SOCIAL JUSTICE

Akin/interlaced with police power w/c is exercised by

state to promote general welfare

Salus populi est suprema lex

2, 9 promote a just and dynamic social order
2, 10 social justice
2, 11 full respect to human rights
2, 12 protect life of mother and unborn
13, 3.1 full protection to labor
13, 4 agrarian reform program
13, 9 urban land reform and housing
13, 10 urban/rural poor dwellers not evicted
13, 11 health development program

Locus standi right to be heard in court

DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS
SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES

6, 27.1 veto power of P, C may override veto (2/3)
7, 16.1 P nominate, w/consent from CoA heads of
exec dept, diplomats, AFP
7, 18.1 martial law by P
7, 18.3 SC reviews factual basis for ML
7, 19.2 P grants amnesty w/majority of C
7, 21 treaty/intl agreement concurred by 2/3
senate
8, 1.1 judicial power to SC
8, 1.2 settle actual controversies, det. grave abuse
8, 5, 2a treaty review by SC
11, 3.2,3,6 Impeachment (HR initiates, 1/3 to
affirm or override resolution, Senate decides)

Angara vs. Electoral Commission
LAUREL, J.:
The separation of powers is a fundamental principle in
our system of government. It obtains not through
express provision but by actual division in our
Constitution. Each department of the government has
exclusive cognizance of matters within its jurisdiction,
and is supreme within its own sphere. But it does not
follow from the fact that the three powers are to be
kept separate and distinct that the Constitution
intended them to be absolutely unrestrained and
independent of each other. The Constitution has
provided for an elaborate system of checks and
balances to secure coordination in the workings of the
various departments of the government.

Abueva vs. Woods
JOHNSON, J.:
If the courts could intervene in the administration of
the other independent departments of the government
or vice versa, they would break away from those
checks and balances of government which were meant,
under our system of government, to be checks of
cooperation and not of antagonism or mastery, and
would concentrate in their own hands something at
least of the power which the people, either directly or
by the action of their representatives, decided to
entrust to the other departments of the government.

People vs. Rosenthal
LAUREL, J.:
The theory of the separation of powers is designed by
its originators to secure action and at the same time to
forestall overaction which necessarily results from
undue concentration of powers, and thereby obtain
efficiency and prevent deposition. Thereby, the "rule of
law" was established which narrows the range of
governmental action and makes it subject to control by
certain devices.

One thing, however, is apparent in the development of
the principle of separation of powers and that is that
the maximum of delegatus non potest delegare or
delegata potestas non potest delegare, has been made
to adapt itself to the complexities of modern
governments, giving rise to the adoption, within
certain limits, of the principle of "subordinate
legislation", not only in the United States and England
but in practically all modern governments.

Pangasinan Transpo Coop vs. PSC
LAUREL, J.:
Accordingly, with the growing complexity of modern
life, the multiplication of the subjects of governmental
regulation, and the increased difficulty of administering
the laws, there is a constantly growing tendency
toward the delegation of greater powers by the
legislature, and toward the approval of the practice by
the court.

Bengzon vs. Drilon
GUTIERREZ JR., J.:
It cannot be overstressed that in a constitutional
government such as ours, the rule of law must prevail.
The Constitution is the basic and paramount law to
which all other laws must conform and to which all
persons including the highest official of this land must
defer. From this cardinal postulate, it follows that the
three branches of government must discharge their
respective functions within the limits of authority
conferred by the Constitution. Under the principle of
separation of powers, neither Congress, the President
nor the Judiciary may encroach on fields allocated to
the other branches of government. The legislature is
generally limited to the enactment of laws, the
executive to the enforcement of laws and the judiciary
to their interpretation and application to cases and
controversies.

Lopez vs. Yniguez
PATAJO, J.:
The doctrine of separation of powers still exists under
the 1973 Constitution though in a modified form made
necessary because of the adoption of certain aspects of
the parliamentary system in the amended 1973
Constitution. The major powers of the Government
have been distributed by the Constitution to the
President, who is the head of the State and chief
executive of the Republic, the Batasan Pambansa and
the Judiciary. Under the doctrine of separation of
Powers as interpreted by the decisions of the Court,
mandamus will not he from one branch of the
government to a coordinate branch to compel
performance of duties within the latter's sphere of
responsibility. More specifically, this Court cannot issue
a writ of mandamus against the Batasan to compel it
to give due course to the complaint for impeachment.

PRESIDENTIAL PARDON
7, 19.2 P grants amnesty w/majority of C

In re: Torres vs. Bureau of Corrections
HERMOSISIMA, JR., J.:
The grant of pardon, the determination of the terms
and conditions of the pardon, the determination of the
occurrence of the breach thereof, and the proper
sanctions for such breach, are purely executive acts
and, thus, are not subject to judicial scrutiny.

POLITICAL QUESTIONS
Purely political questions are out of judicial review
8, 1 SC answers political questions to prevent abuse

PMPF vs. Manglapus
Secrecy of negotiations with foreign countries is not
violative of the constitutional provisions of freedom of
speech or of the press nor of the freedom of access to
information.

The nature of diplomacy requires centralization of
authority and expedition of decision which are inherent
in executive action. Another essential characteristic of
diplomacy is its confidential nature.

BLENDING OF POWER

6, 27 veto power of P
7, 19.2 P grants amnesty w/majority of C
7, 21 treaty/intl agreement concurred by 2/3
senate
8, 8.1 Judicial and Bar Council under SC
8, 8.9 members of SC app by P thru JBC
(3/vacancy)

DELEGATION OF POWERS
No delegation of legislative power unless:

Permitted by constitution
Powers delegated to LGU
When delegated to Admin bodies
Delegated to people at large

People vs. Vera
LAUREL, J.:
The rules governing delegation of legislative power to
administrative and executive officers are
applicable or are at least indicative of the rule which
should be here adopted.

An exception sanctioned by immemorial practice
permits the central legislative body to delegate
legislative powers to local authorities. Courts have
also sustained the delegation of legislative power to
the people at large.

US vs. Barrias
TRACEY, J.:
One of the settled maxims in constitutional law is, that
the power conferred upon the legislature to make laws
cannot be delegated by that department to anybody or
authority. Where the sovereign power of the State has
located the authority, there it must remain; only by
the constitutional agency alone the laws must be made
until the constitution itself is changed. The power to
whose judgment, wisdom, and patriotism this high
prerogative has been entrusted cannot relieve itself of
the responsibility by choosing other agencies upon
which the power shall be developed, nor can its
substitutes the judgment, wisdom, and patriotism and
of any other body for those to which alone the people
have seen fit to confide this sovereign trust.

This doctrine is based on the ethical principle that such
a delegated power constitutes not only a right but a
duty to be performed by the delegate by the
instrumentality of his own judgment acting
immediately upon the matter of legislation and not
through the intervening mind of another.

CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISIONS

6, 23.2 in war, P carries out declared natl policy
6, 28.2 C authorizes P to fix tariff rates, I&E
8, 5.5 SC protects/enforces consti rights, pleading,
prac and proc in courts, adm to bar, and leg
assistance
18, 6 P legislates until C convenes
*functus officio having performed his office

TEST IF DELEGATION IS VALID

Completeness Test complete in all terms, all
conditions
Sufficient Standard Test definite guidelines

Cervantes vs. Auditor General
REYES, J.:
As to the first ground, the rule is that so long as the
Legislature "lays down a policy and a standard is
established by the statute" there is no undue
delegation.

Pelaez vs. Auditor General
CONCEPCION, J.:
Although Congress may delegate to another branch of
the Government the power to fill in the details in the
execution, enforcement or administration of a law, it is
essential, to forestall a violation of the principle of
separation of powers, that said law: (a) be complete in
itself it must set forth therein the policy to be
executed, carried out or implemented by the
delegate and (b) fix a standard the limits of which
are sufficiently determinate or determinable to
which the delegate must conform in the performance
of his functions. Indeed, without a statutory
declaration of policy, the delegate would in effect,
make or formulate such policy, which is the essence of
every law; and, without the aforementioned standard,
there would be no means to determine, with
reasonable certainty, whether the delegate has acted
within or beyond the scope of his authority.