To Format

SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L.
España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 1 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba

susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I |
Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Transcribed by: España Date: AUGUST 14,2018 POLITICAL
LAW ➢ is a branch of public law which deals with the organization, and operations of the governmental
organs of the State and defines the relations of the State with the inhabitants of its territory [People v.
Perfecto, 43 Phil. 887; Macariola v. Asuncion, 114 SCRA 77] ➢ First subject taken in the Bar exam for 4
Sundays. ➢ POLITICAL comes from the Greek word “Polis” (City/state) (eg. Republic of the Philippines –
modern times) ➢ It is a study about the “State” and when you study about the state, you study about
“group of people” more or less with numerous tiny definite proportions of territory having a
government to which they render habitual obedience and enjoys sovereignty. ELEMENTS OF STATE:
(According to Isagani Cruz’s book Political Law) 1. People 2. Territory 3. Government 4. Sovereignty
When you study all of these elements, you will learn to know the following: ➢ How do “People”
participate in the state affairs? ➢ What justifies their participation in governmental affairs? PEOPLE ➢
“inhabitants of the state”. ➢ are those who established the functionaries and consequently established
the agencies. These functionaries are the one who procreate them. For people to participate in that
governance, he has to be a member of that political community. ➢ Citizenship: membership that people
referred to. ➢ Citizen – title referred to a “member/person” of a citizenship. Constitutional Law I: study
about “Who are the citizens of the Philippines?” under Art. 4 of 1987 Constitution ART 4 (Citizenship)
Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines: [1] Those who are citizens of the Philippines at
the time of the adoption of this Constitution; [2] Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the
Philippines; [3] Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship
upon reaching the age of majority; and [4] Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.
TERRITORY ➢ fixed portion of the surface of the earth inhabited by the people of the state. ➢ CANNOT
be a “State” WITHOUT a TERRITORY because where will you put up your governmental agencies and
structures, and who are you going to govern if there is no definite portion of an area or a phase where
you can enact it? In Constitutional Law I, you study about “National Territory”. Especially now, that
Philippines have a controversy regarding the “disputes of land” Over Scarborough Shoal and recently,
over Benham Rise to China. ART.1 (Definition of “National Territory”) NATIONAL TERRITORY ➢ The
national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced
therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of
its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular
shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the
archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the
Philippines. GOVERNMENT ➢ agency or instrumentality in which the will of the state is formulated,
expressed, and realized. ➢ Where authority is being sourced. ➢ The “myth” of your subject matter. ➢
You have conditions on the government like Art. 6 (The Legislative Department), Art. 7 (Executive
Department), Art. 8 (Judicial Department), and SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge
Stella Alma Singko 2 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN
LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) the
subsequent provisions in the constitution really need their own defense like the “Constitutional
Commission” (Consisting of COA, Civil Service, Commission On Election, Commission of Human Rights,
The Ombudsman, and what are the principles governing the relationship between a man, his
government offices and the relation WITH inhabitants of the country. WHAT IS THE SUPREME POWER
TO DO WITHIN AND OUTSIDE OF THE TERRITORIAL BOUNDARIES? ➢ WITHIN: It is the power of the
government to pass laws for the people to obey. ➢ OUTSIDE: It is the freedom of the state from
external control or region of inhabitance. SOVEREIGNTY ➢ Supreme and uncontrollable power inherent
in a state by which the State is governed. ➢ Part of that authority or the essence of that authority.
ASPECTS AND MANIFESTATION OF THE EXERCISE OF SOVEREIGNTY BY THE STATE ➢ Immunity of the
state from SUIT because it is SUPREME, therefore it CANNOT BE SUBJECTED to ANY OTHER AUTHORITIES
including the authority of the court. This is precisely the reason YOU CANNOT SUE THE STATE because
it’s a joint sovereignty and it is sue within. ➢ Also, you have to understand within: WHY ARE YOU
ADDRESSED ESPECIALLY DURING ELECTIONS AS “HARING LUNGSOD” ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE A
VOTER? ➢ The candidates and the politicians always addressed you when delivering their speeches as
“Haring Lungsod”. Hari means “The King” and Lungsod meaning “The State is The King In that
community” actually referring to the members of the community as the “Haring Lungsod”. ➢ The
Constitution says “ART.2 sec.1 The Philippines is a Republican and a Democratic State. Sovereignty
resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.” ➢ Therefore, people direct
today are the “sovereigns” The Preamble states: “We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of
Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society, and establish a Government that shall
embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, conserve and develop our patrimony,
and secure to ourselves and our posterity, the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule
of law and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this
Constitution. ➢ For if not for your vote, these people in the government could not have yielded the
powers, could not have occupy the positions that they are in now and hold these powers of the
government. Ultimately, it is the people decide that they should yield the powers in the government.
That makes you the source of sovereignty. ➢ What happens now to the “Haring Lungsod” is that they
become YOUR KINGS instead of you. They are supposed to be your PUBLIC SERVANTS because the
“Haring Lungsod” chose them. Scope of Political Law 1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ➢ The study of the
maintenance of the proper balance between authority as represented by the three inherent powers of
the State and liberty as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights [Cruz, Constitutional Law, 1993 ed., p. 1].
Constitutional Law 2 ➢ It deals with “How to balance with authority on one hand and rights of
individuals on the other hand?”. Because this pertains to government limiting the rights of individuals as
recognized by bill of rights and at the same time these rights put a limitation on the powers of the state;
then constitutional law must be part of political law. ➢ Under Constitutional Law 2, you study about the
“Art.3 Bill of Rights”. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 3 | P a g
e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE
ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Art.3 Bill of Rights ➢ Charges of your
Liberty that defines the relationship between you, the govern, and the government. ➢ The powers of
the government are now absolute, because they are subject to such limitations as maybe imposed by
the lines of the people that NEEDS protection. ➢ You also have rights of individuals being regulated by
the authority, by the state exercises its powers. 2. ELECTION LAW ➢ How do we choose our government
officials? ➢ pertain to the election of the representatives of the government by the people, the
limitation on the conduct of election. It has something to do with the government because without
election, there cannot be a government or officials in the government 3. LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS ➢
When they are chosen, how do they relate with the govern? ➢ What are their duties and
responsibilities? 4. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW ➢ Those who are in the Executive Branch, in the different
administrative bodies: What are the powers and how do they relate with each other? ➢ deals on how
government officials run the government and the extent of the exercise of the powers on how one
branch or one department, bureau or agency or instrumentality relates with each other. 5. LAWS ON
LOCAL GOVERNMENT OR PUBLIC CORPORATIONS ➢ Study of “How does the Natural government relate
with the Local Government?” (That may be changed in the future, because as of now, we only have
Local autonomy for Local government are subject to the authority of the “National Government”
meaning “they cannot pass laws independent of the “National Government” accdg. To Judge) 6. PUBLIC
INTERNATIONAL LAW ➢ Deals on the Study how these states relate with other states. Source of Political
Law What is your basis in studying Philippines Political law? What would be your reference? ➢ 1987
Constitution. There are provisions in the Constitution recalled by your study of “Political Law”. ➢ 1987
CONSTITUTION IS NOT THE SOLE SOURCE. IT IS NOT EXCLUSIVE. Because understanding Political
Phenomenon, it’s better if you have other sources to refer to because that may not be answered by the
1987 Constitution. Example: ✓ POE vs. COMELEC (Grace Poe Case) ISSUE: Why is Grace Poe Qualified to
run as “President” considering the requirements of “Philippine Citizenship” (and not just any ordinary
citizenship), but one must be a “Natural bornFilipino Citizen” in running for Philippines Presidency?) ➢
However, she lost the election because she has conceded. (That’s unprecedented, because nobody loses
an election just because she proclaims it). ➢ She was described as a “Foundling”- unknown mother and
father. (How can you be sure that the parents are Filipino? She could be a Chinese, onlytransit here in
the country and gave birth to her) ➢ There is NO DEFINITION of “Foundling” in the Constitution, but
NOW it does it state that “A foundling is a Filipino Citizen”. (It’s a HOT ISSUE) ➢ In 1987 Constitution’s
definition of “Citizenship” is Limited only for “Those People as such enumerated by that definition. “ ➢
You have to refer what does it means so you have to understand “Why does the Supreme Court refer to
that manner and be fair to Grace Poe Llamanzares as a natural born Filipino Citizen?” Q: “Why was the
Father (Fernando Poe Jr.) was likely declare as a ‘Filipino Citizen’ when he was born illegitimate to a US
Citizen Mother?” SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 4 | P a g e
Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE
ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) ➢ It’s a legitimate fact that “We’re
supposed to follow the REALLY KNOWN PARENTS, so to waive the Citizenship”. ➢ The Mother knows
that the child is hers, right? So, if she’s not married to the father, then the child usually follows the
surname of the mother especially if there’s no evidence that the child was ever acknowledge by his
father who is not married to the mother. ➢ Similarly, In Citizenship, if the Mother is Filipino, then the
child is illegitimate, and follows the Mother’s Citizenship state. ➢ Take note: The Father (Fernando Poe
Jr./Ronald Poe) was NOT MARRIED to the Mother (US CITIZEN). Q: So why was “Grace Poe” considered
as a “Natural Born Citizen”? ➢ Because the Constitution states that “Those fathers who are Filipino
Citizen”? (But the Father was not married to the mother”?) ➢ Remember, Ronald Poe declared himself
as a “Spaniard” when he got married to the first wife. ➢ Do you know that this Roland Poe, whose
father is Lorenzo Poe, was a “Full Español” (Mother: mestiza; placed on the birth certificate of Ronald
Poe)? Q: How on Earth “Fernando Poe” became a “Natural born citizen”? ➢ Case: Tecson v Comelec:
Supreme Court said, “Roland Poe is natural born and therefore, he is qualified to run as President.” That
legacy was inherited by the daughters. The adoptive daughter was said to be a “Natural born”, only that
she is said to be a “Foundling” and later she was considered as a “Filipino Citizen”. However, this could
not take back down to the 1987 Constitution. 1987 Constitution: NOT AN EXCLUSIVE SOURCE OF
POLITICAL LAW TO EXPLAIN ON CITIZENSHIP. ➢ You have to consider other sources. CITIZENSHIP ➢ You
have to consider the 1987 Constitution before that. ➢ 1973 Constitution, 1935 Constitution, TREATY OF
PARIS and TREATY OF PEACE. ➢ Treaty of Paris & Treaty of Peace: There was a war between Spain and
US. Spain lost that war, so it was compelled to sign TREATY OF PARIS ceding the PHILIPPINES ISLANDS,
and ALL THE INHABITANTS & PROPERTIES BOUND THEREIN to the US for the amount of $20 Million on
sale. To include other territories that Spain was able to acquire, the same were ceded to mention a few
(Eg. Palma Islands) ➢ Palma Islands: Acquired by Spain, then interceded to US by the virtue of Treaty of
Paris. ➢ For the first time, there was a concept of Citizenship. (Remember, during Spanish Colonization,
there was no concept of Citizenship for Filipino Citizens that’s why they are described as “Indios”.) Indios
- Uncivilized people of the islands, because there is no such concept. ➢ We are only considered as the
“subjects” of the King of Spain. ➢ No rights or whatsoever, we were chattels or properties by the King
of Spain. Citizenship Concept: a membership of a political community was introduced to us only when
the Treaty of Paris was signed. There was this “Mass Naturalization”. Mass Naturalization: All the
inhabitants, same for those who declared themselves and remained as “Spanish Citizens”. ➢ All of
them, regardless whether he is a Canadian or an Indio. Whether he is a foreigner, but found, had been
residing in the island or Spaniards even, that have decided to stay in the islands and retain their being in
the country and did not indicate or whatsoever that they will stay as a “Spanish Subjects” of the King of
Spain. (Citizens of Philippine Islands by the Virtue of Treaty of Paris) Under Treaty of Paris, take note,
there was a provision here: “When the transfer of the sovereignty from Spain to US, the Political and
Civil Status of all the inhabitants and the Philippine Islands shall now be determined by the US
SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 5 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba
Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Congress NOT by the President of the given but by the US
Congress that is also stated in the Treaty of Paris. “ ➢ Pursuant to that provision of Treaty of Paris, US
Congress HAS ORGANIC LAWS. ➢ Providing for a Governmental setup, how the inhabitant should be
governed and further defining who are the citizens of the Philippines Islands. ➢ Philippines: term came
from “Filipino” was the idea of the 1st civil Governor of that time. ➢ We are named “Filipino or
Filipinese” (We are Filipinos, because of the word “Philippines”) Q: WHAT ARE SOME OF THESE
ORGANIC LAWS THAT ARE SIGNIFICANT TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT AND THE
DEFINITION OF “PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP”? ➢ First you have the Philippine Bill of 1902 (Cooper Act)
otherwise known as “The Filipino Political Reach Head” ➢ Because for the first time, under that bill, WE,
FILIPINOS are ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE in the National and Governmental affairs. How? ➢ You have a
legislature (bilateral). The UPPER HOUSE is composed of ALL AMERICANS, but the LOWER HOUSE is
composed of ALL FILIPINOS selected by the provinces at that time. ➢ During the time of Spaniards, the
highest position that a Filipino can be elected to is only to a “Barangay Captain (Cabeza de Barangay)” ➢
This time, when we were UNDER AMERICANS, by the virtue of Philippine Bill 1902, we have now
Filipinos who composed of the Philippine Assembly which is the Lower House of the Legislature at that
time. ➢ Under the Philippine Bill of 1902: it defined the “Filipino Citizens” as those who are “Native
born in general or inhabitants of the Philippine Islands.” Q: (Take note of the cut-off period) As of April
11,1899. Why April 11, 1899? ➢ Remember that the signing was on April 1898. Where the exchange of
the ratification of instrument happened only on April 11, 1899. It says “All inhabitants of the Philippine
Islands”, same for those who decided to remain as “Subjects of the Spanish ground” (They have to sign
something, a document.) ➢ All the rest who are found in the Philippine Islands are considered as
“Citizens of the Philippines”. You have the: 1. Native born 2. Peninsulares 3. Foreigners who are neither
native or Spanish Subject (They are like the traders from other neighboring countries who stayed in the
Philippine Islands) Likewise, they were considered as “Filipino Citizens” (Remember about “Mass
Naturalization”) Then it was reiterated, in the JONES LAW of 1916. It says that “The Children subsequent
there to” (Meaning the children of those who have been considered as inhabitants, therefore citizens of
the Philippines are likewise considered as “Filipino Citizens”) ➢ The Jones Law of 1916 with refers to the
government, was likewise significant. Why significant? ➢ It was otherwise known as “The Philippine
Autonomy Act”. Q: Why “The Philippine Autonomy Act”? ➢ Autonomy: when there is recent realization
of powers or transfer of powers. Q: Now, was then the transfer of powers under the Jones Law of 1916
and from whom and to whom? ➢ There was a transfer of legislative powers from the Americans passed
to the Filipinos. ➢ For the first time, you have a legislature composed of ALL FILIPINOS. ➢ Executive
Branch: All Americans; Legislative Branch: All Filipinos and the Judiciary somehow, they were trying to
establish at least a justice of the case. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella
Alma Singko 6 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG.
FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) ➢ The Americans
were not afraid at all of Filipinos being in the legislature. They are not insecure. After all, even if they
passed the laws, they can still be vetoed by the Governor general (Who is an American). That’s the
under control. Anyhow, there is nothing to worry about, at least they have the practice and the
experience on how to pass laws. Now then, corrupted, Aside from The Jones Law of 1916, there was
now the passage of “The Tydings- Mcduffie Law of 1934” Q: What is Tydings-Mcduffie Law? ➢ It is
otherwise known as “The Philippine Independence Act”. Why? ➢ Because we were now promised with
the GRANT OF INDEPENDENCE. Preparing for that independence from the US, it was a condition to
DRAFT CONSTITUTION which will be the basis of a government that will be establish and that was the
COMMONWEALTH (1935 CONSTITUTION). COMMONWEALTH (1935 CONSTITUTION) - drafted to
establish the COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT. ➢ For the first time, you have a Filipino President
elected by the Filipino People. Q: Do you know what is the term of office under the 1935 constitution?
➢ The origin provided for 6 years without reelection. (Just the same with the 1897 Constitution) Q:
Then what happened, how come “Manuel L. Quezon” was the first president of the Commonwealth?
How about the Second President? ➢ Vice president: Osmeña. He is a Cebuano. He became the
President not by election, but by succession because Quezon died. Q: For if were in 6 years without re-
election, how come that he lasted for about 8 years or 7 years if Quezon died because of Tuberculosis?
➢ It was during the World War II, when the Japanese invaded Manila and some of the nature places in
the islands. They cannot go for election when the government was exiled in Washington DC. They have
to amend the 1935 Constitution to extend the term office of the President for 2 more years (A total of 8
years) because his term has already expired. However, he died because of tuberculosis, and the vice -
president RO Osmeña succeeded him not by election but by succession of the Republic. ➢ When we
were granted with our independence, however, Osmeña lost in the election with Roxas. ➢ Manuel A.
Roxas: First president of the 3rd Republic of the Philippines. Q: For example, in the case of Fernando Poe
Jr., can you base it on the 1987 Constitution? ➢ No, you can’t. Why? Because he was not born under
1987. He was born sometime around 1930s. Therefore, what should govern is the 1935 Constitution. ➢
If there was any reference to the 1987 constitution, it was the first paragraph that says “Those who are
residents of the Citizens of the Philippines from the time of the adoption of the 1987 Constitution” ➢
Meaning, if Fernando Poe Jr. remained a Filipino Citizen during the 1987 Constitution, because of that
first paragraph “He is a Filipino Citizen” or Under 1973 Constitution that says “Those who are residents
of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of the 1987 Constitution” (Meaning even before Fernando
Poe Jr. was born before the Adoption, but he remained a Filipino citizen under the time where 1987
Constitution was adopted, he is a Filipino Citizen.) ➢ If he was born then under 1935 Constitution, what
should govern then would be the 1935 Constitution of Citizenship under Art.4 thereof. Q: What does the
1935 Constitution says? ➢ Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines. (The Child is Filipino
Citizen) Going back to the situation of his birth, remember the “Father was a Filipino” and he was not
married to the mother, who was a US Citizen. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge
LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) ➢ Ordinarily,
she should have followed the citizenship of the mother. But, remember, the mother is US Citizen and
that is the requirement of “Acknowledgement of the Child”. ➢ He has to be acknowledged, recognized
in a public document to be a private document, or to be declared by the court that “he is the son of his
father” if he is born illegitimate. ➢ Case: TECSON VS COMELEC FACTS: (Source: Internet) Victorino X.
Fornier, petitioner initiated a petition before the COMELEC to disqualify FPJ and to deny due course or
to cancel his certificate of candidacy upon the thesis that FPJ made a material misrepresentation in his
certificate of candidacy by claiming to be a natural-born Filipino citizen when in truth, according to
Fornier, his parents were foreigners; his mother, Bessie Kelley Poe, was an American, and his father,
Allan Poe, was a Spanish national, being the son of Lorenzo Poe, a Spanish subject. Granting, petitioner
asseverated, that Allan F. Poe was a Filipino citizen, he could not have transmitted his Filipino citizenship
to FPJ, the latter being an illegitimate child of an alien mother. Petitioner based the allegation of the
illegitimate birth of respondent on two assertions - first, Allan F. Poe contracted a prior marriage to a
certain Paulita Gomez before his marriage to Bessie Kelley and, second, even if no such prior marriage
had existed, Allan F. Poe, married Bessie Kelly only a year after the birth of respondent. Petitioners also
questioned the jurisdiction of the COMELEC in taking cognizance of and deciding the citizenship issue
affecting Fernando Poe Jr. They asserted that under Section 4(7), Article VII of the 1987 Constitution,
only the Supreme Court had original and exclusive jurisdiction to resolve the basic issue of the case.
ISSUE: 1. Whether or not FPJ is a natural born Filipino citizen? HELD: 1. Where jurisprudence regarded
an illegitimate child as taking after the citizenship of its mother, it did so for the benefit the child. It was
to ensure a Filipino nationality for the illegitimate child of an alien father in line with the assumption
that the mother had custody, would exercise parental authority and had the duty to support her
illegitimate child. It was to help the child, not to prejudice or discriminate against him. (Questions by
Judge) ISSUE: If born illegitimate, and may have been acknowledge by his father, should she therefor
follow the citizenship of his father? ➢ Given that he was acknowledge by his father, the fact remains
that he is illegitimate. ➢ Father Bernas: “He should have not be faulted for being born out of wedlock. It
is not the fault of the child to be born under that situation. You blame it to the parents “ Q: Should there
be a legitimacy to a child that is born as illegitimate? ➢ It was not the child who is illegitimate, it is the
mother who is illegitimate. ➢ According to Father Bernas, “1935 Constitution does not make any
distinction whether the father is illegitimate or legitimate. ➢ It merely says “Father is Filipino, Child is
Filipino”. Going back to the Father being Filipino now, assuming that he is being acknowledge because
he was illegitimate, do you consider Ronald Poe as the Father, who has to be a Filipino Citizen? ➢ He
has to be a Filipino citizen in order for Fernando Poe to be acknowledge as a Filipino citizen. ➢ There
was no formal constitution before that, you can only refer to the Organic laws. Organic Laws - Jones
Law, Philippine Bill (1902), and Treaty of Paris How was it explained under these documents? ➢ Ronald
Poe is the son of Lorenzo Poe (We don’t know when he was born, but he died in Pangasinan at the age
of 89, sometime in 1954? Note: If you died in the Philippines, you must have been born in the
Philippines. (Logic presented) ➢ Since he died at the age of 89, he must have been born sometime in
April 1899. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 8 | P a g e
ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) ➢ He was presumed to be a resident of
the Philippines as of April 11, 1899 in which “Absence of any group and he has retained his Spanish
credentials or citizenship, then he is considered as a Filipino Citizen”. The law says “Should the
subsequent there to are likewise considered to be a Filipino.” ➢ His Son, Roland Poe, regardless
whether he declared himself as “Spaniard”, the fact remains that he was born as a Filipino Citizen. ➢ If
the grandfather is a Filipino, the father must be Filipino. If the Father is a Filipino, then the Son Fernando
Poe must be a Filipino. Why natural born Citizen? ➢ Under 1935 Constitution, there is NO DEFINITION
OF A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.ALL ARE PRESUMED TO BE NATURAL BORN. ➢ Only under 1973
Constitution, that there was a definition of a “Natural-born Citizen”. ➢ There is no question of doubt
that Fernando Poe Jr. is a Spaniard or American citizen. He is considered as a “Natural Born Citizen”
100%. ✓ Case: POE vs. COMELEC (Grace Poe Case) ➢ The controversy of Citizenship was even adapted
by the adopted daughter. ➢ They were suspecting whether she is a natural daughter of Fernando Poe,
that’s why her parents had become unknown. As far as I knew, Fernando Poe was married to Susan
Roces who was never seen as a pregnant woman. ➢ There were too many speculations of her birth.
FACTS: (Source: Internet) In her COC for Presidency on the May 2016 elections, Grace Poe declared that
she is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines and that her residence up to day before May 9, 2016
would be 10 years and 11 months counted from May 24, 2005. Grace Poe was born in 1968., found as
newborn infant in Jaro,Iloilo and was legally adopted by RONALD ALLAN KELLY POE (FPJ) and JESUS
SONORA POE (SUSAN ROCES) in 1974. She immigrated to the US in 1991 after her marriage to Theodore
Llamanzares who was then based at the US. Grace Poe then became a naturalized American citizen in
2001. On December 2004, he returned to the Philippines due to his father’s deteriorating medical
condition, who then eventually demise on February 3,2005. She then quitted her job in the US to be
with her grieving mother and finally went home for good to the Philippines on MAY 24, 2005. On JULY
18, 2006, the BI granted her petition declaring that she had reacquired her Filipino citizenship under RA
9225. She registered as a voter and obtained a new Philippine Passport. In 2010, before assuming her
post as appointes Chairperson of the MTRCB , she renounced her American citizenship to satisfy the RA
9225 requirements as to Reacquistion of Filipino Citizenship. From then on, she stopped using her
American passport. Petitions were filed before the COMELEC to deny or cancel her candidacy on the
ground particularly among others, that she cannot be considered a natural born Filipino citizen since she
was a FOUNDLING and that her biological parents cannot be proved as Filipinos. The Comelec en banc
cancelled her candidacy on the ground that she is in want of citizenship and residence requirements and
that she committed misrepresentation in her COC. On CERTIORARI, the SUPREME COURT, reversed the
ruling and held a vote of 9-6 that POE is qualified as candidate for Presidency. ISSUE: (1) Whether or not
Grace Poe- Llamanzares is a natural- born Filipino citizen HELD: YES. GRACE POE is considerably a
natural-born Filipino Citizen. For that, she satisfied the constitutional requirement that only natural-
born Filipinos may run for Presidency. (1) there is high probability that Poe’s parents are Filipinos, as
being shown in her physical features which are typical of Filipinos, aside from the fact that she was
found as an infant in Jaro, Iloilo, a municipality wherein there is 99% probability that residents there are
Filipinos, consequently providing 99% chance that Poe’s biological parents are Filipinos. Said probability
and SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 9 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa
ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I |
Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) circumstantial evidence are admissible under Rule 128,
Sec 4 of the Rules on Evidence. (2) The SC pronounced that FOUNDLINGS are as a class, natural born-
citizens as based on the deliberations of the 1935 Constitutional Convention, wherein though its
enumeration is silent as to foundlings, there is no restrictive language either to definitely exclude the
foundlings to be natural born citizens. (3) That Foundlings are automatically conferred with the natural-
born citizenship as to the country where they are being found, as covered and supported by the UN
Convention Law. (Questions by Judge) Q: If the parents has never been known, what is then her
citizenship? ➢ Try to find a provision in the constitution and there is none. Q: Do we recognize Jus Soli
in The Philippines? ➢ No, we don’t. It should not be the place of birth to determine her citizenship by
land relationship. You have to establish that the mother was Filipino in order to consider her as the
daughter of that Filipino. Q: Since there were no applicable domestic laws, what did she adopt? ➢ She
generally accepted the principle of International Law. Q: What is that Principle? ➢ That International
convention on “Reduction of Statelessness”. The purpose of that Convention was to reduce people who
are considered as “Stateless” because they can’t adopt for any citizenship. Q: How is this done Under
this principle of International law? ➢ There is this presumption that if a child is born to unknown
parent, then the child is considered as citizen of the country where he/she is found. ➢ The presumption
would be “That mother maybe a citizen of that country otherwise she could not have given birth to that
Child in that country”. ➢ They presumed that “The Child is Filipino because the Mother was born in the
Philippines, therefore, the Mother being Filipino, the child is Filipino too.” Q: Why do we apply that law
here in the Philippines even though we’re not even signatory to comply with it? ➢ Under the 1987
constitution, it says that “We adopt the Generally accepted principles of International law as part of the
Law of the Land. Automatically, under the Incorporation Clause? (I cannot hear her properly) ➢ In the
absence of domestic law, you apply that generally accepted International law as if it is a domestic law.
➢ Hence, Grace Poe was considered as a “Filipino Citizen.” ➢ This was supported by the fact that Grace
Poe has chinita eyes, pug-nose, and short stature. (Typical features of a Filipino based on decision by the
SC) Take note that this recognition of “Grace Poe” as Filipino Citizen from birth, was confirmed by the
fact that she was adopted. Why? How that confirmed? ➢ Only Filipino children can be the subject for
adoption. If you are not a Filipino, then you cannot be adopted. Is it because of the adopting parents
that are Filipino, that makes her a Filipino? ➢ NO. From the very start, she is a Filipino. Otherwise, she
could not have been adopted by Fernando Poe Jr. and Susan Roces. ➢ She did adopt the citizenship of
her parents but she is already a Filipino citizen by the time she was adopted (Recognition by the state –
Citizen from birth) ➢ She does not have to be at war to perfect her citizenship because from birth, she
was considered a Filipino citizen. ➢ Therefore, she is a “Natural-born citizen”. Q: What provision? - 1987
Constitution “Those whose mothers are Filipino Citizens”. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España
Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 10 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang
narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem
(2018) - 1973 Constitution “Those whose Fathers or Mothers are Filipino Citizen”. (Grace Poe was born
under 1973 Constitution) - Her mother is a Filipino, therefor, she is a Filipino too by blood relationship
(Jus Sanguinis) (Emphasis by Judge) Remember, Grace Poe grew up and she applied for a Philippines
passport (which can only be issued if you are a Filipino Citizen). She did not have to do anything because
she is a Filipino Citizen already and was recognized by the State. Answer (Source: BATASNatin.com) ➢
Under the 1987 Constitution, international law can become part of the sphere of domestic law either by
transformation or incorporation. ➢ The transformation method requires that an international law be
transformed into a domestic law through a constitutional mechanism such as local legislation. ➢ The
incorporation method applies when, by mere constitutional declaration, international law is deemed to
have the force of domestic law. ➢ Treaties become part of the law of the land through transformation
pursuant to Article VII, Section 21 of the Constitution which provides that “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.” ➢ Thus, treaties or conventional international law must go through a process prescribed by
the Constitution for it to be transformed into municipal law that can be applied to domestic conflicts.
(Pharmaceutical & Health Care Assn. of the Phil. v. Health Secretary Duque, et al., G.R. No. 173034,
October 19, 2007) CONSTITUTION ➢ Highest fundamental law upon which all the activities of the
government are based. ➢ Therefore, laws find their justification if there is a conformity with the
constitution. ➢ Decisions and acts of the President are only be considered as “valid” if they are in
consonant with the constitution. Supreme Court ➢ To make sure that the constitution is followed by
everybody, they review those indiscretionary acts by the President and that of Congress to be sure that
they conform with the Constitution. Function of Court (1973 Constitution) ➢ To act as a “referee” in
case of conflicting rights, to settle disputes, applying the law as a basis of that right. ➢ Judge: No longer
review the acts of the President or Congress or any legislature of that matter. Function of Court (1987
Constitution) ➢ The Courts, especially the Supreme Court can determine whether there has to be a
grave abuse of discretion on the part of the President or that of the Congress that would amount to
lack/excess of jurisdiction (Expanded Jurisdiction on Judicial Review) Supremacy of the Constitution ➢
The basic and paramount law of the land, which all other laws must conform, which all people including
highest officials of the land must defer. ➢ Even for grave abuse of discretion and improvised by a Co-
equal branch of government like of the President or of Congress, it can still be reviewed by the SC in
order to assert not the superiority of the Supreme Court, but the Supremacy of the Constitution.
Justiciable questions: Questions involving “Controversies” on contrariety of assertion of rights. Based on
existing laws or applicable rights of the constitution. PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM OF THE GOVERNMENT ➢
There is supremacy of the Parliament and NOT of the constitution. Q: When there is a conflict or
question on Constitutionality of a Parliament act (low cast of the parliament), it is brought to the court.
Can the court declare it as “unconstitutional” and remove it from the books of the statutes? ➢ Not in
the Parliamentary system, because the Supremacy is in the Parliament. It is simply SYSTEMReviewer by:
Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 11 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan
malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma
Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) considered as “Contrary to the Constitution” however, it remains in the book
of Statutes. ➢ It is not being applied but it is still there in the book of Statutes. ➢ It is not being applied,
but it still exists because it is not being modified. ➢ Indifference to the supremacy of the parliament.
KINDS OF CONSTITUTION I.As to origin: 1. ENACTED/CONVENTIONAL CONSTITUTION -enacted by a
Constitutional Convention. 2. EVOLUTIONARY/CUMULATIVE CONSTITUTION -a product of history 3.
FIAT/GRANTED CONSTITUTION -made by one sovereign for another II.As to form: 1. WRITTEN
CONSTITUTION -not because it is in writing; codified -all other sources are found in one single
instrument - Ex. Republic of the Philippines CHARACTERISTICS: (Bar Question) a. broad -Has to cover the
entire government, structure, and organization. b. brief - Not a place for details, you can only have
general principles and the rest will be supplemented by the statutes passed by Congress. - Ex. Congress
has the power to appropriate Public funds for Public purpose (Does it state specifically for what purpose
is the project? – It does not specifically state, because you’re limiting your constitution) c. definite - To
avoid ambiguity and conflicting interpretations of provisions of the constitution. 2. UNWRITTEN
CONSTITUTION -Sources are several written but are scattered -Necessarily, not all parts are written,
some parts are not written - Ex. customs and traditions, Constitution of Britain & UK III.As to the manner
of changing the constitution: 1. RIGID CONSTITUTION -difficult to change. Not flexible -must follow a
certain procedure (STAGES): a. proposal b. submission c. ratification Transcribed by: Rodelas, Legaspi,
Samporna, Samaco August 28, 2018 (RECITS) Q: What is a constitution? It is the highest fundamental law
of the land. Q: If a law passed by Congress will be in conflict with the Constitution, which of the two will
prevail, the Constitution or the law that had been passed by Congress? ➢ The Constitution. Q: Now
would your answer be the same if the system is parliamentary and there is the dominance of the
parliament? Would it still be the Constitution to prevail over a statute or an act that has been passed by
the Congress? ➢ The constitution, because basically it’s the source or the reason why that statute is
being passed. Q: Basically, what would then be the purpose of a statute that is passed by a legislature?
S: It would be.. it would serve like, statute would serve as a.. like a definite or a specific law because
basically the constitution is like the general principles so when the Congress or parliament passed
statute or the law, it serves to be like the specific law or statute. Q: Can you give me an example of a
general principle that is provided by the Constitution where as you have a statute that provides for the
specific? S: Uhm. Constitution. Right of Suffrage. Q: Okay. That is provided by the Constitution. And what
would then be the statute in relation to that? SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge
LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) S: They have
specified the.. who will be their qualified voters, the age, how the voting will be and the process of
voting, judge. Q: The process of voting and how they will vote. Now, we just limit ourselves on
qualifications of a voter. To be considered as such, the constitution has enumerated what are the
qualifications right? Now, can Congress pass a law that would require other qualifications other than
those enumerated by the Constitution? S: Yes judge. J: They can? S: Yes judge. Q: So, even if let us say
for example the Constitution does not require educational, what do you call this, a literacy requirement,
if Congress will pass a law that would require that should be able to read and write, would that be in
consonance with the constitution? S: Yes, judge, because it would be unfair to those.. Q: Without
considering the unfairness of it, okay? Just based on the constitution that does not require literacy as a
qualification, and here is a law providing for basic qualification as such that they’d be able to read and
write. S: No judge, because it is inherent to every Filipino for the right to suffrage. So even though there
are those who cannot read or write, they still have the right to vote. J: Now, without considering the
rationale behind the requirement of or non-requirement of literacy by the Constitution, merely on the
basis of what the Constitution provides, can Congress pass a law then that would provide for other
qualifications other than those that are enumerated in the Constitution? S: I think it’s, if they can change
or amend. J: They can amend the Constitution by ordinary legislation, is that what you’re saying? S: No.
J: So how is it then? What would happen to that law? Would that be a valid law? S: I think as long as
there are.. they still consider the opinion of the people judge. J: That is of the moment, you were like
discussing that the law has to conform with the constitution. Like you gave me an example of
qualifications of a voter as provided by the constitution, that’s why I made up a follow-up question
whether Congress can pass a law that would add to qualification that had already been enumerated by
the Constitution. S: Yes, they can. J: You may sit down, Ms. (called another student) Q: There are
different forms of Constitution, and how do you classify the 1987 Constitution according to its form? S:
Uhm. It’s a written constitution, rigid and conventional. J: You said what? Written? S: It is rigid,
conventional and written. J: No I’m talking about form. I’m not asking you the other forms or kinds of
constitution according to how is it, the sources of the provisions of the constitution. S: It is written
judge. Q: It is written. When you say it is written, then the other kind must be unwritten. So when a
Constitution is unwritten, does it mean that it is not reduced in writing? S: No judge. It only means that
the sources are scattered or there is no single document, if it’s a written constitution. J: Okay. So you
were saying earlier that the 1987 Constitution is written. S: Yes judge. Q: In relation to non-written
constitution, why do you say that 1987 is written? S: Uhm. There is a single document. J: There’s a single
document? While an unwritten constitution does not have? S: Uhm. It does not come from a single
document. It comes from different sources for example judicial decisions, statutes, not on a single
Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Q: Now then, if your constitution in form is written, how
do you classify according to its origin? How was it made? Where did it come from? S: Uhm. It was, it was
somehow came from the.. it followed the US Constitution. J: It followed the US Consti—in following the
US Constitution, how was the 1987 Constitution drafted? S: It was enacted by the Congress. J: It was
Congress who made 1987 Constitution? Are you sure it was Congress? Because there was no legislative
body at that time. Precisely they have to create a Constitution because there was no legislative body
under Freedom Constitution. So how can Congress then make the 1987 Constitution? S: The 1987
Constitution arose from the revolution that happened. J: So it’s a revolutionary constitution then? S: It
arose after a revolution. J: So after a revolution then so how do you classify it according to origin? How
was it made? Where did it come from? You’re not sure how it was made? Following the revolution? S:
Uhm it was made to.. The 1987 Constitution was drafted in order to be the basis for the.. Q: Yes, they
are already but my question is how it came, how did this constitution come about? You may sit down
Ms. (Called another student) According to how difficult to change the constitution, how do you classify
1987 Constitution? S: Ah the 1987 Constitution judge is rigid. It means that it is difficult to change. J:
Why is it difficult to change? S: Because it has a, it has to undergo a formal process. Q: A formal process.
What is this formal process that the 1987 constitution has to undergo before you can effect an
amendment or revision? S: First, uh, there has to be a proposal then submission then ratification of the
revision or the amendment of the constitution. Q: In the proposal for amendment or revision, who can
do that? S: The Congress or a constitutional convention or people’s initiative. J: People’s initiative. Q: If
Congress is going to propose, how is this done? S: There has to be.. if the Congress is to propose a
revision, there has to be ¾ of the votes of the Congress for a revision of or an amendment to the
constitution. J: How is this then different from the basic law making power of congress? This power to
propose changes to the Constitution. S: Come again judge. Q: How is this different? This power of
Congress to propose changes to the Constitution as you said by ¾ votes from the ordinary legislative
power of congress? S: Uhm. It’s different because it.. ah usually the ordinary, I think the ordinary uhm to
have a institute ordinary legislature would be 2/4 of the congress. J: You said what? S: 2/4 J: 2 what? S:
2/4 of the votes J: ¾ votes S: Majority of the.. J: So are you saying that the difference lies in the votes
required in making the proposal for amendment and in making proposal for legislative enactment?
Hence the vote? Now then, if Congress is to act as a constituent assembly to propose changes to the
constitution, would that require approval of the president? S: Yes J: It would require? SYSTEMReviewer
by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 14 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung
kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela
Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) S: No judge. The congress.. To make a constitutional convention, the
congress.. J: I’m talking about congress because you said congress can directly propose or it can be
through a constitutional convention because _ to this congress that is proposing. Is that proposal for
amendment or revision subject to the reviewer approval of the president? S: Yes judge. J: It does? So it’s
just like when they pass a bill for legislative enactment before it becomes a law, it has to be approved by
the president is what you’re saying? S: Uhm. I think no. I think it’s different. J: Why is that? S: Because
uhm making a revision or an amendment to the constitution you need to have a proposal to ratify it, ay
to submit it to the people.. J: So you’re saying that it’s the people that approves it and not the
president? Is that what you’re saying? S: It has to.. I think it’s the people. J: You may sit down MS.
Alright. We’ll continue this one guys. -After recits – All the sources of political law that we used as basis
or references in our understanding of the constitution are: • The 1987 Constitution • The previous
constitution such as: o The 1973 Constitution o The 1935 Constitution o The Treaty of Paris – that
effectively transferred sovereignty from Spain to the US and which justified the passage of organic laws
by US Congress that are important for the establishment of our government starting with: ▪ The
Philippine Bill of 1902 ▪ Jones of 1916 and ▪ The Tydings Mcduffie Law of 1934 You might wonder then
why the constitution is the highest fundamental law of the land which all activities of the government
are based. In other words, therefore, the action of the government and its activities like making laws,
implementation of laws, interpreting the laws will find their justification in there being consistent, being
in conformity with the constitution. First and foremost, you should know the difference also between an
organic law and a constitution. The organic laws then of the US Congress that provided for the system of
government, the structure and the operation then of the government such as those three laws that we
were mentioning. How are they different from an ordinary constitution? First and foremost, they are
similar in the sense that they provided for a structure, an organization of government. The difference is
that the organic laws were passed by a legislative body such as the US Congress. And they are therefore
approved by the US Congress. Whereas the Constitution is drafted particular individuals or group of
individuals subject to the ratification by the electorate. The organic laws provided for in details of the
system of government whereas the constitution provide for the principles underlying the operation of
government. ➢ It is not a place for details. When you change an organic law, you simply pass another
law that would repeal or amend it without need of the approval of the electorate. ➢ Whereas, if you
change a Constitution that still has to follow certain procedure like __ subject to the approval of the
electorate. How about a statute and a Constitution? ➢ You were saying earlier that even statutes must
conform to the constitution being the highest fundamental law, basic law. ➢ So all laws passed by
Congress should be based upon the constitution because if they’re contrary to the constitution, that can
easily be remedied. Either that the president will veto the bill and SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L.
España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 15 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na
ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st
sem (2018) therefore cannot become a law or it can be the subject of a judicial review by the courts and
declare it as contrary to the constitution and therefore void. So, therefore the general rule is all laws
must or acts of the president, and even the interpretations of the supreme court must be in consonance
with the provisions of the Constitution. If for example, the SC would declare a law unconstitutional or
it’s contrary to the constitution, that is not an assertion of the superiority of the courts over the other
branches in the government. But rather, it’s an assertion of the supremacy of the Constitution. Earlier I
asked an example of a provision of the constitution that is provided in the constitution and you passed
laws on the basis of what the constitution says. For example the qualifications of a voter, so there’s an
enumeration, you should be at least 18 years old, registered voter, resident in the Philippines for one
year and six months in the place where he proposes to vote, he must not be insane, he must not have
been declared to have violated his loyalty to the Republic of the Philippines and so on and so forth. And
that I ask what if for example Congress would pass a law this time requiring literacy as a qualification?
Or perhaps qualification like owning a property. Do you know that 1935 Constitution requires that you
should have at least a property not less than 5,000 pesos? ➢ It’s your bond to make sure that you don’t
have flying voters. That’s good because if there is a law that will support that then there is no violation
of the constitution. Like for example the amount can be increased, if it does not state any amount then
the supplement would be by way of legislation to implement that required provided by the constitution.
➢ But if it says 5,000 and Congress now will increase it to 10,000 then definitely that would be contrary
to the constitution. And that cannot be allowed. When the constitution says there is no requirement of
literacy, in fact the constitution is silent with regarding on the matter, on being able to read and write,
that is not so provided in the constitution. So when the constitution is silent that means it is not
prohibited or that is not required. In other words, only those that are specifically so stated in the
constitution. This time Congress pass a law making it as a qualification. If there is no prohibition against
it then congress can pass a law. But if there is such a qualification that what need not be literate in order
to vote then the constitution requiring literacy would not be a violation of the constitution and that
cannot be allowed. Then you ask the question, what is the difference between the constitution and a
statute? ➢ The constitution is practically made by the people because without people’s ratification to
that constitution there can’t be a constitution. ➢ Whereas, statutes are made directly by the legislators
while the representatives of the people. So therefore, that would not require any ratification or
approval from the people because it’s understood that since they are representatives of the people,
then it’s tantamount to having them been approved by the people themselves. You will know also that
the constitution provides only for guidance, principles. There’s no room for details in the constitution.
Otherwise, you won’t have a constitution as thin as you have. Because the thing is, if you are to put all
the details supposedly to accommodate the entire structure and system of government, you’ll be
limiting the government. Like for example, when the constitution says that congress has the power to
approve the public funds or to authorize the disbursement of public funds, you would note that if you
read the constitution, it does not state the date, specific date and the specific amount, or what
particular public purpose is the money going to be spent. There’s nothing in the provision of the
constitution. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 16 | P a g e
ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) So if you follow the principle that is
applicable and honoring in the present existing conditions and as well as to future conditions for as long
as you apply the constitution. Q: So then, how would you implement a particular project when the
constitution does not state the specific? ➢ Now you have the statute. So now, particularly, example the
job appropriation act is a law that authorize disbursement of public funds for the operation of the whole
government. We call it as the GAA, General Appropriation Act. Now it is still pending with the Senate,
they cannot agree among themselves, what will happen if it will not be passed for next year’s fiscal
year? That means the budget for this year will be automatically be enacted the following year. What
would happen? ➢ The expenditures of next year will just be denoted by the budget that has been
approved which is going to be automatically enacted should there be no new budget in the
appropriation acts that will be approved. To give you a concrete example, it would be not good for the
government employees. Why? In the next fiscal year, budget supposedly we are expecting that we will
enjoy the full increase of our salary. Full tranche of our salary. If that budget is not going to be passed,
what will happen? There’ll be no increase in our salary because we will be operating on the basis of the
old budget. And the old budget is just the third tranche of our increase in our salary. So, it’s all limited.
And it is very specific. It is only applicable to particular existing conditions. You cannot apply that to
future conditions. You cannot go beyond what is not so stated in the budget for this year and apply it for
next year. Q: Another example, in the budget this year, it says that DPWH can construct a bridge for 1
billion to be completed within the year. They did not spend the money. What will happen? Can they still
use the money for next year? ➢ Answer is no. That money will be returned to the national treasury
because the statute is so limited, it is all supposedly to provide for the details and it’s only applicable
within existing conditions, cannot be applied to future conditions. Q: Judge how about if unfinished lang
ang project? J: Oh well, that’s different. When you start it already then you have to complete it to finish
then the money need not be returned. But still you are going to be spending within the budget. But if
you’re not going to spend it at all, the money has to be returned. Supposedly like there is a budget for
filling out of vacancies in government offices and they did not make any appointment to those offices or
positions. What would happen to the money that had already been appropriated for that purpose? ➢
What they do usually in government offices, they will consider that as savings and then they are to
transfer the budget to augment the items in the budget. That is allowed if it is approved by certain
individuals. Otherwise, what would happen? The money allocated for that purpose is to be returned to
the national treasury because the law is very specific on how the money should be spent. So you will
note also that in terms of changing the constitution, it’s quite difficult in some instances because you
need ratification from the people. ➢ But statutes, if you’re going to change it either by repeal or
amendment, Congress can easily do that by passing a subsequent law or another law that will amend or
either or revise or rather abolish that law. So let’s continue then according to the forms of Constitution.
The different kinds of constitution will depend on the form. The origin and the manner of changing it or
even depending on the system of government adapted. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I
|Judge Stella Alma Singko 17 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo?
LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) So
when the sources are found in one single instrument, the form is written. But if the sources are
scattered, then the Constitution is unwritten. We said that the Constitution of 1987 is definitely written
because all the provisions are found in one single instrument that is codified. So it’s found in one book.
(28:57) Forms of Constitution The forms of Constitution, guys, can…or different kinds of
constitution…the form or the origin and the manner of changing it or even depending on the system of
government adapted. So when the sources are found in one single instrument… that is… the form is
written. But if the sources are scattered then the constitution is an unwritten. The Constitution of 1987
is definitely written because all the provisions are found in one single instrument that is codified, so it is
found in one book…do you understand? If you want to know what are your rights, all you have to do is
just open Article III. Then all your rights are enumerated there. You know what ___ to like them for you
to know laws passed by Congress where your rights are granted. (30:00) Or the Supreme Court decisions
that provide all your rights because all these laws and decisions from the Supreme Court actually are
based on the Constitution. So laws maybe passed, like protecting your freedom of speech, like the Anti-
Cyber Crime Law, do you understand here? Your libel laws, these are statutes that ___ protection of
your rights… do you understand here? Or the decisions of the Supreme Court expounding the extent of
your exercise of rights that are guaranteed of the Bill of Rights – they form part of the provision of the
Constitution by way of judicial decision. But definitely, the basic provisions are found in one single
source. Do you understand? On the other hand, an unwritten constitution is not necessarily unwritten
or not in writing. (31:00) Because in fact, some sources are written. Right? The Constitution of Great
Britain…England. The Constitution is unwritten, the sources are scattered. That if you want to know
what are the powers of the government, you refer to the Parliament Acts – laws passed by the
Parliament, granting powers to the government. You have to consider the decisions of the Supreme
Court vesting powers to the government. And also then, you may source it from unwritten sources like
customs and traditions of the British people, form part of their Constitution which is unwritten,
conventions and protocols – these are all unwritten but they follow it as if it is the governing law. Do you
understand? ‘Example, they were saying that it’s not…nothing really in their law (32:00) that says if
there is going to be a tie in the election of the Prime Minister, it will be…who’s going to break the tie?
Out of respect to the monarch, it’s the Queen of Great Britain that breaks the tie. There’s no written rule
regarding on that, but that has been the practice. Do you understand? In our case, it has to be all in
writing. Otherwise, that would be too dangerous. Any problems, any questions, clarifications relating to
that? Do we understand each other on this matter? Okay, so now…another form and kind of
Constitution is according to the Origin. How did our 1987 Constitution come about? You may even
consider other constitutions in the past, how they are made, were they enacted, made by Congress?
Were they made by a big individual or a group of individuals? (33:00) Okay? ➢ From the First Philippine
Republic. Who was then the President? ➢ Emilio Aguinaldo. ➢ You recall that he declared
independence from Spain on June 12, 1898. So our celebration of independence day is not that of our
independence from the US. ➢ It was the independence that declared by Aguinaldo from the mother
country, Spain. Do you understand? And we celebrate that every year and you didn’t even know why are
we celebrating the independence day. You thought all the while that because we were independent
when the…the Americans granted us such. Okay? SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I
|Judge Stella Alma Singko 18 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo?
LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Now,
was there a Constitution under the first Philippine Republic? ➢ There was. (34:00) There was a
constitution. How was the Constitution made? ➢ It was made by Felipe Calderon – an individual. ➢ And
it was ratified by…not by the people, because there were just a few of them who recognize the first
Philippine republic. It lasted only for a month. Do you understand? It was kuno ratified by the Malolos
Congress - the legislative body at the time. Do you understand? Now then, so never mind the first
republic. It didn’t register that law. We had the second Philippine Republic. Do you know who the
president was in the second Philippine Republic? ➢ Jose P. Laurel. ➢ And that particular government, if
you can recall, was established against Commonwealth government. The Commonwealth government
came first before the second Philippine republic (35:00) was established by the Japanese military. Do
you understand? So, they call it as the Banana Republic. Or the Japanese-sponsored government, do you
understand? Okay. ➢ The president was appointed, not elected. There was no vice president. Because
there is no…no problem with filling up the vacancy because after all, the president was only appointed,
do you understand? Okay. Was there a constitution at that time (Second Philippine Republic)? ➢ Yes,
there was. Who drafted it? ➢ It was drafted by the Preparatory Commission for Philippine
Independence, alright? And ratified by the Kapisanan sa Paglilingkod ng Bagong Pilipino, or otherwise
known as the KALIBAPI. Do you understand? KALIBAPI. Okay? Alright? And then, how about the
Commonwealth government, (36:00) that was then was then exiled in the Washington DC? Who was the
president? ➢ It was Manuel L. Quezon. Alright? Was there a vice-president? ➢ There was. So who was
the vice-president? Sergio Osmeña Sr. Was that Commonwealth based on the Constitution? ➢ Yes, it
was. Pursuant to the Tydings-McDuffie Law, the 1935 Constitution was drafted by the 1934 ConCon –
Constitution Convention, do you understand? And it was ratified by the people, subject to the approval
of the President of the US. Because at that time we were not yet independent. Do you understand? Are
you following? ➢ Then, we were granted finally our independence by the US on July 4, 1946 (37:00)
that led to the birth of the third Republic of the Philippines. Do you know who was the first president of
the Third Republic? ➢ It was Manuel L. Roxas, Osmeña lost to him. Okay? And Manuel L. Roxas became
the first president… Do you know who was the last president of the Third Republic? ➢ It was Marcos
who was the last president. Was there a Constitution under the third republic of the Philippines? ➢ Yes,
there was. And what was that constitution? The commonwealth was replaced by the Third Republic. ➢
Well, you were granted independence in 1946. You have a 1973 Constitution? And then you tell me, ah,
1946 Constitution. Hardly, you may be correct. But the thing is…these were the amendments made to
the 1935 Constitution, so you still have the 1935 Constitution, amended in 1942 or the extension of the
term of office of SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 19 | P a g e
ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Quezon for two more years. And then in
1946…1947, there were amendments to the Constitution, like for example there was a change for the
term of office of the president from 6 years with 1 election to 4 years with 1 re-election. Do you
understand? (39:04) And then you had Bicameral legislature from National Assembly to Philippine
Congress. Do you understand? ➢ This was in 1946. There was an increase in the membership in the
COMELEC. I think from 3, then, they changed it like 7…7 or 9? I think there were 9 members to the
COMELEC. And then, many other changes were made. Do you understand? That’s why sometimes, they
describe the Constitution as 1947 Constitution but actually it refers to the same 1935 Constitution that
was amended, do you understand? And that was the Constitution that we had until Mr. Marcos ran for
president in 1965. That’s why, that’s four years, his term would have expired in 1969, and since he ran
for re-election, his term would last unta, supposedly in 1973. (40:02) But before that happened, he had
the Constitution revised. Do you understand? And to the eyes, the 1935 Constitution, he made a new
one. In 1971, we had the election for the Constitutional Convention, do you understand? So, that’s why
the question is who made the 1973 Constitution? Who made it? Marcos? Why Marcos when you have
the 1971 ConCon. Mao pa gani pag-istorya. ➢ That was the presumption before. You have like…You’re
not reading your history. Your history is very rich, ‘kay? Come to think of it. Can you compare the history
of other countries? You read your history. Gikan pa sa sultan, datu, hadji and rajah, diba? You get in
views with the history of the European government kay gikan sa king, duke, etc. palaces and Castles, it’s
so romantic to hear about the story. We don’t bother to read our history. Why is that? We don’t bother
reading about our history. Because you’re not so proud of our…what do you call it, your history? Your
heritage, you’re not that so proud. Mao na. Okay. ➢ Anyhow, going back to what I was saying here,
guys. It was presumed to have been drafted or that it was made by Marcos, or at least under his
direction, because of that Constitution of 1935 was revised on September 21, 1972, Martial Law was
declared. Martial Law was declared, do you understand? And then, there were members of the ConCon
who were against Marcos administration, do you understand? So, because they were afraid that they
might get arrested, they left the country or if not, they went into hiding. Do you understand? That
Constitution, they said, was completed only sometime in November 1972, when Martial Law was
already declared and they were saying that some of them, in fact, the members of the ConCon, were
already put in the stockade, so how can they complete it, finish it? Do you understand? That’s why the
rumor, that it may have been completed then by Mr. Marcos, because he was so smart. Anyhow, well
you cannot deny, still the fact, that there was the 1971 ConCon (43:00). Do you understand? You can
only, like, surmise but that is not the fact. The fact remains that there was 1971 ConCon that was
created for the purpose of revising the 1935 Constitution. And then the 1935 Constitution was ratified
by the Citizen Assembly on January 10-15, 1973. And then finally it was declared to have been validly
ratified by Mr. Marcos on January 17, 1973 pursuant to Proclamation 1102. Do you understand? After
1973 Constitution, what happened? ➢ Because under this Constitution that the election was held and
Marcos ran against Cory. Of course, Marcos won in that election, do you understand? (44:00) And
because Cory cannot accept that she didn’t win the election, a revolution in EDSA occurred, not even the
whole country. And then they say, having taken over the government and ousted the Marcoses, they
were brought to America. Do you understand? SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge
LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) And
thereafter, what did Cory do? ➢ She issued Proclamation No. 3 – that is promulgating the Freedom
Constitution. The first thing that she did was to abolish the 1973 Constitution. Because if she would not
abolish it, then she’s not the legitimate president, do you understand? So it was abolished and then she
promulgated Proclamation No. 3. ➢ The system is the same except for the fact that Congress, rather
Interim Batasang Pambansa was abolished. (45:00) ➢ There were still the Courts, she was then the
president of the revolutionary government. And because it was revolutionary, and there was no
legislature, she exercised the legislative power and issued another Proclamation No. 9 to create a
Constitutional Commission, do you understand? ➢ Consisting of 50 members were appointed by her,
coming from different sectors of the society. ➢ These 50 members commission drafted a new
constitution which is the 1987 Constitution. And then ratified on February 2, 1987 and declared that has
been validly ratified on Feb. 11 by Cory, do you understand? Okay. Now then, enumerating to you the
history, narrating to you the history of our Constitution, (46:00) what is the common denominator? Is
that Constitution conventional or enacted, or is it cumulative or revolutionary? Or is it a fiat or granted
constitution? Common denominator? The Constitutions of the Philippines? The 1987 Constitution? Take
note. Are they enacted, do you understand? By the president? Or by someone else? Or by a legislative
body? Or made by a constitutional convention, a ConCon? Do you understand? Are you following here?
1935 ConCon. 1973 ConCon. 1987 Constitutional Commission. So, it is enacted. Do you understand?
(47:00) Should there be proposal for amendments in the 1987 Constitution, what does the law say?
Who can propose amendments or revision to the Constitution? And how do you classify it according to
origin? Do you understand? Do you understand? The Constitution says Congress can act as Constituent
Assembly to enact, to propose changes to the Constitution. Or a Constitutional Convention that is
created by Congress through a law, do you understand? Whose members…they would be appointed or
elected depending upon the law, do you understand here? To propose the changes to the Constitution.
Or otherwise the people themselves can directly initiate amendments ONLY to the Constitution of 1987,
do you understand that? (48:08) Then, that means the Constitution being amended, is what? Enacted or
conventional, do you understand? Are you following? Because a cumulative or an evolution--, not
revolutionary ha, evolutionary constitution is a constitution which is a product of the taking in and out
activities of the government. It’s cumulative of all laws that may be passed by a legislature that will form
part of the Constitution. And it is an ongoing process because in an unwritten constitution, for as long as
the Parliament, (49:00) they continue to make laws, then they continue to make their Constitution, do
you understand? Besides, to adopt a practice as a customary or convention, it has to be followed for a
number of years. Do you understand? In which case, it may now become now customary and
conventional, then if they form part of an unwritten constitution, that constitution is practically the
product of the so many years of practice of the State, do you understand? Or protocol in that particular
place. Do you follow here? What about a Fiat or Granted Constitution? ➢ A fiat or granted constitution
is a constitution is made by one country for another country. (50:00) Like for example, usually this
happens when two countries are in conflict in a war with each other. ➢ One is the victors, the other one
are the losers. Do you understand? And they will sign now a treaty of peace who will guide the
relationship with each other, as the victors and the losers. During World War II, who lost the war? It was
the Japanese. Do you understand? They were…one time ra nga bomba. Then, they surrendered.
Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Diba? And the surrender of the Japanese to the Allied
Forces, particularly to the Americans… What happened? A treaty of peace was signed. And the treaty of
peace guided the Japanese on how they’re going to recover from the devastation of that war. (51:00)
Similarly, the Treaty of Paris was a treaty of peace between Spain and US, where we were ceded by
Spain to the US, do you understand? ➢ And we were already governed by virtue of the Treaty of Paris
by the US. The Treaty of Paris then was our guiding principle on how we should relate to the Americans.
Do you understand? Sabot? Very good. Isn’t that interesting? xxx Okay, any problem, any questions any
clarification, guys? Do you have any question regarding on that matter? None. Let us then proceed to
our recitation again. (52:00) *Calls a student* Question: When a Constitution is difficult to change
because you follow a particular process or procedure, okay? And you classify our Constitution as
difficult, meaning as rigid constitution. How do you then adopt a constitution after following the
process? How do you adopt it? When it becomes effective, alright? So assuming that following the
process, you have proposal, submission and then you have the ratification now of the amendment or
the new Constitution? When will that Constitution then take effect? (53:15) Answer: It will take effect
after it is published… Judge: It is published… so from the ratification, then it has to be published where?
Answer: xxx Judge: General circulation… Answer: xxx Judge: General circulation… So any law that the
Congress will pass, before it takes effect, it has to be published and then fifteen days thereafter on the
last day of the publication, the law becomes effective. Is that…is that the way also that should be done
after ratification…that it has to be published? (54:10) Judge: xxx When will it take effect after
ratification? When is the effectivity? Answer: xxx Judge: After the publication? Okay… Do you know if
the 1987 Constitution was published? You don’t know? So, how did you know that the Constitution is
already effective? (55:03) Judge: No, I’m thinking about the specific date of effectivity. Because you
were saying that it has to be published. So there are dates of… xxx I thought it was after publication,
then why xxx. So, I thought… It should be on the date of ratification. Judge: What if you will be
questioned on the ratification of the Constitution xxx effectivity of the ratification…to take effect on the
date of ratification. When the case was filed in the court ratification. Only after three years. xxx
Constitution to be considered effective on ratification and not on the day of publication. (56:28) Judge:
The declaration made by Cory on February 7, 1978 xxx ratified before 1978. So, are you saying now that
the day of ratification was not on February 7 but from February 7? Judge: Why? (57:07) Judge: So what
if it was ratified on February 2 but you can’t be sure that the ratification was valid until it was declared
by the president…and it was validly ratified? Judge: You know that the 1973 Constitution took effect
upon the declaration of Mr. Marcos that it was validly ratified in January 17, 1973 and not of the dates
of ratification sometime on February 10-15, 1973 by the Citizen Assembly? SYSTEMReviewer by:
Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Judge: Which is more logical? Date of ratification? Or final declaration of the
political sovereign… declaring the constitution was validly ratified? (58:00) Judge: The date of
ratification…because? *Calls another student* Judge: What is the difference between a state and a
nation? (59:08) Judge: What do you mean by the…it is a legal concept when you speak about the state
whereas nation is an ethnic concept, can you demonstrate the difference? Judge: What are the
elements you are referring to? Judge: And the what? Judge: Government? Okay. Whereas the nation?
Judge: The population? Ah, affiliation? Affiliation of whom? (1:00:00) What is the difference between a
state and nation? A nation can exist without the 4 elements: People, Territory, Government and
Sovereignty as long as there are people who assert their oneness, their unity in tradition, beliefs, ideas
and language. Ethnic Concept. When you say ethnic you refer to what? You are referring to a particular
race. Wearing of malong- a practice followed by a particular group of individuals. One ethnic because
they pertain to a race. A state cannot exist without the 4 elements. So how many nations are there in
the Philippines? ➢ One. How do you call your nation? ➢ Filipino Nation. Christians and Muslims both
belong to the same nation, the same race. During the Spanish period we did not have a government we
can call as our own but there exists already the Filipino nation at that time only that we were not named
as such, but the people already share the same culture, ideals and beliefs. ➢ We were called indios,
meaning uncivilized because they cannot give us a name as a group of people sharing the same culture
and tradition. It is only during the American occupation that the concept (state) came about, specially
when they defined relationship between the Americans and the government at that time. So the
concept of citizenship. Ex. Jews. They are called wandering jews because they did not have any territory.
They go from one place to another. They are everywhere in the world and at the same time they have
the same culture, beliefs and ideals and then they are everywhere. A nation can compose of several
states and on the other hand a state may compose several nations. - Example is Arab nation consisting
of several states, that is United Arab Emirates. Another is United States of America, one state composed
of many nations. The kind of Constitution according to the manner of changing it. - Rigid and flexible.
The rigid constitution where you have to follow a particular process of procedure before you can affect
any change Difference between an amendment and revision. The people may be authorized to initiate a
change to the constitution however it is only limited to amendments they cannot make a revision. How
do you determine that the proposed change is an amendment or a revision? Two tests: Qualitative Test
and Quantitative Test. Qualitative Test - goes into the principle underlying the reason for the change
that may result to an overhaul of the constitution because they are practically changing the philosophy
Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) underlying the operation, the structure or the
organization of the government. You are practically change all the provisions relating to it and also
changing the relationship of the government and the governed. When you change a lot of the provisions
quantitative wise that is a revision but if you are only changing a portion or portions of the constitution
that is just an amendment. Ex. When you authorize the foreigners to acquire lands in the Philippines.
You did not change the government. Only that from being prohibited now they can acquire lands in the
Philippines it does not change the relationship of the government and the governed- Amendment.
Changing the term of office of the President. It does not affect his relationship with the legislature or
even with the Supreme Court and the People in generalAmendment. But if you are going to adopt a new
system of government. From Presidential to Parliamentaryrevision. Under the Constitution, who can
propose? Because the process is first there must be a proposal and then once it is final drafted will be
submitted to the people for further studies and discussion then after they can go to ratification.
Proposal The 1987 Constitution provides the entities who can propose: 1. Congress, acting as a
constituent assembly. 2. Constitutional Convention. 3. People You can notice that the president is not
among those who are allowed to propose any amendment or revision. But you will also note in your
history that the 1973 Constitution was amended by Mr. Marcos when he lowered the retirement age
from 70 to 65. He was exercising legislative power because there was no legislature at that time until
the constitution was again changed by him to create another legislature to serve as the legislative body.
And then during the time of the Freedom Constitution promulgated by Cory Aquino because there was
no legislative body. Then the 1987 Constitution was drafted in accordance with the mandate under
Cory. This time should there be any amendment or revision then we follow the procedure as provided
by the constitution. 1. Congress, acting as a constituent assembly. Do you know that congress is not just
a law-making body? It can also serve as a Constituent Assembly. CON ASS. It has two major powers: a.
Law making power. b. Its constituent power that is proposing changes in the constitution. The difference
between the two is, whatever proposal they are going to make in the legislative enactment would pass
through the president for his approval. And if they act as a constituent assembly they are supreme in the
sense that they are accountable to no one. Meaning their proposals are not subject to the review and
approval of the president. They are independent and supreme within their own sphere. Proposals are
not even subject to judicial review because that is discretionary to congress acting as a constituent
assembly. Substance wise of the proposal not subject to judicial review. But if procedure is not followed
in adopting that proposal that requires for example ¾ of the votes, like if they only obtain majority then
that is subject to judicial review. The question however is, it says ¾ of all members of congress and yet it
did not say voting separately. Clearly the House of representatives has more members than the Senate.
So that it is possible that the House of Representatives can reach ¾ votes even if all of the senate does
not vote for such petition. Some comments on “¾ votes of all members of congress” should it be voting
jointly or separately. It is misleading and is misunderstood by the members of the constitutional
commission when they drafted that provision of the constitution that maybe they forgot that
Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) congress is not unicameral. And that they just copied the
provision of the 1973 constitution. Then with regards to this issue there would always be a question in
the Supreme Court with regards to the procedure on the proposal. Not the proposal itself because that
is beyond judicial inquiry. It is a political question. The legislature as representatives of the people are
supreme and sovereign in making any proposal or changes or revisions to the constitution. Transcribed
by: Alvez, Ebal, Balagtas, Whim, Go, Queenie Discussion on the Procedures to change the Constitution
9/3/18 Judge Singco: So you have proposal, submission, and there is the ratification. On proposal guys
we said basically there are 3 entities who can make a proposal, you have Congress acting as a
Constituent Assembly or a call for a ConCon or the Constitutional Convention. We have the people who
can directly propose through initiative but only on amendment. If the congress will act as a constituent
assembly, that will require ¾ votes of all the members of Congress to make that proposal. And as we
said, logically it has to be a voting separately because the Senate will be superseded by the House of
Representatives because it has the number. But you must note that Congress is not only compose of the
House of Representatives but also compose of the Senate. So that’s why I believe that it should be
voting separately when they decide to make a proposal. Or if they do not want to propose and they
would instead refer it to a Constitutional Convention. What would they do? That would require 2/3
votes of the members of Congress to create a Concon and call for an election or maybe they will be
appointed as members to the concon to save money. It depends on the vote that created the concon. So
that would require 2/3 votes. And if they cannot again decide whether to call for a concon or for them
to act on a constituent assembly then they may refer it to the people for them to decide. And that
would require majority votes of Congress to call for a referendum and ask the people whether or not
they will have a concon to propose the changes of the constitution. And I also explained to you guys
when Congress act as a constituent assembly, it is powerful. It is supreme within its sphere. And
therefore their proposals are not subject to any judicial review. Same with a concon, they are not
subject to judicial review. In other words, the substance of a proposal cannot be reviewed by the courts
especially by the Supreme Court because such a constituent body may it be Congress of concon is given
the supreme power to make that proposal. So as I was saying earlier on proposal, how can you
differentiate the function of Congress as a lawmaking body and as a constituent assembly? ➢ As a
lawmaking body, it makes laws. And their proposals for legislative enactments are subject to the
approval of the President. So they have to be submitted to the president for his signature. If the
president for example, does not like it then the president can always veto it. On the other hand, when
Congress acts as a constituent assembly, their proposals do not pass to the president. ➢ It will be
submitted to the people. Not to the president. ➢ When congress acts as a constituent assembly, it can
authorize a disbursement of public funds for the expenditures that would be incurred in the revision or
amendment of the constitution. But if Congress is not acting as a Constituent assembly, it cannot
authorize the disbursement of funds for the amendment of revision of the constitution as the powers
are assigned to Congress as a legislature or a lawmaking body. Now then, since you have people to
propose. How do people propose changes to the Constitution? ➢ It can only be possible, first and
foremost, there has to be a law to provide for the procedure. And so RA 6735 was passed supposedly to
provide for the mechanism on how people can directly propose amendments. ➢ However, in the case
of Santiago v. COMELEC, Supreme Court found that RA 6735 was insufficient to provide for the
procedure. ➢ Nonetheless, in the case of Lambino v. COMELEC, the Supreme Court has emphasized
that the matter of proposing by the people will depend on political will. So meaning, if really the people
as the sovereign would insist on proposing the changes to the constitution, they may do so provided
that… SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 25 | P a g e Ngayon ka
pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti
I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) What are the requirements that need to be established
as required for the petition? ➢ The petition for proposal for changes, if people are to be the authors,
they must represent 12% of the total registered voters nationwide. And each legislative district is
represented at least by 3% of it registered voters. For example, in the province of the City of Cebu, there
are about 10 districts. ➢ Each legislative district must be represented by 3% of its registered voters of
the 12% total registered voters required in order to sign the petition. So 12 and 3 percent should
conform with each other in order to validly initiate a proposal of amendment to the constitution. And it
was further held by the Supreme Court that if people are to be the authors, they must file the petition
themselves so that they should have as many petition as the number of registered voters signing the
petition. ➢ And the Supreme Court also emphasized in the Lambino case, should there be any changes
proposed by the people, that they should only include those that would amend and not revise the
constitution. So you have the distinction between the quantitative and qualitative test whether it is a
mere amendment or it is a revision. Now then, another case that you should take note is the case of the
Province of North Cotabato v. the panel of representatives coming from government in signing the
MOAD for the establishment of the Bangsamoro Juridical entity. You will note that during the
administration of Arroyo, there was already the signing of the agreement between the Muslim
representative and the government that the Bangsamoro will be established. So what happened to the
MOAD? It was then challenged as to its constitutionality. ➢ Firstly because the system of government as
provided in the 1987 Constitution is unitary. There is no place for a substate within a state. Should there
be an adoption or recognition of a substate like Bangsamoro Juridical Entity, you need therefore to
amend the Constitution in order to implement what was agreed upon between the president and the
Muslim representative. So if it is then when President Arroyo signed the MOAD, Pres Arroyo practically
proposed amendments to the Constitution which is not allowed under the 1987 Constitution because
there are only 3 entities who can propose: Congress, ConCon, and the people through initiative. Then
after the proposal, what will happen next? The proposal will be submitted to the people for
deliberation. It is up to now to the people to discuss about it the pros and cons of the adoption of the
amendment or a revision. The only requirement here is should there be any proposal to changes, the
entire proposal should be submitted to the people so that they will have a better view or a relationship
among the proposed changes to the constitution so that they can effectively decide whether to approve
or reject it. So there cannot be an installment bases of submitting any proposal for changes to the
constitution. Now then, after the submission, what will happen? ➢ It will now be deliberated upon by
the proponent to call for a plebiscite in order to approve or ratify the constitution. ➢ So this plebiscite is
a kind of election but unlike the election where you elect people, you vote for the candidates, whereas
in a plebiscite there is only a question of whether or not to approve the constitution. It is just a yes or
no. And because of that, it need not be held in a separate election. ➢ It can be joined in a national
election for governmental elections or a special election, we call it a plebiscite. I think the 1987
Constitution had a separate, yes it was separate. 1973 also separate. But there were amendments that
they had not approve not in a separate plebiscite in the 1973 constitution but approved at the same
time there was a governmental election. So it is possible to save time and money, they can have the
election and at the same time a plebiscite. Now then, how many votes are needed in order to adopt the
amendment or the revision to make it effective? ➢ You need majority votes of the people who cast
their votes for that purpose in that plebiscite. So it’s not based on total registered voters but based on
those who cast their votes needed to have the majority. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti
I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 26 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating
mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Is
this question on the validity of the ratification subject to judicial review? Is it subject to review by the
courts? So for example you question about the manner of the ratification whether the majority really
was obtained. Is that subject to review by the courts or ultimately by the Supreme Court? You will note
that in the case of 1973 Constitution all the ratification cases which questioned the validity of the
ratification of the 1973 constitution were dismissed. What was the reason? That these are political
questions beyond the ambit of judicial inquiry. This has been changed under 1987 Constitution. If the
question is pertaining to the procedure of the ratification, then the question is subject to judicial review
filed by any citizen of the country. So see the difference of the substantive proposal not subject to
judicial review for that is a political question. But if it has something to do with the procedure either in
the proposal, submission, or ratification that would be subject to judicial review. This time, it is no
longer a political question and any person who is a citizen of this country can bring up the matter to the
Supreme Court for judicial review. Then the question, when did the 1987 constitution take effect? ➢ If
you base it in history, you will know that 1935 constitution took effect on the date of ratification. How
about the 1973 Constitution? It took effect on the day that Mr. Marcos declared that it was validly
ratified on January 17, 1973. Supposedly, the ratification was held during the period of January 10 to
January 15 (not sure if it was really on the 15th. Inaudible). And then on the 17th , then Marcos declared
the Constitution to have been validly ratified pursuant to presidential proclamation no. 1102. Next
question now, if you are to base on history, when did the 1987 Constitution take effect? Was it on
February 2 when it was ratified or was it on February 11 when Cory Aquino declared it validly ratified?
➢ Before February 11, you cannot be sure if the Constitution was validly ratified. It was only on
February 11 that there was a confirmation that indeed the 1987 Constitution was validly ratified. And
thus the issue in the case of De leon v. Esteras. You will note in the case of De leon, there was the
removal of the brgy. Captain and his kagawad by the governor. Under the Constitution, the governor has
that power. Under the 1987 Consitution, that power was revoked because according to the Consitution
now, the Congress must take hold of the offices until the next election. And that brgy. Captain was
removed on February 9. If the Constitution took effect on February 2 then the removal is invalid.The
constitution took effect on February 11. What did the Supreme Court say according to that matter?
According to the Supreme Court, the Constitution took effect on the day it was ratified so that the
declaration of the president on the valid ratification was merely a confirmation. But actually, the
effectivity should take effect on the date of the ratification. Why did the supreme court decide in
manner? Because the Constitution says so. According to Sec. 27, Art. 18, any amendments or revision
shall take effect on date upon ratification by majority vote. So should there be any amendment or
revision of the form of government to a federal system, the effectivity should be reckoned on the date
of the ratification. Discussion on the Elements of the State 9/3/18 Judge Singco: as we study political
law, we also study the elements. As the law revolves around the elements of the state: people, territory,
government, and sovereignty. Nation and state can be used interchangeably. Is the state synonymous to
the nation? Are they the same? ➢ The words are used interchangeably in the international law. Can the
state exist in the absence of any of the elements? It can’t because it is a juridical concept. For the state
to exist, it must have all the elements. What about a nation? Can a nation exist without territory,
without government or without the enjoyment of sovereignty? It can exist for as long as there is this
group of people having the same ideals, culture, tradition, etc. A state cannot exist at least without a
nation because nation is composed of the people whereas nation can exist without being a state.
Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) So you apply it in your own. How do you call your state?
Your state is called the Republic of the Philippines. It refers to the political entity having the four
elements. How about your nation? What do you call your nation? ➢ Filipino nation. How many nations
do you have? ➢ You belong in the same nation regardless of you being a Christian or a Muslim. It is just
a matter of beliefs. ➢ But when you say nation, it is the matter which refers to your ethnic or race. The
state can compose of many nations like for example, Great Britain. You have Scottish, the English, and
the Welsh. You can also have a nation consisting of many states like the Arab nation or the United Arab
Emirates (UAE). Or you have the German nation with several states. They used to have East and West. I
don’t know what happened. They are now 1 state and 1 nation. People: pertains to all inhabitants or
residents of the country. There are so many meanings of the same term “people” in the constitution
depending on how they’re being used or within what context of the provisions of the constitution. There
is no requirement as to the number it states only “more or less numerous”. It could be a small
population like the Vatican which has only a thousand bishops and priests. As long as it would
perpetuate, it can survive for a number of years. Or it could have a big population like China. China
practically consists one-half of the world’s population that’s why it is just like they who have this policy
of one child policy. One Child Policy: It means that the government do not anymore support a child, I
mean a child that is more than what is required or allowed the government. It’s very expensive because
you have to be really work hard to feed for that child because the government is not going to support
that child. As long as the states can support and can sustain and provide for a number of years, it does
not matter how many people you have in the country. Exclusive economic zone: the source of
controversy between us and China over the Scarborough Shoal because it is claimed by China in the
South China Sea, now we are referring to it as the West Philippine Sea. Territorial Sea: So you have sea
waters around between connecting the islands, how do we consider them? Are they sea waters? Of
course they are sea waters. If you are to cross the waters going to Bohol, that’s sea waters diba?
Between Bohol and Cebu, do you understand? Now, are they considered as territorial sea? The answer
is no. We have to adapt another doctrine and that is the archipelagic doctrine then what we have will be
the sea waters only along the coastline and to that extent the international law allows the coastal state
to have jurisdiction over the sea waters which is twelve nautical miles from the low water mark, beyond
that they become international waters. We can’t apply that in our territory because there are islands
that are separated by more than twelve nautical miles from each other. So you say twelve nautical miles
from Bohol, twelve nautical miles from Cebu it became international waters and then if you are to
follow the ordinary concept of the rights of a coastal state, we won’t be creating international pockets of
international waters within our territory. That’s the reason why the sea waters in between and
connecting the islands are considered now as fluvial waters. They’re treated like rivers, lakes swamps
and canals. The rivers for example dividing France, Switzerland, my god is so huge. They’re bordered by
the rivers. So they’re so wide and so huge and ilahang rivers it’s like the Atlantic Ocean or Pacific Ocean
guys (exaggerated lang?) the only difference is still waters, ang dagat, it’s huge. Territorial domain: the
sea waters connecting the islands and then we consider the separating the territorial waters and now
the territorial waters. When you apply for a territorial domain you draw a straight line connecting the
outermost point of the outermost islands. ➢ All the seawaters inside are considered as internal or
archipelagic waters and then outside of the state line, you declare the low water mark of the outermost
island. And from there, you count to twelve nautical miles. Now the controversy that we had with China
has nothing to do with the archipelago. It has something to do with the Scarborough Shoal that was
considered as a regime SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 28 |
P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB)
USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) of islands separate from the main
archipelago. That Scarborough Shoal also has its own coastal waters, twelve nautical miles; it has an
exclusive economic zone which according to China has entered practically in their own exclusive
economic zone. Suffice to say, the territory may consist of a terrestrial domain, you have fluvial domain,
you have aerial domain, and the maritime domain. Government: is a juridical agency of political
institution to which we render a habitual obedience through which the will is carried out. ➢ Now
basically, the government as an agency is there to serve and protect the people. They carry out our will.
How do these three powers relate with each other? How does the national government relate with the
local government? How do these people or the change-how do you change people in the government or
are people in the government chosen or how do you transfer powers of one administration to the next
or from one generation to the next, or according to how legitimate or lawful the government that is
existing? ➢ So you have according to number of rulers, according to Aristotle, you may have what we
call, a monarchial system of government, aristocracy, or you have democracy. Dictatorial System of
Government or Authoritarian System of Government: ➢ So who is an example of that was the Marcos
Government. ➢ Under the 1973 Mr. Marcos was the president and at the same time the prime
minister. Was there a legislative body, there was none for some time. So what happened? ➢ He
appointed upon himself legislative power because there was no legislative body, not to mention there
was Martial Law and that justifies his exercise of legislative powers. Even the creation of the Imperium
of Batas Pambansa, he continued to exercise legislative power to the extent that the power weren’t
legally shared between Mr. Marcos and the Imperium of Batas Pambansa. That’s legislative power. Did
he exercise judicial power? ➢ Actually, yes he did. How? ➢ Remember, he was the Commanding Chief
of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and during his time, any criminal case involving violations of
cause relating to national security and peace and order of the country, jurisdiction is with the military
courts. ➢ So if you’re charged with rebellion for example, or even illegal possession of firearms in
furtherance to the crime of rebellion or sedition for example. Where do you file the case? ➢ You don’t
file a case or affidavit in court, you file it with the Military Tribunal. Who reviews the decision of the
Military Tribunal, not the civilian court such as the Supreme Court, the decision is with the Commander
in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. Mr. Marcos can exercise, all the three powers: the
executive, the legislative, and judicial. Question: Is that a violation of the Constitution of 1973 in the
exercise of power to Mr. Marcos? ➢ Of course not! All his powers are granted to him by the
Constitution. ➢ That is why he described his government as democratic dictatorship because it was
based upon a Constitution ratified by the people. ➢ For a constitutional authoritarianism, the powers
vested to him will be all the powers of the government but it is constitutional because the powers were
granted to him by the constitution. That’s how smart he was. Very smart, no one else like him.
Aristocracy: So because of complaints and abuses committed by these Kings during those Olden Times,
it was decided that there must be some people who should share with the powers to check with fiscalize
the ruler. In Parliament, instead of having a single person to rule the society you now have a few people
ruling the society under an aristocratic system of government. These few people could be the richest in
the society if not the most intelligent or otherwise the strongest in the community. What happened is
these rich people would become abusive as well, eventually. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España
Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 29 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang
narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem
(2018) Oligarchy: the perverted form of aristocracy. Instead of aristocracy, you have oligarchical system
of government. In modern times, it is called a totalitarian system of government. Democracy: They are
all people practicing to rule, now people directly ruling the country. When people directly exercise the
powers of government, that’s pure democracy where people directly identify themselves as
government. But that applies only to a scarcely or a barely populated state. It’s impossible to amend
that type of system in a highly populated place like ours. So instead we have this Republican by electing
representatives to the government and the government to us. So the idea of indirect democracy has
been conceived sometimes we call it Republican or a representative kind of democracy. This is mostly a
government according to the people. It’s a government by, of the people. Question: What happens? If
you allow people to directly exercise the powers, then they might do whatever they want. Instead of
establishing a democracy what is established is a mobocracy. It’s that perverted form of direct or pure
democracy. Oral Recitations Questions 9/4/18 Q: According to the relationship of the three branches in
the government how do you classify the form? How many branches in the government? S: We have 3
branches: The Executive, Legislative and Judiciary Q: How do they relate with each other in terms of the
system of government we have today? What is the system? S: Presidential system Q: Why is it
Presidential? S: It is Presidential because the President exercises the executive power.. Q: Only? S: Yes
Q:Now what about the two other branches in the government? S: The Legislative branch creates the
laws and the Judiciary applies the laws. Q: In the exercise of their respective powers, what is the
principle that they are observing? And what interferes in each other’s exercise of their respective
powers? Like the making of laws for example, can the President [appeal] upon the Congress, being the
head of the political party dominating the Congress, what laws are to be passed or enacted? S: With
regards to the exercise of powers, one branch cannot interfere with function of the other. Q: Why not?
S: It’s the exercise of the Separation of Powers Q: Why are the powers separated from each other? S:
The powers are separated so that they cannot abuse the function of the other… Q: Because of the
possibility of abuse that may be committed by one of the branches of government, like in the making of
laws for example, the President cannot interfere in the making of laws by Congress? S: In that sense, The
President can, in the exercise of his executive power, can veto the proposed law by congress. Q: Will the
veto power of the President then, negate the equality of power among the 3 branches, considering that
he will be overruling a law that had been proposed by Congress which is a co-equal branch of
government? S: No. There is no interference of powers but there is an equal exercise of power because
the legislative has already done its part which is formulating the law itself and the executive in his
exercise of power is already in the implementing stage of the law, so there is no interference and there
is an exercise of equal powers of those powers. Q: How do you differentiate between Presidential and
Parliamentary? S: Presidential type of government, the President exercise the administrative whereas
the legislative does the lawmaking and the judiciary applies the law. While in Parliament, the Executive
and the legislative are exercised by one department. Q: What do you mean by exercised by one
department? What department are you referring to? S: The Executive Q: You mean in the Prime
Minister in the Parliamentary System exercises both powers, Executive and Legislative Powers? How can
the president exercise both powers? S: By being able to pass laws SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L.
España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 30 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na
ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st
sem (2018) Q: Prime minister can pass laws as well in a Parliamentary form of government. What else?
What are the differences. In a Parliamentary system of government, can a President be removed by the
legislative body? S: Because he can be removed by impeachment Q: Can the Prime Minister in a
Parliamentary System be removed by the Parliament? Q: According to relationship between National
and Local, how do you classify the forms of government? S: The forms of government according to the
forms of government are Unitary and Federal. Q: How would you classify the Philippine Government?
The present governmental set up? Why? Illustrate. S: It is Unitary because the powers are controlled by
the National Government, there’s only one central government. All of the government processes are
under the National Government. The Local government units only have limited power. Q: Give me an
example of a power that all depends on the National government. S: Like budget of the departments. Q:
The other departments belonging to the executive branch are under the National government. Give me
an example of a relationship between national and local where local government do not have the power
because the power is in the hands of the National government. Can the local governments make the
laws independent of the National government? S: There are laws that can be implemented within the
locality. Q: Now we’re talking about making of laws, can the Sangguniang Panglungsod make a law
contrary to the existing laws passed by Congress? S: No. Because all of the laws would be created or
implemented in the locality should be in concurrence or should not be contrary to the national laws or
the statutes passed by the Congress. Q: So what’s the point of granting police power to LGU when they
cannot even make their own laws? S: Because there some needs of the people in the locality that are
specific to the people. Q: Say for example, the rampant problem with illegal gambling, in the
locality…Can the Sanggunian of that locality pass an Ordinance prohibiting all forms of gambling?
Preferably that is for the promotion of public welfare, public morals protection and promotion of public
safety. Could that be a valid ordinance? S: There is already an existing Ordinance that all forms of
gambling is… Q: Is valid? Is it valid? Q: If there are two governments existing at the same time, how may
you classify the forms of government? S: They would be a de jure and de facto government Q: Let’s have
an example, during the Japanese occupation there were two governments, one of the Commonwealth
government and the other one was the Second Philippine Republic that was sponsored by the Japanese.
Which of the two is a de jure government? S: It is the Commonwealth Q: The Commonwealth is the de
jure one? Why? S: It is ruled or governed with the consideration of the people unlike the de facto
wherein it is ruled or governed with force. Like in the Presidency of Marcos, where he exercise[d] his…all
his rights in running the government. Q: If the Second Republic was the de facto government, what
happened now to the laws of the Commonwealth government? Were they still valid and binding during
the Japanese occupation? S: No. Laws [during] in [the] Japanese occupation are [were] abrogated. Q: So
if you have a note contracted during the Commonwealth and then there was a (___) by the Japanese
and thereby a statute movement (?) that would not enact because the laws governing that utang are
abrogated.Is that what you are saying? S: Yes, judge. Q: What happened after the presumption of the
Commonwealth? What happened to the Japanese laws? Or laws that were passed by the Second PH
Republic upon presumption of Commonwealth? S: I think that those laws under the Japanese
government was [were] abrogated and it’s [were] no longer binding. Q: So the same with the
Commonwealth laws during the Japanese occupation, they too were abrogated? By the Japanese? S: I
think that for the Commonwealth government, it is [was] suspended while during the…when the time
the Japanese government…turnover. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella
FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Continue the
discussion of the DIFFERENT FORMS OF GOVERNMENT We will have the Bourgee
(bourgeois)classification, according to relationship among the three branches in the government. The
three Branches of Government: • Executive • Legislative 1. Judicial Branch Power Head EXECUTIVE
execute or implement the law President LEGISLATIVE make the law Congress/ National Assembly
JUDICIAL apply or interpret the law and apply it in actual cases or controversies Supreme Court (as the
highest affiliate court) Presidential System of Government • three branches are co-equal • they do not
interfere in each other’s functions • They do not co- each other’s powers because the powers are
granted to them by the people o with the people electing to office and them serving their office with
fixed terms So therefore, it is not for Congress to interfere into the powers of the President and neither
President can interfere with the functions of Congress or that of the Supreme Court. Such would negate
the subdivision of the powers or the equality among the three branches in the government. President as
Head of the Political Party For example, even the president is head of the political party that dominates
the Congress because most of the members of the come from the same political party in that case is
being headed by the president, the President cannot dictate upon Congress what laws to be passed. As
far as Congress is concerned, the power is plenary, absolute to them, without intervention of either
branches in the government. Supreme Court cannot compel Congress to pass laws The Supreme Court
cannot also compel Congress to pass laws which Congress does not like to make. Because they are
independent from each other, they are co-equal branches in the government. To give you specific
examples: Where there is a declaration of unconstitutionality of the act of a branch because of a
violation of the separation of powers: 1) DAP (Disbursement Acceleration Program)of former Pres.
Aquino. Ø Why was it declared unconstitutional and thereafter he was charged with usurpation of
legislative function? Under the Constitution, the power to authorize the disbursement of public funds is
vested in Congress. So ang mag-buot in giving the authority of spending the money of government is
Congress. It must always be supported by law, should you make disbursement of public funds. What is
this concept of DAP? What the President did was to get all the monies from the different departments
under him and put them all in one fund, this is the DAP. Then authorize the expenditures of these funds
for projects and purposes not even mentioned in the General Appropriation Act (GAA) which authorizes
the expenditures of funds for the operation of the government in general. In other words, ang nag-buot
of the disbursement is the President using the funds allocated for the Executive SYSTEMReviewer by:
Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) branch and worse, even use those funds for expenditures, for projects of
other departments, like you have legislative department or COA, even the Judiciary have been shared
with those funds coming from the Executive branch without authority from Congress. In effect, the
President was appropriating the funds, which power is exclusive to Congress.Thereby usurping the
function of Congress and violating the separation of powers. What is supposed to be the role of the
President in so far as the GAA that authorize the disbursement of funds? It’s for him to implement it and
not to determine for what project the fund should be spent because there is already that law which they
should have followed. That law is the authority for the disbursement of public funds. 2) Pork Barrel Ø
What is the Pork Barrel? Why was it declared unconstitutional? It was declared unconstitutional because
its Congress that now, who were spending the discretionary funds.Their assigned discretionary fund to
fund projects of their districts according to the needs of their districts. And that money is already
appropriated and included in the GAA. The ones who determine how the funds should be spent,
supposedly, is the GAA that was passed by Congress, that authorized the disbursement. Before ang
mabuhat ra sa Congressman is just to simply identify the project and recommend it to the President. The
actual disbursement of funds and identifying who the persons to whom the money will be given is with
the President because it is supposedly the President who executes the GAA which includes the
disbursement of funds for those projects recommended by the Congressman. What happened? They
(Congress) were the ones who implemented their Pork Barrel by particularly not only identifying the
project, even to whom it will be assigned or for how much, and that by usurping the power of the
president by usurping the GAA and violating the Separation of Powers. Theoretically, ideally: in a
Presidential form of government, there should be independence among the 3 branches because they
are co-equal.But the possibility of one becoming more powerful than the other is not evoked. Ngano
man?Because the powers are absolutely assigned to them. That making the laws, exclusive to Congress.
What is Congress passes a law that is contrary to the Constitution? Who would check Congress if the
power is absolute without checking or any limitation? That Congress if not checked can become even
more powerful than the two other branches in the government. What if it will pass a law that says:
‘remove the Prime Minister or the President’ or ‘those who are absent this evening shall be put to death
tomorrow’ If there is no limitation or checking of the powers, then you will have the dominance of
Congress thereby violating the equality among the 3 branches. ________________________________
Sept. 4 First Half Part 2 The three branches must check each other’s powers making sure not one of the
branches becomes more powerful than the rest thereby protecting the people from any arbitrary
control by any of these branches in the government. How is this done? When laws are made, proposals
are what we call bills. Bills do not become laws unless they pass through the president. If the president
thinks that the bill contradicts to the Constitution or against public interest then the President can
always exercise his prerogative which is veto power. Once he vetoed the bill, that bill may not become a
law. Will that power to veto by the President absolute? No. The Constitution also provides that the veto
power of the President can be overridden by 2/3 votes of both houses. Whether the President likes it or
not, it becomes a law. If the executive and legislative both abuse the exercise of their powers, who’s
going to check them? The Supreme Court exercising judicial review because if the SC says that Congress
is right then the law is passed and if the SC says that the President is right in his veto thereby declaring
the law unconstitutional. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 33
| P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308
(LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Will that be an assertion of
superiority of the court? No but rather it’s an assertion of the supremacy of the Constitution that
maintains the balance and independence of the three powers of the government. You will note that in a
presidential system of government, it is the most adversarial and stressful form of government. Among
the 3 branches, they always check on each other, they’re always suspicious of each other’s motives on
the possibility that the other branch may be usurping the functions of the other or intruding or
overreaching the exercise of their prerogative. Differences Presidential Parliamentary Three branches of
the government that are co-equal: Executive, Legislative and Judiciary Fusion of two powers usually
executive and legislative; dominance of the members of Parliament President directly elected by the
people Prime Minister is chosen by the parliament and parliament members are chosen directly by the
people President has a fixed term of office Prime Minister has indefinite terms of office Congress cannot
oust the President Prime Minister stays as long as he holds the trust and confidence of the members of
the Parliament. The moment the Parliament expresses no confidence to the Prime Minister then he can
be removed through the vote of ‘No Confidence’. President cannot dissolve Congress much less remove
any of its members Prime Minister is given such power to dissolve the Parliament should they can’t
agree on certain issues. Relationship between national and local government Counterparts National
Local Executive: President Executive: Governors in provinces, Mayors in Cities/Municipalities, Brgy
Captains in barangays Legislative: Congress Legislative: Region Assembly, Sangguniang Panlalawigan in
the provinces, Sangguniang Panlungsod in the cities, Sangguniang Panbayan in the municipalities and
Sangguniang Panbarangay in barangays Judiciary: Supreme Court Judiciary: Municipal Trial Court,
Regional Trial Court, etc. Philippines has a unitary type of government wherein all powers are
concentrated in the national government leaving local government dependent on the national
government. The national government does not transfer SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti
mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018)
the power to the local government. There may be autonomy but there is no decentralization of powers.
What is decentralized is merely the administration of their affairs, in other words, division of labor. In
the matters of making laws, local government can’t passed laws in contrary to national laws passed by
Congress. Is an ordinance on prohibiting gambling in certain municipalities valid? • No. Example was a
case in Cagayan de Oro wherein their local government prohibits the operations of casinos. Ordinance
was deemed unconstitutional because PAGCOR (Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation, a
government-owned and controlled corporation established through the Presidential) is created by law
that allows the operation of these casinos. Bottomline, local government cannot pass a law that is
contrary to existing national laws passed by Congress. Unlike the federal system of government, local
and national government can pass their laws independently. Example is the government of the United
States of America. If you passed the bar in one state, it doesn’t follow that you can practice law in
another state. In some states, taxes are high meanwhile on other states, taxes are low. Their only
limitation is not to pass a law that is contrary to the Constitution. As of now, we do not have an
independent local government, not even Bangsamoro juridical entity. The only way to implement the
Bangsamoro Juridical Entity to be independent from the national government is to adopt a federal
system of government. For now, the Bangsamoro Government can only be created in theory as an
autonomous region just like the ARMM, although it is declaring its independence from the National
Government in asserting their identity and the right to self-determination. As long the 1987 Constitution
exist, where this is no amendment or revision to adopt a federal system of government, we do not
recognize any sub-state within a State. There is only one state, the Republic of the Philippines. BJE will
only be autonomous and not independent from the State. There are other forms of government
according to legitimacy. These differences of governments find a significance only when there are 2
governments existing at the same time because if there is only one government, there is no point in
making decision. There can only be one legitimate government. If there are 2 governments existing at
the same time then one of which must be a de facto government (established against the rightful
authority without the consent of the people). De jure government is a government that has the support
of the people, or at least the majority of the people. It was established with the consent of the people or
at least with the consent of the rightful authority. A de facto government is the exact opposite of de jure
government. It only exist in fact but not in law because it does not have the support of the people and it
does not have the consent of the rightful authority. There are 3 kinds of de facto government: 1.
Government that usurp the power of on existing legitimate government by force or by voice of majority
and maintaining itself against that government. Ex. A military junta government trying to overthrow an
established government which leads to having 2 governments: (1) the incumbent government
administration and (2) a government that is run by a military junta. Ex. After a coup d’etat a
revolutionary government is established against an existing legitimate government. Bottom line to
consider it is a de facto is “maintaining itself against an existing established government.” • If there is no
existing government that the de facto government or the other government that usurped the power of
the government then there can only be that government and there is no need to make a distinction
whether if it is de jure or it is de facto. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella
FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Who was the duly
elected president and vice-president of the 1973 Constitution? • It was Marcos and Tolentino. They
were the legitimate president and vice-president under the 1973 Constitution premised on having won
the elections in 1986. Basing it in the 1973 Constitution, Cory did not win the elections. The people
instead directly seized the power from the Marcos Administration and installed Cory to be the President.
Was there the Marcos gov’t that the Cory Administration is maintaining against? • Considering that the
Marcoses fled to Hawaii, there was no Marcos Government that was left that the Cory Administration is
maintaining against. Therefore, you cannot consider the Cory government as a de facto. Even if it was
revolutionary, people took away the power from an abusive government and installed Cory as the
President. What may have started as a de facto may graduate into being a legitimate (de jure)
government. • This gov’t had the support of the people who participated in the EDSA revolution. It was
then recognized by the national community as the legitimate government. • This was manifested
subsequently by the ratification of the 1987 Constitution by the people, so that the government of Cory
this time is not just based under the freedom constitution, a revolutionary government, but under the
1987 Constitution which embodied the will of the people because they are the ones who ratified it. The
Cory gov’t continued to exist with the consent of the people and thereafter there was an election to
confirm, elections of gov’t officials in accordance with the Constitution. There was then no doubt that
the government of Cory became de jure and not a de facto government. 2. Government that is
established by the inhabitants of a territory to rise an insurrection against the colonizers. Ex. The 1st
Philippine Republic of Aguinaldo, however was short-lived. Practically it was de facto. Because the
government declared independence from Spain June 12, 1898. However, it was not recognized by the
international community so it died a natural death after a month. 3. Government that is established by
paramount force where the victors of the war established a government in a defeated or subdued
territory against a rightful authority. It is a belligerent government because it is against a rightful
authority. Ex. During the Japanese occupation, there were 2 governments at the same time: (1) the
Commonwealth and (2) the 2nd Philippine Republic. The Commonwealth was established with the
consent of the US, who had the rightful authority, not the Filipino people, because the Filipinos were not
yet independent. Q: How do you know if it was with the consent of the US? A: It is with the consent of
the USA because, as established by the basis of the 1935 Constitution, which was drafted in accordance
with the Tydings McDuffie Law which, was passed by Congress under the Treaty of Paris, was given that
power to determine the Civil and Political status of the inhabitants and the Philippine Islands. So that
was then the de jure government. On the other hand, the 2nd Philippine Republic that was headed by
President Laurel was established by the Japanese Imperial Army. It was sponsored and controlled by the
Japanese military. This is the reason why the government is sometimes known as the Banana Republic
because it was under the control of the Japanese Military. Q: How do you classify its existence as a form
of government considering that there was already the Commonwealth government with the consent of
the rightful authority? • The government under the 2 nd Philippines Republic cannot be ignored because
they are the ones controlling the affairs of the island. They have controlled major provinces of the
island. They have directly expressing the powers of the government but they don’t have any legitimacy.
They only existed in fact but not law. On the other hand, the Commonwealth Government existed in law
but not in fact because it cannot directly exercise the powers due to the presence of the Japanese in the
islands. The government sponsored by the Japanese was established by paramount force, it was
belligerent because it was against the rightful authority. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti
Q: Since the people were caught in a crossfire, which laws should the people obey? Would it be laws of
Congress and the Commonwealth or laws of the Philippine Republic? Are Filipinos that time still bound
to follow the 1935 Constitution or they are subject to the laws of the Japanese sponsored government?
During this period there were obligations governed by laws, like contract of loans, or any other kinds of
obligation and there has been an adjudication already rendered based on the common laws of the
Commonwealth as regards to the rights and obligations of the parties to that contract. The laws passed
by the Commonwealth that are political in nature. Q: What are laws that are political in nature? A: Laws
that define relationship between the government and the governed or that law that has something to
do with the government or anything pertaining to the government is a political law. The 1935
Constitution is a political law. Q: What will happen to laws that are political? Will it be abrogated or
abolished? Ex. There was no transfer of sovereignty from the USA to the Japanese so these political laws
are not automatically abrogated. They are merely suspended. However, nonpolitical laws like civil laws
or penal laws, already passed by the commonwealth government, they remain good and valid unless
they are repealed by the 2nd Philippine republic. The debt in Commonwealth government is still a debt
in the Japanese government unless the laws governing the debt is repealed by the 2nd Philippine
Republic. When there is no change of sovereignty, political laws are merely suspended. If there is a
change of sovereignty then political laws are automatically abrogated. Spanish laws governing the
inhabitants of the Philippine Islands upon the transfer of the sovereignty to the US were automatically
abrogated. They then ceased to be the rulers in the Philippine Islands. But the Código de Penal remains
valid and binding even with the transfer of sovereignty. Some of these laws are being adopted to our
present penal laws. Q: What happens to the laws passed by the 2nd Philippine republic? Are they still
good and valid even with the assumption of the Commonwealth government? Can you make a
distinction? A: Political laws passed by the 2nd Philippine Republic are automatically abrogated,
abolished upon liberation. But for Non-Political Laws: Municipal Laws consisting of Civil Laws,
Commercial Laws, Penal Laws, they remain good and valid and therefore binding, unless they are
repealed by the Commonwealth Government. ➢ Non-Political Laws are laws governing the private.
Even if it is an ordinary non-political decision or laws that has been violated, during the Japanese
occupation, when tainted with political complexion, then like any political law it is automatically
abrogated. Citizenship as defined is political, and as a citizen of the country, the Filipinos owe allegiance
to the US, because Filipinos are not yet independent from them that time, to the Commonwealth
government. Political laws are suspended for as long as the Japanese were still in the island. An
exception to that, even if it is political, owing allegiance to the commonwealth government is
permanent and it cannot be suspended. Q: What if the government is established by terrorism? A: It is a
de facto govt. if there is a legitimate govt. that it is maintaining against. If a govt. is established by
terrorism, it can only be considered as a criminal act or terrorism. The govt. established by terrorism
cannot be recognized by any govt. nationally or internationally. The govt. shall not be held liable for any
acts resulting from terrorism. Example: The NPA have their own govt. & courts. They have been declared
as terrorist not a rebel group. If they were recognized as a rebel group, they will be considered as a
belligerent group and their govt. may be recognized by international standard. Their acts will be
considered as a rebellion against an established government. Note: In establishing a de facto
government, it has to have control at least on major cities and provinces effectively controlling the
State. The NPA on the other hand, have no control over major cities and provinces. SYSTEMReviewer by:
Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Arroyo’s Presidency was not about de jure or de facto government. There
was a declaration by the SC that Estrada resigned. Under the Constitution, it is automatic that if there is
a vacancy, the vice-president shall succeed to the presidency. Therefore there’s no question that the
administration was de jure. Q: What is the difference between a Civilian Government and a Military
Government? A: A Civilian Government is a govt. run by civilians not by the members of the Armed
Forces. Q: How about during the Martial Law? A: It is a Civilian Government. The civilian authority was
assisted by the military to enforce the laws to make sure peace and order be restored. Q: What is a
Military Government? A: Involves two states. One is the victor state while the other is the defeated state
or the subdued territory. The government established by the victor state on the defeated state is
considered as a military government. Example: Spain lost to the U.S. and the treaty of Paris was signed
and executed. The Philippines during that time experienced a military government. Other forms of
Government: • Bureaucratic System of Government- this govt. consists of different agencies,
subdivisions, and instrumentalities of the govt. where you have to pass from one branch/office to the
other. Usually controlled by the super rich in the country. • Constitutional Government- based upon the
constitution. Manner of transferring powers: 1. Elective- powers are transferred after the expiration of a
term of office to the next successor if they are chosen through an election (either direct or indirect).
Direct- exercised here in the Philippines. Indirect Election- done through an electoral college. 2.
Hereditary- when powers are transferred by one generation to another. Powers are inherited by the
successors. Example: The Monarchy in Great Britain FUNCTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT CONSTITUENT
OR GOVERNMENTAL a compulsory function of government that is something to do with the legislative,
executive, legislative powers. The very bind of the society which the government is deal with executive
functions are: -keeping of peace and other in the society -providing protections to the people against
violence or robbery of the properties. legislative functions (by passing the law) -defining legal function
between husband and wife or between children and parents -defining those acts considered as crimes
and provides for the penalty (pass penal laws) judiciary function -determine what are the rights and
obligations of the parties under the contract -insured the administration of justice. MINISTRANT OR
PROPRIETARY promote public welfare which is optional. Function undertaken by the corporations. To
promote charity, public works or provide for public services which other private companies may also
performed. Government also engaged in a business example Eduction (obligation of the government to
provide for free) - state university, operated by the government performed proprietary functions.
Insurance (those who are less in life) private insurance company cost expensive premium while there
are low premium— SSS and GSIS engaged in business. before: Government have a choice whether to
provide for that kind of services or not under 1987 constitution it has been changed. SYSTEMReviewer
by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 38 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung
kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela
Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) now: government is mandated to promote social justice, improved the
standard of living of those less in life and protect labor. distinction between the governmental and
proprietary becomes blurred and both are obligatory in order to live in a decent life in terms SUABILITY
— governmental functions are immune from suits proprietary functions are suable STATUTES OF
LIMITATION in terms of time, time does not run from the government because they are sovereign unlike
proprietary functions applies and suable against them — government performed governmental function
cannot sue the states — agencies of the government performing proprietary functions are suable
example: occupying a land owned by the government in a sovereign capacity, will never acquired the
land even how long you stayed including the occupancy in the premises because time has never to run
against the government. If it where a property owned by the state in describing a capacity or proprietary
like in property of GSIS, continueosly, adversely, openly against GSIS after 30 years will owned the
property under the acquisitive prescription. when government performing a governmental function sue
individual is it subject to filling fees and court fee? - NO, because it is sovereign . but if the entity is
performing a proprietary function it is subject for fees and other court fees. example. GSIS against _____
. if GSIS did not pay would act prosper? NO. because GSIS in not performing governmental functions and
therefore should pay the fees, failure to pay the filling fees it may cause the dismissal of its complaint
Filing a complaint for damage against the private entity subject to pay filling fees will it prosper? YES,
because it is performing governmental function. PARENS PATRIAE government acts as a protector and
the guardian of those who cannot protect themselves: under disability due to age, gender, due to some
disability those are mentally challenge and physically challenge. CASE: CABANAS v. PILAPIL, 58 SCRA 94 -
case about the illegitimate child and the father died with insurance and stated in his last will of
testament all property will go to the minor illegitimate child and made his brother as the executor.
under the existing laws “wish of the deceased” have to be rejected because it must to be complied with
but it was contested by the mother of minor saying she has the better stand to protect her child, uncle is
just the collateral relative. mother of the child went to the courts and to stiff relief and ask to be
appointed as the guardian of the minor’s property. S.C decided with standing the last will of testament
in favor of the mother because S.C acting as paren patriae and convinced that the mother compared to
the uncle is more competent to protect the interest of the child and promote what is bet for the child.
purpose of protecting the interest those who cannot ordinarily protect themselves without the state
intervention. IMMUNITY OF THE STATE FROM SUITS State sovereign is cannot be sue without its
consent. it is known as the “Royal Prerogative of Dishonesty” on the part of the state. In view of
invocation of immunity from suit is not allowed to prove that thing against the state because state can
never be do wrong to any person then there is no basis to sue the states. why should the state made a
law that allow you to sue it? statue is stupid:)) enough to allow any preson to sue it for damages. state
would be busy it making suits instead a ruling its job. how would you know that an action is against the
state? court should dismiss it out without waiting to motion to dismiss or waive until a motion to dismiss
is filed by the Solicitor General. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma
Singko 39 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR
EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Writ of execution Q: will
this kind of procedure apply to the government where the plaintiff has proven its claim against the state
on the assumption that consent was given to sue the state? Can you ask for a writ of execution? Always
remember that these payments are not private funds hence you cannot ask for a writ of execution. The
proceeding from a suit against the state will only be until revision of judgment even if it has become
final and executory. Because it needs to request for approval/consent from congress to allocate
appropriate funds for the payment of award that was issued by court. And because of this, we cannot
relate it to private cases because there is the presumption that the state is insolvent. All money
deposited in the bank by the government are all EARMARKED, hence the due process for request. -What
is the remedy then? Money claims – ask COA, ask for a clearance. If there’s no money ask the
implementing agency to give you a copy of the clearance (ex, DPWH) then the agency will submit to
DBM. When the budget is prepared by the president, they will include the remedy in their budget (ex.
DPWH) “for the payment of a court order against DPWH” president will submit the budget to congress
for them to make a law for the authorization of the budget. • What about if it’s from Local government?
– Still need authority to disburse money. A request to the Sanggunian to pass a supplemental budget. If
they refuse, you can file a mandamus case against Sanggunian to get authority to disburse funds.
Suability VS liability Even if there was a proven valid claim against the government it does not necessary
follow that you can force the state to pay. Because you need consent of congress to disburse money. Q:
if a parcel of land was confiscated by the DPWH or by LGU for the relocation place for squatters, there
was already an appropriated amount for 1M but the court says the property is worth 2M and judgment
is final. Can you execute the 1M that was appropriated? A: You don’t need a writ of execution. All you
need is a court order to release the money. For the remaining balance, you still have to follow the
process for approval of appropriation of funds. (Appropriation law from congress) - Always remember
that this immunity from suit is a consequence of the state being sovereign. If the state cannot be sued
because it is sovereign the same principle applies to foreign states which may be involved in
cases/action in relation to the performance of its governmental functions Ex. Vatican is a state, they
entered into a contract to sell, to buy a land to establish their official office in the Philippines. The
contract stipulates the full payment will be made only after all the squatters and structures are cleared
for the construction of their building. However, the seller was not able to comply and demanded the
payment. They were not paid. They sued Vatican. Q: will the case prosper? Considering Vatican is a State
and therefore sovereign and immune from suit. A: you go by the nature of the contract, is it a business
or governmental? In this case it is governmental. Therefore the case will not prosper. Mentioned CASES:
• DIZON vs UP • ARIGO vs SWIFT The giving of consent by the State expressly, take note that in the bar
examination guys, that consent can only be given by Congress. Meaning, it is only through a law that a
consent may be given by the State to let someone against the State. • The law that may be passed by
Congress could be a general or it could be a special law. • The Supreme Court emphasizes that there
should be giving of consent by the State can only be done through legislation. Example: Department of
Agriculture entered into a contract with a private entity. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti
In their contract, they have agreed that in case of violation or breach, the party shall have recourse with
each other. Meaning, should the government violates the contract, then, the other party may sue the
State that’s for the DA as it was agreed expressly in the contract. Question: Will that action now prosper
against the Department of Agriculture should that be a violation of the contract by the DA? ➢ No
because a contract is not a law. Even if it was expressly stipulated by the parties. A contract is not a law.
It may be a source of obligation but definitely not a law. A law is something that is passed and enacted
by the Congress. Another case is during the time of Cory Aquino where a father was shot by the Armed
Forces of the Philippines while they were holding a rally against the administration where he is a
member of farmers of Hacienda Luisita. Many of those farmers died, if not, were injured. • The
President is compelled to make a pronouncement that the investigation be conducted to who is
responsible and those responsible be held accountable. Do you understand? :D On the basis of those
Presidential pronouncement, the family now of those who died and got injured file a suit for civil
damages against the officers of AFP. The basis of being that is there was consent on the part of the State
or a waiver of immunity through the pronouncement of the President. Question: Is there contention? ➢
No because there is no…. made by the highest civilian authority of the State. The President is not a
Congress. It has no immunity from suit. Still, it should be Congress and Congress only to give that
consent. Do you understand? :D Now then, let’s have some examples of general laws where the State
has given its consent to be sued. ➢ Commonwealth Act 327 ➢ P.D. 1445 otherwise known as “Auditing
and Accounting Code of the Philippines” There, the State has given its consent but with one condition:
should your claim in the nature of money arising from a contract. The law states that before you file an
action against the State, you must first file your claim in the Commission on Audit. Why? • Because COA
has the exclusive power to determine whether the expenditure is reasonable and in accordance with
law. • Because even then it is in accordance with the law, you don’t need to sue the government
because COA itself will order the government to pay. • But in the event it is found to be irregular or
anomalous, then of course, COA has to do its job by either suspending the expenditure or totally or
entirely disallow. Once COA does that, now you will have a recourse to sue COA including the
government. This time to refer to Supreme Court a petition for certiorari. This was just in the last bar
exam: the PNP entered into a contract with a supplier for a raincoat. Now then, it has been agreed that
in the case of breach of contract, the action or the suit should be filed in Manila where the supplies.
Now then, the PNP after all receiving the raincoats and after lapse of period and became due, did not
pay the supplier. So naturally, the supplier was compelled to file a collection of sum of money. Instead of
filing it in Manila, the supplier filed the case in the RTC Cebu. Question: Will the action prosper against
the PNP? ➢ It will not prosper because the case is filed in the wrong venue. It should have been filed in
Manila. That is a rule of procedure. Why would you not wonder why a rule of procedure is being asked
in political law not in remedial law? ➢ That is in remedial law, it is not applied because this is a political
law subject that you are being SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma
Singko 41 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR
EH 308 (LLB) USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) asked. It must have
something to do with a political principle PNP generally is government. Is it suable or not? It is not. It is
an unincorporated agency. As a rule, it is not suable. Exception: Unless the government gives its consent
to be sued. In this case, was there a law where the State has given its consent to sued? ➢ Answer is yes.
Because this is a money claim arising from a contract. What law should run? Thus, it should be PD 1445.
What is that condition before you can now sue the State? ➢ File your money claim first COA. In this
case, was there money claim filed with COA prior to the filing of the case? ➢ There was none. Because
the State is immune from suit. Do you understand? :D Another instances where under existing laws,
State has given its consent to be sued. Do you remember the acts of special agent. As long as it is an act
of special agent, the State has given its consent to be sued under Article 2180 of the Civil Code. There is
also a provision under the Civil Code on courts “nga if mahog ka sa manhole because it was not covered
due to act of negligence of agency of government”, you have a recourse against the government. R.A.
7160 insofar as Government Code is concerned, the LGUs are suable whether they are exercising
governmental or proprietary functions. It would give anyone the consent to sue the LGU. Example:
Merritt vs. Government of the Philippine Islands. In this case, the guy was riding on his motorcycle but
was bumped by an ambulance owned by the Veterans hospital. He filed a complaint for damages against
the hospital but was dismissed because it is immune from suit. He asked an authority from Congress to
let him prove his claim and was granted by way of special law authorizing him to sue the State. On
express giving of consent, there is no problem regarding on that because it can easily determine. The
problem in the bar exam questions would normally ask on acts of government where government would
have impliedly giving its consent to be sued. For instances: EXEMPTIONS 1.When the government
commences the filing of a complaint against a private individual or initiates the filing of the government
against the private individual or even any ordinary individual, the defendant that you are suing may also
file a counter claim against you. ➢ In another words, when the State initiates the filing of complaint for
affirmative relief, the government has opened itself to a counter claim suit. Example: It is the function of
the PCGG to recover the illgotten wealth of Marcoses. ➢ They suspected that the corporations owned
by the Benedictus are actually owned by the Marcoses. So, they sequestered the shares of stocks of the
corporations. They were contesting on who were actually the owner of the corporations. It went to the
Supreme Court and the Court ruled that the corporations are actually owned by the Benedictus and not
by the Marcoses. Because of the superstition, the Benedictus suffered damages because the PCGG took
over. What did the Benedictus do after the dismissal of the complaint against them? ➢ Now, they
invoke the immunity from the suit because the office is an unincorporated agency and thus not immune
from suit. By initiating the filing of complaint for affirmative relief, the State is considered to waive its
immunity from suit. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 42 | P a
g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB)
USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Affirmative relief is when you are
asking for positive relief for the recovery of ill-gotten wealth. It could be in terms of money or property.
Another case: Juan borrowed money from the bank. He used his vessel as a collateral as guarantee for
his payment. Juan, however, failed to pay. So what did the bank do? ➢ The bank is processing the
foreclosure of the vessel so that it would be sell in public auction and apply the proceeds to the loan.
But before the bank could do that, now the government intervenes in the case as a complainant in
intervening or protecting their interest in the vessel that belongs to the government. ➢ Because of the
intervention complaint, the bank wasn’t able to foreclose the vessel because the case is still pending in
the court. Supreme court decided that the vessel actually belongs to Juan and not to the government.
When the bank already wanting to get the vessel and sell it in a public auction so that the proceeds be
applied to the loan of Juan, they cannot find anymore the vessel because it was lost. They have no way
to get paid by Juan because the vessel is lost. Question: Can the bank run after the government?
Because if it were not the complaint of Juan against the foreclosure, the bank would have been paid.
This is now the counter claim of the bank against the government. Will the action prosper? ➢ Supreme
Court said that the government is still immune from suit. The purpose of initiation for filing of complaint
by the government is to resist the claim against it or to protect interest of the subject of litigation.
Which in this case, the State has not waived its immunity against a suit. 2. When the State engages
purely in business. ➢ If the business of the government is merely incidental to performance of
governmental function, then definitely the State is still immune from suit. Example: Bureau of Customs
engages in arrastre business. ➢ It is still immune from suit because it is incidental as to their operations.
Not unlike kung magtukod ug barbershop ang PNP, nothing to do with maintaining peace and order, the
State is considered to waive its immunity from suit. Case of Camp John Hay They have restaurant, now a
hotel, so that the military men can have R n R after coming back to the Philippines after wherever they
were assigned. Now, naka kontra siguro to nila ang chef sa restaurant, gi ihian ang soup of one of the
customer. It was discovered and the person sued Camp John Hay, military facility owned by the US, for
damages. Of course, the Court said na “kining Camp John Hay is not incidental to any of its performance
of governmental function which is a military function. What eating has to do with protecting the
sovereignty of the US?” Do you understand? Thus, it was allowed to sue the government of US. It is
similar to a case where an unincorporated agency but engages purely business, definitely
notwithstanding, the fact that it has separate and distinct personality from the government of the
Republic of the Philippines, but the act has impliedly given its consent to be sued. 3. When the
government enters into a purely commercial business contracts. Example: you will procure computers
because the government is thinking of putting up an internet café. Do you understand that, guys? ➢ It
has nothing to do with performance of a governmental function. The contract is purely business and
commercial which is making money. Thus, the State is suable. It is considered the State waived its
immunity from the suit. SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L. España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 43 |
P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba susuko, kung kailan malayo na ang narating mo? LABAN LANG. FOR EH 308 (LLB)
USE ONLY Consti I | Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) Another example: Philippine
Information Agency, has its function of communicating programs, projects and services of the
government to the public, to raise revenue entered into a contract with ABS-CBN for the promotion of
the fight of Pacquiao against Mayweather in the Philippines. Do you understand? Okay? Now, the fight
has already been done yet the ABS-CBN has not been paid. Question: Can ABS-CBN sue the
unincorporated agency, PIA? ➢ Yes. Because the contract entered is purely commercial business. Do
you understand? 4. Finally, in appropriation where the owner of the property was not paid with just
compensation, then the property owner can sue the government or the State for payment of just
compensation for reason of equity and justice. The Supreme Court was saying that eminent domain
power should not be used as a tool to oppress any property or owner that would cause injustice to the
property owner. Thus, those property owners who were not paid just compensation may sue the State.
Do you understand? The principle is when the government expropriates a property, it is presumed that
there has been appropriation of public funds for the payment a just compensation. ➢ So, when you sue
the State, it would not necessarily require anymore for the government to make an affirmative act for
such appropriating fund because there is already an appropriation of the funds. Only of the funds that
have been appropriated by the Congress may not be sufficient to fully pay the just compensation.
Because after all, it is not Congress that determine just compensation. It is the court that decides. ➢ So,
it is only possible that the court may award a higher price of just compensation than the amount that
was already set aside for the payment of just compensation by Congress. Do you understand? Thus,
precisely you can sue the State for payment of just compensation even if it is not clear that the consent
has been given. Do you understand? Any problems, questions and clarifications relating to that? Alright.
Now then, finally, once you have proven your claim, what to do next? Then, the court would render
judgment in your favor. The government now making an order to pay to compensate you. Once the
judgment now becomes final, can you immediately get the money? ➢ No, you can’t because there is a
process. Ordinarily, what is the procedure? Both parties involved is private---Once you win the case, you
ask the defendant to settle. “Bayari nalang gud ko so that I won’t compel you to pay.” But if the
defendant doesn’t give you anything, your remedy is to ask for the court a motion for execution of a
judgment. The court will now issue to the sheriff a writ to implement the execution. What is the
implication of enforcement of writ of execution? ➢ The sheriff will now look for properties of the
defendant. If he has personal properties, they can be attached by the sheriff and sell them in a public
auction and proceeds of the sale will be paid to the award that was granted by the court. • Public
bidding- anyone can bid on those properties including the plaintiff. If he has money in the bank, it would
be attached and garnished. How would you know that the defendant has money in the bank? ➢ The
sheriff will send notices to the banks in the place where the person is residing or anywhere in
Judge Estela Alma Singco |S.Y. 1st sem (2018) the Philippines not in the world. Do you understand? If he
has money, it would be kept for the plaintiff. “Ig frozen na imong mga account kay kini nga kwarta ig
bayad sa utang nimo sa plaintiff”. Do you understand that, guys? ➢ If the sheriff finds a real property
this time, then they will be attached. How would the sheriff know that the defendant owns those lands?
➢ He would go to the assessor’s office or registry office and ask there if there is a title in the name of
the defendant. Then, he will notify the registry of deeds that he will be going to allocate the titles and
sell it to public auction and the proceeds will

To Format

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

To Format

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

SYSTEMReviewer by: Lorebeth L.

España Consti I |Judge Stella Alma Singko 1 | P a g e Ngayon ka pa ba

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi