Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Constitution the document which serves as the fundamental law of the state; that written instrument enacted by the direct action of the people
by which the fundamental powers of the government are established, limited and defined, and by which those powers are distributed among the
several departments for their safe and useful exercise, for the benefit of the body politic.
Classifications: (a) written v. unwritten; (b) enacted (conventional) v. evolved (cumulative); (c) rigid v. flexible
Constitutional History
Political Questions
A justiciable question is a definite and concrete dispute touching on the legal relations of parties having adverse legal interests which may be
resolved by a court of law through the application of a law.
Baker v. Carr. the mere fact that the suit seeks the protection of a political right doesn’t mean it presents a political question; arises not between
Federal-State Government, but bet co-equal branches of government; the case provided for guidelines for determining what political (questions)
are in nature: 1. Textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department (textual); 2. A lack of
judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it (Functional); 3. The impossibility of deciding without an initial policy
determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion (Functional); 4. The impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution
without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government (Prudential); 5. an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to
a political decision already made (prudential); 6. The potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments
on one question (prudential)
Casibang v. Aquino
Tanada v. Cuenco. There are two aspects of a political question: (1) Those questions which, under the Constitution, are to be decided by the
people in their sovereign capacity; or, (2) In regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislature or executive
branches of government.
Sanidad v. COMELEC. If the President has been legitimately discharging the legislative functions of the interim Assembly, there is no reason why
he cannot validly discharge the function of that Assembly to propose amendments to the Constitution, which is but adjunct, although peculiar, to
its gross legislative power.
Abueva v. Wood. Under the principle of separation of powers, it ruled that it was not intended by the Constitution that one branch of
government could encroach upon the field of duty of the other. Each department has an exclusive field within which it can perform its part
within certain discretionary limits.
2
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
IBP v. Zamora. The factual necessity of calling out the armed forces is something that is for the President to decide, but the Court may look into
the factual basis of the declaration to determine if it was done with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction.
Mootness
Constitutional questions must be raised at the earliest time possible.
A moot case is one that ceases to present a justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events, so that a declaration thereon would be of no
practical use or value.
Exceptions: (1) where there is a grave violation of the Constitution; (2) the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public
interest is involved; (3) when the constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar, and the
people; (4) capable of repetition yet evading review.
Gonzales v. Narvasa
Sanlakas v. Exec. Sec. The Court may still decide the case provided that the party raising it in a proper case has been and/or continues to be
prejudiced or damaged as a direct result of its issuance.
Lacson v. Exec. Sec
David v. Arroyo. There must be a showing of obvious interest in the validity of the election law in question
3
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
Loss and Reacquisition
ART. IV, §3. Philippine citizenship may be lost or reacquired in the manner provided by law.
Loss:
o Naturalization in a foreign country
o Express renunciation (expatriation)
o Subscribing to an oath of allegiance to the constitution or laws of a foreign country
o Cancellation of certificate of naturalization
o Res judicata does not set in citizenship cases.
Reacquisition
o By naturalization
o By repatriation (RA 8171)
Bengzon III v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal: Repatriation results in the recovery of the original nationality. That means
that a naturalized Filipino who lost his citizenship will be restored to his prior status as a naturalized Filipino citizen. On the other hand,
if he was originally a natural-born citizen before he lost his Philippine citizenship, he will be restored to his former status as a natural
born Filipino
Labo v. COMELEC. He lost citizenship by naturalization in another country, a mode of losing citizenship enumerated in CA 63. Even if it
be assumed that, as the petitioner asserts, his naturalization in Australia was annulled after it was found that his marriage to the
Australian citizen was igamous, that circumstance alone did not automatically restore his Philippine citizenship.
Frivaldo v. COMELEC. Frivaldo’ naturalization was forced upon him to avoid the persecution of Marcos. Further, his participation in the
Philippine elections mean his forfeiture of his American citizenship and therefore his Philippine citizenship should be restored. Valles v.
COMELEC
Yu v. Defensor-Santiago. In 1971, Yu was originally issued a Portuguese passport, valid for 5yrs. He renewed it for the same period
upon presentment before the proper Portuguese consular officer. On Feb 19, 1978, he was naturalized as a Filipino Citizen. On July 21,
1981 he applied for and was issued a Portuguese passport by the Portuguese Embassy in Tokyo. Sometime in April 1980, he declared
his nationality as Portuguese in commercial documents he signed like the Companies Registry in Hongkong. These acts constitute
express renunciation of his Philippine citizenship
Republic v. Guy.
Jao v. Republic. There is no law requiring or authorizing that repatriation should be effected by a judicial proceeding. All that is
required for a female citizen of the Philippines who lost her citizenship to an alien to reacquire her Philippine citizen, upon the
termination of her marital status, "is for her to take necessary oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and to register the
said oath in the proper civil registry"
iii. Effect of Marriage
ART. IV, §4. Citizens of the Philippines who marry aliens shall retain their citizenship, unless by their act or omission, they are deemed,
under the law, to have renounced it.
iv. Dual Allegiance
ART. IV, §5. Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be dealt with by law.
v. dual citizenship: arises when, as a result of concurrent application of the different laws of two or more states, a person is
simultaneously considered a citizen of said states (involuntary)
dual allegiance refers to the situation where a person simultaneously owes, by some positive act, loyalty to two or more states (result
of an individual’s volition and is prohibited by the Constitution
Mercado v. Manzano: The SC stressed that the constitutional policy is not against dual citizenship but not dual loyalty, such as that
often manifested by naturalized Filipinos who while processing allegiance to their adoptive land retain their allegiance to their native
land and even involve themselves in its political affairs. The mere application or possession of an alien certificate of registration does
not amount to renunciation
a. Territory a fixed portion of the surface of the earth inhabited by the people of the State
Art. I. The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories
over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its territorial sea,
the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the
archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.
Straight Baseline Method method of delineating the territorial sea. It consists of drawing straight lines connecting the outermost points
on the coast without departing to any appreciable extent from the general direction of the coast
o Territorial Sea: 12 nautical miles from the baseline
o Contiguous Zone: 24 nautical miles from the baseline/ 12 nautical miles from the edge of the territorial sea
o EEZ: 200 nautical miles from the baseline [there can be a continental shelf without EEZ, but not an EEZ without a continental shelf]
b. Government
i. Definition
4
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
E. O. No. 292, §2(1),(2),(4), & (10)
The agency or instrumentality through which the will of the State is formulated, expressed and realized
ii. De Jure and De Facto governments
De jure has a rightful title but no power or control, either because the same has been withdrawn from it or because it has not yet
actually entered into the exercise thereof
De facto actually exercises power or control but without legal title
Co Kim Chan v. Valdez Tan Keh: de facto Independent government established by the inhabitants of the country who rise in
insurrection against the parent state.
In Re Saturnino Bermudez. Petitioner's allegation of ambiguity or vagueness of the aforequoted provision is manifestly gratuitous, it
being a matter of public record and common public knowledge that the Constitutional Commission refers therein to incumbent
President Corazon C. Aquino and Vice-President Salvador H. Laurel, and to no other persons.
In Re Letter of Associate Justice Reynato Puno. The existing legal order was overthrown by the revolutionary government. The little
resistance met by the new government, control of the state, appointment of key officers in the administration, departure of officials of
the previous regime, and the revamp of the military and judiciary signaled the point where the legal system had ceased to be obeyed
by the Filipino people.
Estrada v. Desierto.
iii. Constituent and Ministrant functions
Constituent – compulsory because constitutive of society
Ministrant: undertaken to advance the general interest of the society
ACCFA v. CUGCO. The implementation of the land reform program of the government according to Republic Act No. 3844 is most
certainly a governmental, not a proprietary, function. The CIR has no jurisdiction but nevertheless the collective bargaining agreements
must be enforced.
iv. Parens Patriae
Government of the Philippine Islands v. Monte de Piedad: the government as guardian of the rights of the people may initiate legal
actions for and in behalf of particular individual
c. Sovereignty
Supreme and uncontrollable power inherent in a state by which the State is governed
Legal: power to issue commands
Political: sum of all the influences which lie behind the law
Internal: the supreme power over everything within its territory
External: freedom from external control
Permanent, exclusive, comprehensive, absolute, indivisible, inalienable, and imprescriptible.
Macariola v. Asuncion. Political laws of the former sovereign, whether compatible or not with those of the new sovereign, are
automatically abrogated, unless they are expressly re-enacted by the affirmative act of the new sovereign. Municipal laws remain in force.
Ruffy v. Chief of Staff. The rule suspending political laws only affects the civilian inhabitants of the occupied territory and is not intended to
bind the enemies in arms. Thus, members of the armed forces continued to be covered by the National Defense Act, the Articles of War, and
other laws relating to the armed forces even during the Japanese occupation. By the acceptance of the petitioners‘ appointments as officers
in the Philippine Army they became amenable to the Articles of War.
Peralta v. Director of Prisons: at the end of the occupation, when the occupant is ousted from the territory, the political laws which had
been suspended during the occupation shall automatically become effective again.
Alcantara v. Director of Prisons. Judgments from courts created by de facto governments were good and valid and remain good and valid,
and therefore enforceable after liberation, provided that such judgments do not have a political complexion. Alcantara’s sentence has no
political complexion. He is convicted on an offense punishable under the municipal law.
d. State Immunity
Art. XVI, §3. The State may not be sued without its consent.
i. Characterization of Suit
Begosa v. Chairman, Philippine Veterans Administration. A suit against the State, regardless of who is named as defendant, if it
produces adverse consequences on the public treasury, whether in the disbursement of funds or loss or property, the public official
proceeded against not being liable in his personal capacity.
Republic v. Feliciano. Feliciano seeks to prove that his ownership of the land as evidenced by his information is valid and makes a claim
to recover said property. However, the court ruled that the state did not give its consent to be sued and thus immune from the
complaint. Although the proclamation stated that it shall be ―subject to private rights if any there be‖, this cannot be construed as an
express waiver of immunity.
ii. Rationale for Immunity
There can be no legal right against the authority which makes the law on which the right depends (“Royal Prerogative of Dishonesty”)
5
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
Sanders v. Veridiano. The doctrine of state immunity is applicable not only to our own government but also to foreign states who are
subject to the jurisdiction of our courts.
United States v. Guinto. Implied Consent when the state enters into a business contract, by right of economic or business relations,
may be sued.
The Holy See v. Rosario. Aside from the privilege of sovereign immunity established by the DFA, the Holy See is nonetheless immune
from suit because the transaction entered into was not for profit or for gain. It merely wanted to dispose off the same because the
squatters living there made it almost impossible for petitioner to use it for the purpose of the donation (construction of Papal Nuncio‘s
residence).
iii. Waiver of Immunity
Sayson v. Singson. Singson’s cause of action is a money claim against the government. The suit filed is a suit against the State.
Republic v. Purisima. Express waiver of immunity cannot be made by a mere counsel of the government but must be effected through
a duly-enacted statute. Neither does such answer come under the implied forms of consent as earlier discussed.
Amigable v. Cuenca. Implied Consent when it would be inequitable for the State to claim immunity
Ministerio v. City of Cebu
Santiago v. Republic
Lim v. Brownell
United States v. Ruiz. NO Implied Consent state enters into a business contract, by right of sovereign power and in the exercise of
sovereign functions
Republic v. Villasor. Consent to be sued does not include consent in the execution of judgment against it. Such execution will require
another waiver, because the power of the court ends when the judgment is rendered, since government funds and properties may not
be seized under writs of execution or garnishment, unless such disbursement is covered by the corresponding appropriation as
required by law.
In re Pinochet
Congo vs. Belgium, ICJ
Flowers vs. Clinton
GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE
a. Separation of Powers
Purpose: to prevent the concentration of authority in one person or group of persons that might lead to irreparable error or abuse in
its exercise to the detriment of republican institutions
Marbury vs. Madison. In essence, court declared that Madison should have delivered the commission to Marbury, but then held that
the section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that gave the Supreme Court the power to issue mandamus exceeded the authority allotted the
Court under Article III of the Constitution, and was therefore null and void. The critical importance of this case is the assumption of the
several powers by the Supreme Court. The court became the arbiter of the Constitution, the final authority on which the document
meant. as such the Supreme Court became in fact as well as in theory an equal partner in government, and it has played that role ever
since.
Boumedienne vs. Bush.
Springer v. Government of Phil. Islands.
Angara v. Electoral Commission. The power of judicial review the courts to test the validity of executive and legislative acts in light of
their conformity with the Constitution. This is not an assertion of superiority by the courts over other departments, but merely an
expression of the supremacy of the Constitution.
b. Non-delegation Doctrine
Premised on the ethical principle that delegated power constitutes not only a right but also a duty to be performed by the delegate
through the instrumentality of his own judgment and not through the intervening mind of another
Permissible delegations
6
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
o To the people at large
o Delegation(system of initiative and referendum)
o Emergency powers of the president
o Tariff powers of the President
o Delegation to administrative bodies
o Delegation to LGUs
Pelaez v. Auditor General. Completeness Test law must be complete in all its essential terms and conditions so that there is nothing
for the delegate to do except to enforce it + Sufficient Standard Test mans out the boundaries of the delegate’s authority by
defining the legislative policy and indicating the circumstances under which it is to be pursued. Both tests must concur
7
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
Initiative – power of the people to propose amendments to the Constitution or top propose and enact legislation through an election
called for the purpose
By a petition of at least 12% of the total number of registered voters of which every legislative district must be represent by at least 3%
of the registered voters therein
For amendments ONLY
Defensor-Santiago v. COMELEC. That the Act does not provide a subtitle for the initiative on the Constitution simply means that the
main thrust of the Act is initiative and referendum on National and Local Laws (not the Constitution with regard to RA 6735)
Lambino vs. COMELEC (PIRMA). This petition violates the Section 2 Article XVII of the constitution. The petition to be signed by the
people should contain a definite proposal of the amendment of the constitution; not merely a general question of whether thay
approve of the amendment or not.
f. Constitutional Convention (ART. XVII, §3) The Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of all its Members, call a constitutional convention,
or by a majority vote of all its Members, submit to the electorate the question of calling such a convention. for both amendments and
revisions
g. Plebiscite Requirement (ART. XVII, §4). Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution under Section 1 hereof shall be valid when
ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the
approval of such amendment or revision. Any amendment under Section 2 hereof shall be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes
cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the certification by the Commission on
Elections of the sufficiency of the petition.
ART. VII, §1. The executive power shall be vested in the President of the Philippines.
Marcos v. Manglapus. The Executive power is vested in the President. Whatever is not judicial, whatever is not legislative, is residual power
exercised by the president.
Pimentel v. Aguirre. AO 372 temporarily holding back LGU funds is prohibited. LGU’s enjoy fiscal autonomy which means they have the power to
create their own sources of revenue in addition to their equitable share in the national taxes released by the national gov’t. A basic feature of
local fiscal autonomy is the automatic release of the shares of LGUs in the national internal revenue. This is mandated by the constitution. The
release shall be made directly to the LGU within 5 days after every quarter of the year and it shall not be subject to any holdback that may be
imposed by the national gov’t for any purpose.
Laurel v. Garcia.
Beltran v. Makasiar. The privilege form immunity from suit (which is aimed to assure the exercise of Presidential duties and functions free from
any hindrance or distraction considering that President’s job requires all of her time and attention) pertains to the President by irtue of the office
and may be invoked only by the holder of the office; not by any other person in the President’s behalf. Thus, an accused in a criminal case in
which the President is complainant cannot raise the presidential privilege as a defense to prevent the case from proceeding against such
accused. Moreover, the President has the right to waive such privilege but it is only him/her that could decide to do so.
Qualifications
ART VII, §2. No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter, able to read and
write, at least forty years of age on the day of the election, and a resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately preceding such
election.
9
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
The Vice-President
ART. VII, §3. There shall be a Vice-President who shall have the same qualifications and term of office and be elected with, and in the same
manner, as the President. He may be removed from office in the same manner as the President. The Vice-President may be appointed as a
Member of the Cabinet. Such appointment requires no confirmation.
Term Limits
ART. VII, §4 (1-2). The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people for a term of six years which shall begin at
noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the day of the election and shall end at noon of the same date, six years thereafter. The
President shall not be eligible for any re-election. No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years
shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time. No Vice-President shall serve for more than two successive terms. Voluntary
renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of the service for the full term for
which he was elected.
How Elected
ART. VII, §4 (3..). Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular election for President and Vice-President shall be held on the second Monday
of May. The returns of every election for President and Vice-President, duly certified by the board of canvassers of each province or city, shall
be transmitted to the Congress, directed to the President of the Senate. Upon receipt of the certificates of canvass, the President of the
Senate shall, not later than thirty days after the day of the election, open all the certificates in the presence of the Senate and the House of
Representatives in joint public session, and the Congress, upon determination of the authenticity and due execution thereof in the manner
provided by law, canvass the votes. The person having the highest number of votes shall be proclaimed elected, but in case two or more shall
have an equal and highest number of votes, one of them shall forthwith be chosen by the vote of a majority of all the Members of both
Houses of the Congress, voting separately. The Congress shall promulgate its rules for the canvassing of the certificates. The Supreme Court,
sitting en banc, shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice-President, and
may promulgate its rules for the purpose.
Defensor-Santiago v. Ramos
Oath
ART. VII, §5. Before they enter on the execution of their office, the President, the Vice-President, or the Acting President shall take the
following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear [or affirm] that I will faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my duties as President [or Vice-
President or Acting President] of the Philippines, preserve and defend its Constitution, execute its laws, do justice to every man, and
consecrate myself to the service of the Nation. So help me God." [In case of affirmation, last sentence will be omitted].
Prohibitions
ART. VII, §6. The President shall have an official residence. The salaries of the President and Vice-President shall be determined by law and
shall not be decreased during their tenure. No increase in said compensation shall take effect until after the expiration of the term of the
incumbent during which such increase was approved. They shall not receive during their tenure any other emolument from the Government
or any other source.
Rules on Succession
ART. VII, §7. The President-elect and the Vice President-elect shall assume office at the beginning of their terms. If the President-elect fails to
qualify, the Vice President-elect shall act as President until the President-elect shall have qualified. If a President shall not have been chosen, the
Vice President-elect shall act as President until a President shall have been chosen and qualified. If at the beginning of the term of the President,
the President-elect shall have died or shall have become permanently disabled, the Vice President-elect shall become President. Where no
President and Vice-President shall have been chosen or shall have qualified, or where both shall have died or become permanently disabled, the
President of the Senate or, in case of his inability, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, shall act as President until a President or a Vice-
President shall have been chosen and qualified. The Congress shall, by law, provide for the manner in which one who is to act as President shall
be selected until a President or a Vice-President shall have qualified, in case of death, permanent disability, or inability of the officials mentioned
in the next preceding paragraph.
ART. VII, §8. In case of death, permanent disability, removal from office, or resignation of the President, the Vice-President shall become the
President to serve the unexpired term. In case of death, permanent disability, removal from office, or resignation of both the President and Vice-
President, the President of the Senate or, in case of his inability the Speaker of the House of Representatives, shall then act as President until the
President or Vice-President shall have been elected and qualified. The Congress shall, by law, provide who shall serve as President in case of
death, permanent disability, or resignation of the Acting President. He shall serve until the President or the Vice-President shall have been
elected and qualified, and be subject to the same restrictions of powers and disqualifications as the Acting President.
ART. VII, §9. Whenever there is a vacancy in the Office of the Vice-President during the term for which he was elected, the President shall
nominate a Vice-President from among the Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives who shall assume office upon
confirmation by a majority vote of all the Members of both Houses of the Congress, voting separately.
10
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
ART. VII, §10. The Congress shall, at ten o'clock in the morning of the third day after the vacancy in the offices of the President and Vice-
President occurs, convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call and within seven days, enact a law calling for a special election to
elect a President and a Vice-President to be held not earlier than forty-five days nor later than sixty days from the time of such call. The bill
calling such special election shall be deemed certified under paragraph 2, Section 26, Article V1 of this Constitution and shall become law upon
its approval on third reading by the Congress. Appropriations for the special election shall be charged against any current appropriations and
shall be exempt from the requirements of paragraph 4, Section 25, Article V1 of this Constitution. The convening of the Congress cannot be
suspended nor the special election postponed. No special election shall be called if the vacancy occurs within eighteen months before the date
of the next presidential election.
ART. VII, §11. Whenever the President transmits to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written
declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the
contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice-President as Acting President. Whenever a majority of all the Members of the
Cabinet transmit to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President
is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice-President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as
Acting President. Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives his
written declaration that no inability exists, he shall reassume the powers and duties of his office. Meanwhile, should a majority of all the
Members of the Cabinet transmit within five days to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, their
written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Congress shall decide the issue. For that
purpose, the Congress shall convene, if it is not in session, within forty-eight hours, in accordance with its rules and without need of call. If the
Congress, within ten days after receipt of the last written declaration, or, if not in session, within twelve days after it is required to assemble,
determines by a two-thirds vote of both Houses, voting separately, that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office,
the Vice-President shall act as President; otherwise, the President shall continue exercising the powers and duties of his office.
Estrada v. Desierto. Immunity from suit during his tenure is deemed implied in the Constitution. The immunity, however, does not extend to
non-official acts or for wrongdoing.
Prohibited Appointments
ART. VII, §13. The spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree of the President shall not, during his tenure, be
appointed as Members of the Constitutional Commissions, or the Office of the Ombudsman, or as Secretaries, Undersecretaries, chairmen or
heads of bureaus or offices, including government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries
Midnight Appointments
ART. VII, §15. Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his term, a President or Acting President shall
not make appointments, except temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service
or endanger public safety.
De Rama v. Court of Appeals. Section 15 applied only to an outgoing President. There is in fact no law prohibiting local elective officers from
appointing during the last day of their term.
In Re Appointment of Valenzuela. The appointments of the two judges fall within the time banned under Section 15. The court reiterates that
Section 4 is to be understood as effective except in instances denied by Section 15. The Court declares void the appointments.
Aytona vs. Castillo. As a rule, once an appointment is issued, it cannot be reconsidered especially where the appointed is qualified. But there are
exceptions such as when mass ad interim appointments issued in the last hours of an outgoing President are to be considered by the
Commission on Appointments that is different from that submitted by an incoming President who may not wholly approve of the selections,
especially if it is doubtful that the outgoing President exercised double care in extending such appointments.
11
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
ART. VII, §16. The President shall nominate and, with the consent of the Commission on Appointments, appoint the heads of the executive
departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, or officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and
other officers whose appointments are vested in him in this Constitution. He shall also appoint all other officers of the Government whose
appointments are not otherwise provided for by law, and those whom he may be authorized by law to appoint.
Appointments solely by the President
o Those vested by the Constitution on the President alone
o Those whose appointments are not otherwise provided by law
o Those whom he may be authorized to appoint
o Those officers lower in rank whose appointment is vested by law in the President alone
Sarmiento v. Mison. In this case, only appointments under the first sentence of Section 16 Article VII need the confirmation of the Commission
on Appointments. Officers of the AFP from the rank of colonel or naval captain is required to gain consent from the Commission on
Appointments.
Bermudez v. Torres. When the Constitution or the law clothes the President with the power to appoint a subordinate officer, such conferment
must be understood as necessarily carrying with it an ample discretion of whom to appoint. It is the considered view of the Court that the phrase
“upon recommendation of the Secretary,” found in Section 9, Chapter II, Title III, Book IV, of the Revised Administrative Code, should be
interpreted to be a mere advise, exhortation or endorsement, which is essentially persuasive in character and not binding or obligatory upon the
party to whom it is made. The recommendation is here nothing really more than advisory in nature.
Manalo v. Sistoza.
Calderon v. Carale. The Congress cannot, by law, expand the list of public officials required to be confirmed by the Commission on Appointments
as provided under Article VII Section 16.
Ad Interim Appointments
ART. VII, §16. The Congress may, by law, vest the appointment of other officers lower in rank in the President alone, in the courts, or in the
heads of departments, agencies, commissions, or boards. The President shall have the power to make appointments during the recess of the
Congress, whether voluntary or compulsory, but such appointments shall be effective only until disapproved by the Commission on
Appointments or until the next adjournment of the Congress.
Matibag v. Benipayo. The court has to choose between 1.) giving the Pres. the power to make ad interim appointments, w/out constitutional
limit, where, if the CA fails to confirm it, the appointee can even serve office for the whole 7 years through continuous successive renewals AND
2.) the Pres. ad interim appointee can only serve while the Congress is in recess and if the CA doesn’t confirm the appointment, then such
appointment shouldn’t be renewed
Pimentel vs. Ermita (Hyatt 10). PGMA did not infringe on the rights of Congress—the power to appoint is executive in nature and the Committee
on Appointments, though it be composed of members of Congress, derives executive power from the Constitution. A department secretary is
considered an alter ego of the President; it is only fitting that she personally appoint such a position of great trust and confidence.
12
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
under the principle that the power to remove is inherent in the power toappoint but that it does not include officers or employees who belong
to the classified service for as to them that inherent power cannot be exercised.
Lacson-Magallanes Co., Inc. v. Pano. The President’s control of all executive departments is of constitutional origin. Implicit then is his authority
to go over, confirm, modify or reverse the action taken by his department secretaries. Hence, the President can rule on the correctness of a
decision of a department secretary.
De Leon v. Carpio. There is no question that when Secretary of Justice directed to reinstate the petitioners, Sec. Ordonez was acting in the
regular discharge of his functions as an alter ego of the President. Carpio should therefore have respected his acts, which is in the Department of
Justice under the direct control of its Secretary. As a subordinate in this department, Carpio was (and is) bound to obey the Secretary’s
directives, which are presumptively the acts of the President of the Philippines.
Chavez vs. Romulo. The right of individuals to bear arms is not absolute, but subject to regulation. The maintenance of peace and order and the
protection of people against violence are constitutional duties of the State, and the right to bear arms is to be construed in connection and in
harmony with these constitutional duties. The President as chief executive has the holds the steering wheel that controls the course of her
government. Whatever policy she chooses, she has her subordinates to implement them.
Commander-in-Chief Powers
ART. VII, §18. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may
call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety
requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part
thereof under martial law. Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus, the President shall submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of
all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall not be set aside by the
President. Upon the initiative of the President, the Congress may, in the same manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to
be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it. The Congress, if not in session, shall, within
twenty-four hours following such proclamation or suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without need of a call. The Supreme Court
may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the
suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision thereon within thirty days
from its filing. A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or
legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to
function, nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall
apply only to persons judicially charged for rebellion or offenses inherent in, or directly connected with, invasion. During the suspension of the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, any person thus arrested or detained shall be judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be
released.
Lacson v. Perez
Aquino v. Military Commission No.2.
Olaguer v. Military Commission No.34. Civilians cannot be tried by military courts if the civil courts are regular and functioning (Open Court
Doctrine)
David v. Arroyo. The Court held that the declaration of PP 1017 is constitutional as a valid exercise of the President’s calling-out power of the
AFP. Its application by the police however was unconstitutional (i.e. warrantless arrest of Randy David, raid of Daily Tribune).
Sanlakas vs. Exec. Sec
Pardoning Power
ART. VII, §19. Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in this Constitution, the President may grant reprieves, commutations,
and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after conviction by final judgment. He shall also have the power to grant amnesty with the
concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress
Not given by president but by Granted by the Chief Reduction of sentence Suspends penalty By proclamation of the
law Executive, a private act You do not extinguish Neither commute Chief executive with the
It doesn't really shorten Pleaded and proved by penalty nor extinguish concurrence of Congress, a
They continue to suffer the person since courts penalty public act
punishment except that it is take no judicial notice Courts take judicial notice
not in jail thereof Granted to classes of
You must serve the minimum Granted to one after persons or communities
of the sentence conviction (to prevent who may be guilty of
13
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
The kind granted to the President from political offenses before or
Teehankee: minimum should exercising executive after the institution of the
have been 30years of power in derogation of criminal prosecution and
reclusion perpetua (murder + the judicial power) sometimes after the
frustrated murder); but was Abolishes and forgives conviction
given parole after only the punishment (looks Abolishes the offense itself
17years --- commutation! forward) (looks backward)
Does not automatically As if the offender
restore rights to hold committed no crime
public office, or the
right of suffrage unless
expressly provided
Never exempts culprit
from the payment of
civil indemnity imposed
upon him by the
sentence
Borrowing Power
ART. VII, §20. 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 subject to such limitations as may be provided by law. The Monetary Board shall, within thirty days from the end of
every quarter of the calendar year, submit to the Congress a complete report of its decision on applications for loans to be contracted or
guaranteed by the Government or government-owned and controlled corporations which would have the effect of increasing the foreign debt,
and containing other matters as may be provided by law.
Constantino vs. Cuisia. The Court upheld the Constitutionality of the program saying that buyback is a necessary power which springs from the
grant of the foreign borrowing power and that bonds, being representations of an issuer’s contractual promise to pay back money borrowed, are
also within the Executive power to contract.
loans
Foreign Affairs Power
ART. VII, §21. No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of
the Senate.
Commissioner of Customs v. Eastern Sea Trading
Secretary of Justice v. Lantion
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. John Gotamco & Sons, Inc.
14
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
Abaya vs. Exec. Sec. An exchange of notes is considered a form of an executive agreement, which becomes binding through executive without
the need of a vote by Congress.
DBM vs. Fernandez and Kolonwel (2008)
Salonga vs. Exec. Sec(2009)
Pimentel vs. Exec Sec. The power to ratify is vested in the President, subject to the concurrence of the Senate. The role of the Senate, however,
is limited to giving or withholding its consent, or concurrence, to the ratification. Hence, it is within the authority of the President to refuse to
submit a treaty to the Senate, or, having secured its consent for its ratification, refuse to ratify it. Although the refusal of a state to ratify a treaty
which has been signed in its behalf is a serious step that should not be taken lightly, such decision is within the competence of the President
alone, which cannot be encroached by the Court via mandamus.
Opening Address
ART VII, §23. The President shall address the Congress at the opening of its regular session. He may also appear before it at any other time.
Term of Office
15
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
ART. VI, §4. The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the
thirtieth day of June next following their election. No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of
the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term of which he was
elected.
ART. VI, §7. The Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term of three years which shall begin, unless otherwise
provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election. No Member of the House of Representatives shall serve
for more than three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption
in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected.
Equitable Representation
ART. VI, §5(4). Within three years following the return of every census, the Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative districts based on
the standards provided in this section.
Rule on Vacancies
Salaries
PHILCONSA v. Mathay. The Constitution’s wording is singular (‘term’ not ‘terms’); hence, both the Senators and the Representatives who
approved such an increase were taken as a single unit.
Parliamentary Immunities
ART. VI, Sec. 11. A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment,
be privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session. No Member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any speech or
debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof.
Martinez v. Morfe
Osmena v. Pendatun. The interpretation of the phrase disorderly behavior is the prerogative of the House concerned and cannot be judicially
reviewed.
Jimenez v. Cabangbang. Privilege speeches and debates (1) remarks must be made while the legislature or the legislative committee is in
session; and, (2) they must be made in connection with the discharge of duties.
People v. Jalosjos. Members of Congress are not exempt from detention for crime. They may be arrested, even when the House is in session, for
crimes punishable by a penalty of more than 6 months
Sessions
ART. VI, §15. The Congress shall convene once every year on the fourth Monday of July for its regular session, unless a different date is fixed by
law, and shall continue to be in session for such number of days as it may determine until thirty days before the opening of its next regular session,
exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. The President may call a special session at any time.
Quorum Requirement
ART. VI, §16(2). A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day and may
compel the attendance of absent Members in such manner, and under such penalties, as such House may provide.
Avelino v. Cuenco. The basis for determining the existence of a quorum in the Senate shall be the total number of Senators who are in the
country and within the coercive jurisdiction of the Senate.
Adjournments
ART. VI, §16(5). Neither House during the sessions of the Congress shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to
any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.
17
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
parties and the parties or organizations registered under the party-list system represented therein. The senior Justice in the Electoral Tribunal
shall be its Chairman.
ART. VI, §19. The Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments shall be constituted within thirty days after the Senate and the
House of Representatives shall have been organized with the election of the President and the Speaker.
Bondoc v. Pineda. Camasura’s expulsion from the Tribunal is a clear impairment of the Tribunal’s prerogative to be the sole judge of election
contests.
Guerrero v. COMELEC.
Abbas v. Senate Electoral Tribunal. Every member of the Tribunal may as his conscience dictates, refrain from participating in the resolution of a
case where he sincerely feels that his personal interests would stand in the way of an impartial judgment. But the SET cannot be legally function
absent its entire Senate membership, and no amendment of its rules can confer on the 3 Justices-members alone the power of valid adjudication
of a senatorial election contest. The litigants would just have to place their trust of vindication in the fitness and sense of justice of the Members
of the Tribunal.
Suanes v. Disbursing Officer of the Senate
Lazatin v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal. Jurisdiction and Power of electoral tribunals include rule-making powers. In the absence
of further constitutional provisions relating to procedure to be followed in filing protests before the HRET, incidental power to promulgate such
rules necessary for the proper exercise of its exclusive power to judge all the contests relating to elections, returns, and qualifications of the
members of Congress, must also be deemed by necessary implication to have been lodged in the Tribunal.
Garcia v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal
Emergency Powers
ART. VI, §23(2). In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may, by law, authorize the President, for a limited period and subject to
such restrictions as it may prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy. Unless sooner withdrawn by
resolution of the Congress, such powers shall cease upon the next adjournment thereof.
19
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
Tio v. Videogram Regulatory Board. The title “An Act Creating the Videogram Regulatory Board” was questioned as to whether or not it is
sufficiently broad to cover a regulatory tax provision included in the act. The tax provision is indeed related to the creation and the functions of
the said Board.
Lidasan v. COMELEC. RA 4790 “An Act Creating the Municipality of Dianaton in the Province of Lanao del Norte” was questioned because the
title did not reflect the fact that 2 barrios from the adjacent province, Cotabato, were included in the new municipality formed. Statute was
declared unconstitutional because the title did not inform the legislature of persons interested as to the full impact of the law.
Tobias v. Abalos San Juan, Mandaluyong
Effectivity of Laws
Tanada v. Tuvera. Publication of laws is part of substantive due process. (CC, 2)
E. O. No. 200 (1987)
Presidential Veto
ART. VI, §27. Every bill passed by the Congress shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the President. If he approves the same he shall
sign it; otherwise, he shall veto it and return the same with his objections to the House where it originated, which shall enter the objections at
large in its Journal and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds of all the Members of such House shall agree to pass
the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds
of all the Members of that House, it shall become a law. In all such cases, the votes of each House shall be determined by yeas or nays, and the
names of the Members voting for or against shall be entered in its Journal. The President shall communicate his veto of any bill to the House
where it originated within thirty days after the date of receipt thereof, otherwise, it shall become a law as if he had signed it.
Bengzon v. Drilon. The president vetoed methods placed by Congress to insure the permanent and continuing obligations to certain officials
would be paid when they fell due. Plus, the president may not veto a law enacted 35-years before his term. PD 644 never became valid. Her
finance advisers gave the wrong info that the questioned provisions were an attempt to overcome her earlier 1990 veto.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court of Tax Appeals. An “item” in a revenue bill does not refer to an entire section imposing a particular
kind of tax, but rather to the subject of the tax and the tax rate. On the other hand, a section identifies the tax and enumerates the persons
covered by the taxation with the corresponding tax rate.
Vote Required for Grant of Exemption No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the concurrence of a majority of all the
Members of the Congress.
Judicial Power
ART VIII, §1. The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law. Judicial power
includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the Government.
includes the duty of the courts to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine
whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or
instrumentality of the Government.
Manila Electric Co. v. Pasay Transportation Co arbitrators
Jurisdiction
ART. VIII, §2. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of the various courts but may not deprive
the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Section 5 hereof. No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it
undermines the security of tenure of its Members.
21
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
ART. VIII, §4. (1) The Supreme Court shall be composed of a Chief Justice and fourteen Associate Justices. It may sit en banc or in its discretion, in
division of three, five, or seven Members. Any vacancy shall be filled within ninety days from the occurrence thereof. (2) All cases involving the
constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law, which shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc, and all other
cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be heard en banc, including those involving the constitutionality, application, or operation
of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances, and other regulations, shall be decided with the concurrence of a
majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon. (3) Cases or matters heard by a
division shall be decided or resolved with the concurrence of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues
in the case and voted thereon, and in no case without the concurrence of at least three of such Members. When the required number is not
obtained, the case shall be decided en banc: Provided, that no doctrine or principle of law laid down by the court in a decision rendered en banc
or in division may be modified or reversed except by the court sitting en banc.
ART. VIII, §5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: (1) Exercise original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public
ministers and consuls, and over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, and habeas corpus. (2) Review, revise, reverse,
modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in: (a) All cases
in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law, presidential decree, proclamation, order,
instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question. (b) All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty
imposed in relation thereto. (c) All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue. (d) All criminal cases in which the penalty
imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher. (e) All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved. (3) Assign temporarily judges of lower
courts to other stations as public interest may require. Such temporary assignment shall not exceed six months without the consent of the judge
concerned. (4) Order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice. (5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and
legal assistance to the under-privileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall
be uniform for all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts
and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.
Mantruste Systems Inc. v. Court of Appeals. SC upholds CA ruling that Proclamation 50-A is constitutional, Proclamation 50-A provides that no
court can issue restraining orders and writs of injunction against Asset Privatization Trust and to those who purchase assets of said trust.
Proclamation does not impinge upon the judicial power as defined by Sec. 1 Article 8 of the Constitution. There can be no justification for judicial
interference in the business of an administrative agency except when it violates a citizen’s constitutional rights, or commits a grave abuse of
discretion or acts in excess of, or without jurisdiction.
Firestone Ceramics v. Court of Appeals
Fortich v. Corona
Fabian v. Desierto
In Re Cunanan
Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice
In re Integration of the Bar of the Philippines
In re Atty. Edillon
Qualifications
ART. VIII, §7. (1) No person shall be appointed Member of the Supreme Court or any lower collegiate court unless he is a natural-born citizen of the
Philippines. A Member of the Supreme Court must be at least forty years of age, and must have been for fifteen years or more, a judge of a lower
court or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines. (2) The Congress shall prescribe the qualifications of judges of lower courts, but no
person may be appointed judge thereof unless he is a citizen of the Philippines and a member of the Philippine Bar. (3) A Member of the Judiciary
must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence.
22
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
ART. VIII, §9. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of the lower courts shall be appointed by the President from a list of at least three
nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council for every vacancy. Such appointments need no confirmation. For the lower courts, the
President shall issue the appointments within ninety days from the submission of the list.
Term of Office
ART. VIII, §11. The Members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower courts shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of
seventy years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office. The Supreme Court en banc shall have the power to discipline judges
of lower courts, or order their dismissal by a vote of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case
and voted thereon.
Salary
ART. VIII, §10. The salary of the Chief Justice and of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, and of judges of lower courts, shall be fixed by
law. During their continuance in office, their salary shall not be decreased.
Nitafan v. Commission on Internal Revenue. The Supreme Court held that the salaries of judges, like those of other government functionaries,
should also be subject to income tax.
Administrative Supervision
ART. VIII, §6. The Supreme Court shall have administrative supervision over all courts and the personnel thereof.
Maceda v. Vasquez. Power of supervision is exclusive so that the Ombudsman may not investigate a judge independently of any administrative
action of SC.
Judge Caoibes, Jr. v. Ombudsman. Under Sec. 6, Art. VIII of the 1987 Constitution, it is the Supreme Court which is vested with exclusive
administrative supervision over all courts and its personnel. Prescinding from this premise, the Ombudsman cannot determine for itself and by
itself whether a criminal complaint against a judge, or court employee involves an administrative matter.
Power to Discipline
People v. Gacott, Jr. Administrative cases which are to be heard by SC en banc includes only: (1) administrative judges; (2) disbarment of lawyers;
(3) suspension of more than 1 year; or (3) fine exceeding PhP10,000.
Fiscal Autonomy
ART. VIII, §3. The Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Appropriations for the Judiciary may not be reduced by the legislature below the amount
appropriated for the previous year and, after approval, shall be automatically and regularly released.
Certification Requirement
ART. VIII, §13. The conclusions of the Supreme Court in any case submitted to it for decision en banc or in division shall be reached in
consultation before the case is assigned to a Member for the writing of the opinion of the Court. A certification to this effect signed by the Chief
Justice shall be issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the case and served upon the parties. Any Members who took no part, or
dissented, or abstained from a decision or resolution, must state the reason therefor. The same requirements shall be observed by all lower
collegiate courts.
Consing v. Court of Appeals. The lack of certification at the end of the decision is only evidence of failure to observe certification requirement
and may be a basis for holding the official responsible for the omission to account therefore. Such absence of certification would not have the
effect of invalidating the decision.
Substance of Decisions
ART. VIII, §14. No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is
based. No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refused due course or denied without stating the
legal basis therefor.
Yao v. Court of Appeals.
Francisco v. Permskul
Valdez v. Court of Appeals
Komatsu Industries Phils, Inc. v. Court of Appeals
23
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013
Constitutional Law 1
Prof. H.L. Roque
AY 2009-2010
Period to Decide
ART. VIII, §15. (1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-four months from
date of submission for the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts, and three
months for all other lower courts. (2) A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading,
brief, or memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by the court itself. (3) Upon the expiration of the corresponding period, a certification to
this effect signed by the Chief Justice or the presiding judge shall forthwith be issued and a copy thereof attached to the record of the case or
matter, and served upon the parties. The certification shall state why a decision or resolution has not been rendered or issued within said period.
(4) Despite the expiration of the applicable mandatory period, the court, without prejudice to such responsibility as may have been incurred in
consequence thereof, shall decide or resolve the case or matter submitted thereto for determination, without further delay.
Annual Report
ART. VIII, §16. The Supreme Court shall, within thirty days from the opening of each regular session of the Congress, submit to the President and
the Congress an annual report on the operations and activities of the Judiciary.
24
Janz Hanna Ria
A2013