Article IX: Constitutional Commissions

A. Common Provisions
Section 1. Independent Commissions
A. COMMON PROVISIONS
Section 1. The Constitutional Commissions, which shall be independent, are the Civil Service Commission, the
Commission on Elections, and the Commission on Audit.

Macalintal v. COMELEC, GR 157013, July 10, 2003

Ombudsman v. Civil Service Commission, GR No. 159940, February 16, 2005
Section 2. Prohibition on Members
Section 2. No member of a Constitutional Commission shall, during his tenure, hold any other office or
employment. Neither shall he engage in the practice of any profession or in the active management or control of
any business which, in any way, may be affected by the functions of his office, nor shall he be financially
interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract with, or in any franchise or privilege granted by the Government,
any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations or
their subsidiaries.

Section 3. Salary
Section 3. The salary of the Chairman and the Commissioners shall be fixed by law and shall not be decreased
during their tenure.

Section 4. Power to Appoint

Section 4. The Constitutional Commissions shall appoint their officials and employees in accordance with law.

Section 5. Fiscal Autonomy

Section 5. The Commission shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Their approved annual appropriations shall be
automatically and regularly released.

CSC v. DBM, 482 SCRA 233

Section 6. Promulgation of Rules
Section 6. Each Commission en banc may promulgate its own rules concerning pleadings and practice before it
or before any of its offices. Such rules, however, shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights.

Macalintal v. COMELEC, GR No. 157013, July 10, 2003

Sabili v. COMELEC, GR 193261, April 24, 2012
Section 7. Decisions of the Commissions
Section 7. Each Commission shall decide by a majority vote of all its Members, any case or matter brought
before it within sixty days from the date of its submission for decision or resolution. A case or matter is deemed
submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief, or memorandum required by the
rules of the Commission or by the Commission itself. Unless otherwise provided by this Constitution or by law, any
decision, order, or ruling of each Commission may be brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari by the aggrieved
party within thirty days from receipt of a copy thereof.

Review of final orders, resolutions and decisions:

1. Rendered in the exercise of quasi-judicial functions
2. Rendered in the exercise of administrative functions
Filipinas Engineering and Machine Shop v. Ferrer, 135 SCRA 25
Saligumba v. CA, 117 SCRA 669
PTTC v. COA, 146 SCRA 190 (1986)
Cua v. COMELEC, 156 SCRA 582 (1987)
Estrella v. COMELEC, GR No. 160465, May 27, 2004
Mison v. COA, 187 SCRA 445 (1990)
Paredes v. COMELEC, 127 SCRA 653 (1984)
Ambil v. COMELEC, 344 SCRA 358 [2000]
Mateo v. CA, GR No. 113219, August 14, 1995
Reyes v. Regional Trial Court, GR No. 108886, May 5, 1995

ABS-CBN v. COMELEC, 323 SCRA 611

Salva v. Makalintal, GR 132603, September 18, 2000
Garces v. CA, GR. No. 114 795, July 17, 1996
Dumayas v. COMELEC, GR Nos. 141952-53, April 29, 2001
Aguilar v. COMELEC, GR No. 185140, June 30, 2009
Cayetano v. COMELEC, GR 193846, April 12, 2011
Dela Llana v. The Chairperson, COA, GR 180989, February 7, 2012
Cagas v. COMELEC, 663 SCRA 644 (2012)
Section 8. Other Functions
Section 8. Each Commission shall perform such other functions as may be provided by law.

B. Civil Service Commission

Section 1. Composition; Qualifications; Term
1. The civil service shall be administered by the Civil Service Commission composed of a Chairman and two
Commissioners who shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines and, at the time of their appointment,
at least thirty-five years of age, with proven capacity for public administration, and must not have been
candidates for any elective position in the elections immediately preceding their appointment.
2. The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments for a term of seven years without reappointment. Of those first appointed,
the Chairman shall hold office for seven years, a Commissioner for five years, and another Commissioner
for three years, without reappointment. Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the unexpired term
of the predecessor. In no case shall any Member be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting
capacity.

Gaminde v. COA 347 SCRA 655 (2000)

Mathay Jr. v. CA, GR No. 124374, December 15, 1999
Section 2.Scope of the system
Section 2.
1. The civil service embraces all branches, subdivisions, instrumentalities, and agencies of the Government,
including government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters.
2. Appointments in the civil service shall be made only according to merit and fitness to be determined, as
far as practicable, and, except to positions which are policy-determining, primarily confidential, or highly
technical, by competitive examination.
3. No officer or employee of the civil service shall be removed or suspended except for cause provided by
law.
4. No officer or employee in the civil service shall engage, directly or indirectly, in any electioneering or
partisan political campaign.
5. The right to self-organization shall not be denied to government employees.
6. Temporary employees of the Government shall be given such protection as may be provided by law.

Cuevas v. Bacal, GR 139382, December 6 2000

Under Civil Service Law
PARAGRAPH 1
MWSS v. Hernandez 143 SCRA 602 [1986]
NSC v. NLRC 168 SCRA 122
UP v. Regino 221 SCRA 598 [1993]
Mateo v. CA 247 SCRA 284 [1995]
DOH v. NLRC 251 SCRA 700 [1995]
Juco v. NLRC 277 SCRA 528 [1997]
Feliciano v. Gison 629 SCRA 103 [2010]
GOCCs Under the Corporation Code

BLISS v. Calejo 237 SCRA 271 [1994]

Postigo v. Philippine Tuberculosis society 479 SCRA 628
LRTA v. Venus 485 SCRA 301
PARAGRAPH 2
Classifications and Appointments
HIGC v. CSC 220 SCRA 148 [1993]
Mauna v. CSC 232 SCRA 388 [1994]
Rimonte v. CSC 244 SCRA 498 [1995]
Gloria v. De Guzman 249 SCRA 126 [1995]
Atty. Ellas Omar A Sana v. Career Executive Service Board, GR 192926, 15 November 2011
Competitive
Samson v. CA 145 SCRA 654[1986]
Non-Competitive
Astraquillo v. Mangalupas 190 SCRA 280 [1990]
Office of the President v. Buenaobra 501 SCRA 302
Policy-Determining
Primarily Confidential
Borres v. CA 153 SCRA 120 [1987]
Grino v. CSC 194 SCRA 458 [1991]
Santos v. Macaraig 208 SCRA 74 [1992]
Hilario v. CSC 243 SCRA 206 [1995]
Rosete v. CA 264 SCRA 147 [1996]
CSC v. Salas 274 SCRA 414 [1997]
Acahacoso v. Macaraig 195 SCRA 235 [1991]
Felix v. Buenaseda 240 SCRA 139 [1995] (par.2)
Pamantasan ng Maynila v. CSC 241 SCRA 503 [1995]
Province of the Camarines Sur v. CA 246 SCRA 231 [1995]
PEZA v. Mercado 614 SCRA 683 [2010]
CSC v. CA 635 SCRA 749 [2010]
Permanent
Luego v. CSC 143 SCRA 327 [1986]
Pangilinan v. Maglaya 225 SCRA 511 [1993] (par.2)
Reorganization
Santiago v. CSC 178 SCRA 733 [1989]
Montecillo v. Civil Service Commission, GR NO. 131954. June 28, 2001
Gatmaitan v. Gonzales 492 SCRA 591
Nieves v. Blanco 673 SCRA 638 [2012]
Appointment vs. designation
Binamira v. Garucho 188 SCRA 154 [1990] (par.2) (designation by Dept. Sec.)
Removal for Cause/Security of Tenure
Cause for Removal: PARAGRAPH 3
1. Loss confidence
Hernandez v. Villegas 14 SCRA 544 [1965]
2. Abolition of Office
Briones v. Osmena 104 PHIL. 588 [1958]
Eugene v. CSC 243 SCRA 196 [1995]
3. Reorganization
Romualdez-Yap v. CSC 225 SCRA 285 [1993]
Fernandez v. Sto Tomas 242 SCRA 192 [1995]

Chato v. Natividad 244 SCRA 787 [1995]

Divinagracia v. Sto. Tomas 244 SCRA 595 [1995] (par.3)
Vinzon-Chato v. Zenarosa, GR 120539, October 20, 2000
De Guzman v. Comelec, GR 129118, July 19, 2000
Cuevas v. Bacal, GR 139382, December 6, 2000
4. Qualification for Eligibility
Mayor v. Macaraig 194 SCRA 672 [1991
5. Abandonment; Acceptance of Incompatible/Other Employment
Canonizado v. Aguirre, 323 SCRA 312 [2001]
Salvador v. CA, GR 127501, May 5, 2000
Due Process in Removal
Enrique v. CA 229 SCRA 180 [1994]
CSC v. Magnaye 619 SCRA 347 [2010]
Rubenecia v. CSC 244 SCRA 640 [1995]
Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office Board Of Directors v. Marie Jean C. Lapid, GR
191940, 12 April 2011
Security of Tenure
Chua v. CSC 206 SCRA 65 [1992]
NLTD v. CSC 221 SCRA 145
Cabagnot v. CSC 223 SCRA 59 (
Marohombsar v. CA, GR 126481, February 18, 2000
Ong v. OP 664 SCRA 413 [2012]
Electioneering or Partisan Political Activity
Santos v. Yatco 106 PHIL 21
People v. De Venecia 14 SCRA 864 [1965]
Right to Self-Organization and Right to Strike
SSS Employees v. CA 175 SCRA 686 [1989]
Balingasan v. CA 276 SCRA 557 [1997]
Jacinto v. CA 281 SCRA 557 [1997]
De la Cruz v. CA 305 SCRA 303
GSIS v. Kapisanan 510 SCRA 622
Temporary Employees
Gloria v. CA, GR 119903, August 15, 2000
Section 3. Purpose of a Civil Service System
Section 3. The Civil Service Commission, as the central personnel agency of the Government, shall establish a
career service and adopt measures to promote morale, efficiency, integrity, responsiveness, progressiveness, and
courtesy in the civil service. It shall strengthen the merit and rewards system, integrate all human resources
development programs for all levels and ranks, and institutionalize a management climate conducive to public
accountability. It shall submit to the President and the Congress an annual report on its personnel programs.

Lazo v. CSC, 236 SCRA 469

Section 4. Oath or Affirmation
Section 4. All public officers and employees shall take an oath or affirmation to uphold and defend this
Constitution.

Section 5. Standardization of Compensation

Section 5. The Congress shall provide for the standardization of compensation of government officials and
employees, including those in government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters, taking into
account the nature of the responsibilities pertaining to, and the qualifications required for, their positions.

Section 6. Prohibition of Appointment of Lame Ducks

Section 6. No candidate who has lost in any election, shall within one year after such election, be appointed to
any office in the Government or any Government-owned or controlled corporations or in any of their subsidiaries.

People v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 164185, July 23, 2008

Section 7. Prohibitions; Appointments; Office; Employment
Section 7. No elective official shall be eligible for appointment or designation in any capacity to any public office
or position during his tenure.
Unless otherwise allowed by law or by the primary functions of his position, no appointive official shall hold any
other office or employment in the Government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including
Government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries.

Flores v. Drilon 223 SCRA 568 (1993)

In re Eduardo Escala, 653 SCRA 141
La Carlota City v. Rojo , GR 181367, 24 April 2012
Sec. 8 Prohibitions; Compensation; Foreign Gift/Office/Title
Section 8. No elective or appointive public officer or employee shall receive additional, double, or indirect
compensation, unless specifically authorized by law, nor accept without the consent of the Congress, any present,
emolument, office, or title of any kind from any foreign government.
Pensions or gratuities shall not be considered as additional, double, or indirect compensation.

Sedusasta v. Municipality of Surigao 72 PHIL. 482 [1941]

Peralta v. Mathay 38 SCRA 296 (1971)
Santos v. CA GR No. 139792, Nov. 22, 2000
Cabili v. CSC, GR No. 156503, June 22, 2006
Benguet State University v. Colting, GR No. 169637, June 8, 2007
Herrera, et al v. NPC, GR No. 166570, December 18, 2009
NEA v. CSC 611 SCRA 14 [2010]
Yap v. COA 619 SCRA 154 [2010]
Sergio I. Carbonilla, et al v. Board of Airlines, GR 193247
Office of the President v. Board of Airlines, GR 194276, 14 September 2011
PEZA V. COA 675 SCRA 513[2012]
Dimagiba v. Espartero 676 SCRA 420 [2012]
C. Commission on Elections
Section 1. Composition; Qualifications; Term
Section 1.
1. There shall be a Commission on Elections composed of a Chairman and six Commissioners who shall be
natural-born citizens of the Philippines and, at the time of their appointment, at least thirty-five years of
age, holders of a college degree, and must not have been candidates for any elective positions in the
immediately preceding elections. However, a majority thereof, including the Chairman, shall be members
of the Philippine Bar who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.
2. The Chairman and the Commissioners shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the
Commission on Appointments for a term of seven years without reappointment. Of those first appointed,
three Members shall hold office for seven years, two Members for five years, and the last Members for
three years, without reappointment. Appointment to any vacancy shall be only for the unexpired term of
the predecessor. In no case shall any Member be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting
capacity.

Cayetano v. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210 (1991)

Brillantes v. Yorac, 192 SCRA 358 (1990)
Matibag v. Benipayo, 380 SCRA 49
Section 2. Powers and Functions
Section 2. The Commission on Elections shall exercise the following powers and functions:
1. Enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite, initiative,
referendum, and recall.

2. Exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the elections, returns, and qualifications
of all elective regional, provincial, and city officials, and appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving
elective municipal officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction, or involving elective barangay
officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction.
Decisions, final orders, or rulings of the Commission on election contests involving elective municipal and
barangay offices shall be final, executory, and not appealable.
3. Decide, except those involving the right to vote, all questions affecting elections, including determination
of the number and location of polling places, appointment of election officials and inspectors, and
registration of voters.
4. Deputize, with the concurrence of the President, law enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of the
Government, including the Armed Forces of the Philippines, for the exclusive purpose of ensuring free,
orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.
5. Register, after sufficient publication, political parties, organizations, or coalitions which, in addition to other
requirements, must present their platform or program of government; and accredit citizens' arms of the
Commission on Elections. Religious denominations and sects shall not be registered. Those which seek
to achieve their goals through violence or unlawful means, or refuse to uphold and adhere to this
Constitution, or which are supported by any foreign government shall likewise be refused registration.
Financial contributions from foreign governments and their agencies to political parties, organizations,
coalitions, or candidates related to elections, constitute interference in national affairs, and, when
accepted, shall be an additional ground for the cancellation of their registration with the Commission, in
addition to other penalties that may be prescribed by law.
6. File, upon a verified complaint, or on its own initiative, petitions in court for inclusion or exclusion of
voters; investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute cases of violations of election laws, including acts
or omissions constituting election frauds, offenses, and malpractices.
7. Recommend to the Congress effective measures to minimize election spending, including limitation of
places where propaganda materials shall be posted, and to prevent and penalize all forms of election
frauds, offenses, malpractices, and nuisance candidacies.
8. Recommend to the President the removal of any officer or employee it has deputized, or the imposition of
any other disciplinary action, for violation or disregard of, or disobedience to, its directive, order, or
decision.
9. Submit to the President and the Congress, a comprehensive report on the conduct of each election,
plebiscite, initiative, referendum, or recall.

Administrative Power
Alfiado v. Comelec, GR 141787, September 18, 2000
Columbres v. Comelec, GR 142038,September 18, 2000
Sahali v. Comelec, GR 134169, February 2, 2000
Claudio v. Comelec, GR 140560, May 4, 2000
De Guzman v. Comelec, GR 129118, July 19, 2000
Social Weather Station, Inc v. COMELEC, GR NO. 147571, May 5, 2001
Information Technology Foundation v. Comelec, GR 159139, Jan 13, 2004
Buac v. Comelec, 421 SCRA 92
Capalla v. COMELEC 673 SCRA 1 [2012]
Election Contests
Flores v. COMELEC 184 SCRA 484 [1990]
Galido v. COMELEC 193 SCRA 78 [1991]
Mercado v. BES 243 SCRA 422 [1995]
Relampagos v. Cumba 243 SCRA 690 [1995]
People v. Delgado 189 SCRA 715 [1990]
Garces v. CA 259 SCRA 99 [1996]
Zarate v. Comelec and Lallave GR 129096, November 19, 1999
Regalado v. CA, GR 115962, February 15, 2000
Faelnar v. People,GR 140850-51, May 4, 2000
Tan v. Comelec, GR 148575, Dec. 10, 2003

Alauya v. Comelec, GR 158830, August 10, 2004

Powers Not Given
Deputizing Law Enforcement Agencies
People v. Basilla 179 SCRA 87[1989]
Registration of Parties and Organization
LDP v. Comelec, GR 161265, February 24, 2004
Atienza v. COMELEC 612 SCRA 761 [2010]
Lokin v. COMELEC 674 SCRA 538[2012]
Prosecution of Election Offenses
People v. Inting 187 SCRA 788 [1990]
Corpus v. Tanodbayan 149 SCRA 281[1987]
COMELEC v. Silva 286 SCRA 177[1998]
Comelec v. Hon. Espanol, GR 149164, Dec. 10, 2003
Arroyo v. DOJ 681 SCRA 181[2012]
Recommendatory Powers
Section 3. Decisions
Section 3. The Commission on Elections may sit en banc or in two divisions, and shall promulgate its rules of
procedure in order to expedite disposition of election cases, including pre- proclamation controversies. All such
election cases shall be heard and decided in division, provided that motions for reconsideration of decisions shall
be decided by the Commission en banc.

Pangilinan v. COMELEC 228 SCRA 36[1993]

Sarmiento v. Comelec 212 SCRA 307[1992]
Carnicosa v. COMELEC 282 SCRA 512[1997]
Ramas v. COMELEC 286 SCRA 189[1998]
Garvida v. Sales 271 SCRA 767[1997]
Velayo v. Comelec, GR 135613, March 9, 2000
Sebastian v. Comelec, GR 139573, Mach 7, 2000
Soller v. Comelec, GR 139853, September 5, 2000
Barroso v. Ampig et al, GR138218, March 17, 2000
Maruhon v. Comelec, GR 139357, May 5,2000
Balindong v. Comelec, GR 153991, Oct. 16, 2003
Jaramilla v. Comelec, GR 155717, Oct. 23, 2003
Bautista v. Comelec, GR 154796-97, Oct. 23, 2003
De Llana v. Comelec, GR 152080, Nov. 28, 2003
Repol v. Comelec, GR 151418, Apr. 28, 2004
Pedragoza v. COMELEC 496 SCRA 513
Cayetano v. COMELEC 479 SCRA 514
Munoz v. COMELEC 495 SCRA 407
Tan v. COMELEC 507 SCRA 352
Enriquel v. COMELEC 613 SCRA 809
Mendoza v. COMELEC 616 SCRA 443
Maria Laarni L Cayetano v. Comelec, GR 193846, 12 April 2011 (also in Sec. 7, Art IX-A)
Section 4. Supervision/Regulation of Public Utilities, Media Grants, Privileges
Section 4. The Commission may, during the election period, supervise or regulate the enjoyment or utilization of
all franchises or permits for the operation of transportation and other public utilities, media of communication or
information, all grants, special privileges, or concessions granted by the Government or any subdivision, agency,
or instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlled corporation or its subsidiary. Such
supervision or regulation shall aim to ensure equal opportunity, time, and space ,and the right to reply, including
reasonable, equal rates therefor, for public information campaigns and forums among candidates in connection
with the objective of holding free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.

Unido v. COMELEC, 104 SCRA 17

Sanidad v. COMELEC, 181 SCRA 529 (1990)
Osmena v. COMELEC 199 SCRA 750 [1991]

Philippine Press Institute v. COMELEC, GR No. 119654, May 22, 1995

Telecom v. COMELEC 289 SCRA 337 [1998]
ABS-CBN v. COMELEC, GR No. 133486, Jan. 28, 2000
SWS v. COMELEC, GR No. 147571, May 5, 2001
Section 5. Favorable Recommendation for Pardon, Amnesty, Parole or Suspension of
Sentence
Section 5. No pardon, amnesty, parole, or suspension of sentence for violation of election laws, rules, and
regulations shall be granted by the President without the favorable recommendation of the Commission.

Section 6. Free and Open Party System

Section 6. A free and open party system shall be allowed to evolve according to the free choice of the people,
subject to the provisions of this Article.

Liberal Party v. COMELEC, GR No. 191771, May 6, 2010

Section 7. No Block-Voting
Section 7. No votes cast in favor of a political party, organization, or coalition shall be valid, except for those
registered under the party-list system as provided in this Constitution.

Section 8. Prohibition on Political Parties

Section 8. Political parties, or organizations or coalitions registered under the party-list system, shall not be
represented in the voters' registration boards, boards of election inspectors, boards of canvassers, or other similar
bodies. However, they shall be entitled to appoint poll watchers in accordance with law.

Section 9. Election Period

Section 9. Unless otherwise fixed by the Commission in special cases, the election period shall commence ninety
days before the day of election and shall end thirty days thereafter.

Section 10. No Harassment and Discrimination

Section 10. Bona fide candidates for any public office shall be free from any form of harassment and
discrimination.

Section 11. Funds

Section 11. Funds certified by the Commission as necessary to defray the expenses for holding regular and
special elections, plebiscites, initiatives, referenda, and recalls, shall be provided in the regular or special
appropriations and, once approved, shall be released automatically upon certification by the Chairman of the
Commission

D. Commission of Audit
Section 1. Qualifications; Term
Section 11. Funds certified by the Commission as necessary to defray the expenses for holding regular and
special elections, plebiscites, initiatives, referenda, and recalls, shall be provided in the regular or special
appropriations and, once approved, shall be released automatically upon certification by the Chairman of the
Commission

Mison v. COA, 187 SCRA 445

Section 2. General Function; Powers
Section 2.
1. The Commission on Audit shall have the power, authority, and duty to examine, audit, and settle all
accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and property,
owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the Government, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or
instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters, and on a
post- audit basis:
a. constitutional bodies, commissions and offices that have been granted fiscal autonomy under this
Constitution;

b. autonomous state colleges and universities;

c.

other government-owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries; and

d. such non-governmental entities receiving subsidy or equity, directly or indirectly, from or through
the Government, which are required by law or the granting institution to submit to such audit as a
condition of subsidy or equity. However, where the internal control system of the audited agencies
is inadequate, the Commission may adopt such measures, including temporary or special preaudit, as are necessary and appropriate to correct the deficiencies. It shall keep the general
accounts of the Government and, for such period as may be provided by law, preserve the
vouchers and other supporting papers pertaining thereto.

Sec. 2 Powers and Functions

2. The Commission shall have exclusive authority, subject to the limitations in this Article, to define the
scope of its audit and examination, establish the techniques and methods required therefor, and
promulgate accounting and auditing rules and regulations, including those for the prevention and
disallowance of irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable expenditures or uses
of government funds and properties.

Examine and Audit: Government revenues and Government expenditures

Blue Bar Coconut Phil. Tantuico 163 SCRA 716 [1988]
DBP v. COA 231 SCRA 202 [1994]
Eslao v. COA 236 SCRA 161 [1994]
J.F.F. Manacop v. CA 266 SCRA 235 [1997]
Polloso v. Gangan, GR 140563, July 14, 2000
Uy v. COA, GR 130685, March 21, 2000
Aguinaldo v. Sandiganbayan 265 SCRA 121 [1996]
DBP v. COA, 422 SCRA 459 [2004]
Home Development Mutual Fund v. COA, GR 142297, June 15, 2004
DBP v. COA 498 SCRA 537 [2006]
Nava v. Palattao 499 SCRA 745 [2006]
Gualberto De Llana v. COA, GR 180989, 7 Feb. 2012
Candelario L. Versoza Jr. v. Guillermo N Carague, GR 157838, 7 February 2012
Philippine Coconut v. Republic 663 SCRA 514 [2012]
Audit Jurisdiction
Caltex v. COA 208 SCRA 726 [1992]
Mamaril v. Domingo 227 SCRA 206[1993]
Philippine Airlines v. COA 245 SCRA 39 [1995]
CIR v. COA 218 SCRA 203 [1993]
CSC v. Pobre, GR 160568, Sept. 15, 2004
Luciano Velos, et al. v. Commission On Audit, GR 193677,6 Sept. 20011
Boy Scout of the Philippines v. COA, GR 177131, 7 June 2011
Dela Llana v. COA 665 SCRA 176 [2012]
Settle Government Account
Philippine Operations, Inc. v. Auditor General, 94 Phil 868 [1953-1954]
ICNA v. Republic, 21 SCRA 40 [1967]
Dingcong v. Guingona, 162 SCRA 782 [1988]
NHC v. COA 226 SCRA 55 [1993]
Euro-Med v. Province of Batangas, 495 SCRA 30 [2006]
Define Scope and Techniques of Auditing Procedures
Danville Maritime v. COA,175 SCRA 701 [1989]
Promulgate Accounting and Auditing Rules
Leycano v. COA, 482 SCRA 215
Decide Administrative Cases Involving Expenditures of Public Funds
NCMH v. COA, 265 SCRA 390 [1996]
Ramos v. Aquino, 39 SCRA 256 [1971]

Salva v. Carague, 511 SCRA 258

City of Basilan v. Hechanova, 58 SCRA 711 [1974]
Section 3. COA Jurisdiction
Section 3. No law shall be passed exempting any entity of the Government or its subsidiaries in any guise
whatever, or any investment of public funds, from the jurisdiction of the Commission on Audit.

Luciano Veloso v. Commisssion on Audit, GR 193677, 6 September 2011

Section 4. Annual Report to the President and to Congress
Section 4. The Commission shall submit to the President and the Congress, within the time fixed by law, an
annual report covering the financial condition and operation of the Government, its subdivisions, agencies, and
instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations, and non-governmental entities subject
to its audit, and recommend measures necessary to improve their effectiveness and efficiency. It shall submit
such other reports as may be required by law.

10

Article X. Local Government

Section 1. Territorial and Political Subdivisions of the Philippines
Cordillera Broad Coalition v. COA, GR No. 79956, January 26, 1990
Section 2. Local Autonomy
Limbona v. Conte Mangelin, et al, GR No. 80391, February 28, 1989
San Juan v. CSC, 196 SCRA 69 (1991)
Drilon v. Lim 235 SCRA 135 [1994]
Magtajas v. Pryce Properties, GR No. 111097, July 20, 1994
Judge Leynes v. COA, GR No. 143596, Dec. 11, 2003
Batangas CATV v. CA and Batangas City, GR No. 138810, September 29, 2004
CREBA v. Secretary of DAR, GR 183409, June 18, 2010
Imbong v. Ochoa, GR 204819, April 8, 2014
Section 3. Local Government Code
Garcia v. COMELEC, 227 SCRA 100 (1993)
Malonzo v. COMELEC, 269 SCRA 380 (1997)
Malonzo v. Zamora 323 SCRA 875
Section 4. Supervision by the President
Ganzon v. CA, 200 SCRA 271
Joson v. Torres, 290 SCRA 279
Drilon v. Lim, 235 SCRA 135 (1994)
Bito-onon v. Fernandez 350 SCRA 732
National Liga v. Paredes 439 130 [2004]
SJS v. Atienza 545 SCRA 92 [2009]
Province of Negros v. COA, GR No. 182574, September 28, 2010

11

Section 5. Taxation Power of Local Government

LTO v. City of Butuan, 322 SCRA 805
Lina v. Pano, 364 SCRA 76 (2001)
Petron v. Mayor, GR No. 158881, April 16, 2008
Yamane v. BA Lepanto Condominium, GR No. 154993, October 25, 2005
Philippine Petroleum v. Municipality of Pililla, GR No. 90773, June 3, 1991
Acebedo Optical v. CA, GR 100152, March 21, 2000
PLDT v. City of Davao, GR 143867, March 25, 2003
John Hay Peoples Alternative Coalition v. Lim, GR No. 119775, October 24, 2003
Manila Electric v. Province of Laguna, GR No. 131359, May 5, 1999
Batangas Power v. Batangas City, GR No. 152675, April 28, 2004
Smart Communications v. City of Davao, GR No. 155491, September 16, 2008
Section 6. Share in National Taxes
Pimentel v. Aguirre, 336 SCRA 201 (2000)
Province of Batangas v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 152774, May 27, 2004
Alternative Center v. Zamora, GR No. 144256, June 8, 2005
League of Cities v. COMELEC August 24, 2010
Section 7. Equitable Share in the National Wealth
Section 8. Term of Local Officials
Borja v. COMELEC, 295 SCRA 157
Lozanida v. COMELEC, GR No. 135150, July 28, 1999
Adormeo v. COMELEC, GR No. 147927, February 4, 2002
Socrates v. COMELEC, 391 SCRA 457 (2002)
Latasa v. COMELEC, GR No. 154829, Dec. 10, 2003
David v. COMELEC, 271 SCRA 90 (1997)
Rivera v. COMELEC 523 SCRA 41
Montebon v. COMELEC, 551 SCRA 50
Ong v. Alegre, GR No. 163295, January 23, 2006
Laceda v. Lumena GR 182867, November 25, 2008
Dizon v. COMELEC, GR No. 182088, January 30, 2009
Alboin v. COMELEC, GR No. 184836, December 23, 2009
Bolos v. COMELEC 581 SCRA 786 [2009]
Aldovino v. COMELEC 609 SCRA 234 [2009]
Datu Michel Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, February 2012
(reconsideration; holdover provision in RA 9054 Unconstitutional as Congress in passing RA
10153 has made clear)
Section 9. Sectoral Representatives
Supangan Jr. v. Santos, GR No. 84662, August 24, 1990
Section 10. Creation, Abolition, Change of Boundaries
Tan v. COMELEC, 142 SCRA 727 (1986)
Tobias v. Abalos 239 SCRA 106 [1994] (metes and bounds)
Mun. of Jimenez v. Judge Baz 265 SCRA 182 [1996](de jure corporation)
Cawaling v. COMELEC GR146319, October 26, 2001
League of Cities of the Philippines v. COMELEC, GR 176951, Nov. 29, 2008
Sema v. COMELEC, 558 SCRA 700
Camid v. Office of the President, GR No. 161414, January 17, 2005
Navarro v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 180050, February 10, 2010
Section 11. Metropolitan Political Subdivisions
MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association Assoc., GR No. 135962, March 27, 2000
MMDA v. Garin, GR No. 130230, April 15, 2005
Gancayco v. City Government of Quezon City, 658 SCRA 853
Section 12. Highly Urbanized Cities, Component Cities
Abella v. COMELEC, GR No. 100710, September 3, 1991

12

Section 13. Local Government Units Grouping Themselves

Section 14. Regional Development Councils and Other Similar Bodies
Pimentel v. Ochoa 676 SCRA 551 [2012]
Sec. 15 Purpose, and how many Autonomous Regions
Section 15. Autonomous Regions
Disomangcop v. Sec. of DPWH,GR 149848, Nov. 25, 2004
Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR No. 196271, October 18, 2011
Section 16. General Supervision of the President
Ampatuan v. Hon Ronaldo Puno, GR 190259. 17 June 2011 (Proclamation 1946 and AOs
and 273 A do not violate the principle of local autonomy under Section 16, Article X of the
Constitution, and Section 1 Article V of the Expanded ARMM Organic Act)
Kulayan v. Tan 675 SCRA 482 [2012]
Section 17. Powers Not Vested to the ARMM
Datu Michel Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, GR 196271, 18 October 2011. (The
framers decided to reinstate the provision in order to make it clear, once and for all, that
these are the limits of the powers to the autonomous government; those not enumerated
are actually to be exercised by the national government; the autonomy granted to the
ARMM cannot be invoked to defeat national policies and concerns Since the
synchronization of elections not just a regional concerns but a national one, the ARMM is
subject to it; the regional autonomy granted to the ARMM cannot be used to exempt the
region from having act in accordance with national policy mandated by no less than the
Constitution)
Sections 18 and19. Organic Act for Autonomous Regions
Abbas v. COMELEC, 179 SCRA 287 (1989)
Ordillos v. COMELEC, 192 SCRA 100 (1990)
Badua v. CBA, 194 SCRA 101 (1991)
Atitiw v. Zamora, 471 SCRA 329
Cordillera Broad Coalition v. COA, GR No. 82217, Jan. 29, 1990
Pandi v. CA, GR No. 116850, April 11, 2002
Sema v. COMELEC, GR No. 177597, July 16, 2008
Province of North Cotabato v. GRP Panel
Datu Michael Abas Kida v. Senate of the Philippines, February 2012 (means that only
amendments to, or revisions of, the organic Act Constitutionally-essential to creation of
autonomous regions i.e. , those aspects specially mentioned in the Constitution which
Congress must provide for the Organic Act require ratification through a plebiscite)
Section 20. Legislative Powers of the Autonomous Regions
Province of North Cotabato v. Government of the Philippines Peace Panel, 568 SCRA 492
Section 21. Preservation of Peace and Order
Article XI. Accountability of Public Officers
Section 1. Public Office
Hipolito v. Mergas 195 SCRA 6 [1991]
Bornasal, Jr. v. Montes 280 SCRA 181 [1997]
Almario v. Resus AM NO. P941076, [November 22, 1999]
Juan v. People, GR 132378, January 18, 2000
Re; AWOL of Antonio Makalintal, AM 99-11-06-SC, February 15, 2000
Estrella v. Sandiganbayan, GR 125160, June 20, 2000
Malbas v. Blanco, A.M P99-1350, December 12, 2001
Manaois v. Lemeo, AM MTJ-03-1492, Aug. 26, 2003
Re; Gideon Alibang, AM 2003-11-SC June 15, 2004
ABAKADA v. Purisima 562 SCRA 251[2008]

13

Salumbides v. OMB, GR 180917, April 23, 2010

Section 2. Officers Subject to Removal by Impeachment
Ombudsman v. CA 452 SCRA 714 [2005] (exclusive list)
Section 3. Procedure for Impeachment
In re Gonzales, 160 SCRA 771 (1988)
Marcoleta v. Brawner 582 SCRA 474 [2009])
Romulo v. Yniguez, 141 SCRA 260 (1986)
Francisco v. House of Representatives, 415 SCRA 44
Estrada v. Desierto, 353 SCRA 452 (2001); MR, 356 SCRA 108 (2001)
Gutierrez v. Committee on Justice, 643 SCRA 198
Section 4. Sandiganbayan
Nunez v. Sandiganbayan 111 SCRA 433 [1982] (creation of Sandiganbayan)
Lecaros v. Sandiganbayan 128 SCRA 324 [1984] (crimes in relation to public office)
Cunanan v. Arceo 242 SCRA 88 [1995] (averment of the nature of the crime committed)
Balmadrid v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 58327, March 22, 1991
Azarcon v. Sandiganbanyan, GR No. 116033, February 26, 1997
Binay v. Sandiganbayan GR NO. 120681-83 [October 1, 1999]
Mayor Layus v. Sandiganbayan GR 134272, December 8, 1999
Abbot v. Mapayo, GR 134102, July 6, 2000
Defensor-Santiago v. Sandiganbayan, 356 SCRA 636 (2001)
Section 5. Ombudsman
Baluyot v. Holganza, GR 136374, February 2000
Garcia v. Ombudsman, GR 127710, February 16, 2000
Lapid v. CA, GR 142261, June 29, 2000
Tirol v. COA, GR 133954, August 3, 2000
Mamburao v. Desierto, 429 SCRA 76
Carandang v. Desierto, 639 SCRA 293
Lacson v. ES, 649 SCRA 142
People v. Morales, 649 SCRA 182
Quarto v. Marcelo, 658 SCRA 580
Section 6. Appointments
Ombudsman v. CSC, GR No. 162215, July 20, 2007
Section 7. Tanodbayan as Special Prosecutor
Quimpo v. Tanodbayan 146 SCRA 137 [1986]
Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, 160 SCRA 843 (1988)
Acop v. Ombudsman, GR No. 120422, September 27, 1995
Deloso v. Domingo, 191 SCRA 545
Almonte v. Vasquez, GR No. 95367, May 22, 1995
Azarcon v. Guerrero, GR No. 121017, Feb 17, 1997
Azarcon v. Guerrero , GR No. 116033, Feb 26, 1997
Camanag v. Hon Guerrero 286 SCRA 473 [1997]
Buenasada v. Flavier, 226 SCRA 645
Macalino v. Sandiganbayan, 376 SCRA 452
BIR v. Ombudsman, GR No. 115103, April 11, 2002
Laurel v. Desierto, GR No. 145368, April 12, 2002
Office of the Ombudsman v. Valera 471 SCRA 715 [2005]
Perez v. Sandiganbayan 503 SCRA 252
Calingin v. Desierto 529 SCRA 720 [2007]
Lazatin v. Desierto 588 SCRA 285 [2009]
Section 8. Qualifications
Section 9. Appointments
Section 10. Rank

14

Section 11. Term

Section 12. Prompt Action on Complaints
Laurel v. Desierto, GR No. 145368, April 12, 2002
Almonte v. Vasquez, 244 SCRA 286 (1995)
Uy v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 105965, March 20, 2001
Raro v. Sandiganbayan, GR 108431, July 14, 2000
Bautista v. Sandiganbayan, GR 136082, May 12, 2000
Roxas v. Vasquez, GR NO. 114944, June 19, 2001
Kara-an v. Ombudsman, GR 119990, June 21, 2004
People v. Sandiganbayan 451 SCRA 413 [2005]
Laxina v. Ombudsman 471 SCRA 542 [2005]
Gemma P. Cabalit v. Commission On Audit-Region VII, Gr 180236, 17 January 2012 (power
of the Ombudsman to determine and impose administrative liability is mandatory)
Gonzales III v. OP 679 SCRA 614 [2012]
Section 13. Powers; Functions; Duties
In General
Cruz v. Sandiganbayan 194 SCRA 474 [1991]
Maceda v. Vasquez 221 SCRA 464 [1993]
Macalino v. Sandiganbayan 376 SCRA 452
Garcia v. Miro, GR No. 148944, Feb 5, 2003
Honasan II v. Panel of Investigating Prosecutors GR No. 159747, April 13, 2004
Samson v. OMB, GR 117741, Sept 29, 2004
Corpuz v. Sandiganbayan, GR 162214, Nov. 11, 2004
Khan, Jr. v. Ombudsman, GR No. 125296, July 20, 2006
Ombudsman v. Estandarte, GR No. 168670, April 13, 2007
Ombudsman v. Lucero, November 24, 2006
Ombudsman v. CA, GR No. 169079, July 17, 2007
Sangguniang Barangay v. Punong Barangay, GR No. 170626, March 3, 2008
Perez v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 166062, September 26, 2006
Buencamino v. CA, GR No. 175895, April 4, 2007
Medina v. COA, GR No. 176478, February 4, 2008
Villas Nor v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 180700, March 4, 2008
Ombudsman v. Rodriguez, GR No. 172700, July 23, 2010
OMB v. Estendarte 521 SCRA 155 [2007]
Salvador v. Mapa 539 SCRA 34 [2000]
OMB v. Masing 542 SCRA 253 [2008]
Medina v. COA 543 SCRA 684[2008]
Borja v. People 553 SCRA 250 [2008]
Preventive Suspension and Imposition of Penalties
Buennaseda v. Favier 226 SCRA 645 [1993](when to suspension)
Hagad v. Gozo-Dadole 251 SCRA 243 [1995] (nature)
Vasquez v. Hobilla-Alinio 271 SCRA 67 [1997] (not in relation to duties)
OMB v. CA 491 SCRA 92
OMB v. Madriaga 503 SCRA 631
OMB v. CA 507 SCRA 593
Estorja v. Ranada 492 SCRA 652
OMB v. Lucero 508 SCRA 593
Balbastro v. Junio 527 SCRA 680 [2007]
OMB v. CA 527 SCRA 798 [2007]
COA v. CA 529 SCRA 245 [2007
OMB v. Santiago 533 SCRA 305 [2007]
Govenciong v. CA 550 SCRA 502 [2008]
Marohomsalic v. Cole 547 SCRA 98
OMB v. Lisondra 548 SCRA 83
Miro v. Abugan 549 SCRA 34
Cesa v. OMB 553 SCRA 357

15

OMB v. De Sahagun 562 SCRA 122

OMB v. Samaniego 564 SCRA 502
Boncalon v. OMB GR 171812, December 24, 2008
OMB v. Beltran 588 SCRA 574 [2009]
OMB v. Apolonio, GR 165132, 07 March 2012 (power to directly impose administrative
penalties, including removal from office)
Jurisdiction over Criminal Cases
Natividad v. Felix 229 SCRA 680 [1994] (amount)
Lastimosa v. Vasquez 243 SCRA 497 [1995] (prosecutors assistance)
Presidential v. desierto 528 SCRA 20 [2007]
Fact-finding distinguished from Preliminary Investigation
Raro v. Sandiganbayan, GR 108431, July 14, 2000
Serapio v. Sandiganbayan, GR 148468, Jan 28, 2003
Section 14. Fiscal Autonomy
Section 15. Right to Recover Properties Unlawfully Acquired
Heirs of Gregorio Licaros v. SB, GR 157438, October 18, 2004
Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-finding Committee on Behest Loans v. OMB Desierto, GR 135715,
13 April 2011. (reiterating Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loans v.
Desierto, GR 130140; provision applies only to civil actions for recovery of ill-gotten
wealth, and not to criminal cases)
Section 16. Loan, Guaranty or Other Form of Financial Accommodation
Section 17. Declaration of Assets and Liabilities
Section 18. Allegiance of Public Officers
Caasi v. CA, 191 SCRA 229 (1990)
Sampayan v. Daza 213 SCRA 807 (1992)
Article XII. National Economy and Patrimony
Section 1. Threefold Goal of the National Economy
Section 2. Regalian Doctrine
Public Domain and Regalian Doctrine
Lee Hong Kok v. David, 48 SCRA 372
Carino v. Insurer Government, 41 PHIL 935
Laurel v. Garcia, 187 SCRA 797 (1990)
Almeda v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 85322, April 30, 1991
Director of Lands v. Kalahi Investments, Inc, GR No. 48066, January 31, 1989
Land Mgt. Bureau v. CA, GR 112567, February 7, 2000
Republic v. De Guzman, GR 105630, February 23, 2000
Pua v. CA, GR 134992, November 20, 2000
Cruz v. Sec. of DENR, GR 135385, December 6, 2000
Chavez v. PEA, GR 133250, July 9, 2002
La Bugal-Blaan v. Ramos, GR 127872, Dec. 1, 2004
Dipido v. Gozun 485 SCRA 586
Chavez v. NHA 530 SCRA 235 [2007]
Republic v. Enciso, GR No. 160145, November 11, 2005
Philippine Geothermal v. Napocor, GR No. 144302, May 27, 2004
JG Summit v. CA, GR No. 124293, January 31, 2005
Alienation
Sta. Rosa Mining v. Lledo, 156 SCRA 1 [1987] (mining claims)
San Miguel Corporation v. CA, 185 SCRA 722 [1990] (possession in the concept of an
owner)

16

Republic v. Bantigue Point development Corporation, GR 162322, 14 March 2012

(burden on applicant to prove land sought to be registered is alienable or disposable on a
positive act the government)
Utilization
Miners v. Factoran 240 SCRA 100[1995] (jura regalia)
Tano v. Socrates 278 SCRA 154 [1997] (Subsistence fisherman)
Villaflor v. CA - 280 SCRA 297 [1997] (private ownership)
Republic v. CA and PREC GR 103882, [November 25, 1998] 299 SCRA 199
Republic v. Rosemoor Mining and Devt Corp. , GR 149927, Mar 30, 2004
Alvarez v. PICOP 606 SCRA 444 [2009]
IID v. PSALM 682 SCRA 602 [2012]
Narra Nickel Mining v. Redmont Consolidated Mines Corp, GR 195580, April 21, 2014
Section 3. Lands of the Public Domain
Director of Lands v. Aquino, 192 SCRA 296 (1990)
Republic v. CA, 160 SCRA 228 (1988)
Apex Mining v. Southeast Mindanao Gold, Inc, GR No. 152613, June 23, 2006
Dir. of Lands v. IAC, 146 SCRA 509 (1986)
Ten Forty Realty v. Lorenzana, GR No. 151212, Sept. 10, 2003
Chavez v. PEA, GR No. 133250, July 9, 2002
Republic v. Southside, 502 SCRA 587
Republic v. T.A.N., 555 SCRA 477
Section 4. Specific Limits of Forest Lands and National Parks
La Bugal-Blaan Tribal Assn. v. DENR, GR127872, Jan 27, 2004, MR GR 127882, Dec. 1,
2004
Section 5. Ancestral Lands and Domain
Cruz v. Sec. of DENR, 347 SCRA 128 (2000)
Section 6. Common Good
Telecom v. COMELEC, 289 SCRA 337 (1998)
Section 7. Private Lands
Republic v. CA, 235 SCRA 567
Zaragosa v. CA, GR No. 106401, September 29, 2000
Ramirez v. Vda. De Ramirez, 111 SCRA 704 (1982)
Halili v. CA, 287 SCRA 465 (1998)
Lee v. Republic, 366 SCRA (2001)
Frenzel v. Catito, GR No. 143958, July 11, 2003
Lentfer v. Wolff 441 SCRA 584 [2004]
Muller v. Muller 500 SCRA 65
Mulller v. Muller, GR No. 149615, August 29, 2006
Matthews v. Taylor Spouses, GR No. 164584, June 22, 2009
Hulst v. PR Builders, GR No. 156364, September 25, 2008
Ting Ho v. Teng 558 SCRA 421 [2008]
Hulst v. PR Builders 566 SCRA 333[2008]
Osmena v. Osmena 611 SCRA 164 [2010]
Beurmer v. Amores 686 SCRA 770 [2012]
Section 8. Exception for Former Filipino Citizens
Republic v. CA, 235 SCRA 567 (1994)
Section 9. Independent Economic and Planning Agency
Section 10. Filipinization
Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, 267 SCRA 408 (1997)
Army and Navy Club v. CA, 271 SCRA 36 (1997)
Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)
Republic v. CA 299 SCRA 199

17

J.G. Summit Holdings v. CA, GR 124293, November 20, 2000

Section 11. Public Utilities
Bagatsing v. Committee, 246 SCRA 344 (1995)
Albano v. Reyes, 175 SCRA 36 (1997)
Tatad v. Garcia, 243 SCRA 436 (1995)
Telecom v. COMELEC, 289 SCRA 337 (1998)
JG Summit Holdings v. CA, 345 SCRA 143 (2000)
Republic v. Express Telecom 373 SCRA 316
Del Mar v. Pagcor [2001]
PTC v. NTC, GR 138295, Aug. 28, 2003
Associated Communications v. NTC, GR No. 144109, February 17, 2003
Eastern Telecom v. Telecom Technologies, GR No. 135992, July 23, 2004
Royal Cargo Corp. v. CAB 421 SCRA 21
Metropolitan v. Adala 526 SCRA 465 [2007]
PAGCOR v. BIR, 645 SCRA 338
Francisco v. TRB 633 SCRA 470 [2010]
Wilson P. Gamboa v. Finance Secretary Malgarito B Tebes, GR 176579, 28 June 2011.
Definition of capital refers only to share of stock entitled to vote in the election of
directors, and thus in the present case only to common share, and not the total
outstanding capital stock comprising
Express Investment v. Bayantel 687 SCRA 50 [2012]
Section 12. Filipino First Policy
Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997)
Section 13. Trade Policy
Espina v. Zamora, 631 SCRA 17
Section 14. Development and Practice of Professions
Section 15. Agency to Promote Cooperatives
Section 16. Corporations
NDC v. PVB, 192 SCRA 257 (1990)
Boy Scouts of the Philippines v. COA, GR 177131, 07 June 2011.
Section 16, Article XII should not be construed so as to prohibit Congress from creating
public corporation. In fact, Congress has enacted numerous laws creating public
corporations or government agencies or instrumentalities vested with corporate powers.
Moreover, Section 16, Article XII, which relates to National Economy and Patrimony, could
not have tied the hands of Congress in creating public corporation to serve any of the
constitutional policies or objective.
Section 17. Temporary Take-Over
Agan v. PIATCO, 420 SCRA 575
David v. Macapagal-Arroyo, GR No. 171396, May 2006
Section 18. Nationalization
Republic v. PLDT, 26 SCRA 620 (1968)
PLDT v. NTC, 190 SCRA 717 (1990)
PLDT v. Eastern Telecom, 213 SCRA 16 (1992)
Section 19. Monopolies and Combinations
Energy Regulatory Board v. CA, GR No. 113079, April 20, 2001
Garcia v. Executive Secretary, GR No. 132451, December 17, 1999
Tatad v. Secretary of Energy, 281 SCRA 330
Eastern Assurance v. LTFRB, GR No. 149717, Oct. 7, 2003
Avon v. Luna, GR No. 153674, December 20, 2006
Section 21. Foreign Loans

18

Section 22. Acts Inimical to the National Interest

Article XVI. General Provisions
Section 1. Flag of the Philippines
Section 2. Name, National Anthem or a National Seal
Section 3. Immunity From Suit
Liang v. People GR 125865, January 28, 2000
Calub v. CA, GR 115634, April 27, 2000
Lansang v. CA, GR 102667 February 23, 2000
Mancenido v. CA, GR 118605, April 12, 2000
Shell v. Jalos 630 SCRA 399(2010)
China National Machinery & Equipment Corp. (Group) v. Hon. Cesar D. Santamaria,
Gr 185572, 07 February 2012, 665 SCRA 189 (2012) (Revisits and reiterates several
Cases : GTZ v. CA, Holy See v. Rosario, DFA v. NLRC)
Foundation of the Rule: A Suit Against the State
Santos v. Santos, 92 PHIL. 281 (1952-1953)
Republic v. Feliciano,148 SCRA 424) 1887
Republic of Indonesia v. Vinzons (2005)
Unincorporated Agencies
Mentran v. Paredes, 79 PHIL. 819 (1947-1948 )
NAC v. Teodoro, 91 PHIL. 203 (1952)
Mobil Philippines v. Customs Arrestre, 18 SCRA 1120 (1966)
Del Mar v. PVA 51 SCRA 340 (1973)
CAA v. CA 167 SCRA 28 (1988)
Farolan v. CTA 217 SCRA 340 (1993)
PNR v. IAC 217 SCRA 401 (1993)
Republic v. Nolasco 457 SCRA 460 (2005)
Republic v. Unimex 518 SCRA 20 (2007)
Professional Video v. TESDA 591 SCRA 83 (2009)
Government Officers
Ministero v. CFI 40 SCRA 464 (1971
Syquia v. Almeda-Lopez 84SCRA 312 [1978]
Festejo v. Fernando 94 SCRA 54 [1979]
Aberca v. Ver 160 SCRA 590 [1988]
Shauf v. CA 191 SCRA 713 [1990]
Vidad v. RTC 271 [1993]
Regional Director v. CA 229 SCRA 557 [1994]
Africa v. PCGG/Villanueva v. Sandiganbayan [January 1992]
DOH v. Phil. Pharmawealth 518 SCRA 240 [2007]
Foreign Government
Baer v. Tizon 57 SCRA 1 [1974]
US v. Ruiz 136 SCRA 487 [1985]
Sanders v. Veridiano 162 SCRA 88 [1988]
U.S v. Reyes 219 SCRA 192 [1993]
The Holy See v. Rosario 238 SCRA 524 [1994]
JUSMAG v. NLRC 239 SCRA 224 [1994]
Larkins v. NLRC 241 SCRA 598 [1995]
Minucher v. CA GR 142396, Feb, 11, 2003
Consent by Law
Carabao v. Agricultural product Com. 35 SCRA 224 [1970]
Arcega v. CA 66 SCRA 230 [1975]
Rayo v. CFI 110 SCRA 456 [1981]

19

Municipality of San Fernando v. Firme 195 SCRA 692 [1991]

Republic v. NLRC 263 SCRA 290 [1996]
Exceptional Circumstance to avoid injustice
DOH v. Canchela 475 SCRA 218 [2005]
Agency Propriety
United States v. Guinto 182 SCRA 644 [ 1990]
Fontanilla v. Maliaman 194 SCRA 486 [1991]
PRC v. CA 256 SCRA 667 [1996]
Waiver
Republic v. Purisima 78 SCRA 470 [1977]
Santiago v. Republic 87 SCRA 294 [1978]
Traders Royal Bank v. IAC 192 SCRA 305 [1990]
Republic v. Sandoval 220 SCRA 124 [1993]
Delos Santos v. IAC 223 SCRA 11 [1993]
DA v. NLRC 227 SCRA 693 [1993]
EPG v. Sec. of DPWH 354 SCRA 566 [2001]
Resulting Liability
Philrock v. Board of Liquidators 180 SCRA 171 [1989]
Liang v. People GR 125865 [January 28, 2000] ADB immunity)
Republic v. Hidalgo 477 SCRA 12 [2005] (writ execution)
Philippine Agila v. Lichauco 489 SCRA 22 [2006]
Curato v. PPA 590 SCRA 215 [2009]
U.P. v. Dizon 679 SCRA 54 [2012]
Section 4. AFP
Section 5. AFP Requirement and Goals
Section 6. Police Force
Quilonia v. The General Court Martial GR No. 9660, March 4, 1992
Carpio v. Executive Secretary 206 SCRA 290 (1992)
Department of Budget v. Manilas Finest, GR No. 169466, May 9, 2007
Mendoza v. PNP, GR No. 139658, June 21, 2005
Section 7. War Veterans
Section 8. Pensions and Benefits for Retirees
Section 9. Protection of Consumers from Trade Malpractices
Section 10. Development of Filipino Capability and Communication Structures
Section 11. Ownership and Management: Mass Media and Advertising
Section 12. Consultative Body for Indigenous Cultural Communities
Article XVII. Amendments or Revisions
Section 1. Amendment or Revision
Imbong v. COMELEC, 35 SCRA 28 (1970)
Lambino v. COMELEC, 505 SCRA 160
Section 2. Initiative
Defensor-Santiago v. COMELEC, 270 SCRA 106 (1997); MR (1997)
Lambino v. COMELEC, 505 SCRA 160 (2006)

20

Section 3. Constitutional Convention

Section 4. Ratification
Gonzales v. COMELEC, 21 SCRA 774 (1967)
Tolentino v. COMELEC, 41 SCRA 702 (1971)
Article XVIII

Transitory Provisions

Sec. 1 First Election Under the New Constitution

Sec. 2 Term of First House Members and Local Officials
Sec. 3 Status of Laws and other Legislation Passes Prior to the Constitution
Sec. 4 Status of Treaties and International Agreements
Sec. 5 Presidential Term and Synchronization
Sec. 6 President Legislative
Sec. 7 Sectorial Representation
Sec. 8 Metropolitan Authority
MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association, GR 135962, March 27, 2000
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.

9 Sub-Provinces
10-11 Security of Tenure Judges
12-14 Cases Filed Prior to Effectivity of New Constitution
15 Term of Carry-over Commission

Sec. 16 Career Civil Service Officers

Dario v. Mison 176 SCRA 84 [1989] (reorganization)
Mendoza v. Quisumbing 186 SCRA 108 [1990]
Ontiveros v. CA. G.R. No. 145401 May 7, 2001
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.

17-18 Readjustment of salary

19-21 Reversion of lands and real rights illegally acquired
22 Idle/Abandoned lands
23 Advertising Entities
24 Private Armies

Sec. 25 Foreign Military Bases, Troops or Facilities

Bayan v. Zamora, GR 138570, October 10, 2000
Sec. 26 Sequestration Orders
Joya v. PCGG 225 SCRA 568 [1993]
Republic v. Sandiganbayan 221 SCRA 189 [1993] (powers of PCGG)
Cojuangco v. Roxas 195 SCRA 797 [1991] (vote of sequestered shares )
Araneta v. Sandiganbayan 242 SCRA 482 [1995] (investigate/prosecutory powers)
Rumualdez v. Sandiganbayan 244 SCRA 152 [1995] (authority over ill-gotten wealth)
Republic v. Sandiganbayan 240 SCRA 376 [1995] judicial action)
Section 27. Effectivity
De Leon v. Esguerra, 152 SCRA 602 (1987)
Section 26. Ill-Gotten Wealth; Sequestration/Freeze Orders
Cojuangco v. Roxas, 195 SCRA 797 (1991)
Section 27. Effectivity
De Leon v. Esquerra, 152 SCRA 602 (1987)

21