn become more involved in decision-making. Second, every
government agency now has it Citizen’s Charter, which provides timeframes for every step in attaining frontline services. Agencies now must
also respond to written queries sent by the stakeholders or interested parties within a period of ten days, otherwise there will be delayed
service. However, this aspect of governance still remains to be one of the causes for the decline of public’s confidence in the public sector.
Although the ARTA has been passed, there is still so much delay in public service delivery. The failure of the government agencies to explain
the charters to the stakeholders is one of the main reasons why there is still delay.
Equity and Inclusiveness
1. Equity and inclusiveness means that all the members of the society, especially the most vulnerable ones or the grassroots level, must be
taken into consideration in policy-making. Everyone has a stake in the society and no one should feel alienated from it. Particularly, those
who belong to the grassroots level must not only be the subject of legislation but they must be given the opportunity to participate in
decision or policy making.
2. Social equity refers to a kind of justice that gives more opportunity to the less fortunate members of the society. It is based on the principle
that those who have less in life should have more in law. Good governance demands that the actors must give preferential attention to the
plight of the poor. Laws must be geared towards this end and the society must actively participate in the promotion of the same.
3. The Philippine Government has done extensive efforts in promoting equity and inclusiveness. The Constitution makes it as one of its state
policies the promotion of social justice. Pursuant to this, the Congress has enacted social legislations like the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law which aims at freeing the farmer tenants from the bondage of the soil. Also, representation in the Congress, under the party list
system, is constitutionally mandated to have sectoral representation of the underprivileged. Gender and Development programs are in the
process of being integrated with the various structures and institutions in the country. But legislation is one thing; implementation is
another. It is in the faithful implementation of these laws that the country failed. Inequality is especially felt in the justice system, electoral
system, and even in the bureaucracy itself.
Consensus Oriented
1. Governance is consensus oriented when decisions are made after taking into consideration the different viewpoints of the actors of the
society. Mechanisms for conflict resolution must be in place because inevitably conflict that will arise from competing interests of the actors.
To meet the consensus, a strong, impartial, and flexible mediation structure must be established. Without such, compromises and a broad
consensus cannot be reached that serves that best interest of the whole community.
2. Fundamentally, democratic governance is based on the partnership of the actors of the society in providing public services. Decisions-
making must therefore entail recognition of their respective interests as well as their respective duties. The essential of governance could
never be expressed in a unilateral act of policy making by the public sector or other dominant sectors. Public hearings or consultations in
arriving at a consensus are therefore inherently necessary in the process of governance.
3. Among the things done by the Philippines in promoting a consensus oriented governance are: (1) creation of a wide-based of representation
in the Congress; (2) a two-tiered legislature or bicameralism which subjects legislation to the evaluation of national and district legislators;
and (3) necessity of public hearings or consultations of various governmental policies and actions.
Accountability
1. Accountability means answerability or responsibility for one’s action. It is based on the principle that every person or group is responsible
for their actions most especially when their acts affect public interest. The actors have an obligation to explain and be answerable for the
consequences of decisions and actions they have made on behalf of the community it serves.
2. Accountability comes in various forms: political, hierarchical, and managerial accountability. Political accountability refers to the
accountability of public officials to the people they represent. Hierarchical accountability refers to the ordered accountability of the various
agencies and their respective officers and personnel in relation to their program objectives. Managerial accountability refers to employee
 accountability based on organization and individual performance. A system of rewards and punishment must be in place to strengthen the
processes and institutions of governance.
3. The Philippines in the recent years had endeavored to comply with the requirements of accountability. It had put in action the concept of
political accountability as it held answerable erring public officials involved in graft and corruption and for acts contrary to the mandate of
the constitution. It had also strengthened parliamentary scrutiny through legislative investigations and creation of special committees
exercising oversight functions. The Office of the Ombudsman, considered as the public watchdog, has become ever so active in investigating
and prosecuting graft and plunders cases. Citizen’s Charter, as required by ARTA, was also an important tool in promoting professional
public service values. In this area, Philippine governance has done relatively well.

CURRENT STATE OF GOVERNANCE IN THE PHILIPPINES

1. The Philippines is plagued by bad governance. Based on the six dimensions of governance in the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI), it
ranks in the lower half of the percentile. In 2010-2011, the Philippines ranked only 85th in the Global Competitive Index (GCI), lagging behind
most of its Southeast Asian neighbors. The decline of trust on the actors of governance and the consequential poor economic condition were
brought about by the systemic corruption among and between public officials and private organizations. In 2013, it ranked 94 th among 177
countries in the Corruption Perception Index. Among the key institutions in the Philippines perceived to be most corrupt based on the Global
Corruption Index are “political parties,” “judiciary,” “police,” “public officials and civil servants,” and “legislature.” This means all branches of
the Philippine government are now challenged.
2. As perceived and experienced by the common Filipino masses, the foremost indicators of bad governance in the Philippines are the
unending cycle of poverty, the huge gap between the rich and the poor, the deep-seated tradition of corruption, mistrust on formal
government institutions, yawning cynicism on the true motive of political actions, instability of the economic environment, constant threats
to the authority of the established government, and questions on accountability and transparency. These are the usual content of everyday
broadcast media, so common that there perceived to be the normal state of affairs in the Philippines.
3. Bad governance is the root cause of all evils. It is what prevents the Philippines from achieving its Millennium Development Goals. Rising
above such state of governance is a political imperative and the ideal solution to a wide range of politico-economic problems. While the
Philippines has already created “islands of good governance”[8] in some national agencies and local government units, its overall state is still
miserable.[9]

Guide Questions:
1. Who are the actors in the process of governance? How do they interact in coming up with, and in implementing, decisions?
2. How are the indicators of good governance related to each other? Give a concrete example of your answer.
3. How does governance transform into bad governance? Give concrete examples.
4. What is the status of governance here in the Philippines? Support your answer.
5. Give your recommendations on how to improve Philippine governance.

THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT

This paper discusses the three departments of the Philippine Government (legislative, executive, and judicial
department) and three Constitutional Commissions, the principles and doctrines underlying their structure and
composition, and their respective roles, powers, and functions. The paper basically discusses the Constitution of
Government.

At the end of the discussion, the students must be able to:

1. Explain the basic political law doctrines involving the Philippine Government;

2. Explain and distinguish the three branches of the government;

3. Identify and compare the respective roles, functions and composition of the branches of the government; and

4. Explain and distinguish the powers, functions, and jurisdiction of the three Constitutional Commissions.

PRELIMINARIES
1. Definition of Government. Government has been defined as that institution or collection of institutions through
which a sovereign society makes and implements law which enable men to live with each other or which are imposed
upon the people forming the society by those who have the authority of prescribing them.
2. Definition of “Government of the Republic of the Philippines.” Under Section 2(1) of the Administrative Code of
the Philippines, the “Government of the Republic of the Philippines” is defined as “the corporate governmental
entity through which the functions of government are exercised throughout the Philippines, including, save as the
contrary appears from the context, the various arms through which political authority is made effective in the
Philippines, whether pertaining to the autonomous regions, the provincial, city, municipal, or barangay
subdivisions, or other forms of local government.” In other words, it refers to the corporate institution which acts as
an instrument through which the people exercise their sovereignty. It is composed of the central or national
government and local government units.
3. Overview of the Structure of the Philippine Government. As provided in Article II of the Constitution, the
Philippine Government is democratic and republican. It follows the separation of powers, so that as provided in
Articles VI, VII and VIII, it divides itself into three branches: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. Although these
branches have their own particular powers and functions, they form only one coherent government with a common
purpose. Independent Constitutional Commissions were also created as constitutional safeguards for the other
aspects of governance in the Philippines, such as audit of public funds, conduct of elections, and maintenance of civil
service. The intricacies of Philippine bureaucracy are laid down in the Constitution of Government, which will be
discussed below.

SEPARATION OF POWERS

Meaning of the Doctrine

The Doctrine of Separation of Powers entails: first, the division of the powers of the government into three, which
are legislative, executive, and judicial; and second, the distribution of these powers to the three major branches of
the government, which are the Legislative Department, Executive Department, and the Judicial Department.
Basically, it means that the Legislative Department is generally limited to the enactment of the law and not to
implementation or interpretation of the same; the Executive Department is generally limited to the implementation
of the law and not to the enactment or interpretation of the same; and the Judicial Department is generally limited
to the interpretation and application of laws in specific cases and not to the making or implementation of the same.

Purpose of the Doctrine

Prevention of Monopoly of Power. Separation of powers is said to be an attribute of republicanism, in that, among
other reasons, it seeks to prevent monopoly or concentration of power to one person or group of persons, and
thereby forestalls dictatorship or despotism. Sovereignty resides in the people, and it should remain that way.
Government officials, who are the representatives of the people, must exercise the powers of their office in the
interest of the public. While representational exercise of power brings out the essence of republicanism, too much
concentration of power rips it apart, as was experienced some administrations.
Separation not Exclusive
Important to understand is the meaning of “separation” not as exclusivity but as “collaboration.” While each of the
Departments exercises its respective power, it does so in collaboration with the other Departments because in the
end they all belong to one unified government with a common purpose. Appointment, for example, of Members of
the Supreme Court by the President must be upon the recommendation of the Judicial and Bar Council. In here
before the President, who belongs to the executive branch, appoint a Supreme Court justice, a recommendation
must first be given to him by the JBC, which is an independent body in the judiciary. Another example would be the
use of public funds. In here, the President prepares the budget, on the basis of which the Congress enacts an
appropriations bill which will then be submitted and approved by the President.

Checks and Balances

From the examples above one can understand the corollary doctrine of “checks and balances.” Under the doctrine,
there is no absolute separation of the three branches of the government, but to maintain their coequality each
department checks the power of the others. Generally, the departments cannot encroach each others’ power, but
constitutional mechanisms allow each one of them to perform acts that would check the power of others to prevent
monopoly, concentration, and abuse of power. For example, the Judicial and Bar Council recommends nominees to
the President so that the latter will not capriciously appoint someone whom he can easily convert into a puppet and
thereby become his medium to control the judiciary. In the same way, the disbursement of public funds cannot
depend solely upon the discretion of the President, but must be based on legislation by the Congress.

Presidential System

The Philippines has a presidential form of government because it observes the principle of separation of powers. The
ordinary connotation of presidential system is that it is headed by a president, as distinguished from a parliamentary
system which is headed by a prime minister. The real essence, however, of the presidential system and that which
distinguishes it from the parliamentary is its strict observance of the separation of powers. Under the presidential
system, any governmental act in violation of the said doctrine is null and void. The government is divided into three
branches and each is limited to the power delegated to it. On the contrary, under the parliamentary form, the
legislative and executive branches are “coordinate branches” so that the two organs are fused together as one body
performing both legislative and executive functions. The Prime Minister, for example, is chosen from among the
lawmakers in the parliament to become the head of the state. His term is at the pleasure of the parliament, thus,
making the executive branch intrinsically merged with the legislative.

THE LEGISLATURE AND THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

Legislative Power

1. Meaning. The word “legislative” is derived from the Latin “lex” which means “law.” In general, legislative power
refers to the power to make and unmake laws. Laws are rules or collection of rules, whether written or unwritten,
prescribed under the authority of a political society for the common good. The “Legislative Department”
(Legislature) is the law-making branch of the government.
2. Delegation to the Congress. Fundamentally, legislative power is an attribute of sovereignty, in that the
Constitution itself, the fundamental law of the State, is a legislation of the sovereign people. However, through the
Constitution, the people “delegated” the legislative power to the Congress of the Philippines. Section 1, Article VI
states that “Legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines…” The delegation of power entails a
surrender of authority to the representatives, or in the case of legislative power, to the Congress. Thus, law-making
can only be performed by the Congress, even if the law it enacts involves the people.
3. Reservation to the People. The Constitution, however, makes a reservation as to the delegation, in that it explicitly
states: “… except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.” In other words,
there is no complete delegation of law-making power to the Congress, as the power is reserved to the people in cases
of initiative and referendum. Thus, laws are made or unmade, first, by the Congress in the form of “statutes,” and
second, by the people in initiatives and referendums; legislative power is exercised by the Congress and the
sovereign Filipino people.
4. Legislative Power as Exercised by Congress. Legislative power as exercised by Congress manifests itself more
specifically in the Constitution as “power of appropriation,” “power of taxation,” and “power of concurrence.”
(a) Power of Appropriation. Section 29 (1), Article VI speaks of the power to appropriate. It states, “No money shall
be paid out of the Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation made by law.” Appropriation means the
authorization by law for the use of a certain sum of the public funds. An appropriations law is necessary before
public funds may be spent by the government for its projects. The government needs money in all its activities and
projects so that the power of appropriation, also known as the “power of the purse,” is said to be one of the most
important prerogatives of the Congress.
(b) Power of Taxation. The power, which is one of the inherent powers of the state, is generally exercised by the
legislative department. The Constitution limits such power as follows: “The rule of taxation shall be uniform and
equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.” As was discussed in Chapter 4, taxation must
be uniform, equitable, and progressive. Any law passed by the Congress contrary to this provision is null and void.
(c) Power of Concurrence. Section 21, Article VII states that “no treaty or international agreement shall be valid and
effective unless concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.” This refers to the power of
concurrence of the Congress in which no treaty can become binding and effective as a domestic law without the two-
thirds concurrence of the Members of the Senate.

Non-Delegation of Powers

1. Meaning and Explanation. The Congress cannot further delegate the power delegated to it by the people. This is in
keeping with the principle of non-delegation of powers which is applicable to all the three branches of the
government. The rule states that what has been delegated cannot further be delegated – potestas delegata non
delegari potest. A delegated power must be discharged directly by the delegate and not through the delegate’s agent.
It is basically an ethical principle which requires direct performance by the delegate of an entrusted power. Further
delegation therefore constitutes violation of the trust reposed by the delegator on the delegate. The people, through
the Constitution, delegated lawmaking powers to the Congress, and as such, it cannot as a rule delegate further the
same to another.
2. Exceptions. In order to address the numerous and complex demands of legislative function, the Constitution
provides exceptions to the rule. Further delegation is permitted in the following cases:
(a) Delegation to the people at large. The Congress further delegates its legislative power by allowing direct
legislation by the people in cases of initiative and referendum;
(b) Delegation of emergency powers to the President. Section 23 (2), Article VI of the Constitution states that “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.” Emergency powers are delegated to the President by the Congress to effectively solve the problems
caused by war or other crisis which the Congress could not otherwise solve with more dispatch than the President;
(c) Delegation of tariff powers to the President. Section 28 (2), Article VI of the Constitution states that “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.” Tariff powers are
delegated to the President by the Congress to efficiently and speedily solve economic problems posed by foreign
trade which the Congress could not otherwise address with more dispatch than the President;
(d) Delegation to administrative bodies. The Congress delegates the so called “power of subordinate legislation” to
administrative bodies. Due to the growing complexity of modern society, it has become necessary to allow
specialized administrative bodies to promulgate supplementary rules, so that they can deal with technical problems
with more expertise and dispatch than the Congress or the courts. Regulations or supplementary rules passed by the
administrative bodies are intended to fill-in the gaps and provide details to what is otherwise a broad statute passed
by Congress. For the rules and regulations to be valid and binding, they must be in accordance with the statute on
which they are based, complete in themselves, and fix sufficient standards. If any of the requirements is not
satisfied, the regulation will not be allowed to affect private rights; and
(e) Delegation to the local governments. This delegation is based on the principle that the local government is in
better position than the national government to act on purely local concerns. Legislative power is therefore given to
them for effective local legislation.

Bicameralism and Composition of Congress

1. Bicameralism in the Congress. The Constitution prescribes bicameralism in the Congress. Congress, to whom
legislative power is vested, “shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” Bicameralism is a traditional
form of legislative body consisting of two chambers or houses, one representing regional interests and the other
representing national interests. The Congress of the Philippines is said to be bicameral because it consists of two
houses: the House of Representatives, which is concerned with local issues, and the Senate, which is concerned with
national issues. These two are co-equal branches and their primary function is law-making.
2. The Senate. The Senate and its members are described in the Constitution as follows:
(a) Composition. The Senate is “composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be elected at large by the qualified
voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law.” It is said to be the training ground of future Presidents
because membership in the Senate requires national constituency and demands a broad circumspection of the issues
and problems of the country.
(b) Qualifications of a Senator. To be a senator, one must be 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.”
(c) Term. Each Senator shall have a term of six years and he shall serve for not more than two consecutive terms.
3. The House of Representatives. The House and its members are described in the Constitution as follows:
(a) Composition. The House of Representatives is composed of “District Representatives” and “Party-list
Representatives.” On the one hand, district representatives or congressmen as they are commonly called, whose
number is now fixed by law, are elected from the “legislative districts” in provinces and cities. On the other hand,
party-list representatives are elected at large through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral
parties or organizations. Twenty percent of the total number of all the members of the House of Representatives
constitutes the party-list representatives.
(b) Qualifications of a Member. To be a member of the House of Representatives, one must be “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.”
(c) Term. Each Member has a term of three years and shall serve for not more than three consecutive terms.
4. The Officers of the Congress are the Senate President, who heads the sessions in the Senate, and the House
Speaker, who heads the House of Representatives. They are elected by majority vote of all their respective members.
If it deems necessary, each House can choose other officers.

Party-list Representation

1. Meaning and Purpose. The party-list system aims at establishing representation of the underprivileged. It is a
social justice tool designed not just to make the underprivileged mere beneficiaries of law but to make them
lawmakers themselves. It opens up the political system to the prejudiced and underrepresented sectors of the
society. Under the present rule, however, party-list representatives need not represent only the marginalized and the
underrepresented; national political parties can participate through their sectoral wings provided they are registered
separately in the COMELEC. Party-list representatives after all may represent not just a marginalized or
underrepresented sectors but also “ideologies” germane to democracy.
2. Parameters for Allocation of Seats. As to the allocation of seats of party-list representatives in the House of
Representatives, the parameters are:
(a) Twenty percent allocation in the House (Sec. 5(2), Art. VI);
(b) To qualify to a seat, at least two percent of the votes is casted on the party;
(c) A qualified party is entitled to a maximum of three seats; and
(d) Proportional representation as to the number of additional seats vis-à-vis the total number of votes cast.

Sessions and Quorum

1. Kinds of Session. The Congress has regular sessions and special sessions. On the one hand, the regular sessions
are conducted once a year starting on the fourth Monday of July and continue as long as the Congress deems it
necessary but only until thirty days before the next regular session. On the other hand, special sessions are
conducted anytime upon the call of the President on subjects he wishes to consider. This can last for as long as the
Congress wants.
2. Quorum. In order to transact business during its regular or special sessions, each House must meet the quorum or
majority of the body. One half of the members plus one is the majority. No law can be passed or a legislative function
discharged unless the quorum is reached. In determining the quorum, however, members who are abroad,
suspended or otherwise prevented from participating are not counted. Only those who are in the Philippines and on
whom the Congress has coercive power to enforce its authority and command are counted. For example, if one of the
members of the Senate is outside the Philippines, the base number is twenty three because the Senator abroad is not
counted. The quorum is therefore twelve since it is the majority of twenty three.
3. Recess. Thirty days before the next regular sessions, the Congress shall have its compulsory recess or
adjournment. But each House can adjourn for a voluntary recess provided that the consent of the other House is
obtained if the adjournment is for three days or to any other place than that to which the two Houses are sitting.

Parliamentary Immunities

1. Meaning. Parliamentary immunity refers to the privilege given to Members of the Congress intended to ensure
their effective discharge of legislative functions and maintenance of representation in the Congress.
2. Two Kinds of Immunity. The Constitution provides two kinds of immunities: “immunity from arrest” and
“privilege of speech and debate.” Section 11, Article VI states: “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.”
(a) Immunity from arrest refers to the freedom of Senators and Members of the House of Representative from arrest
while the Congress is in session, whether regular or special, from the time it convenes until its final adjournment.
The offense, however, of which the arrest is made must not be punishable for more than six years of imprisonment.
For example, if Senator Pedro is charged for the crime of simple theft while the Congress is still in session, he cannot
be arrested because simple theft is not punishable for more than six years of imprisonment. But if he is charged for
rape, he may be arrested even though the Congress is in session because rape is punishable by more than six years
imprisonment.
(b) Privilege of speech and debate refers to the freedom of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives
from being questioned or held liable in any place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee
thereof. This is to give leeway to the members of the Congress to express their ideas without fear of being held liable
in the courts of justice for the effective discharge of their duties. It must be noted, however, that the privilege is
effective only in speeches and debates made in the Congress or in those uttered by the legislator in his capacity as
member of the Congress. Moreover, although the legislator cannot be held liable before the courts, he could be held
liable in the Congress itself for words or conduct unbecoming of a member. For example, if Congressman Pedro,
during his speech before the House, uttered unsavory remarks against a fellow member, he cannot be charged for
libel before the courts but he can be made liable in the House itself for words or conduct unbecoming of a member of
the House.

Restrictions and Disqualifications

1. Conflict of Interest. The Constitution demands transparency in the Congress, particularly in the financial and
business interests of its members, in order for the legislature to be aware of a “potential conflict of interest.”
Potential conflict of interest happens when a legislator derives financial advantage from a law which he legislates or
was legislated during his term and the body was not notified of such conflict. It constitutes betrayal of public trust in
that the personal interest of the legislator is placed over that of the public. Note however that the legislator can still
propose a law even if there is a potential conflict of interest for as long as he has notified the body about it. The
purpose therefore of this requirement is to allow the House to better examine the legislation vis-à-vis the legislator.
2. Incompatible Office. In keeping with doctrine of separation of powers, the Constitution provides that “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.” This disqualification refers to the “incompatible office”
which is any other office in the government that if held by a member of the Congress would result to the forfeiture of
his seat in the Congress. The provision allows a member to hold an incompatible office but the result is the
automatic forfeiture of his seat. For example, if during the term of Senator Pedro he becomes the head of a
government-owned and controlled corporation, he will no longer be Senator because of the automatic forfeiture, the
GOCC being an incompatible office.
3. Forbidden Office. Another disqualification involves the so-called “forbidden offices” or offices which have been
created or the emoluments of which were increased while the legislator was a member of the Congress. The purpose
of this disqualification is to prevent legislators to create an office or to increase its emoluments for personal gain.
Pursuant to this disqualification, a Senator, for example, cannot be appointed to a civil or military office which was
created while he was still a senator. The disqualification lasts for the entire six-year term even if the member resigns
before the end of his term.

Independent Bodies
1. The Constitution creates two independent bodies in the Congress especially to perform non-legislative functions
and to check the appointing power of the Chief Executive, to wit: (a) the Electoral Tribunals and (b) Commission on
Appointments. Although majority of their members come from the Congress, they considered independent bodies in
that they have the exclusive right to prescribe their own rules of procedure, they have their own set of employees
who are under their control and supervision, and they have their own function distinct from that of the Congress.
2. Electoral Tribunal. To ensure fairness and impartiality in deciding election contests involving members of the
Congress, each House in the Congress shall have an Electoral Tribunal: the “Senate Electoral Tribunal” in the
Senate, and “House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal” in the House of Representatives. Each Electoral Tribunal
shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective Members.
Each shall be composed of nine members, three are Justices of the Supreme Court, and six are members of the
Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case may be. The Chairman shall be the senior Justice. While the
member Justices are designated by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the six other legislator members are
chosen on the basis of proportional representation from political parties and party-list organizations (duly registered
under the party-list system) in the Congress. Thus, if there is an election contest, for instance, involving the
qualifications of Congressman Juan, the case shall be decided by the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal
which is the sole judge of election contests involving the Members of the House of Representatives.
3. Commission on Appointments. Another independent body in the Congress is the Commission on Appointments
which was created to check the appointing power of the President, specifically in appointments to importance offices
in the government. It consists of twenty five members: the Senate President, as ex officio Chairman, twelve Senators,
and twelve Members of the House of Representatives. The Senators and Members of the House are elected by their
respective Houses based on proportional representation from the political parties and party-list organizations (duly
registered under the party-list system) in the Congress. The function of the Commission is to approve or disapprove
the nominations submitted to it by the President to appointments that require its approval. For example, before a
Cabinet Member may be appointed, the President must first submit his nomination for approval to the Commission
on Appointments. With the approval, there could be no appointment.

Procedure of How a Bill Becomes a Law

1. Bill vs. Statute. Among the most important things studied in Article VI, The Legislative Department, is the
procedure of how a bill becomes a law. A bill is a proposed law. As such, it is not yet binding nor does it confer or
affect the rights and duties of individuals. It becomes a law only after it has gone through all the formalities and
solemnities of the legislation process as prescribed in the Constitution. The law enacted by the Congress is called a
statute.
2. The procedure is as follows:
(a) A bill is introduced by any Member of the Senate or the House of Representatives by filing it with the Office of
the Secretary where it is calendared for the First Reading. Some bills, however must originate exclusively from the
House of Representatives, such as the appropriation, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of the public
debt, bills of local application, and private bills, although the Senate may propose or concur with amendments.
(b) During the first reading the number, title, and name/s of author/s are read. The subject of the bill as expressed in
its title must only be one in order to avoid hodge-podge or log-rolling legislation which entails insertion of many
unrelated subjects. The bill is referred to an appropriate committee for study. Public hearings or consultations may
be conducted by the committee before it recommends the bill for approval, with or without amendments, or for
consolidation with similar bills, or for disapproval. If it is disapproved, the bill is said to be “killed.” If approved or
reported out, it will calendared for the second reading.
(c) During the second reading, which is the start of the most important stage, the bill is read in its entirety, together
with the amendments introduced by the committee, if there are any. The bill will thereafter be debated upon and
amended if the members deem it necessary.
(d) The approved bill in the second reading is printed in its final form and copies of it are furnished to the members
three days before the third reading. During the third reading, only the title of the bill is read, and immediately after,
the Members will vote thereon and their votes (yeas and nays) will be entered in the journal. No further
amendments are allowed.
(e) The approved bill is referred to the other house where it also undergoes three readings on three separate days. If
compromise or reconciliation of conflicting provisions is necessary because of the differences in the House Bill and
Senate Bill version, the bill shall be submitted to a joint bicameral committee.
(f) After the bill has been approved on third reading on both Houses it shall be submitted to the President for his
action. He approves by signing the bill; he disapproves by vetoing and returning the bill with his objections to the
House of origin. In order to override the veto of the President, two-thirds of all the Members of each house voting
separately must agree to pass the bill. If the President will not act on the bill in thirty days, the bill shall become a
law as if signed by him. “Pocket veto” is not allowed under the laws.
(g) The enrolled bill or bill as printed and approved by the Congress and the President shall be published in a
newspaper of general circulation or in the Official Gazette of the Government and shall become binding fifteen days
following its publication unless another date is provided therein.
3. Three Readings on Three Separate Days. What is important to remember in all these steps is the rule of “three
readings on three separate days.” Except when the President certifies to the necessity of its immediate enactment to
meet a public calamity or emergency, no bill can become a law unless it passes three readings on three separate days
in both Houses of the Congress.

Non-legislative and other Powers of Congress

1. Non-Lawmaking Powers. Aside from lawmaking, Congress performs non-lawmaking functions, such as initiation
and holding of impeachment (Art. XI, Sec. 2), acting as a constituent assembly (Article XVII, Sec. 1), declaration of
existence of war (Art. VI, Sec. 1), approval of Presidential appointments through the Commission on Appointments
(Art. VI, Sec. 17), and deciding election cases involving its members (Art. VI, Sec. 16).
2. Power to Declare the Existence of War. Section 23 (1), Article VI states that “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.” This means that when the Philippines is under attack by foreign invaders, the Congress by means of
enacting a law, affirms that the Philippines is already at war with the enemy. War is not solely controlled by the
President who is the commander in chief of the military; it is likewise controlled by the legislature because it has
power over the money used in the war.
3. Legislative Inquiries. The Congress also conducts legislative inquiries which power is necessarily implied in its
power to legislate. Legislative inquiry is a process held in the Congress especially conducted to compulsorily obtain
requisite information from witnesses in aid of legislation. The process and the requite information taken are
necessary to legislate wisely and effectively. The Constitution provides limitations, to wit: (1) the inquiries must be in
aid of legislation; (2) it must be in accordance with the duly published rules of procedure of the Congress; and (3)
the rights of persons appearing shall be respected.
4. Question Hour. Inquiries may also be conducted to obtain information from the heads of departments on matters
pertaining to how laws are implemented. This is called the question hour. The manner of obtaining information,
however, is not compulsory because of the doctrine of separation of powers. The heads of the departments are alter
egos of the President; to maintain the co-equality of the executive and legislative branch, either House of Congress
may only request for the appearance of the department heads. Conversely, the department heads may appear but the
Congress is not obliged to hear them. Question hour is different from legislative inquiry in that appearance in the
former is not compulsory, while appearance in the latter is compulsory; information derived in the former is in
exercise of “oversight functions,” while informative derived in the latter is in aid of legislation; and the former is not
among the traditional processes of a presidential government, while the latter is an inherent legislative power under
a presidential government.

THE EXECUTIVE AND EXECUTIVE PROCESS

Executive Power
1. Meaning. Executive power includes, first, the power to implement and administer the law, and, second, other
powers necessary to carry out the same. Section 1, Article VII provides that “the executive power shall be vested in
the President of the Philippines,” so that his primary role is to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed. That
executive power is given to the President alone makes him the most potent official in the government. But while
much is given to him, much is also expected. The limits of his awesome powers are structurally provided in the
Constitution to prevent irresponsible and despotic exercise thereof.
2. Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency. While executive power is given only to the President, the President can
appoint “Members of his Cabinet” whom the law considers as his “alter egos” (extensions of himself). Under the
doctrine of qualified political agency, the acts of the Members of the Cabinet are deemed to be the acts of the
President unless reprobated or altered by him. The Cabinet Members are political agents of the President who help
him discharge his powers and duties which alone he cannot efficiently perform. They are the heads of the
departments who serve as presidential advisers. Just as the President has the power of control over them, he also
has the power to remove them, him being still the chief of administration.

Presidential Privileges
1. Meaning. Presidential privilege refers to an immunity or privilege granted to the President intended for the
effective performance of his executive functions and duties.
2. Kinds. The President is granted the privilege of immunity from suit and executive privilege.
(a) Immunity from suit means that the President cannot be sued, if he invokes such privilege, for any civil or
criminal action during his tenure. In one case, the Court said that “the rationale for the grant of the privilege of
immunity from suit is to assure the exercise of the Presidential duties and functions free from any hindrance or
distraction, considering that being the Chief Executive of the Government is a job that, aside from requiring all of
the office-holder’s time, also demands undivided attention.” After his tenure, however, the President can no longer
invoke immunity for non-official acts.
(b) Executive privilege refers to the power of the President to withhold confidential information from the other
branches of the Government and the public. Among these types of information covered by the privilege are: (i)
conversations and correspondence between the President and the public officials (covered by E.O. 464); (ii) military,
diplomatic, and other national security matters which in the interest of national security should not be divulged; (iii)
information between inter-government agencies prior to the conclusion of treaties and executive agreements; (iv)
discussion in close-door Cabinet meetings; and (v) matters affecting national security and public order. These types
of information are closed or withheld from the other branches and the public because they are crucial for the
exercise of executive functions and to prevent the potential harm resulting from the disclosure of the same. Thus, the
President and the Cabinet Members, for instance, can invoke executive privilege even in the Congress during
legislative investigations.
Qualifications, Manner of Election, and Term
1. The President. The Constitution provides the qualifications, manner of election, and term of the President as
follows:
(a) Qualifications. Section 2, Article VII of the Constitution provides the qualifications of a President, to wit: (i) he
must be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines; (ii) a registered voter; (iii) able to read and write; (iv) at least forty
years of age on the day of the election; and (v) a resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately
preceding such election.
(b) Manner of Election. He is elected at large by the direct vote of all qualified citizens.
(c) Term. His term is six years, for which he cannot seek for reelection. He may be removed from office through
“impeachment.”
2. The Vice-President. Section 3, Article VII states that the Vice-President has “the same qualifications and term of
office as the President,” for the reason that his primary role is to succeed the President in case of vacancy due to the
latter’s death, permanent disability, or resignation. He may also be removed from office in the same manner as the
President. However, the Vice-President may serve for two consecutive terms.
3. When Qualifications must be Present. It must be noted that the qualifications must be present on the day of the
election and not on the day of filing the Certificate of Candidacy or the day of proclamation of the President-elect.
Thus, one can still run for President even if he is still thirty nine years old on the day of filling the certificate of
candidacy, for as long as he is forty years old on the day of the election. Worthy of note also is the Constitutional
limitation on the term of the President, that is, he cannot seek for reelection. The manifest purpose of this is to
prevent despotism and to protect the highest public official from being consumed by the overwhelming powers of
Presidency.

Presidential Succession
1. Two Rules on Presidential Succession. Section 7 and Section 8, Article VII prescribe the rules for presidential
succession or the manner of filling a vacancy in the presidency. Section 7 talks of succession when vacancy happens
at the start of the term of the President-elect, while Section 8 talks of succession when vacancy happens at the mid
part of the term of the incumbent President. These rules are important because they provide immediate remedy for
filling the vacancy in the highest and most crucial seat of the land.
2. Succession at the Start of the Term. Under Section 7, Article VII, the rule is:
(a) The Vice-President becomes the Acting President in the event that the President-elect fails to qualify, or when no
President was chosen;
(b) The Vice-President becomes the President in the event that the President-elect dies or becomes permanently
disabled; and
(c) The Senate President or, in case of his inability, the House Speaker, becomes the Acting President on the event
that no President and Vice-President are chosen or qualified, or where both died or become permanently disabled.
In the first case, the Vice-President acts as President until a President-elect is qualified and chosen. In the second
case, the Vice-President does not only act as President but becomes the President. And in the third case, the Senate
President or, in his inability, the House Speaker acts as President until a President or a Vice-President are chosen
and qualified.
3. No Presidential Hold-Over. Note well that the former President, whose term already expired, has no right of
“hold-over.” So as not to repeat the dictatorship of the past, the Constitution is strict with the six-year term limit. No
extensions are allowed, not even in a hold-over capacity. Thus, if no President assumes office after the election, the
former President is not allowed to continue discharging the functions of the presidency.
4. Succession at the Mid-Part of the Term. Under Section 8, Article VII, the rule is:
(a) the Vice-President becomes the President for the unexpired term in case of the latter’s death, permanent
disability, removal from office, or resignation; and
(b) if the same happens to both the President and the Vice-President, then the Senate President or, in case of his
inability, the House Speaker, will act as President until the President or Vice-President will be elected and qualified.
5. Vacancy in the Office of the Vice-President. If the Office of the Vice-President is vacant as a consequence of
presidential succession, the President shall nominate a Vice-President from among the Members of Congress who
shall assume office upon confirmation of the Members of Congress. For example, when former President Joseph
Estrada was ousted from Malacanang through People Power, he was succeeded by then Vice- President Gloria
Arroyo. As a matter of course, the Office of the Vice-President became vacant. Thus, the new President, Gloria
Arroyo, nominated then Senator Teofisto Ginggona for Vice-President whose nomination was confirmed by the
Members of Congress. Note that President Arroyo could have nominated any Member of the Congress, that is, either
a Senator or a Member of the House of Representatives for Vice-Presidency.
6. Temporary Disability of the President. And lastly, Presidential succession also happens when the President is
“temporarily disabled.” The temporary disability of the President, of which the public must be informed, is
determined by:
(a) the President himself through a written declaration transmitted to the Senate President and House Speaker, in
which case the Vice-President becomes the Acting President;
(b) majority of Cabinet Members through a written declaration transmitted to the two officials, in which case the
Vice-President becomes the Acting President; and
(c) 2/3 vote of both Houses of Congress, voting separately, in case there is a dispute between the President and the
Cabinet Members, in which case the Vice-President also becomes the Acting President.
Presidential incapacity is said to be terminated when the President or his Cabinet Members transmit to the Congress
that the inability no longer exists, or in case the temporary disability was declared by the Congress, when both
Houses by 2/3 vote, each voting separately, declare the termination of presidential incapacity.

Inhibitions and Disqualifications

The Constitution provides many inhibitions and disqualifications on the President, Vice-President, Cabinet
Members, and their deputies and assistants. The subjects of the inhibitions and disqualifications are: (1) increase in
their salaries and emoluments; (2) the holding of other offices; (3) appointment of relatives; and (4) midnight
appointment.
1. Inhibition on Salary. The Congress fixes by law the salaries of the President and Vice-President. The salaries
cannot be decreased during their tenure, but the same can be increased. The increase takes effect only after the
expiration of the term of the President and Vice-President during whose term the increase was approved.
2. Disqualification on Holding Other Offices. They cannot also receive during their tenure any other compensation
or allowances from the Government or any other source. The reason for this is that they cannot hold any other office
or employment, unless otherwise provided in the Constitution. Their office, being very important and crucial in the
government, demands their full time and attention. The disqualification also prevents them from extending special
favors to their own private business which comes under their official jurisdiction, and assures the public that they
will be faithful and dedicated in the performance of their functions. Public office is public trust, so that it cannot be
used for personal benefit and familial advantage. Thus, they shall strictly avoid conflict of interest in the conduct of
their office.
It should be noted that the Vice-President can be appointed as Member of the Cabinet and his appointment need not
go through the Commission on Appointments. This is an exception to the above prohibition, of which its purpose is
to give due reverence to the second highest office of the land and more importantly to give him a function other than
being a mere President Reserve.
3. Prohibition against Appointment of Relatives. Nepotism is prohibited by the Constitution. Nepotism happens
when the President, during his tenure, appoints his spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the
fourth civil degree as Members of the Constitutional Commissions, or the Office of the Ombudsman, or as
Secretaries, Undersecretaries, chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices, including government-owned or controlled
corporations and their subsidiaries. Public office is not a property, nor can it be shared and passed as a matter of
right to family members. The Philippines is not the kingdom of the President; his office is only entrusted to him by
the people who are the sovereign rulers of the country and to whom he must serve with utmost responsibility,
integrity, loyalty, and efficiency.
4. Prohibition against Midnight Appointments. Midnight appointments are also prohibited by the Constitution.
Midnight appointment refers to presidential appointment after election but before assumption to office of the next
President. Section 15, Article VII provides that “two months immediately before the next presidential elections and
up to the end of his term, a President or Acting President shall not make appointments.” This is essentially a
limitation to the appointing power of the President. The purpose of the prohibition is to avoid using the Presidency
for partisan considerations and for vote buying. It is also rude and unstatesman-like for an outgoing President to
appoint within the said period so as to prevent the incoming President to exercise his prerogative of selecting his
own set of officers.

Powers of the President

The President of the Philippines has specific powers provided in the Constitution, to wit: (1) appointing power; (2)
power of control and supervision; (3) military power; (4) pardoning power; (5) diplomatic power; (6) residual
power; (7) delegated power; and (8) veto power.
1. Power of Appointment.
(a) Meaning. Appointment is one mode of putting a person in office in which an appointing authority selects a
person to discharge the functions of an appointive office. The power is exercised by the President, although
legislative and judicial officials can also appoint their respective personnel.
(b) Types of Appointment. There are four types of presidential appointments:
(i) Appointment by an Acting President ;
(ii) Temporary appointment ;
(iii) Regular appointment ; and
(iv) Ad interim appointment.
(c) Appointments Distinguished from Each Other. Appointment by an Acting President may be revoked by the
elected President within ninety days from his assumption or reassumption of office. If it were not revoked, the
appointment remains effective, as if it were the President-elect who made the appointment. Temporary appointment
is appointment made prior a presidential election that is subject to a possible cancellation or revocation of the
President-elect. As an exception to midnight appointments, temporary appointments may be extended by an
outgoing President to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger
public safety. Regular appointment is presidential appointment made with or without the consent of the
Commission on Appointments. And Ad interim appointment is appointment made during the recess of the
Congress, whether voluntary or compulsory, which is effective until disapproved by the Commission on
Appointments or until the next adjournment of the Congress.
(d) Ad Interim Appointment vs. Regular Appointment. Ad interim appointment is different from regular
appointment, in that the purpose of the former is to prevent hiatus or lull in government offices, while that of the
latter is to simply fill an office in the ordinary course of business; an ad interim appointee immediately assumes
office, while a regular appointee does not, since confirmation by the Commission on Appointments is still required.
Moreover, an ad interim appointment is different from temporary appointment. Although the former is subject to
the revocation of the Congress (through the Commission on Appointments), it is not temporary because it takes
effect immediately and cannot be revoked or withdrawn by the President if the ad interim appointee is qualified. In
fact, ad interim appointment is permanent and its subsequent disapproval does not change its nature. Lastly, an ad
interim appointment is different from appointment in acting capacity, in that the former requires confirmation of
the Commission on Appointments, while the latter does not; the former is permanent, while the latter is temporary;
and the former is made during recess, while the latter in made either during recess or not.
(e) Appointments Requiring Confirmation. Section 16, Article VII provides an exclusive list of Presidential
appointees whose appointments require the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments. These officials are:
(1) the department secretaries, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls; (2) officers of the armed forces
from the rank of colonel or naval captain; (3) other officers whose appointments are vested in him in the
Constitution; (4) all other officers of the Government whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law,
and those whom he may be authorized by law to appoint; and (5) the heads of departments, agencies, commissions,
boards, those lower in rank in the President. Members of the Constitutional Commissions and regular members of
the Judicial and Bar Council are officers whose appointments are vested in him in the Constitution. The list is
exclusive, thus, other appointments by the President do not require consent of the Commission on Appointments.
The appointees are subject to the control of the President in line with the doctrine of the qualified political agency.
The President has the power to change and set-aside their acts.
2. Power of Control and Supervision.
(a) Control. The President has control over all executive departments, bureaus, and offices; as chief administrator,
he has the primary duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed. Power of control refers to the power of the
President, being the Chief Executive, to alter, modify or set aside the acts of his subordinates and substitute his
judgment for that of the latter. His subordinates include the Cabinet Members or heads of the executive
departments, heads of bureaus and offices, and their subordinates and assistants. The Cabinet Members are alter
egos of the President as enunciated in the doctrine of qualified political agency; thus, the President has the power to
alter or set aside their acts. Moreover, the power of control is connected to the appointing power of the President.
Just as he can put people to appointive positions, he can also investigate, discipline, suspend, and remove them
when they become inefficient or corrupt.
(b) Supervision. The power of control includes the power of supervision. The power of supervision refers to the
authority to oversee a subordinate officer and to see to it that he performs his functions and duties in accordance
with law. It generally includes the power to investigate. It must be noted that the power of control is broader than
the power of supervision, since the former includes the latter. The President has power of supervision over local
government units, in which he can investigate and see to it that they perform their duties in accordance to
established laws. He does not, however, have power of control over them, so that he cannot change their acts or
substitute his judgment for their judgment.
3. Military Powers.
The President is granted military powers, the primary purpose of which is to maintain civilian supremacy over the
military. The power includes: (a) calling-out power; (b) power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus;
and (c) power to declare martial law.
(a) President as Commander-in-Chief. Section 18, Article VII states that the President is the Commander-in-Chief of
the armed forces of the Philippines, and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to
prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. As the highest civilian officer, the President is also the
highest military authority. This is so because civilian authority should, at all times, be supreme over the military in
the democratic, republican Philippines. The military is the single most power institution equipped by law to use
violence and force. Thus, to prevent military takeover, the fundamental law makes a civilian the commander-in-chief
of the military. Although the President lacks military training, the ideals of democracy dictate that he should possess
the tremendous power of controlling and directing the military even in times of war. While he may delegate to, and
ask advice from, military men, the ultimate authority to direct and call out the armed forces is with him. Not even
the courts can question him in exercise of this prerogative of calling the armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless
violence, invasion or rebellion.
(b) Suspension of the Privilege of Habeas Corpus. Section 18, Article VII also expressly gives the President the power
to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. The writ of habeas corpus is a written order issued by the court
directing a person detaining another to produce (habeas) the body (corpus) of the latter and to explain before the
court his authority for detaining the latter. Habeas corpus is a special proceeding which provides speedy remedy for
the immediate release of an unlawfully detained person. Thus, a person who was arrested and detained without a
valid warrant may file a petition for habeas corpus for his immediate release, after the judge determines that there is
no valid ground for his detention. Under Section 18, this “privilege” of habeas corpus may be suspended by the
President in case of invasion or rebellion, and when public safety requires it. The rationale for such power is to allow
the President to expediently reestablish peace and order by detaining apparent offenders without the hindrance or
threat of their immediate release. Note, however, that what is suspended is the “privilege,” not the right to file the
petition for habeas corpus. Thus, even when the President suspends the privilege, persons unlawfully detained may
still file a petition for habeas corpus. Only the privilege of immediate release is suspended.
(c) Martial Law. The power to declare martial law is likewise expressly granted in Section 18. Martial law, within the
Constitutional context, means temporary military rule especially declared not to replace civilian authority but to
help it recover in case of invasion or rebellion, and when public safety requires it. Martial law, unlike a military
takeover, does not suspend the operation of the Constitution and guarantee for respect of human rights. It is not
permanent; it is declared only for a limited duration, that is, for not more than sixty days. In addition, the President
must also report in writing to the Congress within forty eight hours from proclamation, and the Congress may
conduct special sessions even without the call of the President. As far as the courts are concerned, the military courts
do not acquire jurisdiction over cases involving civilians if civil courts are still able to function. These constitutional
limitations are intended to uphold democracy and civilian supremacy in the Philippines, as well as to prevent the
rise of an abusive military regime that does not respect due process and takes for granted the liberties of the
sovereign people.
(d) Comparison of the Military Powers. To compare the military powers of the President, it must be noted that the
power to declare martial law and the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus are the greater
powers since it curtails the freedoms and civil liberties of the citizens. The calling out power is said to be lesser or
benign power, in that it has no such effect. Thus, the Constitution limits the former powers by making them
susceptible to review by the courts, whereas the calling out power is exercised by the President with full discretion
and wisdom as the commander-in-chief of armed forces, not subject to judicial review.
4. Pardoning Power.
The pardoning power of the President refers to the exercise of executive clemency. It includes: (a) pardon; (b)
commutation; (c) reprieve; (d) amnesty; and (e) parole.
(a) Pardon is an act of grace which exempts an individual from serving his sentence or punishment which the law
inflicts for the crime he committed. It forgives the offender by not letting him pay for the crime he committed. For
pardon to be given, a person must first be declared guilty of a crime by final judgment of the court, and the President
thereafter extends pardon. Instead of making him serve his sentence, the President exempts him through his
personal act of grace. What the convict is exempted from is criminal liability not civil liability.
There are two kinds of pardon: absolute and conditional. Absolute pardon is one that absolves the convict from
criminal liability without any conditions whatsoever, while condition pardon absolves the convict from criminal
liability under the penalty of recommitment to prison in case any condition provided is violated.
It must be remembered, however, that pardon cannot be granted in cases of impeachment; or in violations of
election laws without favorable recommendation of the COMELEC; or in cases of legislative contempt or civil
contempt; or can it restore forfeited public offices.
(b) Commutation refers to reduction or mitigation of the penalty. For example, instead of serving ten years of
imprisonment, reduction has the effect of reducing the penalty to five years, for instance, at the discretion of the
President.
(c) Reprieve refers to the postponement of sentence or stay of execution. This was applicable when death penalty
was still effective. For instance, the execution of a death convict may be postponed by the President to another date
if he extends reprieve.
(d) Parole is probational release from imprisonment. It is given to a convict who has served the minimum sentence
of his penalty and has acted in good behavior inside the penal institution. Parole does not fully restore the freedom
of the parolee since he is still in the custody of the law although not in confinement.
(e) Amnesty is an act of grace by the President extended to groups of persons who committed political offenses. It
requires the concurrence of the legislature and puts into oblivion the offense itself. It is distinguished from pardon,
in that: the former forgives political offenses (such as treason and rebellion) deemed expedient for the public welfare
than prosecution of the same, while the latter forgives crimes against the peace of the state (such as homicide and
murder); the former is usually given to groups of offenders, whereas the latter is given to an individual; the former
requires concurrence of the Congress, while the latter does not; the former is a public act which the courts takes
judicial notice, whereas the latter is a private act of the President which must be pleaded by the person pardoned for
the court to take judicial notice; and the former looks backward and abolishes the criminal and civil liability of the
offenders, while the latter looks forward and relieves only the criminal liability of the offender.
5. Diplomatic Powers.
The President has diplomatic powers because, as the head of the State, he is the spokesman of the nation on matters
of external affairs. “He may deal with foreign states and governments, extend or withhold recognition, maintain
diplomatic relations, enters into treaties, and otherwise transact with the business of foreign relations,” The
Constitution, however, limits this power of the President, as it expressly states “no treaty or international agreement
shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.” Thus, if the
President, for instance, enters into an international agreement with the United States of America for the
establishment of civilian rights mutually benefiting the citizens of both countries, then on the part of the Philippines,
least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate must concur with the said international agreement.
6. Residual Powers.
The President, as the head of the State, is given residual powers. Under the presidential system, the President is not
a mere symbolic head; he is the chief executive granted with powers, so broad to include even those not mentioned
in the Constitution. “The powers of the President are not limited to what are expressly enumerated in the article on
Executive Department and in scattered provisions of the Constitution.” He has unstated powers called “residual
powers” which are implied from the grant of executive powers and necessary for the exercise of his duties under the
Constitution. It is called “residual” because it is whatever power which the legislature or the judiciary does not
possess and which the President could, thus, legitimately exercise consistent with his functions. This is not to foster
another dictatorship or an unbridled exercise of power as was experienced during the Marcos administration; nor is
it a violation of the Constitutional intent to limit the specific powers of the President to avoid another abusive regime
(since appropriate measures are already provided in the new Constitution). The grant of residual powers, rather, is
just in recognition of the general grant of executive power to the President.
7. Delegated Powers.
As previously discussed, the Congress can delegate legislative powers to the President, among which are emergency
powers (Section 23(2), Article VI) and tariff powers (Section 28(2), Article VI).
8. Veto Power.
The President exercises veto power in relation to his role of checking the power of the Congress. If he thinks that a
bill enacted by Congress should be disapproved, he exercises his veto power and returns the same with his objections
to the House of origin. As a general rule, the veto must pertain to the entire bill, so that he is not allowed to veto
separate items of the bill. The exception, however, is “item veto” allowed in case of appropriation, revenue and tariff
bill. The Constitution expressly provides that “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.”

THE JUDICIARY AND THE JUDICIAL PROCESS

Judicial Power
1. Meaning in General. In a broad sense, judicial power refers to the power of the different courts of justice to
interpret and apply the laws in particular cases. Interpretation, on the one hand, refers to the process by which the
court discovers the true meaning of the language used by the law. Its purpose is to give effect to the intent or spirit of
the law. The application of the law, on the other, refers the process by which the court relates the pertinent legal
provisions to the set of facts of a particular case.
2. Strict Meaning. In a strict sense, the Constitution provides that “judicial power includes the duty of the courts of
justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on
the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.” The definition includes two aspects of judicial power:
(a) duty to settle actual controversies; and (b) authority to determine if there is grave abuse of discretion.
(a) The first aspect, settlement of actual controversies, is the traditional meaning of judicial power. In here, there
exists an “actual controversy” which, if properly filed, the court has duty to settle. For an actual controversy to exist
there must be a legally demandable or enforceable right which is violated by another who, in turn, has the correlative
duty to respect it. If the other party asserts an opposite legal claim, then it becomes susceptible of judicial
adjudication. A right is legally demandable or enforceable if it is recognized by law and enforceable before the courts.
A right which has no basis in law cannot be enforced in the courts and violation of which does not produce an actual
controversy. Thus, while a woman has a right to demand for financial support from the father of her son, she does
not have the right to demand for marriage from a person who impregnated her because the right has no basis in law;
the first can give rise to an actual controversy, while the other cannot.
(b) The second aspect, determination of grave abuse of authority, is the expanded part of judicial power. It is said to
be expanded because traditionally the courts cannot question the “political acts” of the other departments of the
government (executive and legislative – political departments). The courts can only settle justiciable questions or
questions involving rights and laws, and not political questions or questions addressed to the wisdom or discretion
of political departments. But with the expanded authority, the courts can now determine if the political departments
gravely abused the exercise of their discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. Grave abuse of discretion
refers to “such capricious and arbitrary exercise of judgment as is equivalent, to the eyes of the law, to lack of
jurisdiction” and for it to be covered by judicial power, abuse of discretion must be palpably grave. Thus, the
President and the Congress cannot escape the authority of the courts in determining whether or not their political
acts are void, even if they invoke that their political acts are matters of political question. This is manifestly in line
with the principle of checks and balances, and consequently, with the doctrine of separation (in the sense of
collaboration) of powers.
For example, the President is given the so-called calling out power which is a discretionary power solely vested in
him. Generally, the courts cannot inquire in this and substitute it for its own decision since this is a political
question. But if it can be shown that there is a grave abuse of discretion on the part of the President, it will be subject
to judicial review. This is now the effect of the expanded power of the judiciary.
3. Who Exercises Judicial Power. Section 1, Article VIII, states that judicial power is vested in one Supreme Court
and in such lower courts as may be established by law. This means that the power to interpret and apply the laws in
actual controversies is given to, first, the Supreme Court, and, second, to other/lower courts.
4. Supreme Court and Other Lower Courts. There could only be one Supreme Court, and its supremacy puts finality
to all legal disputes. The other courts are all lower than it, thus, they are referred as lower courts. Lower courts are
also called “statutory courts” because they are created by the act of Congress. The only Constitutional court is the
Supreme Court, while statutory courts include the Court of Appeals, Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court,
Municipal Trial Court, Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Sandiganbayan, and Court of Tax Appeals, among others. The
Court of Appeals, Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court, and Municipal Circuit Trial
Court are “regular courts” created by the Judiciary Reorganization Law (as amended). Sandiganbayan and the Court
of Tax Appeals are “special courts” respectively created by P.D. No. 1606 and R.A. No. 1125 (as amended). These
courts comprise the judicial department which exercises judicial power.
Power of Judicial Review
1. Meaning. The courts also have the power of judicial review or the power to test the validity or constitutionality of
the legislative and executive acts, such as treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree,
proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation. It is an aspect of judicial power, in that it is essentially
derived from the duty of the court to settle controversies between conflicting parties by applying the appropriate law.
The applicable law may be the Constitution or some appropriate statute; in case of conflict between the two, the
Constitution must prevail, and the statute which is not in accordance with it must be stricken out, or at least some
parts of it. The Constitution is the fundamental law and therefore all the acts or laws passed by the government must
be in accordance with it.
2. Requisites. The requisites of judicial review are: (a) there must be an actual controversy; (b) the question of
constitutionality must be raised by the proper party; (c) the question is raised at the earliest opportune time; and (d)
the resolution of the constitutional question is the main issue.
3. Explanatory Example. Pedro is running for reelection for his third term as congressman. However, the Congress
passed a law prohibiting reelection for the third term. Apparently, the statute is in conflict with the Constitution
which allows reelection of a congressman for his third term. He questions the validity of the statute. Judicial review
is proper in this case. There is an actual controversy between Pedro and the government. He likewise has a legal
standing because he has a personal and substantial interest in the case such that he will be directly benefited or
injured by the decision to the case. The question was raised in the earliest possible time and the resolution of the
constitutional question is the main issue.

Judicial Independence
The Judicial Department plays an indispensable role in the government as the administrator of justice. The
government and consequently the State will not survive without the judiciary. It preserves the cohesiveness of the
different governmental organs, always seeing to it that they function in accordance with the Constitution. And
inasmuch as the Philippines is a government of laws and not of men, the judiciary protects the very essence of
democracy being guardian of rights and legal processes. Thus, in order for the judiciary to function effectively and
impartially, the Constitution provides safeguards for its independence, to wit:
(1) The Supreme Court, as a constitutional body, cannot be abolished by law passed by the Congress;
(2) Members of the Supreme Court can only be removed through impeachment;
(3) The Supreme Court cannot be deprived of its minimum and appellate jurisdiction; appellate jurisdiction may not
be increased without its advice or concurrence;
(4) The Supreme Court has administrative supervision over all inferior courts and personnel;
(5) It has exclusive power to discipline judges/justices of inferior courts;
(6) Members of the judiciary have security of tenure;
(7) Members of the judiciary may not be designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative
functions;
(8) Salaries of judges may not be reduced;
(9) The judiciary enjoys fiscal autonomy;
(10) The Supreme Court alone can initiate the Rules of Court;
(11) It alone may order temporary detail of judges; and
(12) It can appoint all officials and employees of the judiciary.

Jurisdiction
1. Meaning. Jurisdiction is the power and authority of the court to hear and decide cases. Judicial power is exercised
by the various courts within their respective jurisdictions, so that if judicial power is exercised without or in excess of
jurisdiction, then the decisions of the courts are said to be null and void.
2. Role of Congress. The various courts have their respective jurisdiction. Each jurisdiction is defined, prescribed,
and apportioned by the Congress, except that of the Supreme Court whose jurisdiction (as enumerated in Section 5,
Article VIII) is Constitutionally prescribed so that it cannot be lessened or taken away by the Congress.
3. Kinds of Jurisdiction. Jurisdiction could be “general or limited,” “original or appellate,” and “exclusive or
concurrent.” On the one hand, a court has a general jurisdiction when it is empowered to hear and decide all
disputes filed before it except those falling in the jurisdiction of other courts; on the other hand, a court is said to
have a limited jurisdiction if it can hear and decide specific cases only. Example of a court of general jurisdiction is
the Regional Trial Court, and an example of a court of limited jurisdiction is the Court of Tax Appeals. Moreover, a
court has an original jurisdiction, on the one hand, if it is empowered to hear and decide cases filed for the first time,
whereas a court has appellate jurisdiction, on the other, if it can review a decision rendered by a lower court. The
Municipal Trial Court, for instance, has original jurisdiction over forcible entry cases, while the Regional Trial Court
has appellate jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Municipal Trial Court. And lastly, a court has exclusive
jurisdiction if it alone has authority to hear and decide a case filed before it, while it has concurrent jurisdiction if
other courts can hear and decide a case which could be filed before it. For example, a Regional Trial Court acting as
Family Courts has exclusive jurisdiction over family cases, whereas it (Regional Trial Court) has current jurisdiction
with the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court over habeas corpus cases.

Qualifications and Tenure

1. Qualifications of Members of the Supreme Court. Section 7(1), Article VIII provides the qualifications of a Member
of the Supreme Court or any lower collegiate court: (a) he must be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines; (b) at
least forty years of age; (c) must have been a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the
Philippines for fifteen years or more; and (d) must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and
independence. The qualifications of judges in lower courts shall be prescribed by Congress, but the qualifications
must include Philippine citizenship and membership in the Philippine Bar.
2. Tenure. Justices and judges can hold office until they reach the age of seventy or become incapacitated to
discharge the duties of their office. They must be in good behavior during their tenure; otherwise they (judges) may
be disciplined or dismissed by the Supreme Court (sitting en banc).

Composition of the Supreme Court

1. Composition. The Supreme Court is composed of fifteen members: a Chief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices.
Any vacancy must be filled within ninety days from its occurrence.
2. How Cases are Heard. In hearing cases, the Supreme Court may either sit en banc or in division of three, five, or
seven Members. On the one hand, if it sits en banc, majority of the members who actually took part in the
deliberations of the case must concur or come up with the same vote, in order to resolve the case. En banc cases
include those involving constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law, those involving the
constitutionality, application, or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances,
and other regulations. Also, only the Court sitting en banc can modify or reverse a doctrine or principle which it
itself laid down. Discipline and dismissal of judges are likewise decided by the Court sitting en banc.
On the other hand, if the Court sits in division, at least three members must take part in the deliberations and
hearings of the case, and must have the same vote thereon in order to resolve the case. If the required number is not
obtained, the case shall be decided en banc. For example, if the Court sits in division of seven, then at least three of
the members must actually deliberate the case and have the same stand thereon. If only two concurred or have the
same vote, then the case will now be decided by the Court en banc, meaning majority of all the fifteen Justices must
take part in the deliberations and majority of those who took part must have the same stand on the case.
Nonetheless, if Court sits in division of three, all the members must take part in the deliberations and come up with
the same vote in order to resolve the case. This is because the “at least three members” requirement must also be
followed.
3. Prohibitions. It must be noted that the Members of the Supreme Court and the lower courts cannot be designated
to any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions. An agency is said to perform a “quasi-judicial”
function if it acts like a court in that it hears and decides cases even if it is not a court. Administrative agencies are
under the executive branch and may be delegated quasi-judicial powers in deciding specific cases which it could
competently and efficiently resolve. Justices and judges cannot be designated to these agencies in accordance with
the principle of separation of powers. If they are allowed to be designated to administrative agencies, then they are
likewise performing executive function, thus violating the said principle.

Judicial and Bar Council

1. Meaning. The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) is a constitutional body under the supervision of the Supreme Court
that has the principal function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary. As was previously discussed, the
Justices or Members of the Supreme Court and judges of the lower courts are among the officials who are appointed
by the President. For their appointments to be valid, they must first be nominated by the JBC. For every vacant seat
in the judiciary, the Council prepares a list of at least three nominees from which the President shall select and
appoint. Manifestly, this is form of constitutional check on the appointing power of the President which is already
deemed sufficient even without the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments. Thus, if there is a vacancy for
judgeship in a court, the JBC must first provide a list of at least three nominees. From the list the President shall
select whom he shall appoint.
2. Composition. The JBC is composed of seven members: (a) the Chief Justice as ex officio Chairman; (b) the
Secretary of Justice as an ex officio member; (c) a representative of the Congress as ex officio member; (d) a
representative of the Integrated Bar; (e) a professor of law; (f) a retired Member of the Supreme Court; and (g) a
representative of the private sector. The ex officio members are the Chief Justice, Secretary of Justice, and
representative of the Congress. The four others are called regular members. The ex officio members, on the one
hand, are those who by reason of their office are also members of the Council. The regular members, on the other,
are appointed by the President for a term of four years with the consent of the Commission on Appointments. The
Secretary of the Council, who shall be in-charge with the records keeping, is the Clerk of the Supreme Court.
Powers of the Supreme Court
The powers of the Supreme Court are expressly provided in Section 5, Article VIII. Its powers are classified into: (1)
its original jurisdiction; (2) its appellate jurisdiction; (3) power to temporarily assign judges; (4) power to change
venue; (5) rule-making power; (6) power to appoint court personnel; and (7) administrative supervision over lower
courts.
1. Original jurisdiction means the authority to settle cases filed for the first time. Among the cases which can be filed
and settled for the first time in the Supreme Court are, first, cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and
consuls, and, second, petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus.
The first set of cases involves diplomatic agents, who under international law are considered representatives of the
States where they are nationals. An ambassador, being a representative or extension of a sovereign State, has
immunity from suits in the receiving state. The immunity is based on the international law doctrine of State
immunity and the equality of sovereign states. For example, the ambassador of U.S. cannot be sued for a criminal
offense committed in the Philippines, unless the immunity or privilege is waived. In here the Philippines is the
receiving State and the ambassador is a representative of U.S. Note, however, Filipino ambassadors are not immune
from suits here in the Philippines. A consul, likewise, although a diplomatic agent, has no diplomatic immunity.
Nevertheless, all cases involving these diplomats, ambassadors, public ministers and consuls, may be heard for the
first time in the Supreme Court.
The second set of cases involves special civil actions (certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, and quo warranto) and a
special proceeding (habeas corpus). The Rules of Court provide for their definition and the manner of their filing.
(a) Certiorari is a special civil action which is filed by a person who is aggrieved by any tribunal, board or officer
exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions that had acted without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and there is no plain and speedy remedy in the
ordinary course of law. Its purpose is to invalidate a judgment rendered without or in excess of authority or
jurisdiction.
(b) Prohibition is a special civil action filed by a person aggrieved in the proceedings of any tribunal, corporation,
board, officer or person, whether exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions, which proceedings are
without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction, and there is no plain and speedy remedy in the ordinary course of law. Its purpose is to stop a tribunal
or person from further engaging in proceedings done without or in excess of authority or jurisdiction.
(c) Mandamus is a special civil action filed by a person aggrieved by any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or
person, who unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from
office, trust, or station, or unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which such
other is entitled, there is no plain, adequate, and speedy remedy in the ordinary course of law. Its purpose is to
compel the performance of a ministerial duty or duty mandated by law to be performed under certain circumstances.
(d) Quo Warranto is a special civil action instituted by the Philippine Government against a person, public officer, or
association which usurps, unlawfully holds, intrudes into an office, position, or franchise. Its purpose is to recover
an office or position from a usurper or from an officer, who has forfeited his office, and a franchise from a false
corporation (one without legal personality).
(e) Habeas corpus is a special proceeding the purpose of which is to grant speedy remedy for the release of a person
illegally confined or detained, or for the grant of rightful custody over a child or person to someone from whom the
custody is withheld or to whom it rightfully belongs.
2. Appellate jurisdiction refers to the authority to review decisions of a lower court. The Supreme Court has appellate
jurisdiction over final judgments and orders of lower courts in:
(a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law,
presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question.
(b) All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in relation thereto.
(c) All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.
(d) All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.
(e) All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.
The review of cases involves the right to appeal. As a general rule, the right to appeal is only “statutory,” meaning it
is the Congress, by means of a statute, that determines whether a person can appeal an adverse decision of a lower
court to a higher court. However, the present provision dealing with the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
is not statutory but constitutional, meaning the Congress cannot diminish or lessen the Court’s jurisdiction and
consequently prevent a person from appealing thereto. Thus, persons adversely affected by final judgments and
decrees of lower courts involving the above enumerated cases may file an appeal or certiorari in the Supreme Court
if all the requirements are met.
It could be gleaned also from the present provision that the power of judicial review is exercised also by lower courts.
The constitutionality or validity of laws and decrees may be passed upon by the lower courts whose decisions may be
subjected to review by the Supreme Court upon filing of the proper party.
Important to note also that only cases involving error or question of law are appealable to the Supreme Court, except
some cases. If it involves questions of fact or a mixture of fact and law, the case cannot be elevated to Supreme
Court. On the one hand, a case involves a question of fact if it requires the determination of the truth or falsity of a
fact in dispute as alleged in the pleadings of the parties. For example, if the issue of the case is whether or not the
document is genuine, then it involves a question of fact. On the other hand, a case involves a question of law if it
does not involve the determination of the truth or falsity of a fact but only a question of validity or applicability of a
law. An example is a case involving the constitutionality of a statute. Under the Rule of Court, the mode of appeal to
the Supreme Court appropriate in cases involving purely question of law is certiorari under Rule 45.
3. Temporary Assignment of Judges. The Supreme Court also has the power to “assign temporarily judges of lower
courts to other stations as public interest may require. Such temporary assignment shall not exceed six months
without the consent of the judge concerned.” This power reinforces the independence of the Supreme Court from the
Executive Department as well as balances the powers of the government. Even if he is the appointing authority, the
President has no power to temporarily assign or transfer at his pleasure judges to other courts. Under the law and
the present rules, only the Supreme Court has the power to do so and under the conditions that the temporary
assignment results to a better administration of justice, faster disposition of cases, and impartial decision making.
4. Change of Venue. The Court is empowered to order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of
justice. Venue refers to the place where the trial is conducted. The Rules of Court provide the rules on venue, which
are clearly intended for the speedy, impartial, and convenient disposition of cases. If instead of being convenient,
venue causes miscarriage of justice, the Supreme Court has the power to change the venue. Even if venue is
jurisdictional in criminal cases, the Supreme Court still has the power to change the same. For example, venue
maybe changed by the Supreme Court to allow a witness to give an objective testimony without fear of retaliation
from the adverse party. The venue may also be changed when there is danger to the life of the accused.
5. Rule-Making Power. The Court has the power to promulgate rules concerning:
(a) The protection and enforcement of constitutional rights;
(b) Pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts;
(c) The admission to the practice of law;
(d) The Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and
(e) Legal assistance to the under-privileged.
Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform
for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of
special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.
This power of the Supreme Court is the basis for making the Rules of Court.
6. Power to Appoint Its Own Personnel. The Court has the power to appoint all officials and employees of the
Judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Law. Although the power to appoint is vested in the President, the
Supreme Court has the power to appoint officials and employees of the Judicial Department. However, the
appointment must be in accordance with the Civil Service Law.
7. Administrative Supervision. Section 6, Article VIII states that the Supreme Court has administrative supervision
over all courts and its personnel. This is one of the constitutional safeguards for the independence of the judiciary.
During the effectivity of the 1935 Constitution, the Department of Justice had administrative supervision over the
lower courts which compromised the independence of the courts as their decisions were often swayed by the
executive department. But with the transfer of supervision to the Supreme Court, courts are empowered and freed
from the political pressures of the executive branch.
Decisions of the Supreme Court
1. Consultation. The Supreme Court is a collegiate court, in that it is composed of many members and its decisions
are reached through consultation or thorough deliberation of its members. Consultation is necessary before the case
is assigned to a member for the writing of the opinion of the Court. Justices of the Court must discuss with each
other and vote on the settlement of the case before a certification is given assigning the writing of the opinion to a
member. For members who did not participate, abstained, or dissented from a decision or resolution, they must
explain and state their reason for it. The same requirements must also be observed by lower collegiate courts.
2. Constitutional Requirement. In rendering a decision, the Court must express clearly and distinctly the facts and
the law on which the decision is based. The purpose of this constitutional requirement is to inform the parties, most
especially the adversely affected party, the reasons why the judgment is rendered as such. The Court must, therefore,
state the factual and legal basis of its decision. In the same way, resolutions refusing a petition for review or denying
a motion for reconsideration of a court decision must state the legal basis for it.
3. Period for Rendering Judgments. After the trial and parties already submitted the case for decision, the court is
duty bound to render the decision within a certain period of time. A case or matter is deemed submitted for decision
or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by the
court itself. From date of submission, the Supreme Court must decide the case or resolve any matter within twenty-
four months, and lower courts must decide and resolve within twelve months, unless reduced by the Supreme Court.
If the court fails to render a decision within the applicable mandatory period, it must still decide or resolve the case
or matter without further delay and without prejudice to such responsibility incurred because of the delay.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS

Independence of the Commissions

The three Constitutional Commissions are the Civil Service Commission, Commission on Elections, and Commission
on Audit. They are independent bodies not under the jurisdiction of any department in the government. To ensure
their independence, the Constitution provides for the following safeguards:
(1) They are created by the Constitution and cannot therefore be abolished by a statute passed by Congress;
(2) Each has powers and functions which cannot be diminished by statute;
(3) The Constitution expressly describes them as independent;
(4) The Chairmen and members of the Commissions have a fairly long term of seven years;
(5) The Chairmen and members can only be removed through impeachment;
(6) The Chairmen and members cannot be reappointment or appointed in an acting capacity;
(7) Salaries of Chairmen and members cannot be decreased;
(8) The Commissions enjoy fiscal autonomy;
(9) Each Commission can promulgate its own rules;
(10) Disqualifications are provided to strengthen the integrity of the Commissions; and
(11) The Commissions may appoint their own officials and personnel in accordance with the Civil Service Law.

Powers and Functions of Each Commission

1. The Civil Service Commission is the central personnel agency of the Government. As such, it has the following
powers and functions:
(a) Establish a career service and adopt measures to promote morale, efficiency, integrity, responsiveness,
progressiveness, and courtesy in the civil service;
(b) Strengthen the merit and rewards system, integrate all human resources development programs for all levels and
ranks; and
(c) Institutionalize a management climate conducive to public accountability.
2. The Commission on Elections is a constitutional creature which safeguards the core of republicanism and
democracy by being an effective instrument for ensuring the secrecy and sanctity of ballots being the expression of
the will of the people. It shall exercise the following powers and functions:
(a) Enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite, initiative,
referendum, and recall.
(b) Decide, except those involving the right to vote, all questions affecting elections, including determination of the
number and location of polling places, appointment of election officials and inspectors, and registration of voters.
(c) Deputize, with the concurrence of the President, law enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of the
Government, including the Armed Forces of the Philippines, for the exclusive purpose of ensuring free, orderly,
honest, peaceful, and credible elections.
(d) Register, after sufficient publication, political parties, organizations, or coalitions which, in addition to other
requirements, must present their platform or program of government; and accredit citizens’ arms of the Commission
on Elections.
(e) File, upon a verified complaint, or on its own initiative, petitions in court for inclusion or exclusion of voters;
investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute cases of violations of election laws, including acts or omissions
constituting election frauds, offenses, and malpractices.
(f) Recommend to the Congress effective measures to minimize election spending, including limitation of places
where propaganda materials shall be posted, and to prevent and penalize all forms of election frauds, offenses,
malpractices, and nuisance candidacies.
(g) Recommend to the President the removal of any officer or employee it has deputized, or the imposition of any
other disciplinary action, for violation or disregard of, or disobedience to, its directive, order, or decision.
(h) Submit to the President and the Congress, a comprehensive report on the conduct of each election, plebiscite,
initiative, referendum, or recall.
3. The Commission on Audit is the watchdog of the financial operations of the government. It sees to it that
government funds are well accounted for and that they are spent in accordance with the appropriations law. As such
it has the following powers and functions:
(a) Examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of
funds and property, owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the Government;
(b) Keep the general accounts of the Government and preserve the vouchers and other supporting papers pertaining
thereto;
(c) Define the scope of its audit and examination, establish the techniques and methods required therefor; and
(d) Promulgate accounting and auditing rules and regulations, including those for the prevention and disallowance
of irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable expenditures or uses of government funds and
properties.
Jurisdiction of the Commissions
1. The Civil Service Commission has jurisdiction over all branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of
the Government, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters as far as civil
service is concerned. Civil service refers to that part of public service composed of professional men and women
working for the government as their lifetime career basically governed by the so-called merit system.
2. The Commission on Elections has exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the elections, returns,
and qualifications of all elective regional, provincial, and city officials. It has appellate jurisdiction over all contests
involving elective municipal officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction, or involving elective barangay
officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction.
3. The Commission on Audit has auditing authority over the Government, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or
instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters. It also has post
auditing authority over (a) constitutional bodies, commissions and offices that have been granted fiscal autonomy
under this Constitution; (b) autonomous state colleges and universities; (c) other government-owned or controlled
corporations and their subsidiaries; and (d) such non-governmental entities receiving subsidy or equity, directly or
indirectly, from or through the Government.
Review of Final Orders, Resolutions, and Decisions
1. Final orders, resolutions, and decision of the CSC may be appealed to the Court of Appeals under rule 43 of the
Rules of Court.
2. Final orders, resolutions, and decision of the COMELEC may be reviewed by way of petition for certiorari to the
Supreme Court under Rule 65 in relation to Rule 64 of the Rules of Court.
3. Final orders, resolutions, and decision of the COA may be reviewed by way of petition for certiorari to the
Supreme Court under Rule 65 in relation to Rule 64 of the Rules of Court.

Guide Questions:
1. Explain the structure of the government using the doctrine of separation of powers.
2. Briefly compare the powers of the branches of the government. Then explain how they are related with each other.
3. What is meant by a bicameral legislature? Give at least three advantages of bicameralism.
4. If there are 200 District Representatives, how many Party-List Representatives are required to complete the
Members of the House of Representatives?
5. If there are 215 Members of the House of Representatives, and 15 are abroad, what would constitute the quorum?
6. A Bill of Local Application was submitted by Senator Wade to the Senate Secretary. It has passed three readings in
the Senate and then in the Congress. Thereafter, it was presented to the President for approval, but the same was
disapproved. The President vehemently objected to the validity of the entire process.
Is the President correct?
7. What are congressional disqualifications? Give examples.
8. Concisely discuss the steps of how a bill becomes a law
9. Enumerate at least five powers of the President and briefly discuss each power.
1o. When the president dies, is permanently disabled, is impeached, or resigns, the Vice-President becomes
President for the unexpired term. However, if both the President and Vice-President die, become permanently
disabled, are impeached, or resigned, the Senate President shall act as President until the President or VP shall have
been elected and qualified.
If the Senate President becomes disabled, who will succeed?
11. Juan Dela Cruz was nominated by President Pedro Santos to the rank of naval captain in the Armed Forces of the
Philippines. His nomination has been confirmed by the Commission on Appointments, and his appointment (by
President Siuagan) followed thereafter. Juan Dela Cruz have accepted the nomination with great pride and honor.
The President reconsidered his appointment after discovering that Mr. Dela Cruz has a criminal record. The
President withdrew his appointment. Is this allowed?
12. President Juan Masipag filed an application for appropriation, and in pursuance thereof money was paid out of
the National Treasury. It must be noted that the appropriation is for a public purpose, and it is not for any specific
sect, church, denomination.
Is there something wrong with the presidential appropriation?
13. Discuss briefly the hierarchy of courts in the Philippine Judiciary.
14. What is judicial review?
15. Concisely compare and distinguish the powers and functions of the three Constitutional Commissions.

CITIZENSHIP AND SUFFRAGE

This paper explains briefly Article IV (Citizenship) and Article V (Suffrage) of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

At the end the discussion, the students are expected to:

1. Explain the meaning and requirements of Philippine citizenship;
2. Discuss and distinguish the different principles and concepts involving citizenship;
3. Explain the meaning and requirements of suffrage; and
4. Discuss the various related concepts and principles in suffrage.

PRELIMINARIES
Need for Citizenship Education
1. Citizenship education, which is the primary purpose of studying Philippine politics and governance, entails
knowing the basic rights as well as the corresponding duties of the citizens. Section 3 (2), Article XIV provides that
all educational institutions “shall inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for human
rights, appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of the country, teach the rights and
duties of citizenship, strengthen ethical and spiritual values, develop moral character and personal discipline,
encourage critical and creative thinking, broaden scientific and technological knowledge, and promote vocational
efficiency.”
2. It must also be noted that one of the State Policies of the Philippines is the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency.
Section 13, Article II provides that “the State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-building and shall
promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth
patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs.” This is also why, under
Section 12, Article II, the State supports the parents in their primary right and duty in rearing the youth for civic
efficiency and development of moral character.
3. Before delving on the rights and duties of the citizens, it is logically important to know first who are the citizens of
the Philippines, the modes of acquiring citizenship, the types of citizens, and difference between a citizen and a non-
citizen as to possession of rights, privileges, and duties. Knowing these concepts will preparatory for the discussion
of suffrage, which is one of the rights and duties of a citizen, and the bill of rights, which is the declaration and
enumeration of the rights individuals as will be discussed in Chapter 9.
Constitutional Provisions on Citizenship and Suffrage
Article IV of the 1987 Constitution discusses Citizenship. Article V discusses Suffrage. These provisions will be
explained in detail in the following subtopics.

CITIZENSHIP
Meaning of Citizenship
Citizenship refers to the membership of a person to a democratic state which bestows upon him/her full civil and
political rights (unless especially disqualified by law), and the corresponding duty to support and maintain
allegiance to the state. Such membership underscores the symbiotic relationship of the state, which on the one hand
gives protection to the citizen, and the citizen, who on the other hand is duty bound to support the state.
Citizens of the Philippines
1. Classification. There are four instances enumerated in the Constitution as to who are considered citizens of the
Philippines. Section 1, Article IV of the Constitution, provides:
“The following are citizens of the Philippines:
(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;
(2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;
(3) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age
of majority; and
(4) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.”
First, those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of the 1987 Constitution, referring to those
who were already Filipinos under the 1973 Constitution and were still citizens at the time of the passage of the 1987
Constitution. Second, those who are Philippine citizens because either their fathers “or” mothers are Philippine
citizens. Third, those whose fathers are foreigners, and then later elected their Philippine citizenship upon reaching
18 years old in accordance with 1935 Constitution which was in effect at the time of their birth. And fourth, those
who are naturalized under the procedures provided by law.
2. Natural Born and Naturalized Citizens. Basically, there are only two categories of Philippine citizens: the natural
born and the naturalized. On the one hand, a natural born citizen is someone who is already a Filipino at the time of
his birth and does not have to do anything to acquire or perfect his citizenship (Sec. 2, Art. II). In other words, he is a
Filipino by birth. On the other hand, a naturalized citizen is someone who was once a foreigner then later on became
a Filipino by legal fiction. Paragraph 2 (Either father or mother is a Filipino) and paragraph 3 (Elect Philippine
Citizenship) of the above provision are natural born citizens, while paragraph 4 (naturalized under the law) refers to
the naturalized citizen. Paragraph 1 (citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution) may refer to either a
natural born or naturalized citizen depending on the kind of citizenship he has at the time of the adoption of the
1987 Constitution.
3. Principles Determining Citizenship. How can birth determine citizenship in the case of natural born citizens?
There are two principles that could answer this. First is the jus sanguinis principle, which states that “blood
relations” determine citizenship, and the second is the jus soli or jus loci principle, which states that the “place of
birth” determines citizenship. The Philippines adopts the jus sanguinis principle and is now the underlying theory
behind Article IV. Thus, someone becomes a Filipino by birth if either his mother “or” father is a Filipino, so that by
virtue of his blood relations to either his Filipino parents he is also a Filipino. If Pedro, for example, has a Filipino
mother and a foreigner father, then he is still a Filipino by birth, and therefore a natural born citizen.
4. Old Rule. It must be noted that the present rule is different from that in the 1935 Constitution. Under the old rule,
those whose fathers are foreigners and whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines must still elect their Philippine
citizenship upon reaching 18 years old. In other words, citizenship depends upon blood relations with the father.
This was no longer the rule under the 1973 Constitution and under the present Constitution. Citizenship is now
attributable to both the father and mother. But for those who were born during the effectivity of the 1935
Constitution, or before January 17, 1973 (the date of promulgation of the 1973 Constitution), they must still elect
their Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority. For instance, if Pedro was born in January 1, 1970, of
a Chinese father and a Filipino mother, then in 1988 when he is already 18 years old, he must elect his Philippine
citizenship. Under Section 2, Article II, those who elect their Philippine citizenship are still deemed natural born
citizens.
Naturalized Citizens
1. Who are Naturalized Citizens? Naturalized citizens those are clothed by law with the rights and privileges
accorded to a citizen of the Philippines, as well as bound by their duties to the State. In other words, they are also
Filipinos. Thus they can vote during elections, acquire real property, and engage in business, among others. They
must likewise observe loyalty to the Philippines, pay their taxes, and obey the laws and duly constituted authorities
of the land. However, they cannot be elected President or Vice-President, or member of the Congress, or appointed
justice of the Supreme Court or lower collegiate courts, or member of any of the Constitutional Commissions, or
Ombudsman or his Deputy, or member of the Central Monetary Agency. These are among the restrictions to a
naturalized citizen which are reserved only to a natural born citizen, who is by birth and heart a Filipino.
2. Naturalization entails renunciation of former allegiance and the subsequent act of formal entrance into a new
body politic. The grant of citizenship by naturalization is an act of grace on the part of the State. Just as the State can
confer or grant citizenship, it can also withhold or take away the same. Thus, aliens or foreigners do not have a
natural or inherent right to demand membership to the State.
3. Kinds of Naturalization. The government, through its three branches, can confer citizenship by naturalization.
Hence, a foreigner can be naturalized in either of three ways:
(a) Judicial naturalization refers to naturalization by means of court judgment pursuant to the “Revised
Naturalization Act.” Applications are filed with the proper Regional Trial Court which will render the decree of
naturalization;
(b) Legislative naturalization refers to naturalization by means of a direct act of Congress, that is, by the enactment
of a law by the Congress declaring therein that a foreigner is conferred citizenship and admitted into the political
community; and
(c) Administrative naturalization is naturalization by means of administrative proceedings before the Special
Committee on Naturalization pursuant to the “Administrative Naturalization Law of 2000.” Applicants must be
aliens born and residing in the Philippines with all of the qualifications and none of the disqualifications provided by
law.
Lost and Reacquisition of Citizenship
1. Lost of Citizenship. Section 3, Article 4 of the Constitution states that “Philippine citizenship may be lost or
reacquired in the manner provided by law.” There are two laws which provide the manner of loss of citizenship. First
is “Commonwealth Act No. 63” which provides that citizenship is lost by naturalization in another country, by
express renunciation of citizenship, by subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution and laws of
another country, by rendering service to a foreign armed forces, and by deserting the armed forces of the
Philippines. Second is Commonwealth Act No. 473 which states that citizenship is lost by cancellation of certificate
of naturalization by court, by permanent residence in the country of origin for a period of five years from the time of
naturalization, by an invalid declaration of intent in the petition, by failure to with the educational requirements of
the minor children, and by allowing oneself to used by a foreigner.
2. Reacquisition of Citizenship. As far as reacquisition of citizenship is concerned, Commonwealth Act No. 63 also
provides that citizenship which was lost may be reacquired by naturalization, by a direct act of Congress, or by
repatriation.
(a) Naturalization may be applied for by a former Philippine citizen who lost his citizenship under any of the
aforesaid ways. For example, Pedro was a Filipino who became a naturalized citizen in another country, and as a
result he lost his Philippine citizenship. If he applies for naturalization and later on the court gave him a decree of
naturalization, then he reacquires his Philippine citizenship.
(b) The Congress can also reinstitute, by means of a law, citizenship to those who lost it.
(c) Repatriation is accomplished by taking the necessary oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and
then registering the same in the proper Civil Registry and in the Bureau of Immigration. This is available to women
who have lost their citizenship through marriage to aliens, those who lost their citizenship on account of economic
and political necessity not otherwise disqualified by law, and deserters of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
3. R.A. No. 9225. Special note must be given to Republic Act No. 9225, otherwise known as “Citizenship Retention
and Reacquisition Act of 2003,”which amended Commonwealth Act No. 63. It provides that natural born citizens of
the Philippines who lost their citizenship because of naturalization in a foreign country shall be deemed to have
reacquired their Philippine citizenship upon taking the oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines. After the
effectivity of RA 9225, those who are naturalized in a foreign country shall retain their Philippine citizenship also
upon taking the oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines. Thus, under the present law, it is the taking of
the necessary oath of allegiance and registration of the same that retains and reacquires Philippine citizenship.
4. Marriage to an Alien. Under Section 4, Article IV, mere marriage to an alien is not a ground for losing Philippine
citizenship, unless there is implied or express renunciation through acts or omissions. For example, if Maria is
married to Friedrich, a foreigner, and in Friedrich’s country his marriage confers on Maria their citizenship, then
Maria will not automatically lose her citizenship as provided by the Constitution. What she has is dual citizenship.
But if Maria subscribes to an oath of allegiance to her husband’s country, then her act is deemed a renunciation of
her Philippine citizenship, thus, a ground for losing her citizenship.
Dual Allegiance and Dual Citizenship
1. Dual Allegiance as Provided in the Constitution. Section 5, Article IV states, “Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical
to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.” Dual allegiance happens when a naturalized citizen of the
Philippines maintains his allegiance to his country of origin. For example, if Joe, who was a foreigner, becomes a
naturalized citizen of the Philippines, and after naturalization he still maintains his allegiance to his mother country,
then his case is said to be one of dual allegiance. This is prohibited by the Constitution to prevent a former foreigner,
who gained political membership, to have false allegiance or pretend loyalty to the Philippines.
2. Dual Allegiance vs. Dual Citizenship. The Constitution, however, does not prohibit dual citizenship. Dual
allegiance is different from dual citizenship. Dual citizenship happens when an individual is a citizen of two
countries because the laws of both countries confer upon him membership to their State. For example, if Pedro’s
parents are Filipinos and he is born in United State of America, he acquires Philippine citizenship under the
principle of jus sanguinis and American citizenship under the principle of jus soli. Thus, he has dual citizenship
because of the respective laws of the two countries. Another example is when a Filipino marries a foreigner and
thereby acquires the citizenship of the spouse, there is also dual citizenship. The Philippines cannot prohibit dual
citizenship because its laws cannot control the laws of other states. It is dual allegiance that is prohibited because it
is intentional while dual citizenship is generally unintentional, in that it is only accidentally cause by birth in a
foreign state or marriage with a foreigner.
3. Limitation on Dual Citizenship. Dual citizenship may be prohibited under special cases. For instance, pursuant to
the Constitution, RA 9225 requires that all those who are seeking elective public offices in the Philippines to execute
a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship to qualify them as candidates in the Philippine
elections.

SUFFRAGE
Meaning of Suffrage
Suffrage is the right and obligation to vote. It is a political right conferred by the Constitution empowering a citizen
to participate in the process of government which makes the State truly democratic and republican. Section 1, Article
V, however, provides that “suffrage may be exercised…” thus, making it non-mandatory. Failure to exercise such
right is not punishable by law, but nonetheless makes a citizen irresponsible. In other words, suffrage is an
obligation but a non-mandatory one.
When Suffrage may be Exercised
Suffrage is exercised not only during elections, but also during initiatives, referendums, plebiscite, and recalls.
Election is the means by which the people choose their representatives who are entrusted the exercise of the powers
of the government. Initiative is the means by which people directly propose and enact laws, that is, they initiate the
law-making process. Referendum refers to process by which the people ratify or reject a law or part thereof referred
or submitted to them by the national or local law-making body. Plebiscite entails a process by which the people
either ratify or reject an amendment or revision to the Constitution. And recall is a mode of removing an incumbent
official from office by a vote of the people upon proper registration of a petition signed by the required number of
qualified voters. In all these instances, a qualified citizen can rightfully exercise suffrage.
Who may Exercise Suffrage
1. Qualified Citizens Only. Suffrage can be exercised only by a citizen of the Philippines, who has none of the
disqualifications, at least eighteen years of age on the day of the election, and a resident of the Philippines for at least
one year and of the place where he intends to vote for at least six months immediately preceding the election
(Section 1, Article V). Suffrage is an attribute of citizenship, and therefore aliens cannot exercise the same.
2. Reason for Lowering the Voting Age. The voting age was lowered down from 21 to 18 years old to broaden the
electoral base. If the voting age is 21, then only a small percentage of the total population of the Philippines can vote.
Moreover, according to psychologists, 18 to 21 year-old Filipino youth, living in urban or rural areas, have the same
political maturity. This is affirmed in many provisions of Philippine law, in that the marrying age, the age when
someone can enter into a contract, and the age when someone can be called to defend the State, is 18 years old. It
must be noted, however, “registration” may be done before reaching the age of majority for as long as the voter is 18
years old on the day of the election.
3. Explanation of Residency Requirement. A citizen, in order to be qualified to vote, must have resided in the
Philippines for at least one year and for at least six months on the place where he intends to vote immediately
preceding the elections. The “one year residency requirement” means “permanent residence” while the “six month
residency requirement” means either “permanent or temporary residence.” On the on hand, permanent residence or
domicile requires bodily presence in the locality, the intention to remain there (animus manendi), and an intention
to return to it if one goes somewhere else (animus revertendi). If a new residence is established, permanent
residence requires an intention not to return to the old domicile (animus non revertandi). For example, if a Filipino
citizen works abroad to look for greener pastures, but still has the “intention to return” to the Philippines, he can still
exercise his right to vote since his domicile is still in the Philippines. On the other hand, temporary residence only
requires the intention to reside in a fixed place. To be familiar with the needs of the locality, a voter must reside
therein for at least six months immediately preceding the elections. This is requirement for both national and local
elections. In here, since residence can also mean temporary residence, one can vote in either his locality of
permanent residence or locality of temporary residence during local or national elections. For example, Pedro is
domiciled in Tuguegarao City and is a registered voter therein. But he is working in Manila for more than six months
already, has established a temporary residence, and is likewise a registered voter there. Under the law, he can vote in
Tuguegarao city since he is a permanent resident of the place or in Manila since he has a temporary residence there.
4. No Additional Substantive Requirement. Still in keeping with the trend for broadening electoral base, the
Constitution does not provide for “literacy, property or other substantive requirements.” Rather it encourages the
“participation” and “equalization” of the privileges and rights of the people. Being democratic and republican, the
State endeavors for the establishment of a wide base of electoral involvement by the people, not only by the rich
minority who joy the privilege of formal education, but also by the poor majority who are usually unlettered because
of poverty. It must also be emphasize that there is no direct relationship between education or property, on the one
hand, and capacity for intelligent voting, on the other, in that even a rich and highly educated person may initiate
and be swayed by sham elections.
Absentee Voting
Because of the phenomenon of “Filipino labor explosion overseas,” the so-called “absentee voting system” is
mandated by the Constitution to be provided for, or legislated, by the Congress. Section 2, Article V states, “The
Congress shall provide… a system for absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad.” For as long as they are
qualified, overseas Filipino workers can still participate in elections despite their temporary absence in the
Philippines. While residency is a voting requirement, it must not be a reason for disenfranchising thousands of
Filipinos abroad whose hearts are still with the Philippines.
Importance of Suffrage
As a final note, the importance of suffrage cannot be overemphasized as it is the bed rock of Philippine democracy
and republicanism. Removed, then the Philippines is no longer democratic and republican. This is why the
Constitution mandates the Congress “to provide a system for securing the secrecy and sanctity of the ballot.” The
mandate becomes especially important now that the electoral base is broadened to include the illiterate and the
disabled who are the usual prey of unscrupulous politicians. Thus, to secure the very essence of Philippine
democracy and to protect the illiterates and disabled from being disenfranchised, the Constitution also provides that
“The Congress shall also design a procedure for the disabled and the illiterates to vote without the assistance of other
persons. Until then, they shall be allowed to vote under existing laws and such rules as the Commission on Elections
may promulgate to protect the secrecy of the ballot.”