CONSTITUTIONAL LAW CONCEPTS

Judge Cooley defines "constitution" in the following curt terms: "That body of rules
and maxims in accordance with which the. powers of sovereignty are habitually
exercised.

SUPREMACY of the CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE II – DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES

Selected principles

SEC 1. The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides

in the people and all government authority emanates from them.

Elements of a State (for municipal law purposes) CODE:

PTSG 1. A community of persons, more or less numerous (PEOPLE) 2.
Permanently occupying a definite portion of territory (TERRITORY) 3.
Independent of external control (SOVEREIGNTY) 4. Possessing an
organized government to which the great body of inhabitants render habitual
obedience (GOVERNMENT)

Definition of
“People” CODE: CNCH 1. A Community of persons; 2. Sufficient in
Number; 3. Capable of maintaining the continued existence of the
community; and 4. Held together by a common bond of law.

“Sovereignty”
1. LEGAL sovereignty a. The supreme power
to make law. b. It is lodged in the people.
2. 2. POLITICAL sovereignty a. The sum total of all the influences in a
state, b. Legal and non-legal, c. Which determine the course of law.

*According to the Principle of AUTO-LIMITATION: Sovereignty is the property of the

state-force due to which it has the exclusive capacity of legal self-determination
and self-restriction.

“Government” 1. That institution or aggregate of institutions 2. by

which an independent society 3. makes and carries out those rules of
action 4. which are necessary to enable men to live in a social state 5. or
which are imposed upon the people forming that society by those who
possess the power or authority of prescribing them.

Classification of governments :
A. De jure - one established by the authority of the legitimate
sovereign
B. De facto - one established in defiance of the legitimate sovereign

Classification of de facto governments

1. De facto proper
a. That government that gets possession and control of
b. or usurps by force or by the voice of majority
c. the rightful legal government
d. and maintains itself against the will of the latter.

2. Government of paramount force

a. That which is established and maintained by military forces;
b. who invade and occupy a territory of the enemy
c. in the course of war.
3. That established as an independent government by the inhabitants of a country
who rise in insurrection against the parent state.

Definition of “Republican State” It is one wherein all government authority

emanates from the people and is exercised by representatives chosen by the
people.

Definition of Democratic State This merely emphasizes that the Philippines has
some aspects of direct democracy such as initiative and referendum.

SEC. 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts

the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land
and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and
amity with all nations.

Kind of war renounced by the Philippines:

The Philippines only renounces AGGRESSIVE war as an instrument of national
policy. It does not renounce defensive war.

Some "generally accepted principles of international law" recognized by the Court:

1. Right of an alien to be released on bail while awaiting deportation when his
failure to leave the country is due to the fact that no country will accept him
(Mejoff v. Director of Prisons, 90 Phil. 70)
2. The right of a country to establish military commissions to try war criminals
(Kuroda v. Jalondoni, 83 Phil. 171)
3. The Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals (Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA
195) Amity with all nations This does not mean automatic diplomatic recognition
of all nations. Diplomatic recognition remains a matter of executive discretion.

SEC 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. The Armed
Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to
secure the sovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory.

Civilian authority/supremacy clause (1st sentence)

1. Civilian authority simply means the supremacy of the law because authority,
under our constitutional system, can only come from law. Under this clause, the
soldier renounces political ambition.

Mark of sovereignty (2nd and 3rd sentences)

1. Positively, this clause singles out the military as the guardian of the people and
of the integrity of the national territory and therefore ultimately of the majesty of
the law.
2. Negatively, it is an expression of disapproval of military abuses.

SEC 4. The prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people. The
Government may call upon the people to defend the State and, in the fulfillment
thereof, all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by law, to render
personal, military, or civil service.

SEC. 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty and
property, and the promotion of the general welfare are essential for the
enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy.

SEC. 6. The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.

Selected state policies

SEC. 7. The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with
other states, the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial
integrity, national interest, and the right to self-determination.

SEC. 8. The Philippines, consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues
a policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory. Policy of freedom from
nuclear weapons
1. The policy PROHIBITS: a. The possession, control and manufacture of nuclear
weapons b. Nuclear arms tests.
2. The policy does NOT prohibit the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.

SEC. 12. The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and
strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally
protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. etc.
Principle that the family is not a creature of the state. Protection for the unborn
1. It is not an assertion that the unborn is a legal person.
2. It is not an assertion that the life of the unborn is placed exactly on the level of
the life of the mother. Hence, when it is necessary to save the life of the mother,
the life of the unborn may be sacrificed.
3. Under this provision, the Roe v. Wade doctrine allowing abortion up to the 6th
month of pregnancy cannot be adopted in the Philippines because the life of the
unborn is protected from the time of conception.

SEC. 16. The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a
balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
1. While the right to a balanced and healthful ecology is found under the
declaration of Principle and State Policies and not under the Bill of Rights, it does
not follow that it is less important than any of the civil and political rights
enumerated in the latter. (Oposa v. Factoran)
2. The right to a balanced and healthful ecology carries with it the correlative duty
to refrain from impairing the environment. (Oposa v. Factoran)

SEC. 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public
service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.

SEC. 27. The State shall maintain honesty and integrity in the public service and
take positive and effective measures against graft and corruption.

SEC. 28. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts and
implements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public
interest.

ARTICLE VI – THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

SEC. 1. The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines,
which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the
extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.

Definition of Legislative Power: The authority to make laws and to alter or repeal
them.

Classification of legislative power: (O De CO)

1. Original – Possessed by the people in their sovereign capacity
2. Delegated – Possessed by Congress and other legislative bodies by virtue of the
Constitution
2. Constituent – The power to amend or revise the Constitution
3. Ordinary – The power to pass ordinary laws
Note: The original legislative power of the people is exercised via initiative and
referendum. In this manner, people can directly propose and enact laws, or
approve or reject any act or law passed by Congress or a local government unit.
Limits on the legislative power of Congress:
1. Substantive – limitations on the content of laws. E.g. no law shall be passed
establishing a state religion.
2. Procedural – limitations on the manner of passing laws. E.g. generally a bill
must go through three readings on three separate days. Note: Provided that these
two limitations are not exceeded, Congress’ legislative power is plenary.

Corollaries of legislative power:

1. Congress cannot pass irrepealable laws. Since Congress’ powers are plenary,
and limited only by the Constitution, any attempt to limit the powers of future
Congresses via an irrepealable law is not allowed.
2. Congress, as a general rule, cannot delegate its legislative power. Since the
people have already delegated legislative power to Congress, the latter cannot
delegate it any further.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Delegation of legislative power to local government units;
2. 2. Instances when the Constitution itself allows for such delegation [see Art. VI
Sec. 23(2)] What may Congress delegate: Congress can only delegate, usually to
administrative agencies, RULE-MAKING POWER or LAW EXECUTION.
This involves either of two tasks for the administrative agencies: 1. “Filling up the
details” on an otherwise complete statute; or 2. Ascertaining the facts necessary
to bring a “contingent” law or provision into actual operation.

Sections 2-4. SENATE Composition 24 senators who shall be elected at large by

the qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law. Qualifications 1.
Natural-born citizen;
3. At least 35 years old on the day of election;
4. Able to read and write;
5. A registered voter; and
6. Philippine resident for at least 2 years immediately preceding the day of the
election.

Note: The qualifications of both Senators and Members of the House are limited
to those provided by the Constitution. Congress cannot, by law, add or subtract
from these qualifications.

Term of Office: 6 years, commencing (unless otherwise provided by law) at noon,

30 June next following their election. Term Limitations:
1. No Senator shall serve for more than 2 consecutive terms.
2. Voluntary renunciation of office for any length of time shall not be considered
as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was
elected.

Sections 5-7. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Composition:

1. Not more than 250 members, unless otherwise fixed by law; and
2. Party-list Representatives Election of 250 members

A. They shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among the

provinces, cities and the Metropolitan Manila area.
B. Legislative districts are apportioned in accordance with the number of
inhabitants of each area and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio. a.
Each district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact and
adjacent territory;
C. Each city with at least 250,000 inhabitants will be entitled to at least one
representative.
D. Each province will have at least one representative.
E. Legislative districts shall be re-apportioned by Congress within 3 years after the
return of each census.
F. The standards used to determine the apportionment of legislative districts is
meant to prevent ‘gerrymandering’, which is the formation of a legislative district
out of separate territories so as to favor a particular candidate or party.

Qualifications
1. Natural born citizen of the Philippines;
2. At least 25 years old on the day of the election;
3. Able to read and write;
4. Registered voter in the district he seeks to represent; and
5. A resident of such district for at least one year immediately preceding the day
of the election.

Term of Office
1. Each member of the House shall be elected for a term of three (3) years which
shall commence (unless otherwise provided for by law) at noon on 30 June next
following their election.
2. Voluntary renunciation of office for any length of time shall not be considered
as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was
elected.

Term Limitations
No member of the House of Representatives shall serve for more than three (3)
consecutive terms.

Distinctions between Term and Tenure 1. Definition a. Terms means the period
during which the elected officer is legally authorized to assume his office and
exercise the powers thereof. b. Tenure is the actual period during which such
officer actually holds his position.

Limitation/Possible Reduction
a. Term CANNOT be reduced.
b. Tenure MAY, by law, be limited. Thus, a provision which considers an elective
office automatically vacated when the holder thereof files a certificate of
candidacy for another elective office (except President and Vice-President) is
valid, as it only affects the officers tenure and NOT his constitutional term.

Party-List Representatives
1. Constitute 20% of the total number of representatives, including those under
the party-list system (thus a maximum of 50 party-list members of the House)

2. However, for 3 consecutive terms from 2 February 1987 (i.e., the 1987-92, 92-
95 and 95-98 terms), 25 seats shall be allotted to sectoral representatives.
Under Art. XVIII, Sec. 7, the sectoral representatives are to be appointed
by the President until legislation otherwise provides.
3. Mechanics of the party-list system:
a. Registered organizations submit a list of candidates in order of priority.
b. b. During the elections, these organizations are voted for at large.
c. The number of seats that each organization gets out of the 20% allotted to the
system depends on the number of votes they get.

4. Qualifications
a. Natural born citizen of the Philippines
b. At least 25 years of age on the day of the election c. Able to read and write

SEC. 9. In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, a

SPECIAL ELECTION may be called to fill such vacancy in the manner prescribed by
law, but the Senator or Member of the House of Representatives thus elected shall
serve only for the unexpired term.

SEC. 10. Salaries of Senators and Members of the House Determination of

Salaries: Salaries of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives shall
be determined by law.

Rule on increase in salaries: No increase in their salaries shall take

effect until after the EXPIRATION OF THE FULL TERM (NOT TENURE) OF
ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES APPROVING SUCH INCREASE. Note: Since the
Constitution ‘provides for rules on “salaries” and not on ‘emoluments,’
our distinguished legislators can appropriate for themselves other sums
of money such as travel allowances, as well as other side ‘benefits.’

SEC. 11: CONGRESSIONAL IMMUNITIES

1. ) Immunity from arrest:
a. Legislators are privileged from arrest while Congress is “in session” with respect
to offenses punishable by up to 6 years of imprisonment. Thus, whether Congress
is in regular or special session, the immunity from arrest applies.
b. If Congress is in recess, members thereof may be arrested.
c. The immunity is only with respect to arrests and NOT to prosecution for criminal
offenses.

2. ) Legislative privilege:
a. No member shall be questioned or held liable in any forum other than his/her
respective Congressional body for any debate or speech in the Congress or in any
Committee thereof.
b. Limitation on the privilege: (i) Protection is only against forum other than
Congress itself. Thus for inflammatory remarks which are otherwise privileged, a
member may be sanctioned by either the Senate or the House as the case may
be. (ii) The ‘speech or debate’ must be made in performance of their duties as
members of Congress. This includes speeches delivered, statements made, votes
cast, as well as bills introduced, and other activities done in performance of their
official duties. (iii) Congress need NOT be in session when the utterance is made,
as long as it forms part of ‘legislative action,’ i.e. part of the deliberative and
communicative process used to participate in legislative proceedings in
consideration of proposed legislation or with respect to other matters with
Congress’ jurisdiction.

SEC. 12. All Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives shall, upon
assumption of office, make a full disclosure of their financial and business
interests. They shall notify the House concerned of a potential conflict of interest
that may arise from the filing of a proposed legislation of which they are authors.
SEC. 13-14: CONGRESSIONAL DISQUALIFICATIONS: Disqualifications:
DISQUALIFICATION WHEN APPLICABLE
1. Senator/Member of the House cannot hold any other office or employment in
the Government or any subdivision, agency or Instrumentality thereof, including
GOCCS or their subsidiaries. During his term. If he does so, he forfeits his seat.
2. Legislators cannot be appointed to any office.
IF the office was created or the emoluments thereof increased during the term for
which he was elected.
3. Legislators cannot personally appear as counsel before any court of justice,
electoral tribunal, quasi-judicial and administrative bodies.
During his term of office.
4. Legislators cannot be financially interested directly or indirectly in any contract
with or in any franchise, or special privilege granted by the Government, or any
subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including any GOCC or its
subsidiary.
During his term of office.
5. Legislators cannot intervene in any matter before any office of the government
when it is for his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to act on
account of his office.

SEC. 15: REGULAR AND SPECIAL SESSIONS Regular Sessions:

1. ) Congress convenes once every year on the 4th Monday of July (unless
otherwise provided for by law) 2.) Continues in session for as long as it sees fit,
until 30 days before the opening of the next regular session, excluding Saturdays,
Sundays, and legal holidays.

Special Sessions: Called by the President at any time when Congress is not in
session.

SEC. 16. Officers: 1.) Senate President; 2.) Speaker of the House; and 3.) Each
House may choose such other officers as it may deem necessary. Election of
Officers By a majority vote of all respective members.

Quorum to do business:
1. Majority of each House shall constitute a quorum.
2. A smaller number may adjourn from day to day and may compel the
attendance of absent members.
3. In computing a quorum, members who are outside the country and thus outside
of each House’s coercive jurisdiction are not included.

Internal Rules:
1. Each House shall determine its own procedural rules.
2. Since this is a power vested in Congress as part of its inherent powers, under
the principle of separation of powers, the courts cannot intervene in the
implementation of these rules insofar as they affect the members of Congress.
3. Also, since Congress has the power to make these rules, it also has the power
to ignore them when circumstances so require.

Discipline:
1. ) Suspension a. Concurrence of 2/3 of ALL its members and b. Shall not
exceed 60 days.
2. ) Expulsion a. Concurrence of 2/3 of ALL its members.

Congressional Journals and Records:

1. ) The Journal is conclusive upon the courts.
2. ) BUT an enrolled bill prevails over the contents of the Journal. An enrolled bill
is the official copy of approved legislation and bears the certifications of the
presiding officers of each House. Thus where the certifications are valid and are
not withdrawn, the contents of the enrolled bill are conclusive upon the courts as
regards the provision of that particular bill.

Adjournments:
1. ) Neither House can adjourn for more than 3 days during the time Congress is
in session without the consent of the other House.
2. ) Neither can they adjourn to any other place than that where the two houses
are sitting, without the consent of the other.

Section 17: THE ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL The Senate and the House shall each have
an Electoral Tribunal which shall be composed of:
1. 3 Supreme Court Justices to be designated by the Chief Justice; &
2. 6 Members of the Senate or House, as the case may be. The senior Justice in
the Electoral Tribunal shall be its Chairman.
Note: The congressional members of the ET’s shall be chosen on the basis
of proportional representation from the political parties and party-list
organizations.

Jurisdiction:
1. ) Each ET shall be the sole judge of all CONTESTS relating to the election,
returns, and qualifications of their respective members. This includes determining
the validity or invalidity of a proclamation declaring a particular candidate as the
winner.
2. ) An ‘election contest’ is one where a defeated candidate challenges the
qualification and claims for himself the seat of a proclaimed winner.
3.) In the absence of an election contest, the ET is without jurisdiction. However,
the power of each House to expel its own members or even to defer their oath-
taking until their qualifications are determined may still be exercised even without
an election contest.

Issues regarding the Electoral Tribunals:

1. ) Since the ET’s are independent constitutional bodies, independent even of
the House from which the members are respectively taken, neither Congress nor
the Courts may interfere with procedural matters relating to the functions of the
ET’s, such as the setting of deadlines or filing their election contests with the
respective ETs.
2. ) The ETs being independent bodies, its members may not be arbitrarily
removed from their positions in the tribunal by the parties which they represent.
Neither may they be removed for not voting according to party lines, since they
are acting independently of Congress.
3. ) The mere fact that the members of either the Senate or the House sitting on
the ET are those which are sought to be disqualified due to the filing of an election
contest against them does not warrant all of them from being disqualified from
sitting in the ET. The Constitution is quite clear that the ET must act with both
members from the SC and from the Senate or the House. If all the legislator-
members of the ET were to be disqualified, the ET would not be able to fulfill its
constitutional functions.
4.) Judicial review of decisions of the ETs may be had with the SC only insofar as
the decision or resolution was rendered without or in excess of jurisdiction or with
grave abuse of discretion constituting denial of due process.

Section 18: THE COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENTS Composition:

1. ) Senate President as ex-officio chairman;
2. ) 12 Senators; and
3. ) 12 Members of the House.
Note: The 12 Senators and 12 Representatives are elected on the basis of
proportional representation from the political parties and party-list
organizations.
Voting/Action 1.) The chairman shall only vote in case of a tie. 2.) The CA shall act
on all appointments within 30 session days from their submission to Congress. 3.)
The Commission shall rule by a majority vote of all the Members.
Jurisdiction 1.) CA shall confirm the appointments by the President with respect to
the following positions: a. Heads of the Executive Departments (except if it is the
Vice-President who is appointed to the post). b. Ambassadors, other public
ministers or consuls. c. Officers of the AFP from the rank of Colonel or Naval
Captain: and d. Other officers whose appointments are vested in him by the
Constitution (e.g. COMELEC members).

3. ) Congress CANNOT by law prescribe that the appointment of a person to an

office created by such law shall be subject to confirmation by the CA.
4. ) Appointments extended by the President to the above-mentioned positions
while Congress is not in session shall only be effective until disapproval by the CA
or until the next adjournment of Congress.

Note: The ET and the CA shall be constituted within 30 days after the Senate and
the House of Representative shall have been organized with the election of the
President and the Speaker.
Sections 21-22: LEGISLATIVE INQUIRIES Scope:
1. Either House or any of their committees may conduct inquires ‘in aid of
legislation’.
2. “In aid of legislation” does not mean that there is pending legislation regarding
the subject of the inquiry. In fact, investigation may be needed for purposes of
proposing future legislation.
3. If the stated purpose of the investigation is to determine the existence of
violations of the law, the investigation is no longer ‘in aid of legislation’ but ‘in aid
of prosecution’. This violates the principle of separation of powers and is beyond
the scope of congressional powers.

Enforcement:
1. Since experience has shown that mere requests for information does not
usually work, Congress has the inherent power to punish recalcitrant witnesses for
contempt, and may have them incarcerated until such time that they agree to
testify.
2. The continuance of such incarceration only subsists for the lifetime, or term, of
such body. Once the body ceases to exist after its final adjournment, the power to
incarcerate ceases to exist as well. Thus, each ‘Congress’ of the House lasts for
only 3 years. But if one is incarcerated by the Senate, it is indefinite because the
Senate, with its staggered terms, is a continuing body.
3. BUT, in order for a witness to be subject to this incarceration, the primary
requirement is that the inquiry is within the scope of Congress’ powers. i.e. it is in
aid of legislation.
4. The materiality of a question is determined not by its connection to any
actually pending legislation, but by its connection to the general scope of the
inquiry. 5. The power to punish for contempt is inherent in Congress and this
power is sui generis. It cannot be exercised by local government units unless they
are expressly authorized to do so.

Limitations:
1. The inquiry must be conducted in accordance with the ‘duly published rules of
procedure’ of the House conducting the inquiry; and
2. The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be
respected. Ex. The right against self-incrimination.

Appearance by department heads before Congress: 1. Since members of the

executive department are co-equals with those of the legislative department,
under the principle of separations of powers, department heads cannot be
compelled to appear before Congress. Neither may the department heads impose
their appearance upon Congress.

3. Department heads may appear before Congress in the following instances: a.

Upon their own initiative, with the consent of the President (and that of the House
concerned); or b. Upon the request of either House (which cannot compel them to
attend)
4. The appearance will be conducted in EXECUTIVE SESSION when: a. Required by
the security of state or required by public interest; and b. When the President so
states in writing

Sections 23-24. DECLARATION OF WAR/EMERGENCY POWERS Vote requirement:

(to declare the existence of a state of war)
1. 2/3 of both Houses, in joint session
2. Voting separately Emergency powers:
1. During times of war or other national emergency, Congress may, BY LAW,
authorize the President to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a
declared national policy.
2. Limitations: a. Powers will be exercised for a limited period only; and b. Powers
will be subject to restrictions prescribed by Congress

3. Expiration of emergency powers a. By resolution of Congress or b. Upon the

next adjournment of Congress

Sections 24-27, 30-31 LEGISLATION Bills that must originate from the House of
Representatives (Section 24)
1. A ppropriation bills
2. R evenue bills
3. T ariff bills
4. Bills authorizing the increase of public debt
5. Bills of local application
6. Private bills

Note: The Senate may, however, propose or concur with amendments.

Appropriation bills 1. The primary and specific aim of an appropriation bill is to
appropriate a sum of money from the public treasury. 2. Thus, a bill enacting the
budget is an appropriations bill. 3. BUT: A bill creating a new office, and
appropriating funds therefor is NOT an appropriation bill.

Revenue Bill 1. A revenue bill is one specifically designed to raise money or

revenue through imposition or levy. 2. Thus, a bill introducing a new tax is a
revenue bill, but a provision in, for instance, the Videogram Regulatory Board law
imposing a tax on video rentals does not make the law a revenue bill.

Bills of local application A bill of local application, such as one asking for the
conversion of a municipality into a city, is deemed to have originated from the
House provided that the bill of the House was filed prior to the filing of the bill in
the Senate even if, in the end, the Senate approved its own version.

Limitations:
1. For appropriation bills: a. Congress cannot increase the appropriations
recommended by the President for the operation of the Government as specified
in the budget. b. Each provision or enactment in the General Appropriations Bill
must relate specifically to some particular appropriation therein and any such
provision or enactment must be limited in its operation to the appropriation to
which it relates. c. The procedure in approving appropriations for Congress shall
strictly follow the procedure for approving appropriations for other departments
and agencies. d. A special appropriations bill must specify the purpose for which it
is intended and must be supported by funds actually available as certified by the
National Treasurer or to be raised by a corresponding revenue proposal therein. e.
Transfer of appropriations: i. Rule: No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer
of appropriations ii. BUT the following may, BY LAW, be authorized to AUGMENT
any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings
in other items of their respective appropriations - President - President of the
Senate - Speaker of the House of Representatives - Chief of Justice of the Supreme
Court - Heads of the Constitutional Commissions f. Discretionary funds
appropriated for particular officials shall be: i. Disbursed only for public purposes;
ii. Should be supported by appropriate vouchers; and iii. Subject to guidelines as
may be prescribed by law. g. If Congress fails to pass General Appropriations Bill
(GAB) by the end of any fiscal year: i. The GAB for the previous year is deemed
reenacted ii. It will remain in full force and effect until the GAB is passed by
Congress.

2. For law granting tax exemption It should be passed with the concurrence of a
MAJORITY of ALL the members of Congress.

3. For bills in general

a. Every bill shall embrace only one (1) subject, as expressed in the title thereof i.
As a mandatory requirement ii. The title does not have to be a complete
catalogue of everything stated in the bill. It is sufficient if the title expresses the
general subject of the bill and all the provisions of the statute are germane to that
general subject. iii. A bill which repeals legislation regarding the subject matter
need not state in the title that it is repealing the latter. Thus, a repealing clause in
the bill is considered germane to the subject matter of the bill.
b. Readings 1. In order to become a law, each bill must pass three (3) readings in
both Houses. 2. General rule: Each reading shall be held on separate days &
printed copies thereof in its final form shall be distributed to its Members three (3)
days before its passage. 3. Exception: If a bill is certified as urgent by the
President as to the necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a public
calamity or emergency, the 3 readings can be held on the same day. 4. First
reading – only the title is read; the bill is passed to the proper committee Second
reading – Entire text is read and debates are held, and amendments introduced.
Third reading – only the title is read, no amendments are allowed. Vote shall be
taken immediately thereafter and the yeas and nays entered in the journal.

Veto power of President:

1. Every bill, in order to become a law, must be presented to and signed by the
President.
2. If the President does not approve of the bill, he shall veto the same and return
it with his objections to the House from which it originated. The House shall enter
the objections in the Journal and proceed to reconsider it.
3. The President must communicate his decision to veto within 30 days from the
date of receipt thereof. If he fails to do so, the bill shall become a law as if he
signed it.
4. This rule eliminates the ‘pocket veto’ whereby the President would simply
refuse to act on the bill.
5. To OVERRIDE the veto, at least 2/3 of ALL the members of each House must
agree to pass the bill. In such case, the veto is overriden and becomes a law
without need of presidential approval.
6. Item veto a. The President may veto particular items in an appropriation,
revenue or tariff bill. b. This veto will not affect items to which he does not object.
c. Definition of item TYPE OF BILL ITEM 1. Revenue/tax bill Subject of the tax and
the tax rate imposed thereon 2. Appropriations bill Indivisible sum dedicated to a
stated purpose d. Veto of RIDER 1. A rider is a provision which does not relate to a
particular appropriation stated in the bill. 2. Since it is an invalid provision under
Section 25(2), the President may veto it as an item.
Specific limitations on legislation 1. No law shall be enacted increasing the
Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction without the SC’s advice and concurrence.
2. No law shall be enacted granting titles of royalty or nobility.

Section 28. POWER TO TAX Limitations: 1) The rule of taxation should be

UNIFORM 2) It should be EQUITABLE 3) Congress should evolve a PROGRESSIVE
system of taxation. 4) The power to tax must be exercised for a public purpose
because the power exists for the general welfare 5) The due process and equal
protection clauses of the Constitution should be observed.

Delegation of power to fix rates 1) Congress may, BY LAW, authorize the President
to fix the following: a) Tariff rates b) Import and Export Quotas c) Tonnage and
wharfage dues d) Other duties and imposts Within the framework of the national
development program of the Government 2) The exercise of such power by the
President shall be within the specified limits fixed by Congress and subject to such
limitations and restrictions as it may impose.

Constitutional tax exemptions: 1) The following properties are exempt from REAL
PROPERTY taxes (CODE: Cha Chu M- CA) a) Charitable institutions b) Churches,
and parsonages or convents appurtenant thereto c) Mosques d) Non-profit
cemeteries; and e) All lands, buildings and improvements actually, directly and
exclusively used for religious, charitable, or educational purposes. 2) All revenues
and assets of NON-STOCK NON-PROFIT EDUCATIONAL institutions are exempt
from taxes and duties PROVIDED that such revenues and assets are actually,
directly and exclusively used for educational purposes. (Art. XIV Sec 4 (3)) 3)
Grants, endowments, donations or contributions used actually, directly and
exclusively for educational purposes shall be exempt from tax. This is subject to
conditions prescribed by law. (Art. XIV. Sec 4 (4))

Section 29. Power of the Purse 1) No money shall be paid out of the National
Treasury EXCEPT in pursuance of an appropriation made by law. a) This places the
control of public funds in the hands of Congress. b) BUT: This rule does not
prohibit continuing appropriations. e.g. for debt servicing. This is because the rule
does not require yearly, or annual appropriation. 2) Limitations. a) Appropriations
must be for a PUBLIC PURPOSE b) Cannot appropriate public funds or property,
directly or indirectly, in favor of (i) Any sect, church, denomination, or sectarian
institution or system of religion or (ii) Any priest, preacher, minister, or other
religious teacher or dignitary as such. EXCEPT if the priest, etc is assigned to: - the
Armed Forces; or - any penal institution; or - government orphanage; or -
leprosarium

c) BUT the government is not prohibited from appropriating money for a valid
secular purpose, even if it incidentally benefits a religion, e.g. appropriations for a
national police force is valid even if the police also protects the safety of
clergymen. d) ALSO, the temporary use of public property for religious purposes is
valid, as long as the property is available for all religions

3) Special Funds a) Money collected on a tax levied for a special purpose shall be
treated as a special fund and paid out for such purpose only. b) Once the special
purpose is fulfilled or abandoned, any balance shall be transferred to the general
funds of the Government

Section 32. INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM

1) Through the system of initiative and referendum, the people can directly
propose and enact laws or approve or reject any act or law or part thereof passed
by the Congress or local legislative body.
2) Required Petition a) Should be signed by at least 10% of the total number of
registered voters b) Every legislative district should be represented by at least 3%
of the registered voters c) Petition should be registered
ARTICLE VII. THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

Section 1. EXECUTIVE POWER Scope:

1) Executive power is vested in the President of the Philippines.
2) The scope of this power is set forth in Art. VII of the Constitution. But this
power is not limited to those set forth therein.
The SC, in Marcos v. Manglapus, referred to the RESIDUAL powers of the President
as the Chief Executive of the country, which powers include others not set forth in
the Constitution. EXAMPLE: The President is immune from suit and criminal
prosecution while he is in office.
2) Privilege of immunity from suit is personal to the President and may be invoked
by him alone. It may also be waived by the President, as when he himself files
suit.
3) BUT The President CANNOT dispose of state property unless authorized by law.

Section 2. QUALIFICATIONS
1) Natural-born citizen of the Philippines
2) Registered voter;
3) Able to read and write;
4) At least 40 years old on the day of election
5) Philippine resident for at least 10 years immediately preceding such election.

The Vice-President has the same qualifications & term of office as the President.
He is elected with & in the same manner as the President. He may be removed
from office in the same manner as the President.

Section 4. MANNER OF ELECTION/ TERM OF OFFICE Manner of Election

1) The President and Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people.
2) Election returns for President and Vice-President, as duly certified by the proper
Board of Canvassers shall be forwarded to Congress, directed to the Senate
President.
3) Not later than 30 days after the day of the election, the certificates shall be
opened in the presence of both houses of Congress, assembled in joint public
session.
4) The Congress, after determining the authenticity and due execution of the
certificates, shall canvass the votes.
5) The person receiving the highest number of votes shall be proclaimed elected.
6) In case of a tie between 2 or more candidates, one shall be chosen by a
majority of ALL the members of both Houses, voting separately. In case this
results in a deadlock, the Senate President shall be the acting President until the
deadlock is broken.
7) The Supreme Court en banc shall act as the sole judge over all contests relating
to the election, returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice-President and
may promulgate its rules for the purpose.

Term of Office
1) President a) 6 years beginning at noon on 30 June immediately following the
election and ending at noon on the same day 6 years later. b) Term limitation:
Single term only; not eligible for any reelection. c) Any person who has succeeded
as President, and served as such for more than 4 years shall NOT be qualified for
election to the same office at any time.
2) Vice-President: a) 6 years, starting and ending the same time as the President.
b) Term limitation: 2 successive terms. c) Voluntary renunciation of the office for
any length of time is NOT an interruption in the continuity of service for the full
term for which the Vice-President was elected.

Section 6. SALARIES AND EMOLUMENTS

1) Official salaries are determined by law.
2) Salaries cannot be decreased during the TENURE of the President and the
VicePresident.
3) Increases take effect only after the expiration of the TERM of the incumbent
during which the increase was approved.
4) Prohibited from receiving any other emolument from the government or any
other source during their TENURE

Sections 7-12, PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION

1. Vacancies at the beginning of the term
VACANCY SUCCESSOR President-elect fails to qualify or to be chosen VP-elect will
be Acting President until someone is qualified/chosen as President. President-elect
dies or is permanently disabled. VP becomes President. Both President and VP-
elect are not chosen or do not qualify or both die, or both become permanently
disabled.
1. Senate President or
2. In case of his inability, the Speaker of the House shall act as President until a
President or a VP shall have been chosen and qualified. In case of death or
disability of (1) and (2), Congress shall determine, by law, who will be the acting
President.

Vacancies after the office is initially filled:

VACANCY SUCCESSOR President dies, is permanently disabled, is impeached, or
resigns. Vice-President becomes President for the unexpired term. Both President
and Vice-President die, become permanently disabled, are impeached, or resign.
1. Senate President or 2. In case of his inability, the Speaker of the House shall act
as President until the President or VP shall have been elected and qualified.

Vacancy in office of Vice-President during the term for which he was elected:
a) President will nominate new VP from any member of either House of Congress.
b) Nominee shall assume office upon confirmation by majority vote of ALL
members of both Houses, voting separately. (Nominee forfeits seat in Congress)
4)

Election of President and Vice-President after vacancy during tem

a) Congress shall convene 3 days after the vacancy in the office of both the
President and the VP, without need of a call. The convening of Congress cannot
be suspended.
b) Within 7 days after convening, Congress shall enact a law calling for a special
election to elect a President and a VP. The special election cannot be postponed.
The special election shall be held not earlier than 45 days not later than 60 days
from the time of the enactment of the law.
c) The 3 readings for the special law need not be held on separate days.
d) The law shall be deemed enacted upon its approval on third reading. BUT: No
special election shall be called if the vacancy occurs within 18 months before the
date of the next presidential election.

Temporary disability of the President: The temporary inability of the President to

discharge his duties may be raised in either of two ways: a) By the President
himself, when he sends a written declaration to the Senate President and the
Speaker of the House. In this case, the Vice-President will be Acting President
until the President transmits a written declaration to the contrary. b) When a
majority of the Cabinet members transmit to the Senate President and the
Speaker their written declaration. (i) The VP will immediately be Acting President.
(ii) BUT: If the President transmits a written declaration that he is not disabled, he
reassumes his position (iii) If within 5 days after the President re-assumes his
position, the majority of the Cabinet retransmits their written declaration,
Congress shall decide the issue. In this event, Congress shall reconvene within 48
hours if it is not in session, without need of a call. (iv) Within 10 days after
Congress is required to assemble, or 12 days if Congress is not in session, a 2/3
majority of both Houses, voting separately, is needed to find the President
temporarily disabled, in which case, the VP will be Acting President.

Presidential Illness: a) If the President is seriously ill, the public must be informed
thereof. b) Even during such illness, the National Security Adviser, the Secretary
of Foreign Affairs, and the Chief of Staff of the AFP are entitled to access to the
President

Section 13. DISQUALIFICATIONS SUBJECT SOURCE OF DISQUALIFICATION

President, Vice-President, Cabinet Members, Deputies or Assistants of Cabinet
Members Prohibited from:
1. Holding any office or employment during their tenure, UNLESS: a. otherwise
provided in the Constitution (e.g. VP can be appointed a Cabinet Member, Sec. of
Justice sits on Judicial and Bar Council); or b. the positions are ex-officio and they
do not receive any salary or other emoluments therefor (e.g. Sec. of Finance is
head of Monetary Board).
2. Practicing, directly or indirectly, any other profession during their tenure;
3. Participating in any business;
4. Being financially interested in any contract with, or in any franchise, or special
privilege granted by the government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
thereof, including GOCC's or their subsidiaries.
N. B. The rule on disqualifications for the President and his Cabinet are stricter
than the normal rules applicable to appointive and elective officers under Art. IX-
B, Sec. 7. Spouses and 4th degree relatives of the President (consanguinity or
affinity) Cannot be appointed during President’s tenure as: 1. Members of the
Constitutional Commissions; 2. Office of the Ombudsman; 3. Department
Secretaries; 4. Department under-secretaries;
5. Chairman or heads of bureaus or offices including GOCC’s and their
subsidiaries.
N.B. a. If the spouse, etc., was already in any of the above offices at the time
before his/her spouse became President, he/she may continue in office. What is
prohibited is appointment and reappointment, NOT continuation in office. b.
Spouses, etc., can be appointed to the judiciary and as ambassadors and consuls.

Sections 14-16. POWER TO APPOINT Principles: 1) Since the power to appoint is

executive in nature, Congress cannot usurp this function. 2) While Congress (and
the Constitution in certain cases) may prescribe the qualifications for particular
offices, the determination of who among those who are qualified will be appointed
is the President’s prerogative.

Scope: The President shall appoint the following: 1) Heads of executive

departments (CA confirmation needed): 2) Ambassadors, other public ministers,
and consuls (CA confirmation needed). 3) Officers of AFP from rank of colonel or
naval captain (CA confirmation needed). 4) Other officers whose appointment is
vested in him by the Constitution (CA confirmation needed), such as: a) Chairmen
and members of the COMELEC, COA and CSC. b) Regular members of the Judicial
and Bar Council. c) The Ombudsman and his deputies; d) Sectoral representatives
in Congress.
• N.B. President also appoints members of the Supreme Court and judges of the
lower courts, but these appointments do not need CA confirmation. 5) All other
officers whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law; and those
whom he may be authorized by law to appoint. a) This includes the Chairman and
members of the Commission on Human Rights, whose appointments are provided
for by law NOT by the Constitution. b) Congress may, by law, vest the
appointment of other officers lower in rank in the President alone or in the courts,
or in the heads of departments, agencies, boards or commissions. c) BUT :
Congress cannot, by law, require CA confirmation of the appointment of other
officers for offices created subsequent to the 1987 Constitution (e.g. NLRC
Commissioners, Bangko Sentral Governor). d) ALSO: Voluntary submission by the
President to the CA for confirmation of an appointment which is not required to be
confirmed does not vest the CA with jurisdiction. The President cannot extend the
scope of the CA’s power as provided for in the Constitution. Procedure: 1) CA
confirmation needed: a) Nomination by President b) Confirmation by CA c)
Appointment by President; and d) Acceptance by appointee. Note: At any time
before all four steps have been complied with, the President can withdraw the
nomination/appointment. 2) No CA confirmation: a) Appointment; and b)
Acceptance. Note: Once appointee accepts, President can no longer withdraw the
appointment.

Ad-interim appointments: 1) When Congress is in recess, the President may still

appoint officers to positions subject to CA confirmation. 2) These appointments
are effective immediately, but are only effective until they are disapproved by the
CA or until the next adjournment of Congress. 3) Appointments to fill an office in
an ‘acting’ capacity are NOT ad-interim in nature and need no CA approval.
Appointments by an Acting President: These shall remain effective UNLESS
revoked by the elected President within 90 days from his assumption or re-
assumption of office.

Limitation 1) 2 months immediately before the next Presidential elections, and up

to the end of his term, the President or Acting President SHALL NOT make
appointments.
This is to prevent the practice of ‘midnight appointments.” 2) EXCEPTION: a) Can
make TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS b) To fill EXECUTIVE POSITIONS; c) If continued
vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety.
Section 17. Power of Control and Supervision Power of Control: The power of an
officer to alter, modify, or set aside what a subordinate officer has done in the
performance of his duties, and to substitute the judgment of the officer for that of
his subordinate. Thus, the President exercises control over all the executive
departments, bureaus, and offices. The President’s power over government-
owned corporations comes not from the Constitution but from statute. Hence, it
may be taken away by statute.

Qualified Political Agency: 1) Since all executive and administrative organizations

are adjuncts of the Executive Department, the heads of such departments, etc.
are assistants and agents of the President. 2) Thus, generally the acts of these
department heads, etc, which are performed and promulgated in the regular
course of business, are presumptively the acts of the President. 3) Exception: If
the acts are disapproved or reprobated by the President. 4) Under Administrative
Law, decisions of Department Secretaries need not be appealed to the President
in order to comply with the requirement of exhaustion of administrative remedies.

4) Qualified political agency does NOT apply if the President is required to act in
person by law or by the Constitution. Example: The power to grant pardons must
be exercised personally by the President. Disciplinary Powers: 1) The power of the
President to discipline officers flows from the power to appoint the, and NOT from
the power control. 2) BUT While the President may remove from office those who
are not entitled to security of tenure, or those officers with no set terms, such as
Department Heads, the officers, and employees entitled to security of tenure
cannot be summarily removed from office. Power of Supervision: 1) This is the
power of a superior officer to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed by
subordinates. 2) The power of the president over local government units is only of
general supervision. Thus, he can only interfere with the actions of their
executive heads if these are contrary to law. 3) The execution of laws is an
OBLIGATION of the President. He cannot suspend the operation of laws. 4) The
power of supervision does not include the power of control; but the power of
control necessarily includes the power of supervision.

Section 18. COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF POWERS Scope: 1) The President is the

Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.
3) Whenever necessary, the President may call out the AFP to PREVENT or
SUPPRESS: a) Lawless violence; b) Invasion; or c) Rebellion.
3) The President may also: a) Suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus;
and b) Proclaim a state of martial law. Suspension of the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus and declaring martial law;
1. Grounds a. Invasion or b. Rebellion; and c. Public safety requires it. 2. The
invasion or rebellion must be ACTUAL and not merely imminent.

Limitations:
a. Suspension or proclamation is effective for only 60 days.
b. Within 48 hours from the declaration or suspension, the President must submit
a report to Congress.
c. Congress, by majority vote and voting jointly, may revoke the same, and the
President cannot set aside the revocation.
d. In the same manner, at the President’s initiative, Congress can extend the
same for a period determined by Congress if: i. Invasion or rebellion persist and ii.
Public safety requires it.
NOTE: Congress CANNOT extend the period motu propio.
e. Supreme Court review: i. The appropriate proceeding can be filed by any
citizen. ii. The SC can review the FACTUAL BASIS of the proclamation or
suspension. iii. Decision is promulgated within 30 days from filing.
f. Martial Law does NOT: i. Suspend the operation of the Constitution. ii. Supplant
the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies. iii. Authorize
conferment of jurisdiction on military courts over civilians where civil courts are
able to function and iv. Automatically suspend the privilege of the writ.
g. Suspension of privilege of the writ: i. Applies ONLY to persons judicially charged
for rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion. ii. Anyone
arrested or detained during suspension must be charged within 3 days. Otherwise
he should be released. Note: While the suspension of the privilege of writ and the
proclamation of martial law is subject to judicial review, the actual use by the
President of the armed forces is not. Thus, troop deployments in times of war is
subject to the President’s judgment and discretion.

Section 19: EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY Scope: 1.) The President may grant the
following: [ Pa R C Re] a. Pardons (conditional or plenary) b. Reprieves c.
Commutations d. Remittance of fines and forfeitures 2.) These may only be
granted AFTER conviction by final judgment.
2. ) ALSO: The power to grant clemency includes cases involving administrative
penalties.
3. ) Where a conditional pardon is granted, the determination of whether it has
been violated rests with the President. Limitations:
1. ) As to scope: Cannot be granted: a.) Before conviction b.) In cases of
impeachment c.) For violations of election laws, rules, and regulation without the
favorable recommendation of the COMELEC d.) In cases of civil or legislative
contempt 2.) As to effect: a.) Does not absolve civil liabilities for an offense. b.)
Does not restore public offices already forfeited, although eligibility for the same
may be restored. Amnesty:

1. ) An act of grace concurred in by Congress, usually extended to groups of

persons who commit political offenses, which puts into oblivion the offense itself.
2. ) President alone CANNOT grant amnesty. Amnesty needs concurrence by a
majority of all the members of Congress.
3. ) When a person applies for amnesty, he must admit his guilt of the offense
which is subject to such amnesty. If his application is denied, he can be convicted
based on this admission of guilt.
4.) Amnesty V. Pardon AMNESTY PARDON Addressed to POLITICAL offenses
Addressed to ORDINARY offenses Granted to a CLASS of persons Granted to
INDIVIDUALS Need not be accepted Must be accepted Requires concurrence of
majority of all members of Congress No need for Congressional concurrence A
public act. Subject to judicial notice Private act of President. It must be proved.
Extinguishes the offense itself Only penalties are extinguished. May or may not
restore political rights. Absolute pardon restores. Conditional does not. Civil
indemnity is not extinguished. May be granted before or after conviction Only
granted after conviction by final judgement

Section 20. Power to Contract or Guarantee Foreign Loans Limitations: (1) The
President may contract or guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the Republic of the
Philippines with the prior concurrence of the Monetary Board; and (2) Subject to
such limitations as may be provided by law.

Section 21. Foreign Relations Powers include: (1) Power to negotiate treaties and
other international agreements (a) BUT: Such treaty of international agreement
must be concurred in by at least 2/3 of all Senators in order to be valid and
effective in our country. (b) Options of Senate when a treaty is submitted for its
approval: (i) Approve with 2/3 majority; (ii) Disapprove outright; or (iii) Approve
conditionally, with suggested amendments. (c) If treaty is not re-negotiated, no
treaty (d) If treaty is re-negotiated and the Senate’s suggestions are
incorporated, the treaty will go into effect without need of further Senate
approval. Note: While our municipal law makes a distinction between
international agreements and executive agreements, with the former requiring
Senate approval and the latter not needing the same, under international law,
there is no such distinction. Note: The President cannot, by executive agreement,
undertake an obligation which indirectly circumvents a legal prohibition. (e)
Conflict between treaty and municipal law. (i) Philippine court: The later
enactment will prevail, be it treaty or law, as it is the latest expression of the
State’s will. (ii) International tribunal Treaty will always prevail. A State cannot
plead its municipal law to justify noncompliance with an international obligation.
(2) Power to appoint ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls. (3) Power
to receive ambassadors and other public ministers accredited to the Philippines.
(4) Power to contract and guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the Republic (5)
Power to deport aliens (a) This power is vested in the President by virtue of his
office, subject only to restrictions as may be provided by legislation as regards the
grounds for deportation.
(b) In the absence of any legislative restriction to authority, the President may still
exercise this power. (c) The power to deport aliens is limited by the requirements
of due process, which entitles the alien to a full and fair hearing. BUT: The alien is
not entitled to bail as a matter of right.

ARTICLE VIII. THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT SEC. 1. JUDICIAL POWER

Scope:
1. Judicial power is the authority to settle justiciable controversies or disputes
involving rights that are enforceable and demandable before the courts of justice
or the redress of wrongs for violations of such rights.
2. Vested in the Supreme Court and such lower courts as may be established by
law.
3. Since the courts are given ‘judicial power’ and nothing more, courts may
neither attempt to assume or be compelled to perform non-judicial functions.
They may not be charged with administrative functions except when reasonably
incidental to the fulfillment of their duties.
4. In order that courts may exercise this power, there must exist the following:
a. An actual controversy with legally demandable and enforceable rights;
b. Involving real parties in interest;
c. The exercise of such power will bind the parties by virtue of the court’s
application of existing laws.

5. Judicial power cannot be exercised in vacuum. Without any laws from which
rights arise and which are violated, there can be no recourse to the courts. 6. The
courts cannot be asked for advisory opinions. 7. Judicial power includes: a. The
duty of the courts to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally
demandable and enforceable; and b. 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.

Political Questions:
1. A ‘political question’ is one the resolution of which has been vested by the
Constitution exclusively in either the people, in the exercise of their sovereign
capacity, or in which full discretionary authority has been delegated to a co-equal
branch of the Government.
2. Thus, while courts can determine questions of legality with respect to
governmental action, they cannot review government policy and the wisdom
thereof, for these questions have been vested by the Constitution in the Executive
and Legislative Departments.

SEC. 2. ROLES OF CONGRESS

1. Defining enforceable and demandable rights and prescribing remedies for
violations of such rights; and
2. Determining the court with jurisdiction to hear and decide controversies or
disputes arising from legal rights.
3. Thus, Congress has the power to define, prescribe and apportion the
jurisdiction of various courts.
4. BUT, Congress cannot deprive the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases
provided for in the Constitution.
5. Creation and abolition of courts: a. The power to create courts implies the
power to abolish and even reorganize courts. b. BUT this power cannot be
exercised in a manner which would undermine the security of tenure of the
judiciary. c. If the abolition/re-organization is done in good faith and not for
political or personal reasons, then it is VALID. (same rule applies for civil
servants)

SEC. 3. FISCAL AUTONOMY 1. The entire judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. 2.
Annual appropriations for the judiciary cannot be reduced below the amount
appropriated for the previous year. 3. Once approved, appropriations shall be
automatically and regularly released.

SECS. 4-7; 12 JUDICIARY Composition of the Supreme Court: 1. Chief Justice and 2.
14 Associate Justices Note: Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts
established by law shall not be designated to any agency performing quasi-
judicial or administrative functions.

Qualifications of members of the SC:

1. Natural born citizen of the Philippines
2. At least 40 years old
3. At least 15 years of experience as a judge or in the practice of law in the
Philippines
4. Person of proven competence, integrity, probity and independence.
Qualifications of members of lower collegiate courts (CA, CTA, Sandiganbayan) 1.
Natural born citizen of the Philippines 2. Member of the Philippine bar 3.
Possesses other qualifications prescribed by Congress 4. Person of proven
competence, integrity, probity and independence.

Qualifications of judges of lower non-collegiate courts: 1. Citizen of the

Philippines (may be a naturalized citizen) 2. Member of the Philippine Bar 3.
Possesses other qualifications prescribed by Congress 4. Person of proven
competence, integrity, probity and independence.

Section 8. JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL 1. The Judicial and Bar Council is under
the supervision of the SC. A. Is under the supervision of the Supreme Court and is
composed of: 1. Chief Justice, as ex-officio chairman 2. Secretary of Justice, as an
ex-officio member 3. Representative of Congress, as an ex-officio member 4.
Representative of the Integrated Bar 5. A professor of law 6. A retired member of
the SC; and 7. Private sector representative Note: The last four re the regular
members of the JBC. Regular members are appointed by the President with CA
approval. Regular members serve for 4 years, with staggered terms.

Functions of JBC 1. Principal function: recommend appointees to the Judiciary 2.

Exercise such other functions as the SC may assign to it.

Appointments to the Judiciary

1. President shall appoint from a list of at least 3 nominees for each vacancy, as
prepared by the JBC. 2. No CA confirmation is needed for appointments to the
Judiciary.
2. Vacancies in SC should be filled within 90 days from the occurrence of the
vacancy.
4. Vacancies in lower courts should be filled within 90 days from submission to the
President of the JBC list.

SEC. 10. SALARIES 1. Salaries of SC Justices and judges of lower courts shall be
fixed by law. 2. Cannot be decreased during their continuance in office, but can
be increased. 3. Members of the Judiciary are NOT exempt from payment of
income tax.

SEC. 11. TENURE/DISCIPLINARY POWERS OF SC 1. Members of the SC and judges

of the lower courts hold office during good behavior until a. The age of 70 years
old; or b. They become incapacitated to discharge their duties. 2. Disciplinary
action against judges of lower courts: a. Only the SC en banc has jurisdiction to
discipline or dismiss judges of lower courts. b. Disciplinary action/dismissal:
Majority vote of SC Justices who took part in the deliberations and voted therein.
3. Removal of SC Justices: a. Only by IMPEACHMENT. b. Cannot be disbarred
while they hold office.

SECS. 4-6, 13. THE SUPREME COURT Hearing of cases: 1. En banc; or

3. Divisions of 3, 5, or 7.

Cases required to be heard en banc:

1. All cases involving constitutionality of a/an: a. Treaty b. International or
executive agreement or c. Law.
2. All cases required to be heard en banc under the Rules of Court: a. Appeals
from Sandiganbayan; and b. From the Constitutional Commissions
3. All cases involving the constitutionality, application or operation of a.
Presidential decrees b. Proclamations c. Orders d. Instructions e. Ordinances;
and f. Other regulations.
4. Cases heard by a division where required majority of 3 was not obtained.
5. Cases where SC modifies or reverses a doctrine or principle of law laid down by
the SC en banc or by a division.
6. Administrative cases to discipline or dismiss judges of lower courts; and
7. Election contests for President and Vice-President. Cases heard by division 1.
Must be decided with the concurrence of a majority of the members who took part
in the deliberations and voted thereon. 2. Majority vote in a division should be at
least 3 members. Powers of the SC 1. SC has ORIGINAL jurisdiction over a. Cases
affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls. Note: This refers to
foreign ambassadors, etc., stationed in the Philippines. b. Petitions for certiorari,
prohibiton, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus. 2.

SC has APPELLATE jurisdiction over final judgments and orders in the following:
a. All cases involving the constitutionality or validity of any i. treaty ii.
international or executive agreement iii. law iv. presidential decree v.
proclamation vi. order vii. instruction viii. ordinance, or ix. regulation; b. All cases
involving the legality of any i. tax ii. impost iii. assessment or iv. toll or v. any
penalty imposed in relation thereto; c. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any
lower court is in issue d. Criminal cases where the penalty imposed is reclusion
perpetua or higher; and e. All cases where ONLY errors or questions of law are
involved.

4. Temporarily assign lower court judges to other stations in the public interest.
Note: Temporary assignment shall not exceed 6 months without the consent of
the judge concerned.
5. Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice.
6. Promulgate rules concerning: a. The protection and enforcement of
constitutional rights; b. Pleading, practice and procedure in all courts; c.
Admission to the practice of law; d. The Integrated Bar; and e. Legal assistance
to the underprivileged.

Limitations on Rule Making Power a. It should provide a simplified and inexpensive

procedure for the speedy disposition of cases. b. It should be uniform for all
courts of the same grade. c. It should not diminish, increase, or modify
substantive rights.

7. Appoint ALL officials and employees of the Judiciary, in accordance with Civil
Service Law.
8. Exercise administrative supervision over ALL courts and the personnel thereof.
Decisions of the Supreme Court: 1. Reached in consultation before being assigned
to a member for the writing of the opinion. 2. A certification to this effect must be
signed by the Chief Justice and attached to the record of the case and served
upon the parties. 3. Members of the SC who took no part, or who dissented or
abstained must state the reasons therefore.

Note: This procedure shall also be observed by all lower collegiate courts (CA,
CTA, and the Sandiganbayan).

JUDICIAL REVIEW Definition 1. Judicial Review is the power of the SC to declare a

law, treaty, ordinance etc. unconstitutional. 2. Lower courts may also exercise
the power of judicial review, subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the SC. 3.
Only SC decisions are precedent, and thus, only SC decisions are binding on all.
Requisites Code: [A R S Co R] 1. An ACTUAL CASE calling for the exercise of
judicial power 2. The question involved must be RIPE FOR ADJUDICATION, i.e. the
government act must have had an adverse effect on the person challenging it. 3.
The person challenging the governmental act must have ‘STANDING’, i.e. a
personal and substantial interest in the case such that he has sustained, or will
sustain, direct injury as a result of its enforcement. 4. The question of
Constitutionality must be raised in the first instance, or at the earliest opportunity.
5. Resolution of the issue of constitutionality is unavoidable or is the very lis
mota. Effect of a declaration of unconstitutionality: 1. Prior to the declaration that
a particular law is unconstitutional, it is considered as an ‘operative fact’ which at
that time had to be complied with. 2. Thus, vested rights may have been
acquired under such law before it was declared unconstitutional. 3. These rights
are not prejudiced by the subsequent declaration that the law is unconstitutional.

SEC. 14. DECISIONS 1. Decisions MUST state clearly and distinctly the facts and
the law on which it is based. 2. Refusal to give due course to petitions for review
and motions for reconsideration must state the legal basis for such refusal. 3.
Memorandum decisions, where the appellate court adopts the findings of fact and
law of the lower court, are allowed as long as the decision adopted by reference is
attached to the Memorandum for easy reference. 4. These rules only apply to
courts. They do not apply to quasi-judicial or administrative bodies nor to military
tribunals.

DUE PROCESS

Section 1—NO PERSON SHALL BE DEPRIVED OF LIFE, LIBERTY OR PROPERTY

WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW, NOR SHALL ANY PERSON BE DENIED EQUAL
PROTECTION OF THE LAWS.

Kinds of Due Process:

a. substantive due process—requires the intrinsic validity of the law in

interfering with the rights of the person to life, liberty or property. In short, it is to
determine whether it has a valid governmental objective like for the interest of
the public as against mere particular class.

b. Procedural due process—one which hears before it condemns as pointed

out by Daniel Webster.

Due process is a law which hears before it condemns, which proceeds upon
inquiry and renders judgment only after trial (Per Daniel Webster in the
DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE)

1. Requisites of “judicial due process”.

a. BANCO ESPANOL VS. PALANCA, 37 Phil. 921

Requisites:

1. There must be an impartial court or tribunal clothed with judicial power

to hear and decide the matter before it;

2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant

or over the property subject of the proceedings;

3. The defendant must be given the opportunity to be heard;

4. Judgment must be rendered only after lawful hearing.

GALMAN VS. PAMARAN (the 1st case)

IMELDA MARCOS VS. SANDIGANBAYAN, October 6, 1998

IMELDA R. MARCOS VS. SANDIGANBAYAN, G.R. No. 126995, October 6, 1998

Facts:

1. On June 8, 1984, IMELDA MARCOS and JOSE DANS, as Chairman and

Vice Chairman of the Light Railway Transit Authority (LRTA) entered into a Lease
Contract with the Philippine General Hospital Foundation (PGHFI) involving an
LRTA property in Pasay City for P102,760.00 per month for 25 years;

2. On June 27,1984, the PGHFI subleased the said property for P734,000.00
per month to the Transnational Construction Corporation represented by one
Ignacio Jumenez;

3. After petitioner’s husband was deposed as President of the Philippines,

she and Dans were charged of alleged violation of Section 3 [g] of RA 3019,
otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act before the
Sandiganbayan;

4. After trial , the First Division of the Sandiganbayan failed to comply with
the legal requirement that all the 3 justices must be unanimous in its Decision
because Justice Garchitorena and Justice Jose Balajadia voted for the conviction of
both accused while Justice Narciso Atienza voted to acquit them;

5. Thereafter, Justice Garchitorena as Presiding Justice issued

Administrative Order No. 288-93 constituting a Special Division of five and
designating Justices Augusto Amores and Cipriano del Rosario;

6. On September 21, 1993, Justice Amores wrote Justice Garchitorena that

he be given 15 days his Manifestation. On the same date, however, Justice
Garchitorena dissolved the division of 5 allegedly because he and Justice
Balajadia had agreed to the opinion of Justice del Rosario;

7. On September 24, 1993, a Decision was rendered convicting the

petitioner and Dans of violation of Sec. 3 [g] of RA 3019;

8. On June 29, 1998, the Third Division of the Supreme Court by a vote of
3-2 affirmed the conviction of the petitioner but acquitted DANS;

9. Petitioner then filed a Motion for Reconsideration and at the same time
prayed that her Motion be heard by the Supreme Court en banc claiming that her
right to due process of law, both substantive and procedural, was violated:

a. as a result of the fact that she was convicted as a result of the alleged
disparity of the rentals agreed upon with PGHFI and the subsequent sub-lease
contract between PGHFI and Transnational Construction Corporation; and

b. the First Division convicted her after Justice Garchitorena dissolved the
Special Division of 5 after a lunch in a Quezon City restaurant where they agreed
to convict her in one case and acquit her in her other cases. The said meeting was
attended by another justice who is not a member of the First Division or the
Special Division in violation of the Rules of the Sandiganbayan which requires that
sessions of the court shall be done only in its principal office in Manila and that
only justices belonging to the division should join the deliberations.

Held:

The petitioner is hereby acquitted.

1. The great disparity between the rental price of the lease agreement signed by
the petitioner (P102,760.00 per month) and the sub-lease rental (P734,000.00
per month) does not necessarily render the monthly rate of P102,760.00
manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the government in the absence of any
evidence using rentals of adjacent properties showing that the rentals in the
property subject of the lease agreement is indeed very low. NO EVIDENCE
WHATSOEVER WAS PRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTION REGARDING THE RENTAL
RATE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES.. As such, the prosecution failed to prove the
guilt of the petitioner reasonable doubt.

2. The court notes likewise the bias and prejudice of Presiding Justice Garchitorena
against the petitioner as shown by his leading, misleading and baseless
hypothetical questions of said justice to RAMON F. CUERVO, witness for the
petitioner. Said justice asked 179 questions to the witness as against the
prosecutor who cross-examined the witness which was 73. Said number of
questions could no longer be described as “clarificatory questions”. Another
ground therefore for the acquittal of the petitioner is that she was denied
IMPARTIAL TRIAL before the Sandiganbayan. This is one reason why the case could
no longer be remanded to the Sandiganbayan especially so that the other
Sandiganbayan Justices in the Special Division of 5 have retired. There is therefore
no compelling reason why the case should still be remanded to the lower court
when all the evidence are already with the Supreme Court.

(NOTE: The vote was 9-5 for Acquittal. CJ Narvasa, Justices Regalado, Davide, Jr.,
Romero, and Panganiban voted for conviction while Justice Vitug was the only
Justice who voted for the return of the case to the Sandiganbayan “to allow the
corrections of the perceived ‘irregularities’ in the proceedings below.)

MAYOR BAYANI ALONTE VS. JUDGE SAVELLANO, 287 SCRA 245

Vitug, J.

Mayor Alonte of Binan, Laguna was charged of rape before Branch 25, RTC of
Laguna. However, as a result of a petition for a transfer of venue filed by the
prosecution and granted by the SC, his case was transferred to RTC Branch 53,
Manila, presided over by the respondent judge.

After the petitioner’s arraignment, the prosecution submitted an AFFIDAVIT OF

DESISTANCE signed by the private complainant JUVIE-LYN PUNONGBAYAN where
she prayed for the withdrawal of the case because she is no longer interested in
pursuing the same with no intention of re-filing the said case in the future.

Pending resolution of the said motion to withdraw, the petitioner filed a motion for
bail. The same was not resolved despite several motions filed by the petitioner to
resolve the same.

On December 17, 1997, counsel for the petitioner, ATTY. PHILIP SIGFRID FORTUN,
received a notice from the respondent judge notifying him of the promulgation of
the decision in this case despite the fact that the prosecution and the defense
have not presented their evidence in court.

On December 18, 1997, the respondent judge issued a Decision convicting the
petitioner of rape and sentenced to suffer a penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA.

Issue:

Whether or not the petitioner was denied his right to due process of law.

Held:
In order that an accused in a criminal proceedings is deemed to have been given
the right to due process of law, the following requisites must be complied with
before a decision is rendered:

1. the court or tribunal trying the case is clothed with jurisdiction to hear
and determine the matter before it;

2. that jurisdiction was lawfully acquired by it over the person of the

accused;

3. that the accused is given the opportunity to be heard; and

4. that judgment is rendered only upon lawful hearing (PEOPLE VS.

DAPITAN, 197 SCRA 378)

The act of the respondent judge in rendering a decision without even giving the
petitioner the right to adduce evidence in his behalf is a gross violation of his right
to due process of law. The Decision rendered is NULL AND VOID for want of due
process.

2. Procedural due process before administrative bodies

TIBAY VS. CIR, 69 Phil. 635

Requisites:

a. the right to a hearing which includes the right to present evidence;

b. the tribunal must consider the evidence presented;

c. the decision must have something to support itself;

d. the evidence must be substantial;

e. the decision must be based on the evidence presented during the

hearing;

f. the tribunal or body must act on its own independent consideration of

the law or facts;

g. the board or body shall in all controversial questions, render its decision
in such a manner that the parties to the proceedings can know the various issues
involved.

AMERICAN TOBACCO VS. DIRECTOR, 67 SCRA 287

c. MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY VS. NLRC, 263 SCRA 531

d. DELGADO VS. CA, November 10, 1986

If an accused was represented by a non-lawyer during the trial (though he thought

that he was a lawyer), his right to due process was violated and therefore entitled
to a new trial.

Velez v. De Vera[19][7] held:

Due process of law in administrative cases is not identical with “judicial process”
for a trial in court is not always essential to due process. While a day in court is a
matter of right in judicial proceedings, it is otherwise in administrative
proceedings since they rest upon different principles. The due process clause
guarantees no particular form of procedure and its requirements are not
technical. Thus, in certain proceedings of administrative character, the right to a
notice or hearing are not essential to due process of law. The constitutional
requirement of due process is met by a fair hearing before a regularly established
administrative agency or tribunal. It is not essential that hearings be had before
the making of a determination if thereafter, there is available trial and tribunal
before which all objections and defenses to the making of such determination may
be raised and considered. One adequate hearing is all that due process requires. .
..

The right to cross-examine is not an indispensable aspect of due process. Nor is

an actual hearing always essential.

THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE

…nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

1. The scope of the equal protection clause, 95 SCRA 420

2. Equal protection of the law, 13 SCRA 266

3. Requisites for a valid classification-

Read:

1. People vs. Cayat, 68 Phil. 12

a. There must be real and substantial distinctions;

b. It must be germane tot he purposes of the law;

c. It must not be limited to existing conditions only; and

d. It must apply equally to all members of the same class.

THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE PROVISION

Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers
and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and
for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest
shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge
after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses
he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the
persons or things to be seized.

NOTE: Applicable provisions of the Human Security Act/Anti-Terrorism Law,

Republic Act No. 9372, Approved on March 6, 2007 and effective on July 15, 2007
(This Law shall be automatically suspended one (1) month before and two (2)
months after the holding of any election)
Sec. 18. Period of detention without judicial warrant of arrest.- The provisions of
Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, notwithstanding, any police or law
enforcement personnel, who, having been duly authorized in writing by the
Anti-Terrorism Council has taken custody of a person charged with or suspected
of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall,
WITHOUT INCURRING ANY CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF
DETAINED PERSONS TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES, DELIVER SAID
CHARGED OR SUSPECTED PERSON TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITY WITHIN
A PERIOD OF THREE (3) DAYS counted from the moment said charged or
suspected person has been apprehended or arrested, detained, and taken into
custody by the said police, or law enforcement personnel: Provided, That the
arrest of those suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit
terrorism must result from the surveillance under Section 7 and examination of
bank deposits under Section 27 pf this Act.

The police or law enforcement personnel concerned shall, before detaining the
person suspected of the crime of terrorism, present him or her before any judge at
the latter’s residence or office nearest the place where the arrest took place at
any time of the day or night. It shall be the duty of the judge, among other things,
to ascertain the identity of the police or law enforcement personnel and the
person or persons they have arrested and presented before him or her, to inquire
of them the reasons why they have arrested the person and determine by
questioning and personal observation whether or not the subject has been
subjected to any physical, moral or psychological torture by whom and why. The
judge shall then submit a written report of what he/she had observed when the
subject was brought before him to the proper court that has jurisdiction over the
case of the person thus arrested.

The judge shall forthwith submit his report within 3 calendar days from the time
the suspect was brought to his/her residence or office.

Immediately after taking custody of a person charged with or suspected of the

crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, the police or law
enforcement personnel shall notify in writing the judge of the court nearest the
place of apprehension or arrest; provided, That where the arrest is made during
Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or after office hours, the written notice shall be
served at the residence of the judge nearest the place where the accused was
arrested. The penalty of 10 years and 1 day to 12 years imprisonment shall be
imposed upon the police or law enforcement personnel who fails to notify any
judge as provided in the preceding paragraph.

Section 19. Period of Detention in the event of an actual or imminent terrorist

attack.- In the vent of an actual or imminent terrorist attack,, suspects may not be
detained for more than three days without the written approval of a municipal,
city, provincial or regional official of a Human Rights Commission, or judge of the
municipal, regional trial court, the Sandiganbayan or a justice of the Court of
Appeals nearest the place of arrest. If the arrest is made during Saturdays,
Sundays or holidays, or after office hours, the arresting police of law enforcement
personnel shall bring the person thus arrested to the residence of any of the
officials mentioned above that is nearest the place where the accused was
arrested. The approval in writing of any of the said officials shall be secured by the
police or law enforcement personnel concerned within five days after the date of
the detention of the persons concerned; Provided, however, That within three
days after the detention the suspects whose connection with the terror attack or
threat is not established, shall be released immediately.

Section 26 provides that persons who have been charged with terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism—even if they have been granted bail because
evidence of guilt is not strong—can be:
o Detained under house arrest;
o Restricted from traveling; and/or
o Prohibited from using any cellular phones, computers, or other means of
communications with people outside their residence.

Section 39. Seizure and Sequestration.- The deposits and their outstanding
balances, placements, trust accounts, assets, and records in any bank or financial
institution, moneys, businesses, transportation and communication equipment,
supplies and other implements, and property of whatever kind and nature
belonging:

o To any person charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to

commit terrorism;
o to a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist organization or group of persons;
o to a member of such judicially declared and outlawed organization, association or
group of persons,

-shall be seized, sequestered, and frozen in order to prevent their use, transfer or
conveyance for purposes that are inimical to the safety and security of the people
or injurious to the interest of the State.

The accused or suspect may withdraw such sums as are reasonably needed by his
family including the services of his counsel and his family’s medical needs upon
approval of the court. He or she may also use any of his property that is under
seizure or sequestration or frozen because of his/her indictment as a terrorist
upon permission of the court for any legitimate reason.

Section 40. The seized, sequestered and frozen bank deposits…shall be deemed
property held in trust by the bank or financial institution and that their use or
disposition while the case is pending shall be subject to the approval of the court
before which the case or cases are pending.

Section 41. If the person suspected as terrorist is acquitted after arraignment or

his case dismissed before his arraignment by a competent court, the seizure…
shall be lifted by the investigating body or the competent court and restored to
him without delay. The filing of an appeal or motion for reconsideration shall not
stay the release of said funds from seizure, sequestration and freezing.

If convicted, said seized, sequestered and frozen assets shall automatically

forfeited in favor of the government.

Requisites of a valid search warrant

Read:

a. Essentials of a valid search warrant,145 SCRA 739

b. Validity of a search warrant and the admissibility of evidence obtained

in violation thereof.

c. The place to be searched as indicated in the warrant is controlling

 PEOPLE VS. CA, 291 SCRA 400

Narvasa, CJ

In applying for a search warrant, the police officers had in their mind the first four
(4) separate apartment units at the rear of ABIGAIL VARIETY STORE in Quezon City
to be the subject of their search. The same was not, however, what the Judge who
issued the warrant had in mind, AND WAS NOT WHAT WAS ULTIMATELY
DESCRIBED IN THE SEARCH WARRANT. As such, any evidence obtained from the
place searched which is different from that indicated in the search warrant is
inadmissible in evidence for any purpose and in any proceeding.

This is so because it is neither licit nor fair to allow police officers to search a
place different from that stated in the warrant on the claim that the place actually
searched—although not that specified in the search warrant—is exactly what they
had in view when they applied for the warrant and had demarcated in their
supporting evidence. WHAT IS MATERIAL IN DETERMINING THE VALIDITY OF A
SEARCH IS THE PLACE STATED IN THE WARRANT ITSELF, NOT WHAT THE
APPLICANTS HAD IN THEIR THOUGHTS, OR HAD REPRESENTED IN THE PROOFS
THEY SUBMITTED TO THE COURT ISSUING THE WARRANT. As such, it was not just
a case of “obvious typographical error”, but a clear case of a search of a place
different from that clearly and without ambiguity identified in the search warrant.

NOTE: Very Important: Where a search warrant is issued by one court and the
criminal action base don the results of the search is afterwards commenced in
another court, IT IS NOT THE RULE THAT A MOTION TO QUASH THE WARRANT (or
to retrieve the things seized) MAY BE FILED ONLY IN THE ISSUING COURT—SUCH A
MOTION MAY BE FILED FOR THE FIRST TIME IN EITHER THE ISSUING COURT OR
THAT IN WHICH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDING IS PENDING.

d. Validity of a warrantless search and seizure as a result of an informer’s tip. Note

the two (2) conflicting decisions of the Supreme Court.

PEOPLE VS. ARUTA, 288 SCRA 626

On December 13, 1988, P/Lt. Abello of the Olongapo PNP was tipped off by an
informer that Aling Rosa would be arriving from Baguio City the following day
with a large volume of marijuana. As a result of the tip, the policemen waited for
a Victory Bus from Baguio City near the PNB Olongapo, near Rizal Ave. When the
accused got off, she was pointed to by the informer. She was carrying a traveling
bag at that time. She was not acting suspiciously. She was arrested without a
warrant.

The bag allegedly contained 8.5 kilos of marijuana. After trial, she was convicted
and imposed a penalty of life imprisonment.

Issue:Whether or not the marijuana allegedly taken from the accused is

admissible in evidence.

Held:

Warrantless search is allowed in the following instances:

1. customs searches;

2. searches of moving vehicle;

3. seizure of evidence in plain view;

4. consented searches;
5. search incidental to a lawful arrest; and

6. stop and frisk measures.

The above exceptions to the requirement of a search warrant, however, should

not become unbridled licenses for law enforcement officers to trample upon the
conditionally guaranteed and more fundamental right of persons against
unreasonable search and seizures. The essential requisite of probable cause must
still be satisfied before a warrantless search and seizure can be lawfully
conducted. In order that the information received by the police officers may be
sufficient to be the basis of probable cause, it must be based on reasonable
ground of suspicion or belief a crime has been committed or is about to be
committed. The marijuana obtained as a result of a warrantless search is
inadmissible as evidence for the following reasons:

a. the policemen had sufficient time to apply for a search warrant but they
failed to do so;

b. the accused was not acting suspiciously;

c. the accused’s identity was previously ascertained so applying for a

warrant should have been easy;

d. the accused in this case was searched while innocently crossing a street

Consequently, there was no legal basis for the police to effect a warrantless
search of the accused’s bag, there being no probable cause and the accused’s not
having been legally arrested. The arrest was made only after the accused was
pointed to by the informant at a time when she was not doing anything
suspicious. The arresting officers do not have personal knowledge that the
accused was committing a crime at that time.

Since there was no valid warrantless arrest, it logically follows that the
subsequent search is similarly illegal, it being not incidental to a lawful arrest. This
is so because if a search is first undertaken, and an arrest effected based on the
evidence produced by the search, both such search and arrest would be unlawful,
for being contrary to law.

This case is similar tot he case of PEOPLE VS. AMINNUDIN, and PEOPLE
VS. ENCINADA.

PEOPLE VS. MONTILLA, 284 SCRA 703

On June 19, 1994, at about 2 p.m., SPO1 Talingting and SPO1 Clarin of the
Dasmarinas, Cavite PNP were informed by an INFORMER that a drug courier would
be arriving in Barangay Salitran, Dasmarinas, Cavite, from Baguio City, with an
undetermined amount of marijuana. The informer likewise informed them that he
could recognize said person.

At about 4 in the morning of June 20, 1994, the appellant was arrested by
the above-named police officers while alighting from a passenger jeepney near a
waiting shed in Salitran, Dasmarinas, Cavite, upon being pointed to by the
informer. The policemen recovered 28 kilos of dried marijuana leaves. The arrest
was without warrant.

The trial court convicted the appellant for transporting marijuana based on
the testimonies of the Above-named police officers without presenting the alleged
informer.

Issue:
 Was the warrantless arrest valid?

Held:

The accused claims that the warrantless search and seizure is illegal
because the alleged information was received by the police on June 19, 1994 and
therefore, they could have applied for a search warrant. The said contention is
without merit considering that the information given by the informer is too
sketchy and not detailed enough for the obtention of the corresponding arrest or
search warrant. While there is indication that the informer knows the courier, the
records do not show that he knew his name. On bare information, the police could
not have secured a warrant from a judge.

Furthermore, warrantless search is allowed in the following instances:

1. customs searches;

2. searches of moving vehicle;

3. seizure of evidence in plain view;

4. consented searches;

5. search incidental to a lawful arrest; and

6. stop and frisk measures.

Since the accused was arrested for transporting marijuana, the subsequent search
on his person is justified. An arresting officer has the right to validly search and
seize from the offender (1) dangerous weapons; and (2) those that may be used
as proof of the commission of the offense.

In the case at bar, upon being pointed to by the informer as the drug courier, the
policemen requested the accused to open and show them the contents of his bag
and the cartoon he was carrying and he voluntarily opened the same and upon
cursory inspection, it was found out that it contains marijuana. Hence the arrest.

The accused insists that it is normal for a person traveling with a bag and cartoon
which should not elicit the slightest suspicion that he was committing a crime. In
short, there was no probable cause for these policemen to think that he was
committing a crime.

The said contention was considered without merit by the Supreme Court
considering the fact that he consented to the search as well as the fact that the
informer was a reliable one who had supplied similar information to the police in
the past which proved positive.

(NOTE: The SC held that the non-presentation of the informer does not affect the
case for the prosecution because he is not even the best witness. He is merely a
corroborative witness to the arresting officers. )

JUSTICE PANGANIBAN:

To say that “reliable tips” from informers constitute probable cause for a
warrantless arrest or search IS A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT AND PLACES IN GREAT
JEOPARDY THE DOCTRINES LAID DOWN IN MANY DECISIONS MADE BY THIS COURT.
(PEOPLE VS. BURGOS, 144 SCRA 1; PEOPLE VS. AMINNUDIN, 163 SCRA 402;
PEOPLE VS. ENCINADA, October 2, 1997; PEOPLE VS. MENGOTE, 220 SCRA).

The case is similar to the case of People vs. Encimada where the appellant was
searched without a warrant while disembarking from a ship on the strength of a
tip from an informer received by the police the previous afternoon that the
appellant would be transporting prohibited drugs. The search yielded a plastic
package containing marijuana. On Appeal, the SC reversed the decision of
conviction and held that Encinada did not manifest any suspicious behavior that
would necessarily and reasonably invite the attention of the police.

g. Warrantless searches and seizures–when valid or not. Is “Operation Kapkap”

valid?

Read:

PEOPLE VS. MENGOTE, G.R. No. 87059, June, 1992, 210 scra 174

Warrantless search and seizure

Cruz, J.

Facts:

1. On August 8, 1987, the Western Police District received a telephone call from
an informer that there were three suspicious-looking persons at the corner of Juan
Luna and North Bay Blvd., in Tondo, Manila;

2. When the surveilance team arrived therein, they saw the accused “looking from
side to side” and “holding his abdomen”. They approched these persons and
identified themselves as policement that is why they tried to ran away because of
the other lawmen, they were unable to escape;

3. After their arrest, a .38 cal. Smith and Wessor revolver was confiscated from the
accused and several days later, an information for violation of PD 1866 was filed
against him;

4. After trial, Mengote was convicted of having violated PD 1866 and was
sentenced to suffer reclusion perpetua based on the alleged gun as the principal
evidence. Hence this automatic appeal.

Issue:

Was there a valid warrantless search and seizure?

Held:

There is no question that evidence obtained as a result of an illegal search or

seizure is inadmissible in any proceeding for any purpose. That is the absolute
prohibition of Article III, Section 3 [2], of the Constitution. This is the celebrated
exclusionary rule based on the justification given by Justice Learned Hand that
“only in case the prosecution, which itself controls the seizing officials, knows that
it cannot profit by their wrong will the wrong be repressed.”

Section 5, Article 113 of the Rules of Court provides:

Sec. 5. Arrest without warrant; when lawful.- A peace officer or private person
may, without warrant, arrest a person:

(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually
committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;

(b) When an offense has in fact just been committed, and he has personal
knowledge of facts indicating that the person to be arrested has committed it;
and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or temporarily confined
while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one
confinement to another.

x x x

We have carefully examined the wording of this Rule and cannot see how
we we can agree with the prosecution.

Par. (c) of Section 5 is obviously inapplicable as Mengote was not an escapee

from a penal institution when he was arrested. We therefore confine ourselves to
determining the lawfulness of his arrest under either Par. (a) or Par. (b) of this
Section.

Par. (a) requires that the person be arrested (1) after he has committed or while
he is actually committing or is at least attempting to commit an offense, (2) in the
presence of the arresting officer.

These requirements have not been established in the case at bar. At the time of
the arrest in question, the accused-appellant was merely “looking from side to
side” and “holding his abdomen,” according to the arresting officers themselves.
There was apparently no offense that had just been committed or was being
actually committed or at least being attempted by Mengote in thie presence.

The Solicitor General submits that the actual existence of an offense was not
necessary as long as Mengote’s acts created a reasonable suspicion on the part
of the arresting officers and induced in them the belief that an offense had been
committed and that accused-appellant had committed it”. The question is, What
offense? What offense could possibly have been suggested by a person “looking
from side to side” and “holding his abdomen” and in aplace not exactly
forsaken.

These are certainly not sinister acts. And the setting of the arrest made them less
so, if at all. It might have been different if Mengote had been apprehended at an
unholy hour and in a place where he had no reason to be, like a darkened alley
at 3 o’clock in the morning. But he was arrested at 11:30 in the morning and in
a crowded street shortly after alighting from a passenger jeep with his
companion.He was not skulking in the shadows but walking in the clear light of
day. There was nothing clandestine about his being on that street at that busy
hour in the blaze of the noonday sun.

On the other hand, there could have been a number of reasons, all of them
innoent, why hiseyes were darting from side to sideand he was holding his
abdomen. If they excited suspicion in the minds of the arresting officers, as the
prosecution suggests, it has nevertheless not been shown what their suspicion
was all about.

When illegal arrest is deemed waived.

Warrantless arrest; no personal knowledge of the arresting officer

PEOPLE VS. GALVEZ, 355 SCRA 246

Mendoza, J.

The policeman arrested the accused-appellant on the basis solely of what

Reynaldo Castro had told him and not because he saw the accused-appellant
commit the crime charged against him. Indeed, the prosecution admitted that
there was no warrant of arrest issued against accused-appellant when the latter
was taken into custody. Considering that the accused-appellant was not
committing a crime at the time he was arrested nor did the arresting officer have
any personal knowledge of facts indicating that accused-appellant committed a
crime, his arrest without a warrant cannot be justified.

However, by entering a plea of not guilty during the arraignment, the accused-
appellant waived his right to raise the issue of illegality of his arrest. IT IS NOW
SETTLED THAT OBJECTION TO A WARRANT OF ARREST OR THE PROCEDURE BY
WHICH A COURT ACQUIRES JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF AN ACCUSED
MUST BE MADE BEFORE HE ENTERS HIS PLEA, OTHERWISE, THE OBJECTION IS
DEEMED WAIVED. THE FACT THAT THE ARREST WAS ILLEGAL DOES NOT RENDER
THE SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS VOID AND DEPRIVE THE STATE OF ITS RIGHT TO
CONVICT THE GUILTY WHEN ALL THE FACTS POINT TO THE CULPABILITY OF THE
ACCUSED.

LATEST CASES ON SEARCH AND SEIZURES

UY VS. BIR, 344 SCRA 36

The following are the requisites of a valid search warrant:

1. The warrant must be issued upon probable cause;

2. The probable cause must be determined by the judge himself and not
by applicant or any other person;

3. In determining probable cause, the judge must examine under oath and
affirmation the complainant and such witnesses as the latter may produce; and

4. The warrant issued must particularly describe the place to be

searched and the person or things to be seized.

A description of the place to be searched is sufficient if the

officer with the warrant can, with reasonable effort, ascertain and
identify the place intended and distinguish it from other places in the
community. Search warrants are not issued on loose, vague or doubtful
basis of fact, nor on mere suspicion or belief. In this case, most of the
items listed in the warrants fail to meet the test of particularity,
especially since the witness had furnished the judge photocopies of the
documents sought to be seized. THE SEARCH WARRANT IS SEPARABLE, AND
THOSE ITEMS NOT PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED MAY BE CUT OFF WITHOUT
DESTROYING THE WHOLE WARRANT.

PEOPLE VS. VALDEZ, 341 SCRA 25

The protection against unreasonable search and seizure covers

both innocent and guilty alike against any form of highhandedness of
law enforces.

The “plain view” doctrine, which may justify a search without

warrant, APPLIES ONLY WHERE THE POLICE OFFICER IS NOT SEARCHING FOR
EVIDENCE AGAINS THE ACCUSED, BUT INADVERTENTLY COMES ACROSS AN
INCRIMINATING OBJECT.

Just because the marijuana plants were found in an unfenced lot

does nor prevent the appellant from invoking the protection afforded by
the Constitution. The right against unreasonable search and seizure is
the immunity of one’s person, which includes his residence, papers and
other possessions. For a person to be immune against unreasonable
searches and seizures, he need not be in his home or office, within a
fenced yard or private place.

PEOPLE VS. BAULA, 344 SCRA 663

In case of consented searches or waiver of the constitutional

guarantee against obtrusive searches, it is fundamental that to constitute
waiver, IT MUST APPEAR THAT THE RIGHT EXISTS; THE PERSONS INVOLVED HAD
KNOWLEDGE, EITHER ACTUAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE, of the existence of such right.
The third condition did not exist in the instant case. Neither was the
search incidental to a valid warrantless arrest. (PEOPLE VS. FIFUEROA,
July 6, 2000) An alleged consent to a warrantless search and seizure
cannot be based merely on the presumption of regularity in the
performance of official duty. THE PRESUMPTION BY ITSELF, CANNOT
PREVAIL AGAINST THE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS OF AN
INDIVIDUAL, AND ZEAL IN THE PURSUIT OF CRIMINALS CANNOT ENNOBLE
THE USE OF ARBITRARY METHODS THAT THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF
ABHORS.

Rights Of Accused During Trial

WHAT ARE THE 9 RIGHTS OF AN ACCUSED IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS?

The following are the rights accorded the accused:

1. To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable

doubt.

2. To be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.

3. To be present and defend in person and by counsel at every stage of the

proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of the judgment.

4. To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross-examination on

matters covered by direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner
prejudice him.

5. To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself.

6. To confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him at the trial. Either
party may utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a witness who is
deceased, out of or can not with due diligence be found in the Philippines,
unavailable, or otherwise unable to testify, given in another case or
proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and
subject matter, the adverse party having the opportunity to cross-examine
him.

7. To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and

production of other evidence in his behalf.
8. To have speedy, impartial and public trial.

9. To appeal in all cases allowed and in the manner prescribed by law.