Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 4

THESIS TOPIC:

IS THERE A NEED FOR THE ENACTMENT OF A STATUTE FOR


IMPLEMENTING THE CONSTITUTIONAL GRANT OF THE RIGHT TO
STRIKE TO GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL?

The 1987 Constitution states under Article XIII :

Section 3. The State shall afford full protection to labor, local and
overseas, organized and unorganized, and promote full employment and
equality of employment opportunities for all.
It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to self-organization, collective
bargaining and negotiations, and peaceful concerted activities, including
the right to strike in accordance with law . They shall be entitled to
security of tenure, humane conditions of work, and a living wage. They
shall also participate in policy and decision-making processes affecting
their rights and benefits as may be provided by law.
The State shall promote the principle of shared responsibility between
workers and employers and the preferential use of voluntary modes in
settling disputes, including conciliation, and shall enforce their mutual
compliance therewith to foster industrial peace.
The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers,
recognizing the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and
the right of enterprises to reasonable returns to investments, and to
expansion and growth.
Though recent jurisprudence have upheld that strikes are prohibited
to be exercised by government employees because of the prohibition under

the Civil Service Law, the Supreme Court did not mention that a statute
allowing or regulating the right to strike of government employees that effect
will be violative of the constitution. And by clear interpretation of the
Constitution particularly the said section 3 of Art XIII, the term all workers
does not contain any exemptions.

QUALIFIED THEFT OR CARNAPPING WHAT CRIME IS


COMMITTED BY A PERSON, WHO, WITH INTENT TO GAIN, TAKES A
MOTOR VEHICLE BELONGING TO ANOTHER WITH THE LATTERS
CONSENT
Art. 310. Qualified theft. The crime of theft shall be punished by
the penalties next higher by two degrees than those respectively specified
in the next preceding article, if committed by a domestic servant, or with
grave abuse of confidence, or if the property stolen is motor vehicle, mail
matter or large cattle or consists of coconuts taken from the premises of the
plantation or fish taken from a fishpond or fishery, or if property is taken on
the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic erruption, or any other
calamity, vehicular accident or civil disturbance.
AN ACT PREVENTING AND PENALIZING CARNAPPING
Section 1. This Act shall be known and may be cited as the "Anti-Carnapping Act
of 1972."
Section 2. Definition of terms. The terms "carnapping", "motor vehicle", "defacing
or tampering with", "repainting", "body-building", "remodeling", "dismantling", and
"overhauling", as used in this Act, shall be understood, respectively, to mean
"Carnapping" is the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor vehicle belonging
to another without the latter's consent, or by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things.
"Motor vehicle" is any vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular
power using the public highways, but excepting road rollers, trolley cars,

street-sweepers, sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers, graders, fork-lifts,


amphibian trucks, and cranes if not used on public highways, vehicles,
which run only on rails or tracks, and tractors, trailers and traction engines
of all kinds used exclusively for agricultural purposes. Trailers having any
number of wheels, when propelled or intended to be propelled by
attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be classified as separate motor
vehicle with no power rating.
la

Election Cases : Supreme Court or HRET/SET


An Analysis on the Latest Jurisprudence in Election Cases
TAX Law : Administrative Claim + Judicial Claim : A viable method or
a burden to Tax Payers?
*Including latest jurisprudence

UN Resolution 1378 vs BBL Agreement


SECURITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTS WIDE-RANGING
ANTI-TERRORISM RESOLUTION which states:
2. Decides also that all States shall:
x
x
x
x
(c) Deny safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit
terrorist acts, or provide safe havens;
(d) Prevent those who finance, plan, facilitate or commit terrorist acts from
using their respective territories for those purposes against other States or
their citizens;
With this provision, the alleged perpetrators of the massacre of
several police officers can be held liable for allegedly supporting terrorist.
However under the BBL Agreement, the supposed punishment for unlawful
acts committed by the members of the MILF shall be under the MILF
Organization.

UN Resolution versus An Agreement


International Protocol versus Agreement

THE COURT IN PRAYER: DOES THE ECUMENICAL PRAYER FOR THE COURTS VIOLATE THE NONESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE?