Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
The History of the 1987 Constitution began on April 11, 1899, the
date when the TREATY OF PARIS between the United States and Spain of
December 10, 1898 became effective upon the exchange of the instruments
of ratification of both countries. But the sources of the 1987
Constitution are:
Under the Treaty of Paris, the Philippine was ceded by Spain to the
United States. Spain relinquished its sovereignty over the Philippine
Islands. Consequently, all laws that were political in nature were
automatically abrogated or fallen to the ground ipso facto. The Treaty
provided that the civil and political status of all inhabitants of the
Islands were to be determined by the U.S. Congress. The Treaty defined
the metes and bounds of the archipelago by longitude and latitude,
degrees and seconds. Under the Treaty, the Philippine was not given the
status of an incorporated territory as to make it a candidate for
statehood. And so, the U.S. Constitution did not apply to the
Philippines.
It defined for the first time who the citizens of the Philippines
were. Pursuant to the Philippine Bill of 1902, the citizens of the
Philippines were: “All the inhabitants of the Philippine Islands who
were subjects of Spain as of April 11, 1899, who continued to reside
therein, and all the children born subsequent thereto.”
The new Legislature under the Jones law was inaugurated at Manila on
October 16, 1916. Manuel L. Quezon, who had just returned from the
United States after a brilliant work as resident Commissioner, was
chosen President of the Senate and Sergio Osmeña was elected as House
Speaker. The Nationalista Party swept the elections and dominated the
two Houses of the Philippine Legislature. On January 11, 1917, the first
Cabinet was organized by Governor-General Harrison, and a Council of
State was created on October 16, 1918.
However, notice has to be taken that under the Jones law, while the
Filipinos had all the Legislative Power, the Americans had all the
Executive Power and thus had also the control of the government.
On March 23, 1935, the draft was certified by the President Franklin
D. Roosevelt as conforming to the Tydings-McDuffie Law.
On May 14, 1935, the draft Constitution was ratified by the people
in a plebiscite with the provisions on the qualification of the
President, Vice-President, and members of Congress taking effect right
upon ratification.
On November 15, 1935, the Commonwealth was inaugurated and the 1935
Constitution took effect.
On April 30, 1946, one week after the election of the first
officials of the Philippine Republic, the U.S. Congress passed the Bell
Trade Act which: 1) would grant Prime Exports: a) entry to the U.S. free
of customs duties from 1946 to 1954; and b) gradual increase in duties
from 1954 to 1974; and 2) provided that the Philippines would grant U.S.
citizens and corporations: a) the same privileges; b) the right to
exploit the natural resources of the Philippines in parity with
Filipinos; c) the right to operate public utilities; 3) must be accepted
by the Philippine Congress, embodied in an executive agreement, and
reflected as an amendment in the Constitution.
The Senate approval of the Bell Trade Act gave rise to the case of
Vera vs. Avelino.
===== O =====
Facts: The Senate then had eleven (11) Nacionalistas and thirteen
(13) Liberals. Three Nacionalista Senators-elect, namely, VERA, DIOKNO,
and ROMERO, known to be against the Bell trade Act were prevented by the
rest of the Senate from taking their oath on the grounds that their
election was marred with fraud. The Senators-elect went to the Supreme
Court and alleged that only the Electoral Tribunal had jurisdiction over
contests relating to their election, returns and disqualification.
So that, if not all the powers regarding the election, returns, and
qualifications of members was withdrawn by the Constitution from the
Congress; and if, as admitted by petitioners themselves at the oral
===== O =====
===== O =====
But with the three (3) Senators, namely, Vera, Diokno, and Romero,
still suspended , only the twenty-one (21) remaining Senators were used
as the basis in computing the three-fourth (3/4) requirement.
===== O =====
RBH No. 2 was approved. RBH Nos. 1 and 3 gave rise to the case of
Gonzales vs. COMELEC.
===== O =====
===== O =====
On November 10, 1970, election of delegates to the Constitutional
Convention took place.
===== O =====
Held: The Court holds that there is, and it is the condition and
limitation that all the amendments to be proposed by the same Convention
must be submitted to the people in a single election or plebiscite ...
Under Section 1 of Article XV of the Constitution, a proposal of
Amendment to the Constitution should be submitted to the people not
separately from but together with all other amendments to be proposed by
this present Convention.
===== O =====
===== O =====
===== O =====
Facts: On January 20, 1973 or soon after Proclamation No. 1102 was
issued by the President, Javellana filed a petition questioning the
validity of said proclamation. His grounds are:
Held: The voting, views, and opinions of the Justices of the Supreme
Court on the foregoing issues are summarized as follows:
Concepcion (CJ)
Makalintal, J.
Zaldivar, J
Castro, J.
Fernando, J.
Teehankee, J.
J. Barredo: The Court may inquire into whether or not there has
actually been approval by the people and in the affirmative to
keep its hands off out of respect to the people’s will and in the
negative that it could then determine the factual and legal
angles as to whether the pertinent provisions of the 1935
Constitution were complied with.
Makasiar, J.
Antonio, J.
Esguerra, J.
Concepcion, CJ
Makalintal, J.
Zaldivar, J.
Castro, J.
Fernando, J.
Teehankee, J.
Makasiar, J.
Antonio, J.
Esguerra, J.
The following Members hold that the people have already accepted
the 1973 Constitution:
Barredo, J.
Makasiar, J.
Antonio, J.
Esguerra, J.
The following Members hold that under martial law there was no
freedom of expression and it could not therefore be said that the
people accepted or rejected the 1973 Constitution:
Concepcion, CJ.
Zaldivar, J.
Makalintal, J.
Castro, J.
Teehankee, J.
Makalintal, J.
Castro, J.
Barredo, J.
Makasiar, J
Antonio, J.
Esguerra, J.
Concepcion, CJ.
Zaldivar, J.
Fernando, J.
Teehankee, J.
Barredo, J.
Makasiar, J.
Antonio, J.
Esguerra, J.
Makalintal, J.
Castro, J.
Fernando, J.
Teehankee, J.
Concepcion, CJ.
Zaldivar, J.
Please note that the result therefore on this last issue is that
THERE IS NOT ENOUGH VOTES TO DECLARE THAT THE NEW CONSTITUTION IS
NOT IN FORCE.
===== O =====
For the meantime, the political parties have started campaigning and
the people were so involved such that to stop it on legal grounds would
frustrate their very WILL. And so, failing to come up with the necessary
majority to hold the Snap Election Law UNCONSTITUTIONAL, the SUPREME
COURT could not issue the INJUNCTION prayed for. The ELECTION WENT
AHEAD.
BASIS OF THE AQUINO GOVERNMENT: What was the basis of the AQUINO
GOVERNMENT? Did it assume power pursuant to the 1973 Constitution? Or,
was it a REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT?
The better view is the latter view. The AQUINO GOVERNMENT was not an
offshoot of the 1973 Constitution for under which, a procedure was given
for the election of the President --- PROCLAMATION BY THE BATASAN ---
and the CANDIDATE that the BATASAN proclaimed was MARCOS.
===== O =====
===== O =====