Pre Bar Review Question Part I

7/24/2019 Pre Bar Review Question Part I

1/34

Pre-Bar Quizzer in Political Law PART I:Constitution of Government 1-1

!"# $$

Posted by %a&z

1. Define Political Law

It is that 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. 'P()PL( *+, P(R(CT). /0 Pil, 2234

2. What are included in Political Law?

Constitutional Law;

Administrative Law

Law of Public fficers Law on Public Corporation

!lection Law

3. What is the doctrine of constitutional supremacy?

"nder the doctrine of constitutional supremacy# if a law or contract violates any norm of the

constitution that law or contract whether promulgated by the legislative or by the e$ecutive

branch or entered into by private persons for private purposes is null and void and without any

force and effect. %hus# since the Constitution is the fundamental# paramount and supreme law of

the nation# it is deemed written in every statute and contract.

4. What are the requisites for the exercise of people!s initiati"e# to amend the

$onstitution?

It is provided under Section Art. '(II of the Constitution which provides that )Amendments to

this Constitution may li*ewise be directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a

petition of at least +&, of the total number of registered voters# of which every legislative district

must be represented by at least -, of the registered voter therein. %he Congress shall provide

for the implementation of the e$ercise of this right.

%. &s there a law which would pro"ide for the mechanism for the people to propose

amendments to the $onstitution 'y people!s initiati"e?

/hile Congress had enacted 0A 12-3 purportedly to provide the mechanisms for the

people4s e$ercise the power to amend the Constitution by people4s initiative# the Supreme Court

in 5I0IA5 6!7!8S09SA8%IA:# et al. (s. C5!L!C# :.0. 8o. +&2-&3# 5arch +# +2 < =une

+># +2# the Supreme Court held that RA 5306 is incom7lete. ina8e9uate or wantin& in

essential terms an8 con8itions insofar as initiative on amen8ments to te Constitution is

concerne8, Its lacunae on tis sustantive matter are fatal an8 cannot e cure8 ;

s %otion for Reconsi8eration el8 tat RA #o, 5306 is a8e9uate

an8 com7lete for te 7ur7ose of 7ro7osin& amen8ments to te Constitution trou& 7eo7le>s

initiative ; a vote of 1 memers as 7er Certification of te (n Banc>s Cler? of Court,

%(a. )ay the question Do you appro"e the amendment of *rticles +& and +&& of the 1,-

Philippine $onstitution chan/in/ the form of /o"ernment from Presidential(0icameral to

Parliamentary(nicameral# 'e allowed to 'e su'mitted to the people for their ratification
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-1-10/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-1-10/


2/34


3/34

,. What is the Doctrine of Proper 8u'mission# in connection with proposed

amendments to the $onstitution?

octrine of 4roper &ubmission means all the proposed amendments to the Constitution

shall be presented to the people for the ratification or re5ection at the same time, not

piecemeal. -T01+T*+ )&. C2101C, 6' &C!% 78#3

1, @at is te arci7ela&ic 8octrine or arci7ela&o teor;

It is the &ndsentence of Section +# Art. I of the Constitution which states that )thewaters around#

between and connecting the islands of the archipelago# regardless of their breadth and

dimensions# form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.

Pre-Bar Quizzer in Political Law Part I:

Constitution of Government 11-$!"# $$

Posted by %a&z

11. What are the elements of state#?

As held in C001CT! )&. C%24& !91%, 6# &C!% #:, the elements of a state are.

+. people

&. territory

-. sovereignty

. government

12. *re the two(fold function of /o"ernment as enumerated 'y the 8upreme $ourt in 0*$*9&

+8. 9*$:$:; 1 and $onstituent =)andatory>

unctions5 still applica'le today?

+o more as held in %CC% )&. C9C, :8 &C!%


4/34

a. %he first# or government de facto in a proper legal sense# is that government that gets

possession and control of# or usurps# by force or by the voice of the maority# the rightful legal

governments and maintains itself against the will of the latter# such as the government of !ngland

under the Commonwealth# first by Parliament and later by Cromwell as Protector.

b. %he second is that which is established and maintained by military forces who invade and

occupy a territory of the enemy in the course of war# and which is denominated a government of

paramount force# as the cases of Castine# in 5aine# which was reduced to ritish possession in the

war of +J+ and %ampico# 5e$ico# occupied during the war with 5e$ico# by the troops of the

"nited States.

c. And the third is that established as an independent government by the inhabitants of a

country who rise in insurrection against the parent state of such as the government of the

Southern Confederacy in revolt not concerned in the present case with the first *ind# but only

with the second and third *inds of de facto governments.

)ut there is another description of government# called also by publicists a government de facto#

but which might# perhaps# be more aptly denominated a government of paramount force. Its

distinguishing characteristics are

?+@# that its e$istence is maintained by active military power with the territories# and against the

rightful authority of an established and lawful government; and

?&@# that while it e$ists it necessarily be obeyed in civil matters by private citizens who# by acts of

obedience rendered in submission to such force# do not become responsible# or wrongdoers# for

those acts# though not warranted by the laws of the rightful government.

1%. What is the postliminy theory or us postliminium?

/hen a foreign power occupies a state and e$ercises the powers of government# the political laws

of the said state are deemed automatically suspended but the former government automatically

comes to life and will be in force and in effect again upon the re9establishment of the former

government. ?%aylor# International Law# p. 1+3.@

16. What is the doctrine of so"erei/nty as auto limitation#?

In the succinct language of =elline*# it )is the property of a state9force due to which it has the

e$clusive capacity of legal self9determination and self9restriction,= A state ten. if it cooses to.

ma; refrain from te eFercise of wat oterwise is illimitale com7etence,= %he opinion was

at pains to point out though that even then# there is at the most diminution of urisdictional

rights# not its disappearance. ?Cited in 0eagan vs. Commissioner# 41401 )&. /, ?: &C!% 67 ?+&&@ because the child is not a mere creature of

the State and the parents have the natural right and duty of rearing their children for civic

efficiency.

26. )ay the 8tate require parents to enroll their small children only to pu'lic schools "alid?

As held in PI(RC( *+, +)CI(TH ) +I+T(R+. $52 "+ 61 '1$64# a law reDuiring small *ids to be

enrolled in public schools only is unconstitutional since it interferes with the right of parents in


7/34

rearing their children. %hey have the right to choose which school is best suited for the

development of their children without interference from the State. %BIS IS S !CA"S! %B!

CBIL60!8 A0! 8% 5!0! C0!A%"0!S 7 %B! S%A%!.

2. Do we practice the free enterprise system in the Philippines or is it the welfare state

concept? Distin/uish the two.

As held in ACC7A (S. C":C# -> SC0A 1 the Philippines never practiced the free enterprise

system. It is the welfare9state concept which is being followed as shown by the constitutional

provision on agrarian reform# housing# protection to labor ?8%!# however# that the +J2

Constitution have provisions which provide for )free enterprise@. %he said doctrine was reiterated

in PBILIPPI8! CC8"% 6!SICCA%0S (S. PBILIPPI8! CC8"% A"%B0I%F# &J1 SC0A +> where it

was held that the Philippine Constitutions# starting from the +-3 document# BA(!

0!P"6IA%!6 laisseD faire ?or the doctrine of free enterprise@ as an economic principle# and

although the present Constitution enshrines free enterprise as a policy# it nevertheless reserves to

the government the power to intervene whenever necessary to promote the general welfare. Assuch# free enterprise does not call for the removal of )protective regulations for the benefit of

the general public. %his is so because under Art. 'II# Sections 1 and # it is very clear that the

government reserves the power to intervene whenever necessary to promote the general welfare

and when the public interest so reDuires.

&29a. 5ay the PC:: Commissioners refuse to appear before a Senate Committee conducting

alleged irregularities committed by them while sitting in the oard of PBILC5SA%# a private firm

seDuestered by the government on account of !$ecutive rder 8o. + providing that they should

not be the subect of any investigation in connection with their acts in connection with the

performance of their duties as suchM

8o. Such act would violate Section &J# Art. II of the Constitution mandating disclosure of all public

transactions involving the public interest. Such act would also violate the )right to information on

matters of public concern as well as the )public accountability of public officials as embodied in

Section +# Art. 'I of the +J2 Constitution# not to mention that such would render nugatory the

power of Congress under Section &+# Art. (I. ?SAI (S. :068# 3> SC0A 2>@

2-. What *re the limitations to the $on/ress power to exercise le/islati"e power?

%he limitations areE

+. it cannot pass irrepealable laws

&. principle of separation of powers

-. non9delegability of legislative powers

2,. What are the constitutionally allowed dele/ation of le/islati"e power# 'y $on/ress?

%he permissible delegation of legislative power is.

+4 +ec, $0 '$4 of Article *I?!mergency powers to the President in case of war or other national

emergency# for a limited period and subect to such restrictions as Congress may provide# to


8/34

e$ercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy. "nless sooner

withdrawn by 0esolution of Congress# such powers shall cease upon the ne$t adournment thereof.

&@ +ec, $2 '$4 of Article *I,%he Congress may by law# authorize the President to fi$ within

specified limits# and subect to such limitations and restrictions as it may impose# tariff rates#

import and e$port Duotas# tonnage and wharfage dues# and other duties or imposts within the

framewor* of the national development program of the government.

-@ 6elegation to local governments

@ 6elegation of 0ule9ma*ing power to administrative bodies

3@ 6elegation to the People 'Section Art. '(II of the Constitution and Section - Article (IO%he

Congress shall# as early as possible# provide for a system of initiative and referendum# and the

e$ceptions therefrom# whereby the people can directly propose and enact laws or approve or

reect any act or law or part thereof passed by the Congress of local legislative body after the

registration of a petition thereof signed by at least +>, of the total number of registered voters#

of which every legislative district must be represented by at least -, of the registered voters

thereof.

3 provides that )Any person who had lost

his Philippine Citizenship by rendering service to# or accepting commission in# the Armed 7orces ofthe "nited States# or after separation from the Armed 7orces of the "nited states# acDuired "S

citizenship# 5AF 0!ACK"I0! PBILIPPI8! CI%I!8SBIP F %ANI8: A8 A%B 7 ALL!:IA8C! % %B!

0!P"LIC 7 %B! PBILIPPI8!S A86 0!:IS%!0I8: %B! SA5! /I%B %B! LCAL CI(IL 0!:IS%0F I8 %B!

PLAC! /B!0! B! 0!SI6!S 0 LAS% 0!SI6!6 I8 %B! PBILIPPI8!S. %he said ath of allegiance shall

contain a renunciation of any other citizenship. And he shall still be considered )natural born

7ilipino citizen.
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/


9/34

32. &f the candidate for $on/ressman is su'sequently disqualified for non(compliance of the

residence requirement under *rt. +&; may the 2 nd

placer 'e declared the winner in his place?

When may the 2nd

placer 'e allowed to 'e declared the winner?

It depends. As held in )CA%P) *+, E)"+( (L(CT)RAL TRIB"#AL an8 %ARI) CR(+P). a,?,a,

%ARD !I%(#(. !une 16. $/,

+. %here must be a final udgment disDualifying a candidate in order that the votes of a

disDualified candidate can be considered )stray. %his final udgment must be renderedB()R(

TE( (L(CTI)#. %his was the ruling in the case of C6ILLA (S. 6! (!8!CIA. Bence# when a

candidate has not been disDualified by final udgment during the election day he was voted for#

the votes cast in his favor cannot be declared stray. %o do so would amount to disenfranchising the

electorate in whom sovereignty resides. %he reason behind this is that the people voted for him

bona fide and in the honest belief that the candidate was then Dualified to be the person to whom

they would entrust the e$ercise of the powers of government.

&. %he disDualification of a candidate who obtained the highest number of votes AT(R TE(

(L(CTI)#does not entitle the second placer to be declared the winner. %he said principle waslaid down as early as ++& and reiterated in the cases of LAB) *+, C)%(L(C. AB(LLA *+,

C)%(L(C an8 )%I#) *+, C)%(L(C.

33. &n case of "acancy in the 8enate or in the Bouse of 7epresentati"es under 8ection , of

*rticle +&&; is it automatic for the $:)CLC$ to hold a special election?

8o# there must be a law passed by Congress appropriating the funds for the said purpose. ?0/%%

vs. C2101C, '#8 &C!% ::73

0/, @ile a %emer of Con&ress is not allowe8 to a77ear as counsel for an; 7art; in

court or efore a8ministrative o8ies. ma; e 8o so as a


10/34

?8%!# however# that the ournal prevails over the enrolled bill on all matters reDuired to be

entered in the ournals# li*e yeas and nays on the final reading of a bill or on any Duestion at the

reDuest of +Q3 of the members present. G=ustice Isagani CruzH@

3-. )ay $on/ress chan/e the existin/ mem'ership of the $ommission on *ppointments or

Clectoral Fri'unals as a result of the chan/es of mem'ership of the different political

parties?

Yes *f the changes in the political part affiliations of the members of Congress is

substantial and at the same time permanent so as to dramaticall increase the membership of

one part while significantl reducing the other, the number of representatives of the different

parties in the Commission on %ppointments ma also be changed in proportion to their actual

memberships. -+T1> *n Cunanan vs. Tan, the membership of the &enators was onl temporar

so as not to result in the change of membership in the Commission on %ppointments3

3-(a. )ay a political party LDP5 replace its representati"e in the Bouse of 7epresentati"es

Clectoral $ommission who; in a preliminary "otin/ in a protest case a/ainst an LDP )em'er;

"oted in fa"or of the other party and a/ainst the candidate of his "ery own party?

Hhile as a rule the different political parties ma change their representatives in the

1lectoral Tribunal or Commission on %ppointments, it ma not change a 2ember who completel

heard and participated in a particular case "and has alread indicated his vote to the members of

the tribunal$ and replace him with another who has no participation therein, eEcept onl to vote

for a partImate who is involved in the protest. &uch would be a travest of 5ustice. -@+C

)&. 4*+1%, &eptember #


11/34

8o if the conversations are covered by the )e$ecutive privilege.

4s

&eneralize8 interest in confi8entialit;. %he privilege is said to be necessary to guarantee the

candor of presidential advisors and to provide )te Presi8ent an8 tose wo assist im

wit free8om to eF7lore alternatives in te 7rocess of sa7in& 7olicies an8 ma?in& 8ecisions

an8 to 8o so in a wa; man; woul8 e unwillin& to eF7ress eFce7t 7rivatel;,=

In *n !e> &ealed Case,=3>=3 the ".S. Court of Appeals delved deeper. It ruled that there are two ?&@

*inds of e$ecutive privilege; one is the 7resi8ential communications 7rivile&e and# the other is

the 8elierative 7rocess 7rivile&e. %he former pertains to


12/34

%hat privilege was# however# found insufficient to ustify the confidentiality of the #-+ withheld

documents.

ut more specific classifications of communications covered by e$ecutive privilege are made in

older cases. Courts ruled early that the !$ecutive has a right to withhold documents that might

revealmilitar; or state secrets.G2HG-Hi8entit; of &overnment informers in some circumstances. #GJH

G-3Hand information relate8 to 7en8in& investi&ations.GHG-1H An area where the privilege is highly

revered is in forei&n relations.

5aority of the above urisprudence have found their way in our urisdiction. In ChaveD v. 4C=1

=3->, this Court held that there is a )governmental privilege against public disclosure with respect to

state secrets regarding military# diplomatic and other security matters. InChaveD v. 41%,G++H

G-H there is also a recognition of the confidentiality of Presidential conversations#

correspondences# and discussions in closed9door Cabinet meetings. In &enate v. 1rmita# the

concept of7resi8ential communications 7rivile&eis fully discussed.

As may be gleaned from the above discussion# the claim of e$ecutive privilege is highly recognized

in cases where the subect of inDuiry relates to a power te$tually committed by the Constitutionto the President# such as the area of military and foreign relations. "nder our Constitution# the

President is the repository of the commander9in9chief#G+&HG>Happointing#G+-HG+Hpardoning#G+HG&Hand

diplomaticG+3HG-H powers. Consistent with the doctrine of separation of powers# the information

relating to these powers may enoy greater confidentiality than others.

%he above cases# especially# +iEon, *n !e &ealed Case andKudicial Hatch,somehow provide the

elements of 7resi8ential communications 7rivile&e# to witE

14 %he protected communication must relate to a )Duintessential and non9delegable

presidential power.

$4 %he communication must be authored or )solicited and received by a close advisor of the

President or the President himself. %he udicial test is that an advisor must be in )operational

pro$imity with the President.

04 %he 7resi8ential communications 7rivile&eremains a Dualified privilege that may be

overcome by a showing of adeDuate need# such that the information sought )li*ely contains

important evidence and by the unavailability of the information elsewhere by an appropriate

investigating authority.G+1HGH

Simply put# the bases are 7resi8ential communications 7rivile&e and e$ecutive privilege on

matters relating to 8i7lomac; or forei&n relations.

"sing the above elements# we are convinced that# indeed# the communications elicited by the

three ?-@ Duestions are covered by the 7resi8ential communications 7rivile&e. irst# the

communications relate to a )Duintessential and non9delegable power of the President# i.e. the

power to enter into an e$ecutive agreement with other countries. %his authority of the President

to enter into eEecutive agreementswithout the concurrence of the Legislature has traditionally

been recognized in Philippine urisprudence.G+2HG3H 8econd; the communications are )received by

a close advisor of the President. "nder the )operational pro$imity test# petitioner can be

considered a close advisor# being a member of President Arroyo4s cabinet. %nd third# there is no

adeDuate showing of a compelling need that would ustify the limitation of the privilege and of

the unavailailit;of the information elsewhere by an appropriate investigating authority.

'#)T(: In #iFon. te "+ +u7reme Court el8 tat invocation of

=4-> that )demonstrated#

specific need for evidence in 7en8in& criminal trial outweighs the President4s )generalized

interest in confidentiality. Bowever# the present case4s distinction with the +iEoncase is very

evident. In +iEon# there is a pending criminal proceeding where the information is

reDuested and it is the demands of due process of law and the fair administration of criminal
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn7https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn7https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn8https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn8https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn9https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn10https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn11https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn12https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn12https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn13https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn13https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn14https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn14https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn15https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn15https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn16https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn16https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn17https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn17https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn18https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn7https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn8https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn9https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn10https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn11https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn12https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn13https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn14https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn15https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn16https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn17https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-31-40/#_ftn18


13/34

ustice that the information be disclosed. %his is the reason why the ".S. Court was Duic* to

)limit te sco7e of its 8ecision, It stressed that it is s &eneralize8 interest in confi8entialit; F F F an8 con&ressional

8eman8s for information,= "nli*e in+iEon# the information here is elicited# not in a criminal

proceeding# but in a legislative inDuiry. In this regard# &enate v. 1rmita stressed that the validity

of the claim of e$ecutive privilege depends not only on the ground invo*ed but# also# on

the 7roce8ural settin&or theconteFtin which the claim is made. 7urthermore# in +iEon,the

President did not interpose any claim of need to protect military# diplomatic or sensitive national

security secrets. In the present case# !$ecutive Secretary !rmita categorically claims e$ecutive

privilege on the grounds of 7resi8ential communications 7rivile&ein relation to her e$ecutive

and policy decision9ma*ing process and diplomatic secrets.

G+HG&JH C0S 0eport for Congress# Presidential Claims of !$ecutive PrivilegeE Bistory# Law#

Practice and 0ecent 6evelopments at p. &.

G&HG&H +J ".S. 1J-.

G-HG->H *n !e> &ealed Case +o. 19-+ =une +2# +2.

GHG-+H *d.

G3HG-&H C0S 0eport for Congress# Presidential Claims of !$ecutive PrivilegeE Bistory# Law#

Practice and 0ecent 6evelopments at pp. +J9+.

G1HG--H -13 7.-d ++>J# -1+ ".S.App.6.C. +J-# 1 7ed. 0. !vid. Serv. ++.

G2HG-H See 9nited &tates v. !enolds, -3 ".S. +# 19J ?+3-@; Chicago v. %irlines, *nc. v.

Haterman &teamship Corp., --- ".S. +>-# +++; Totten v. 9nited &tates, =# 9.&. '8?, '8


14/34

)%he rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inDuiries shall be respected. It follows

then that the rights of persons under the ill of 0ights must be respected# including the right to

due process and the right not to be compelled to testify against one4s self. ut broad as is this

power of inDuiry# it is not unlimited. %here is no general authority to e$pose the private affairs of

individuals without ustification in terms of the functions of Congress. 8or is the Congress a law

enforcement or trial agency. %hese are functions of the e$ecutive and udicial departments of

government. 8o inDuiry is an end in itself; it must be related to and in furtherance of a legitimate

tas* of Congress. Investigations conducted solely for the personal aggrandizement of the

investigators or to )punish those investigated are indefensible.

41. )ay local le/islati"e 'odies "alidly cite a person in contempt of court as what $on/ress

could do5 for refusin/ to appear therein or to answer the questions of the mem'ers thereof?

8o. In 8!:0S 0I!8%AL II !L!C%0IC CP!0A%I(! (S. SA8::"8IA8: PA8:L"8:S6 7

6"5A:"!%! CI%F# :.0. 8o. 2& 8ov. 3# +J2# +33 SC0A &+# the Supreme Court held that such

power was not delegated by Congress to local government units.

42. What are the 'ills that must exclusi"ely ori/inate from the Bouse of 7epresentati"es?

"nder Section Art. (I# All appropriations# revenue or tariff bills# bills authorizing increase of

the public debt# bills of local application# and private bills shall originate e$clusively in the Bouse

of representatives# but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments. ?#)T(:In Tolentino

vs, +ecretar; of inance# the Supreme Court held that the !9(A% Law is constitutional even if thesame was the (!0SI8 which came from the Senate# not from the Bouse of 0epresentatives. %his

is so because the Senate is allowed to )propose amendments to bills which must e$clusively

originate from the Bouse of 0epresentatives.@

43. When is transfer of appropriations allowed 'y the $onstitutionM

nly those covered by Section &3 G3H which provides that )8o law shall be passed authorizing any

transfer of appropriations; however# the President# the President of the Senate# the Spea*er of the

house of 0epresentatives# the Chief ustice of the Supreme Court# and the heads of theconstitutional commissions may# by law# be authorized to augment any item in the general

appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective

appropriations.

44. What is the so(called executi"e impoundment#?

It means that although an item of appropriation is not vetoed by the President# he however

refuses for whatever reason# to spend funds made possible by Congress. It is the failure to spend

or obligate budget authority of any type. Proponents of impoundment have invo*ed at least three

?-@ principal sources of authority of the President. G+H authority to impound given to him by

Congress# either e$pressly or impliedly; G&H the e$ecutive power drawn from his power as

Commander9in9chief; and G-H the 7aithful e$ecution clause of the Constitution. 8ote that in this

case the SC held that the Countryside 6evelopment 7und ?C67@ or )Por* arrel of Congressmen

and Senators is C8S%I%"%I8AL because the same is )set aside for Rinfrastructure# purchase of


15/34

ambulances and computers and other priority proects and activities# and credit facilities to

Dualified beneficiaries as proposed and identified by said Senators and Congressmen. ?PBILC8SA

(S. !80IK"!# &-3 SC0A 3>1@

4%. )ay the President refuse to enforce a law on the /round that in his opinion it is

unconstitutional?

8o. therwise# he will be violating the doctrine of separation of powers because by doing so# he

will be arrogating unto himself the power to interpret the law# not merely to implement it. ?0.&.

2+ L C. )&. G%!!*&+, 6: 4hil.:J3

#3 )AT. )&. &4!*+1!, ?8 4hil. ?#=, read also the separate opinion.

46. Fhe President of the Philippines; 'y *dministrati"e :rder; mandates the *D:PF&:9

: * 9*F&:9*L $:)PFC7&GCD &DC9F&&$*F&:9 7CC7C9$C 8H8FC)# and appropriatin/

funds therefore?&s this within his executi"e power#?

8o as held by the Supreme Court in LAS PL! (S. 0"!8 %00!S# !% AL.# :.0. 8o. +&21J3#

=uly &-# +J# the A establishes a system of identification that is all9encompassing in scope#

affects the life and liberty of every 7ilipino citizens and foreign residents and therefore# it is

supposed to be a law passed by Congress that implements it# not by an Administrative rder issued

by the President. Administrative Power# which is supposed to be e$ercised by the President# is

concerned with the wor* of applying policies and enforcing orders as determined by proper

governmental organs. It enables the President to fi$ a uniform standard of administrative

efficiency and chec* the official conduct of his agents. Prescinding from the foregoing precepts#

A ->J involves a subect that is not appropriate to be covered by an Administrative rder. An

administrative order is an ordinance issued by the President which relates to specific aspects in

the administrative operation of the government. It must be in harmony with the law and should be

for the sole purpose of implementing the law and carrying out the legislative policy. %he subect

of A ->J therefore is beyond the power of the President to issue and it is a usurpation of

legislative power.

4. What is the totality test# used 'y the 8upreme $ourt in holdin/ that former President

Ioseph Cstrada resi/ned as President on Ianuary 2


16/34

4,. )ay the President ma@es appointment to "acancies in the udiciary within two months

immediately 'efore the next presidential election and up to the end of his term# in order to

comply with the requirement of 8ections 4 and -; *rt. +&&& for him to fill up "acancies in the

udiciary within ,< days from the su'mission of the list of nominees 'y the Iudicial and 0ar

$ouncil?

8o. Section +3# Article (II applies only to temporary appointments to e$ecutive positions when

continued vacancies therein will preudice public service or endanger public safety and not to the

udiciary.

%


17/34

appointments. Acting appointments are a way of temporarily circumventing the need of

confirmation by the Commission on Appointments.

%2. What is the ta@e care power# of the President of the Philippines?It is the power of the President under Section +2# Art. (II which provides that %he President shall

have control of all the e$ecutive departments # bureaus and offices. Ee sall ensure tat te

laws e faitfull; eFecute8,

%3. What is the power of control of the President. Distin/uish it from power of super"ision.

)Control has been defined as )the power of an officer to alter or modify or nullify or set aside

what a subordinate officer had done in the performance of his duties and to substitute the

udgment of the former for test of the latter. )Supervision on the other hand means

)overseeing or the power or authority of an officer to see that subordinate officers perform their

duties. ?586A8 (S. SIL(SA@

%4. )ay the President "alidly require all officers and employees under the executi"e

department to maintain &D systems and ha"e &D cards?

Fes in accordance with her power of control under Section +2# Art. (II of the Constitution.

?NIL"SA8: 5AF "8 (S. !'!C"%I(! S!C0!%A0F !6"A06 !05I%A# !% AL.# April +# &>>1 < =une

&># &>>1@ ut not for a national I6 system which includes civilians as held in ple vs. %orres#

supra.

%%. What is the doctrine of qualified political a/ency?

It simply means that )te Presi8ent is not eF7ecte8 to 7erform in 7erson an te multifarious

eFecutive an8 a8ministrative functions, Te )ffice of te (Fecutive +ecretar; is an auFillar;

unit wic assists te Presi8ent, "n8er our constitutional set-u7. te (Fecutive +ecretar; acts

for an8 in ealf of te Presi8ent: an8 ; autorit; of te Presi8ent. e as un8is7ute8

Nuris8iction to affirm. mo8if;. or even reverse an; or8er of te +ecretar; of #atural Resources

an8 oter Cainet +ecretaries. /here the !$ecutive Secretary acts )by authority of the

President his decision is that of the President. ?Lacson95agallanes Co.# Inc. vs. Pano# &+ SC0A

J3@.

%6. What are the differences 'etween the power of the President to declare martial law or

suspend the pri"ile/e of the writ of ha'eas corpus under the 1,- $onstitution and the

pre"ious $onstitutions?

"nder the +J2 Philippine Constitution# such acts of the President may be reviewed not only by

the Supreme Court but also the Congress of the Philippines. Previously# such would be considered

)political Duestion which is beyond the review powers of the courts. Li*ewise# there is a definite

period for the said suspension unli*e before and more importantly# the grounds are only invasion

and rebellion /B!8 %B! P"LIC SA7!%F 0!K"I0!S I%. %he Supreme Court may review# in an

appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen# the sufficiency of the factual basis of the


18/34

proclamation of martial law or suspension of the privilege of the writ or the e$tension thereof#

and must promulgate its decision thereon within -> days from its filing.

A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution# nor supplant the

functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies# nor authorize the conferment of

urisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to function#

nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ.

%he suspension of the privilege of the writ shall apply only to persons udicially charged for

rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with invasion.

6uring the suspension of the privilege of the writ# any person thus arrested or detained shall be

udicially charged within - days# otherwise# he shall be released.

%. )ay the President under the 1,- $onstitution "alidly issue decrees after declarin/ a

state of national emer/ency. )ay she direct the ta@e o"er of 'usiness affected with national

interest 'y reason of the emer/ency# which she herself proclaimed?

In the case of PR), RA#)L +, A*I. et Al *+, GL)RIA %ACAPAGAL-ARR)H). A+

PR(+I(#T A# C)%%A#(R-I#-CEI(. et al,. G,R, #o, 13105. %a; 0. $5# it was held that in

declaring a state of national emergency# President Arroyo did not only rely on Section +J# Article

(II of the Constitution# a provision calling on the A7P to prevent or suppress lawless violence#

invasion or rebellion. She also relied on Section +2# Article 'II# a provision on the State4s

e$traordinary power to ta*e over privately9owned public utility and business affected with public

interest. %he Supreme Court ruled that the assailed PP +>+2 is unconstitutional insofar as itgrants President Arroyo the authority to promulgate )decrees. Legislative power is peculiarly

within the province of the Legislature. Section +# Article (I categorically states that )GtHhe

legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate

and a Bouse of 0epresentatives. %o be sure# neither 5artial Law nor a state of rebellion nor a

state of emergency can ustify President Arroyo4s e$ercise of legislative power by issuing decrees.

Li*ewise# the e$ercise of emergency powers# such as the ta*ing over of privately owned public

utility or business affected with public interest# is also unconstitutional. %his reDuires a

delegation from Congress.

%-. What are the requisites of udicial re"iew?

Courts may e$ercise the power of udicial review only when the following reDuisites are

presentEfirst, there must be an actual case or controversy; second, petitioners have to raise a

Duestion of unconstitutionality; third,the constitutional Duestion must be raised at the earliest

opportunity; andfourth, the decision of the constitutional Duestion must be necessary to the

determination of the case itself.


19/34

%,. When may the courts still "alidly decide moot and academic cases?

A moot and academic case is one that ceases to present a usticiable controversy by virtue of

supervening events#G+Hso that a declaration thereon would be of no practical use or value.

:enerally# courts decline urisdiction over such caseG&Hor dismiss it on ground of mootness.

%he # & SC0A 2-1.

G&H !oal Cargo Corporation v. Civil %eronautics @oard, :.0. 8os. +>->33931# =anuary &1#

&>># &+ SC0A &+; )da. e abao v. Court of %ppeals# supra.

G-H lac*4s Law 6ictionary# 1th!d. ++# p. +.

GH &alonga v. Harner @arnes L Co.,JJ Phil. +&3 ?+3+@.

Pre-Bar Quizzer in Political Law Part I:Constitution of Government 51-3

!"# $$

Posted by %a&z

61. What are the tests of locus standi in the PhilippinesM

%he original wasE G+H If the act involves the disbursement of public funds# mere ta$payer has the

capacity to sue and Duestion such act. G&H If it does not involve disbursement of public funds# only

those who are )directly inured by the said law or contract entered into by the government.

Case law in most urisdictions now allows both )citizen and )ta$payer standing in public

actions. %he distinction was first laid down in @eauchamp v. &ilB#G+H where it was held that the
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftn1https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftn1https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftn2https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftn3https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftn4https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref1https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref1https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref2https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref2https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref3https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref3https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref4https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref4https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn1https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftn1https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftn2https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftn3https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftn4https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref1https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref2https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref3https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-51-60/#_ftnref4https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn1


20/34

plaintiff in a ta$payer4s suit is in a different category from the plaintiff in a citizen4s suit. In te

former. te 7laintiff is affecte8 ; te eF7en8iture of 7ulic fun8s. wile in te latter. e is

ut te mere instrument of te 7ulic concern

Bowever# to prevent ust about any person from see*ing udicial interference in any official policy

or act with which he disagreed with# and thus hinders the activities of governmental agencies

engaged in public service# the "nited State Supreme Court laid down the more stringent ) 8irect

inNur; testin 1E 4arte 0evitt#G&Hlater reaffirmed in Tileston v. 9llman.G-H%he same Court ruled

that for a private individual to invo*e the udicial power to determine the validity of an e$ecutive

or legislative action# e must sow tat e as sustaine8 a 8irect inNur; as a result of tat

action. an8 it is not sufficient tat e as a &eneral interest common to all memers of te

7ulic,

%his Court adopted the H this Court resolved to pass upon the issues raised due to the )far-reacin&

im7lications of the petition notwithstanding its categorical statement that petitioner therein had

no personality to file the suit. Indeed# there is a chain of cases where this liberal policy has been

observed# allowing ordinary citizens# members of Congress# and civic organizations to prosecute

actions involving the constitutionality or validity of laws# regulations and rulings.G++H

%hus# the Court has adopted a rule that even where the petitioners have failed to show direct

inury# they have been allowed to sue under the principle of )transcen8ental im7ortance.

Pertinent are the following casesE

'14ChaveD v. 4ublic 1states %uthorit,G+&Hwhere the Court ruled thatte enforcement of te

constitutional ri&t to information an8 te e9uitale 8iffusion of natural resources are matters

of transcen8ental im7ortance wic clote te 7etitioner wit locus standiO

24@agong %lansang 2aBabaan v. /amora,G+-H wherein the Court held that


21/34

-. for voters# there must be a showing of obvious interest in the validity of the election law

in Duestion;

. for concerne8 citizens# there must be a showing that the issues raised are of

transcendental importance which must be settled early; and

3. for le&islators# there must be a claim that the official action complained of infringes

upon their prerogatives as legislators.

Significantly# recent decisions show a certain toughening in the Court4s attitude toward legal

standing.

In Nilosbaan, *nc. v. 2orato#G+1Hthe Court ruled that the status of Nilosbaanas a people4s

organization does not give it the reDuisite personality to Duestion the validity of the on9line

lottery contract# more so where it does not raise any issue of constitutionality. 5oreover# it

cannot sue as a ta$payer absent any allegation that public funds are being misused. 8or can it sue

as a concerned citizen as it does not allege any specific inury it has suffered.

In Telecommunications and @roadcast %ttornes of the 4hilippines, *nc. v. Comelec#G+2H the Court

reiterated the )direct inury test with respect to concerned citizens4 cases involving

constitutional issues. It held that )there must be a showing that the citizen personally suffered

some actual or threatened inury arising from the alleged illegal official act.

In 0acson v. 4ereD#G+JHthe Court ruled that one of the petitioners# 0aban ng emoBratiBong

4ilipino?L6P@# is not a real party9in9interest as it had not demonstrated any inury to itself or to

its leaders# members or supporters.

In &anlaBas v. 1Eecutive &ecretar#G+Hthe Court ruled that only the petitioners who are members

of Congress have standing to sue# as they claim that the President4s declaration of a state of

rebellion is a usur7ation of te emer&enc; 7owers of Con&ress. tus im7airin& teir le&islative

7owers. As to petitioners &anlaBas, 4artido 2anggagawa, and &ocial Kustice &ociet# the Court

declared them to be devoid of standing# eDuating them with the L6P in 0acson.

62. What is the ta@e o"er# pro"ision of the $onstitution. )ay the President "alidly

exercise the same?

%his is Section +2# Article 'II # which readsE

+ec, 13, In times of national emergency# when the public interest so reDuires# the State

may# during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it# temporarily ta*e over or

direct the operation of any privately9owned public utility or business affected with public

interest.

/hile the President alone can declare a state of national emergency# however# without

legislation# he has no power to ta*e over privately9owned public utility or business affected

with public interest. %he President cannot decide whether e$ceptional circumstances e$ist

warranting the ta*e over of privately9owned public utility or business affected with public

interest. 8or can he determine when such e$ceptional circumstances have ceased.

Li*ewise# witout le&islation, the President has no power to point out the types of businesses

affected with public interest that should be ta*en over. In short# the President has no absolute

authority to e$ercise all the powers of the State under Section +2# Article (II in the absence of anemergency powers act passed by Congress.

50. What are the limitations of the President!s power of executi"e clemency?
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn16https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn17https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn18https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn19https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn16https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn17https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn18https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftn19


22/34

%he same is not available in cases of impeachment as well as violation of election laws# rules and

regulations without the favorable recommendation of the Commission on !lections. ?Section +#

Art. (II and Section 3# Art. I'9C@@

64. Distin/uish pardon from amnesty.

As held in A00IK"I8% (S. 7!08A86!# J& Phil. 1 the distinctions are as followsE

G+H Pardon is granted by the Chief !$ecutive and as such it is a private act which must be pleaded

and proved by the person pardoned# because the courts ta*e no notice thereof; while amnesty by

Proclamation of the Chief !$ecutive with the concurrence of Congress# and it is a public act of

which the courts should ta*e udicial notice.

G&H Pardon is granted to one after conviction ?of ordinary crimes@ ; while amnesty is granted to

classes of persons or communities who may be guilty of political offenses# generally before or

after the institution of the criminal prosecution and sometimes after conviction.

G-H Pardon loo*s forward and relieves the offender from the conseDuences of an offense of which

he has been convicted# that is# it abolished or forgives the punishment# and for that reason it does

)nor wor* the restoration of the rights to hold public office# or the right of suffrage# unless such

rights be e$pressly restored by the terms of the pardon# and it )in no case e$empts the culprit

from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence article -1# 0evised

Penal Code@. while amnesty loo*s bac*ward and abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense itself#

it so overloo*s and obliterates the offense with which he is charged that the person released byamnesty stands before the law precisely as though he had committed no offense. ?section +>G1H#

Article (II# Philippine Constitution; State vs. laloc*# 1& 8.C.# & &2; In re riggs# +-3 8.C.#

++J; 2 S.!. >&.# >-; !$ parte Law# -3 :A.# &J3# &1; State e$ rel Anheuserusch rewing Ass4n.

vs. !by# +2> 5o.# 2; 2+ S./ 3 1+; urdic* vs "nited States# 8.F.# -3 S. Ct.# &12; &2+; &-1 ".S.#

2; 3 Law. ed.# 21.@

GH Pardon is complete with the act of the President while Amnesty is valid only with the

concurrence of the maority of the members of all the members of Congress.

6%. &s it required for the person applyin/ for amnesty to admit his /uilt 'efore his amnesty

application 'e considered?

Ye,s as held in )1!% )&. 41401, 7 &C!% '?#. efore one may validly apply for e$ecutive clemency

?pardon or amnesty@ he 5"S% A65I% BA(I8: C55I%%!6 %B! AC%S /BICB 0!S"L%!6 I8 BIS

I5P0IS85!8%. %his rule abandoned the contrary ruling in arrioDuinto vs. 7ernandez.

66. )ay a pu'lic officer; who has 'een /ranted an a'solute pardon 'y the $hief

Cxecuti"e; entitled to automatic reinstatement to her former position without need of a 9ew

appointment?

+o. %s held in %)#+A#T) *+, ACT)RA#.eruar;. 12. a pardon loo*s to the future. It is not

retrospective. It ma*es no amends for the past. It affords no relief for what has been suffered by

the offender. It does not impose upon the government any obligation to ma*e reparation for what

has been suffered. )Since the offense has been established by udicial proceedings# that which has

been done or suffered while they were in force is presumed to have been rightfully done and

ustly suffered# and no satisfaction for it can be reDuired. Tis woul8 eF7lain w; 7etitioner.


23/34

tou& 7ar8one8. cannot e entitle8 to reinstatement. unless a77ointe8 a&ain ; te

a77ointin& autorit;. receive ac?7a; for lost earnin&s an8 enefits.

6. )ay the power of executi"e clemency applied to administrati"e cases li@e the

suspension of a Pro"incial Ao"ernor?

Hes, Tis was te rulin& of te +u7reme Court in Llamas vs, (Fec, +ec, )ros. )ct, 16.

11, Te wor8


24/34

GH 13 Phil. 31 ?+-2@.

G3H :.0. 8o. ++2# 8ovember 2# +3 ?"nreported@.

G1H :.0. 8o. &2# =anuary ++# +3 ?"nreported@.

G2H ++> Phil. --+ ?+1>@.

GJH 22 Phil. +>+& ?+2@.

GH J Phil. -1J ?+@ %he Court heldE )Above all# the transcendental importance to the

public of these cases demands that they be settled promptly and definitely# brushing aside# if we

must# technicalities of procedure.

G+>H L98o. >>># =anuary -+# +23# 1& SC0A &23.

G++H FaJada ". Fu"era, :.0. 8o. 1-+3# April +J3# +-1 SC0A &2# where the Court held

that where the Duestion is one of public duty and the enforcement of a public right# the people

are the real party in interest# and it is sufficient that the petitioner is a citizen interested in the

e$ecution of the law;

Le/aspi ". $i"il 8er"ice $ommission, :.0. 8o. 2&++# 5ay +J2# +3> SC0A 3-># where the

Court held that in cases involving an assertion of a public right# the reDuirement of personalinterest is satisfied by the mere fact that the petitioner is a citizen and part of the general public

which possesses the right.

Kapatiran n/ m/a 9a/lilin/@od sa Pamahalaan n/ Pilipinas; &nc. ". Fan, L. 8o. J+-++# =une

-># +JJ# +1- SC0A -2+# where the Court held that obections to ta$payers4 lac* of personality to

sue may be disregarded in determining the validity of the (A% law;

*l'ano ". 7eyes, :.0. 8o. J-33+# =uly ++# +J# +23 SC0A &1# where the Court held that

while no e$penditure of public funds was involved under the Duestioned contract# nonetheless

considering its important role in the economic development of the country and the magnitude of

the financial consideration involved# public interest was definitely involved and this clothed

petitioner with the legal personality under the disclosure provision of the Constitution to Duestion

it.

*ssociation of 8mall Landowners in the Philippines; &nc. ". 8ec. of */rarian 7eform;:.0.

8o. 2J2 =uly +# +J# +23 SC0A --# where the Court ruled that while petitioners are strictly

spea*ing# not covered by the definition of a )proper party# nonetheless# it has the discretion to

waive the reDuirement# in determining the validity of the implementation of the CA0P.

Aonales ". )acarai/; Ir,# :.0. 8o. J21-1# 8ovember +# +># ++ SC0A 3 where the

Court held that it enoys the open discretion to entertain ta$payer4s suit or not and that a

member of the Senate has the reDuisite personality to bring a suit where a constitutional issue is

raised.

)aceda ". )acarai/; Ir., :.0. 8o. JJ&+# 5ay -+# ++# +2 SC0A 22+# where the Court held

that petitioner as a ta$payer# has the personality to file the instant petition# as the issues

involved# pertains to illegal e$penditure of public money;

:smeJa ". $omelec,:.0. 8o. +>>-+J# +>>->J# +>>+2#+>>&># =uly -># ++# + SC0A 23>#

where the Court held that where serious constitutional Duestions are involved# the

)transcendental importance to the public of the cases involved demands that they be settled

promptly and definitely# brushing aside technicalities of procedures;

De Auia ". $omelec, :.0. 8o. +>2+ 5ay 1# + &>J SC0A &># where the Court held that

the importance of the issues involved concerning as it does the political e$ercise of Dualified

voters affected by the apportionment# necessitates the brushing aside of the proceduralreDuirement of locus standi.

G+&H :.0. 8o. +--&3># =uly # &>> -J SC0A +3&.

G+-H :.0. 8os. +-J32># +-J32 +-J3J2# +-J1J># +-J1J# ctober +># &>>># -& SC0A .

G+H :.0. 8o. +3+3# April ++# &>> -J> SC0A 2-.
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref4https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref4https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref5https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref5https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref6https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref6https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref7https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref7https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref8https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref8https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref9https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref9https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref10https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref11https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref12https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref13https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref4https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref5https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref6https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref7https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref8https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref9https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref10https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref11https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref12https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref13


25/34

G+3H &upra.

G+1H :.0. 8o. ++J+># 8ovember +1# +3# &3> SC0A +->.

G+2H :.0. 8o. +-&& April &+# +J# &J SC0A --2.

G+JH :.0. 8o. +22J># +22J+# +22# +2J+># 5ay +># &>>+# -32 SC0A 231.

G+H :.0. 8o. +3>J3# 7ebruary -# &>># &+ SC0A 131.


!"# $$

Posted by %a&z

1. )ay udicial power 'e exercised 'y the 8upreme $ourt in cases of decisions of the Bouse

of 7epresentati"es Clectoral tri'unal since 8ection 16; *rt. +& of the $onstitution pro"ides

that the B7CF is the sole ud/e# (.23..23.of all contestests in"ol"in/ the election;

returns and qualifications of the mem'ers of the Bouse of 7epresentati"es?

Fes if there is allegation of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lac* or in e$cess of

urisdiction on the part of the B0!% ?86C (S. PI8!6A@

2. What is a political question?

*n %02%!* )&. %0@%, '#7 &C!% - Phil.# political Duestion was defined as Duestions to be answered by the

people in their sovereign capacity or in regard to which full discretionary authority is vested to

the e$ecutive or legislative branch of the government.

r in :onzales vs. C5!L!C# &+ SC0A 22 # when the cru$ of the problem deals with the wisdom

of an act# it is political@.

3. What is the extent of the fiscal autonomy /ranted to the udiciary under the 1,-

$onstitution?

As provided under Section -# At. (III# the udiciary shall enoy fiscal autonomy and as such

appropriations for the udiciary may not be reduced by the legislature below the amount

appropriated for the previous year and# after approval# shall be automatically and regularly

released.

4. What are the cases to 'e decided 'y the 8upreme $ourt en 'anc?
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref16https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref17https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref18https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref19https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-71-80/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref16https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref17https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref18https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-61-70/#_ftnref19https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-71-80/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/


26/34

All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty# international or e$ecutive agreement# or law#

which shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc# including those involving the

constitutionality# application# or operation of presidential decrees# proclamations# orders#

instructions# ordinances# and other regulations# shall be decided with the concurrence of a

maority of the members who actually too* part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and

voted thereon. Also# no doctrine or principle of law laid down by the court en banc or in division

may be modified or reversed e$cept by the court sitting en banc.

Also if two ?&@ divisions of the Supreme Court have conflicting decisions# the same shall be

resolved by the Supreme Court en banc. Cases referred to by the division to the banc involving

novel Duestions of law # the same shall be decided by the en banc accepted by the latter.

7inally# dismissal of udges and disbarment of lawyers are also decided by the Supreme Court en

banc.

36, @at are te 7owers of te +u7reme Court

As enumerated in Art. (III# Section 3# t he Supreme Court shall have the following powersE

'14 (Fercise ori&inal Nuris8iction over cases affectin& amassa8ors. oter 7ulic ministers an8

consuls. an8 over 7etitions for certiorari. 7roiition. man8amus. 9uo warranto. an8 aeas

cor7us,

'$4 Review. revise. reverse. mo8if;. or affirm on a77eal or certiorari as te law or te Rules of

Court ma; 7rovi8e. final Nu8&ments an8 or8ers of lower courts in:

'a4 All cases in wic te constitutionalit; or vali8it; of an; treat;. international or eFecutive

a&reement. law. 7resi8ential 8ecree. 7roclamation. or8er. instruction. or8inance. or

re&ulation is in 9uestionO

'4 All cases involvin& te le&alit; of an; taF. im7ost. assessment. or toll. or an; 7enalt;

im7ose8 in relation teretoO

'c4 All cases in wic te Nuris8iction of an; lower court is in issueO

'84 All criminal cases in wic te 7enalt; im7ose8 is reclusion 7er7etua or i&erO

'e4 All cases in wic onl; an error or 9uestion of law is involve8,

'04 Assi&n tem7oraril; Nu8&es of lower courts to oter stations as 7ulic interest ma; re9uire,

+uc tem7orar; assi&nment sall not eFcee8 5 monts witout te consent of te Nu8&e

concerne8,

'/4 )r8er a can&e of venue or 7lace of trial to avoi8 a miscarria&e of Nustice,

'64 Promul&ate rules concernin& te 7rotection an8 enforcement of constitutional ri&ts.

7lea8in& . 7ractice . an8 7roce8ure in all courts. te a8mission to te 7ractice of law. te

Inte&rate8 Bar. an8 le&al assistance to te un8er7rivile&e8, +uc rules sall 7rovi8e a

sim7lifie8 an8 ineF7ensive 7roce8ure for te s7ee8; 8is7osition of cases. sall e uniform forall courts of te same &ra8e. an8 sall not 8iminis. increase or mo8if; sustantive ri&ts,

Rules of 7roce8ure of s7ecial courts an8 9uasi-Nu8icial o8ies sall remain effective unless

8isa77rove8 ; te +u7reme Court,

'54 A77oint all officials an8 em7lo;ees of te Nu8iciar; in accor8ance wit te civil service

law,


27/34

6. What is the writ of amparo#?

It is a writ issued by the courts for the 7rotection an8 enforcement of te constitutional ri&ts

of a 7erson un8er 8etention, '+ection 6 '64. Art, *III4

. What are the 3(fold unctions of Iudicial 7e"iew?

%hese are theE

+@ legitimizing function

&@ chec*ing function

-@ symbolic or educational function

-. )ay inferior courts also exercise the power of udicial re"iew declarin/ a law; treaty;

etc. unconstitutional5 in the li/ht of the requirements of 8ection 425 of *rticle +&&& that not

e"en any of the 8upreme $ourt!s three 35 di"isions; sittin/ separately could not declare a

law; treaty; etc.; unconstitutional?

Fes because the power of udicial review is ust a part of udicial power which is available to all

courts ?Section +# Art. (III@. Li*ewise# as shown by Section 3 G&H ?a@# the decision of lower courts

declaring a law unconstitutional is subect to review by the Supreme Court. ? H#)T *+, IAC. %arc$. 1234

,. What is the operati"e fact doctrine#?

It simply means that the declaration of unconstitutionality of a law# treaty# etc.# is prospective. As

such# all acts done in connection with the said law before its declaration of unconstitutionality

shall be considered legal# valid and binding. It is only the declaration of unconstitutionality which

is the )operative fact which would stop the people from complying with its provisions. ?1

%@%Y%+* )&. 4+@, :J &C!% 6#=3

-


28/34

Posted by %a&z

-1. nder the 1,- $onstitution; may the salaries of the mem'ers of the udiciary 'e taxed

without "iolatin/ 8ection 1


29/34

C% =J &C!% 6#6. 2%0%C!% )&. C%, ''7 &C!% 6:?. 2%!C10*+ )&. C!9/, '#' &C!% ?'an81

!2% )&. C%, '?# &C!% #8?3

23. What are co"ered 'y the powers of the $i"il 8er"ice $ommission

"nder Section Article I'9 of the Constitution# the civil service embraces all branches#

subdivisions# instrumentalities# and agencies of the government# including government owned and

controlled corporations /I%B 0I:I8AL CBA0%!0S.

--. What are the requirements 'efore one may 'e appointed in the ci"il ser"ice? Cxceptions?

Appointments in the CS shall be made only according to merit and fitness to be determined as far

as practicable# and eFce7t as to 7ositions wic are 7olic; 8eterminin&. 7rimaril; confi8ential

or i&l; tecnical# by competitive e$amination.

2, efine te tree '04 eFce7tions to te rule tat te a77ointee must e cosen ase8 on

merit an8 fitness to e 8etermine8 ; com7etitive eFamination

Polic; 8eterminin&is one charged with laying down of principal or fundamental guidelines or

rules# such as that head of a department.

Primaril; confi8ential 7ositionis one denoting not only confidence in the aptitude of the

appointee for the duties of the office but primarily close intimacy which ensures freedom of

intercourse without embarrassment or freedom from misgivings or betrayals of the personal trust

on confidential matters of the state ?!$ampleE Chief Legal Counsel of the P8# esa vs. P8# --

SC0A -->@

Ei&l; tecnical 7ositionreDuires the appointee thereto to possess technical s*ill or training in

the supreme or superior degree.

. &s the position of $ity Cn/ineer of 0a/uio $ity a hi/hly technical# positionM

8o. %he position of City !ngineer of aguio City is technical )but not highly so. ?1 0& &%+T&

)&. 2%00%!1, J7 4hil. #J=3


!"# $$

Posted by %a&z

,1. &s there such a thin/ as next(in(ran@# or seniority rule in fillin/ up "acancies in

the classified ci"il ser"ice?

+o. %s held in 2edenilla vs. C&C, ebruar '=, '==', there is no need to wait for thedeadwoods to retire before one ma be promoted to fillIup a vacanc as a result of the

presence of other emploees with longer ears of service or neEtIinIranB. Hhat is important is

that the appointee meets all the Mualifications for the said position.

,2. What is the extent of the powers of the $8$ in appointment cases?
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-91-100/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pre-bar-quizzer-in-political-law-part-i-constitution-of-government-91-100/https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/author/lawphilreviewer/


30/34

*t has onl the power to approve the appointment if the appointee meets all the

Mualifications and the power to den the appointment if the appointee does not meet the

Mualifications. *T 1& +T G%)1 TG1 4H1! T &9@&T*T9T1 TG1 %44*+T11 CG&1+ @Y TG1

%44*+T*+ %9TG!*TY H*TG %+TG1! HG*CG *T @10*1)1& T @1 2!1 O9%0**1.

,3. &s the position of $ity or Pro"incial Le/al :fficer a primarily confidential position?

Yes, as held in C%*1+T1 )&. &%+T&, '6# &C!% $2. te Provincial Le&al )fficer is a

7rimaril; confi8ential office. ut not is assistant, Te same was reiterate8 in &%2&+ )&. C%,

'6? &C!%were it was el8 tat Te Cit; Le&al officer is a 7rimaril; confi8ential officer,

,4. )ay /o"!t. employees form unions for purposes of collecti"e 'ar/ainin/ and to

stri@e a/ainst the /o"ernment?As held in %00*%+C1 )T. H!N1!& )&. 201, '#6 &C!% and 1Eecutive rder +o. 'J8 ,

Kune ', '=J7, government emploees ma form unions but not authoriDed to striBe or demand for

collective bargaining agreement with the government. authoriDing govt. emploees to form

unions.

,%. )ay /o"ernment employees 'e remo"ed without cause as a result of a /o"ernment

reor/aniation?

8o. %his is clear from 0A 1131# =une +># +JJ # which is )An act to protect the security of tenureof civil service officers and employees in the implementation of government reorganization.

%here must be full compliance of the due process reDuirement. It must be based on ust cause and

with due process.?%!* )&. 2*&+, %ugust J, '=J=# 0!1/% )&. +4*+, ebruar #


31/34

8, Re&ulate te enNo;ment or utilization of all francises for te o7eration of trans7ortation

an8 oter 7ulic utilities. me8ia of communication,,

,-. Which court has urisdiction o"er election cases in"ol"in/ municipal and 'aran/ay

officialsM

!lection cases involving municipal official shall be filed before the 0%C whose decision may be

appealed to the C5!L!C. %hose involving barangay officials shall be filed with the 5%C whose

decision is li*ewise subect to appeal to the C5!L!C whose decision in both instances is final and

not appealable.

,,. Where must election cases in"ol"in/ city and pro"incial officials 'e filed?

It must be filed with the C5!L!C# not with the courts.

1># automatic release of funds of Local :overnment "nits# particularly the I0A# is mandated

with no conditions imposed for its release. %o allow the President to impose conditions for the

release of the I0A amounts to control to local government units when the President4s power over

local government units is confined to general supervision# not power of control as enunciated

in rilon vs, Lim. $06 +CRA 106,


!"# $$

Posted by %a&z

1


32/34

1


33/34

It includes the power to determineE

a. who may teach#

b. what may be taught#

c. how it shall be taught# and

d. who may be admitted to studyR ?!mphasis supplied; citing Sinco# Philippine Political Law#

+# ?+1&@ and the concurring opinion of =ustice 7ran*furter in Sweezy v. 8ew Bampshire ?-3 "S

&- G+32H# :A0CIA (S. 7AC"L%F A65ISSI8# 1J SC0A &22@.

11


34/34

which includes the provision that the &tate cannot be sued without its consent, it has consented

or waived said right to sue3.

113. Bow may the 8tate /i"es its consent to 'e sued?

!$pressly when there is a law allowing it and impliedly when it enters into a contract with an

individual because in the latter# it descended to the level of an individual ma*ing it susceptible to

counterclaims or suits.

114. )ay the /o"ernment 'e sued in the exercise of its /o"ernmental functions?

Fes if the government agency has a charter which allows it to be sued. ?!%Y )&. C*

@90%C%+, ''8 &C!% 6?

Documents

Pre Bar Review Question Part I