Province of North Cotabato v.
Government of the Republic and implements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions
FACTS: The Memorandum of Agreement on the Ancestral Domain (MOA-
AD) brought about by the Government of the republic of the Philippines
(GRP) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) as an aspect of Tripoli
Agreement of Peace in 2001 is scheduled to be signed in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia.
This agreement was petitioned by the Province of North Cotabato for
Mandamus and Prohibition with Prayer for the Issuance of Writ of
Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order. The agreement
mentions Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) to which it grants the
authority and jurisdiction over the Ancestral Domain and Ancestral Lands of
the Bangsamoro; authority and jurisdiction over all natural resources within
internal waters. The agreement is composed of two local statutes: the organic
act for autonomous region in Muslim Mindanao and the Indigenous Peoples
Rights Act (IPRA).
ISSUE: Whether or not the GRP violated the Constitutional and statutory
provisions on public consultation and the right to information when they
negotiated and initiated the MOA-AD and Whether or not the MOA-AD
brought by the GRP and MILF is constitutional
HELD:GRP violated the Constitutional and statutory provisions on public
consultation and the right to information when they negotiated and initiated
the MOA-AD and it are unconstitutional because it is contrary to law and the
provisions of the constitution thereof.
REASONING: The GRP is required by this law to carry out public
consultations on both national and local levels to build consensus for peace
agenda and process and the mobilization and facilitation of peoples
participation in the peace process.
Article III (Bill of Rights)
Sec. 7. The right of people on matters of public concern shall be recognized,
access to official records and to documents and papers pertaining to official
acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used
as basis for policy development shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such
limitations as may be provided by law.
Article II
Sec. 28. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law , that state adopts
involving public interest.
LGC (1991), require all national agencies and officers to conduct periodic
consultations. No project or program be implemented unless such
consultations are complied with and approval mus be obtained.
Article VII (Executive Department)
Sec. 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.
Article X. (Local Government)
Sec. 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the
Philippines are the province, cities, municipalities and barangays. There shall
be autonomous regions on Muslim Mindanao and the Cordillera as
hereinafter provided.
Sec. 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and
in the Cordilleras consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities and
geographical areas sharing common and distinctive historical and cultural
heritage, economic and social structures and other relevant characteristics
within the framework of this constitution and the national sovereignty as
well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines.
Section 16. The President shall exercise general supervision over autonomous
regions to ensure that laws are faithfully executed.
Sec. 18. The creation of autonomous region shall be effective when approved
by a majority of the votes cast by the constituents units in a plebiscite called
for the purpose, provided that only provinces, cities and geographic areas
voting favourably in such plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous
region.
Sec. 20. Within its territorial jurisdiction and subject to the provisions of this
Constitution and national laws, the organic act of autonomous regions shall
provide for legislative powers over:
1. Administrative organization;
2. Creation of sources of revenues;
3. Ancestral domain and natural resources;
4. Personal, family, and property relations;
5. Regional urban and rural planning development;
6. Economic, social, and tourism development;
7. Educational policies;
8. Preservation and development of the cultural heritage; and
9. Such other matters as may be authorized by law for the promotion of the
general welfare of the people of the region.
The President has sole authority in the treaty-making.
ARTICLE XVII (AMENDMENTS OR REVISIONS)
Section 1. Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be
proposed by:
1. The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members; or
2. A constitutional convention.
Section 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.
MOA-AD states that all provisions thereof which cannot be reconciled with
the present constitution and laws shall come into force upon signing of a
comprehensive compact and upon effecting the necessary changes to the
legal framework. The presidents authority is limited to proposing
constitutional amendments. She cannot guarantee to any third party that the
required amendments will eventually be put in place nor even be submitted
to a plebiscite. MOA-AD itself presents the need to amend therein.
Co Kim Chan v. Tan Keh
FACTS: All acts and proceedings of the legislative, executive and judicial
departments of a de facto government are good and valid.
Issue: WoN governments established during the Japanese military
occupations were de facto governments.
Held: Actions not of a political complexion were good and valid and by
postliminy remained good and valid after liberation.
Kinds of de facto governments: (1) Government that gets possession and
control of, or usurps, by force or by the voice of the majority, the rightful
legal government, and maintains itself against the will of the latter (England
under Commonwealth) (2) Established and maintained by military forces
who invade and occupy a territory of the enemy in the course of war, and
which is denominated a government of paramount force (Maine, Tampico
Mexico) (3) Established as an independent government by the inhabitants of
a country who rise in insurrection against a parent state (Southern
Confederacy)
Philippine Virginia Tobacco Administration v. Court of Industrial
Relations
FACTS: Private respondents filed a petition seeking relief for their alleged
overtime services (in excess of their 8 regular hours a day) and the failure to
pay for said compensation in accordance with Commonwealth Act No. 444.
Section 1: The legal working day for any person employed by another shall
not be of more than eight (8) hours daily.
Petitioner denies allegations for lack of a cause of action and jurisdiction.
Respondents filed a Petition for Certiorari on grounds that the corporation is
exercising governmental functions and is therefore exempt from CA No. 444
which was denied and dismissed by RTC and CA. Motion for
Reconsideration were also DENIED.
ISSUE: Whether or not PVTA discharges governmental and not proprietary
functions and is exempt from CA No. 444.
HELD: It is an inherent state function which makes government required to
support its people and promote their general welfare. This case explains and
portrays the expanded role of government necessitated by the increased
responsibility to provide for the general welfare.
The Court held that the distinction and between constituent and ministrant
functions, which the Chief Justice points out, is already irrelevant
considering the needs of the present time. He says that "The growing
complexities of modern society have rendered this traditional classification
of the functions of government obsolete." The distinction between
constituent and ministrant functions is now considered obsolete.
The Court affirms that the Petition as well as the subsequent Motion for
Reconsideration be DENIED.
Cabaas v. Pilapil
FACTS: Florentino Pilapil insured himself and he indicated in his insurance
plan that his child will be his beneficiary. He also indicated that if upon his
death the child is still a minor; the proceeds of his benefits shall be
administered by his brother, Francisco Pilapil. The child was only ten years
of age when Florentino died and so Francisco then took charge of
Florentinos insurance proceeds for the benefit of the child.
On the other hand, the mother of the child Melchora Cabanas filed a
complaint seeking the delivery of the insurance proceeds in favor and for her
to be declared as the childs trustee. Francisco asserted the terms of the
insurance policy and that as a private contract its terms and obligations must
be binding only to the parties and intended beneficiaries.
ISSUE: Whether or not the state may interfere by virtue of parens patriae
to the terms of the insurance policy.
HELD: Yes. The Constitution provides for the strengthening of the family as
the basic social unit, and that whenever any member thereof such as in the
case at bar would be prejudiced and his interest be affected then the judiciary
if a litigation has been filed should resolve that case according to the best
interest of that person. The uncle here should not be the trustee, it should be
the mother as she was the immediate relative of the minor child and it is
assumed that the mother shall show more care towards the child than the
uncle will. The application of parens patriae here is in consonance with this
countrys tradition of favoring conflicts in favor of the family hence
preference to the parent (mother) is observed.
Laurel v. Misa
FACTS: Anastacio Laurel filed a petition for habeas corpus contending that
he cannot be prosecuted for the crime of treason defined and penalized by
the Article 114 of the Revised Penal Code on the grounds that the
sovereignty of the legitimate government and the allegiance of Filipino
citizens was then suspended, and that there was a change of sovereignty
over the Philippines upon the proclamation of the Philippine Republic.
ISSUE: 1 Is the absolute allegiance of the citizens suspended during
Japanese occupation?
2. Is the petitioner subject to Article 114 of the RPC?
HELD: The absolute and permanent allegiance of the inhabitants of a
territory occupied by the enemy of their legitimate government on sovereign
is not abrogated or severed by the enemy occupation because the sovereignty
of the government or sovereign de jure is not transferred to the occupier.
There is no such thing as suspended allegiance. The petitioner is subject to
the Revised Penal Code for the change of form of government does not affect
the prosecution of those charged with the crime of treason because it is an
offense to the same government and same sovereign people.
Estrada vs Desierto
Estrada was inaugurated as president of the Republic of the Philippines on
June 30, 1998 with Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as his Vice President.
FACTS : In October 2000, Ilocos Sur governor Luis Chavit Singson, a close
friend of the President, alleged that he had personally given Estrada money
as payoff from jueteng hidden in a bank account known as Jose Velarde a
grassroots-based numbers game. Singsons allegation also caused
controversy across the nation, which culminated in the House of
Representatives filing of an impeachment case against Estrada on November
13, 2000. House Speaker Manny Villar fasttracked the impeachment
complaint. The impeachment suit was brought to the Senate and an
impeachment court was formed, with Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr. as
presiding officer. Estrada, pleaded not guilty. The expos immediately
ignited reactions of rage. On January 18, a crowd continued to grow at
EDSA, bolstered by students from private schools and left-wing
organizations. Activists from the group Bayan and Akbayan as well as
lawyers of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and other bar associations
joined in the thousands of protesters. On January 19, The Philippine National
Police and the Armed Forces of the Philippines also withdrew their support
for Estrada and joined the crowd at EDSA Shrine.
At 2:00pm, Estrada appeared on television for the first time since the
beginning of the protests and maintains that he will not resign. He said that
he wanted the impeachment trial to continue, stressing that only a guilty
verdict will remove him from office.
At 6:15pm, Estrada again appeared on television, calling for a snap
presidential election to be held concurrently with congressional and local
elections on May 14, 2001. He added that he will not run in this election.
OnJanuary 20, the Supreme Court declared that the seat of presidency was
vacant, saying that Estrada constructively resigned his post. Noon of the
same day, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo took her oath of office in the presence of
the crowd at EDSA, becoming the 14th president of the Philippines.
At 2:00 pm, Estrada released a letter saying he had strong and serious
doubts about the legality and constitutionality of her proclamation as
president, but saying he would give up his office to avoid being an obstacle
to healing the nation. Estrada and his family later left Malacaang Palace.
A heap of cases then succeeded Estradas leaving the palace, which he
countered by filing a peition for prohibition with a prayer for a writ of
preliminary injunction. It sought to enjoin the respondent Ombudsman from
conducting any further proceedings in cases filed against him not until his
term as president ends. He also prayed for judgment confirming petitioner
to be the lawful and incumbent President of the Republic of the Philippines
temporarily unable to discharge the duties of his office, and declaring
respondent to have taken her oath as and to be holding the Office of the
President, only in an acting capacity pursuant to the provisions of the
Constitution.
ISSUE:
1.) Whether or not the case at bar a political or justiciable issue. If
justiciable, whether or not petitioner Estrada was a president-on-leave or did
he truly resign.
2.) Whether or not petitioner may invokeimmunity from suits.
Arroyo as president despite his questioning of its legality and his emphasis
on leaving the presidential seat for the sake of peace. The Court held that
petitioner Estrada had resigned by the use of the totality test: prior,
contemporaneous and posterior facts and circumstantial evidence bearing a
material relevance on the issue.
As to the issue of the peitioners contention that he is immuned from suits,
the Court held that petitioner is no longer entitled to absolute immunity from
suit. The Court added that, given the intent of the 1987 Constitution to
breathe life to the policy that a public office is a public trust, the petitioner, as
a non-sitting President, cannot claim executive immunity for his alleged
criminal acts committed while a sitting President. From the deliberations,
the intent of the framers is clear that the immunity of the president from suit
is concurrent only with his tenure(the term during which the incumbent
actually holds office) and not his term (time during which the officer may
claim to hold the office as of right, and fixes the interval after which the
several incumbents shall succeed one another).

HELD: The Court defines a political issue as those questions which, under
the Constitution, are to be decided by the people in their sovereign capacity,
or in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the
legislative or executive branch of the government. It is concerned with issues
dependent upon the wisdom, not legality of a particular measure.

The Court made a distinction between the Aquino presidency and the
Arroyo presidency. The Court said that while the Aquino government was a
government spawned by the direct demand of the people in defiance to the
1973 Constitution, overthrowing the old government entirely, the Arroyo
government on the other hand was a government exercising under the 1987
constitution, wherein only the office of the president was affected. In the
former, it The question of whether the previous president (president Estrada)
truly resigned subjects it to judicial review. The Court held that the issue is
legal and not political.

For the president to be deemed as having resigned, there must be an intent to

resign and the intent must be coupled by acts of relinquishment. It is
important to follow the succession of events that struck petitioner prior his
leaving the palace. Furthermore, the quoted statements extracted from the
Angara diaries, detailed Estradas implied resignation On top of all these, the
press release he issued regarding is acknowledgement of the oath-taking of