state immunity, citizenship, art vi, vii and viii

8/2/2019 State Immunity, Citizenship, Art VI, VII and VIII

1/53

STOCKHOLM DECLARATION It is a declaration of the United Nations Conference on

Environment made in Stockholm, Sweden in June 17, 1962 The state has in accordance with

the limitations of international law sovereign rights to exploit their own natural resources

pursuant to their own environmental policy and the responsibility to ensure that the activities

within their control or jurisdiction do not cause damage to the environment of other states or

of areas beyond the limit of their jurisdiction.

AMENDMENT OR REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION

- Congress acting as a constitutional convention is not correct. That is not correct.

Because Constitutional Convention is a body separate and distinct from the

Congress.

-Art. XVII does not provide for Congress acting as a Constitutional Commission as a

mode of proposing amendment or revision of the Constitution. 1987 Constitution

was proposed and drafted by a Constitutional Commission whose members were

appointed by Pres. Aquino but it is not found in the present constitution.

-Congress acting as a Constituent Assembly this takes place when Congress meets

in order to directly propose amendments or revision by votes of all its members

Congress is not acting as a legislative body but rather as a constituent assembly. Thisis the proper term.

Question:Amendmentof the Constitution may be proposed by?

a. Congress acting as a Constitutional Conventionb. Congress acting as a Constitutional Commissionc. Congress acting as a Constituent AssemblyThis is still the correct answer.d. The people through initiative upon a petition of at least 10% of the total number

of registered voters of which every legislative district must be represented by atleast 3% of the registered voters therein. This is not correct because the

Constitution provides for 12% of the total number of registered voters.

SELF EXECUTING VS NON-SELF EXECUTING

Self executing provisions they are operative upon the effectivity of the Constitution.

They do not require any enabling act from the Congress for them to be operative.


2/53

Ex. provisions of Bill of Rights

Non-self executing provisionsthese requires enabling act from Congress for them to

be operative.

Ex. Art II-Declaration of Principles and State Policies they serve as guide to theCongress in enacting a law and aid to the Court in interpreting the provisions of

the Constitution.

-But take note that the Sec. 16 of Art. II is a self-executing provision. The state

shall protect the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in

accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature. According to the Supreme Court

this carries with it the duty not to impair the environment. This speaks of a right

but it is not found in the Bill of Rights. Does it mean that it is less important

compared to other rights enumerated in the Bill of rights? The SC said no. What

are found in the Bill of Rights are civil and political rights. Those are limitations to

the powers of the government. This right belongs to a different category. This

right assumes to exist from the inception of human kind.

Presumption: the presumption is all constitutional provisions are self-executing unless

it is expressly provided that a legislative enactment is necessary in order to carry out the

constitutional mandate. The reason given by the SC is if the presumption is not in favor

of self-executing the Congress would in effect have the power to ignore and nullify the

mandate of the fundamental law. (Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS)

NATIONAL TERRITORY (Art. I)

-Do not say West Philippine Sea, the correct term is West Philippine Sea

-Spratlys Group of Islands is officially known as the Municipality of Kalayaan under the

Province of Palawan by virtue of P.D 1596

a. Philippine Archipelago historically and legally this refers to the territory ceded bySpain to the United States by virtue of the Treaty of Paris.

-But remember in the Treaty of Paris there were islands that were omitted like the

island of Sulu and Sibutu that is why a year later in 1900 another treaty was entered

into between Spain and the United States to include those islands.


3/53

-On Jan. 2, 1930 a treaty was entered into between the United States and Great

Britain wherein Great Britain ceded its territories to the United States the Manse

Islands and Turtle Islands.

b. and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or

jurisdiction

-Doctrine of Effective Occupation under this doctrine discovery alone is not

enough; it merely gives the discoverer an inchoate right over the territory, for title

to finally to finally vests with the discover, the discovery must be followed within

reasonable time with effective occupation of the territory.

-We adhere to the straight baseline method in defining our territory because of our

irregular coastline.

-2nd

sentence of Art. 1- The waters around, between and connecting the

archipelago, regardless of their breath and dimension shall form part of the internal

waters of the Philippines this shows our adherence to the archipelagic principle.

-The International Court of Justice may not assume jurisdiction over the Spratlys

issue. The jurisdiction of the ICJ to on contentious cases is always based on mutual

consent of all the parties to the dispute. This is consensual.

STATE IMMUNITY (Sec. 3 Art. XVI)

-Even it is not expressly provided in the Constitution still we would be bound by that

doctrine because this doctrine is a generally accepted principles of international law.

Under Sec. 2 Art. 2 of the Constitution it says there that the Philippines adopts the

generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land. This is

an affirmation of our adherence to the Doctrine of Incorporation.

-This doctrine also applies to foreign governments because of another international

law principle the doctrine of sovereign equality among states. An equal may not

assume jurisdiction over another equal. Par in parem non habet imperium. Unless the

foreign government waives its immunity.


4/53

-Ethical basis of this doctrine: There can be no legal right as against the authority that

makes the law upon which the right depends. This doctrine of state immunity is

sometimes referred to as the Royal Prerogative of Dishonesty.

TWO WAYS TO WAIVE STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUIT

1. EXPRESS WAIVERa. General Law Act. 3083 this applies to money claims arising from

contract with the government whether express or implied. However, Act.

3083 must always be correlated with C.A. 327 (General Auditing Law) as

amended by P.D. 1445 because under this law any money claims arising

from contract with the government in order to be allowed to sue the

government one is required first to file a claim with the Commission on

Audit. And it is only when the claim is refused payment by the COA that

they go to court to sue. They can elevate the matter to the Supreme

Court on certiorari and in effect sue the State with its consent.

b. Special Law1. Art. 2180 of the Civil Codethis provides that the State is liable for

damages when acting through a special agent

2. Art.2189 of the Civil Code this provides that cities, municipalitiesand provinces are liable for damages due to defective maintenance or

roads, streets and canals etc. under their supervision.

3. Sec. 24 of the Local Govt CodeLocal government units and theirofficials are not exempt from liability for death or injury to persons or

damage to property.

4. Charters creating Govt Corporations that it can sue and be suedDBP, Landbank, GSIS, SSS, PCSO

-Take note: A mere lawyer of the government may not validly waive the

immunity from suit of the state. (Republic vs. Purisima)

-Only Congress may validly waive the state immunity from suit through the

enactment of a general law or a special law waiving state immunity from suit.

This is among the plenary power of Congress.


5/53

2. IMPLIED WAIVER

a.

When the state commenced litigation against a private partywhereby it opens itself to a possible counterclaim.

-But there is no waiver of immunity if the State filed a complaint

in intervention to join the defendant in invoking the Doctrine of

State immunity to secure the dismissal of the action. The Phil

Govt. was not asking any affirmative relief but had intervened

only for the purpose of resisting the claim.

b.

When the state enters into a contract with a private party on thetheory that when the state enters into a contract with a private

party it is deemed to have gone down into to the level of the private

party and therefore it is deemed to have waived its immunity from

suit.

However, in the case of USA vs. Ruiz the Supreme Court made a

qualification. It rules that not every contract entered into by the

government is deemed to be a waiver from immunity from suit. A

distinction must be made between governmental and sovereign acts(jure imperii) and proprietary acts (jure gestionis). The rule is that

state immunity only extends to acts jure imperii - Restrictive Doctrine

of State Immunity.

-When youre confronted in the bar with a problem in state

immunity, determine first the other party to a contract, if the other

party is a foreign government, do not use express waiver because our

Congress may not validly waive state immunity from suit of foreign

governments.

SUABILITY VERSUS LIABILITY

-Waiver of immunity by the State does not mean concession of its liability.

Suability is the result of the express or implies consent of the State to be sued.


6/53

Liability, on the other hand, is determined after hearing on the basis of the

applicable laws and facts of the case. Therefore, when the State allows itself to

be sued, all it does is to give the claimant an opportunity to prove that he may

hold the state liable. The state may raise possible defenses to avoid liability.

-One defense that may be raised is that Art. 2180 of the Civil Code provides that

the State shall be held liable only when it acts through a special agent and not

when the damage has been caused by the official to whom the task properly

pertains.

- Municipal corporations, for example, are suable because their

charters grant them the competence to sue and be sued. Nevertheless, they

may not be held liable for they may raise the defense that the complained act is

in the discharge of governmental functions or that they were not acting in a

proprietary capacity. In permitting such entities to be sued, the State merely

gives the claimant the right to show that the defendant was not acting in its

governmental capacity when the injury was committed or that the case comes

under the exceptions recognized by law.

SUIT AGAINST GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

-To determine if the State has given its consent to be sued, the ascertainment

will depend on whether the government agency is an incorporated agencies or

unincorporated agencies.

-INCORPORATED AGENCY - An incorporated agency has a charter of its own that

invests it with a separate juridical personality. If the agency is incorporated the

test of suability is found in its charter. The rule is that it is suable if its charter

says so, and this is true regardless of the function it is performing.

-Municipal corporations, for example, are agencies of the State when they are

engaged in governmental functions and therefore should enjoy immunity from

suit. Nevertheless, they are subject to suit even in the performance of such

functions because their charter provides they they can sue and be sued.


7/53

UNINCORPORATED AGENCY Since it has no separate juridical personality, any

suit filed against it is necessarily an action against the Philippine Government of

which it is a part. Thus, it is necessary to determine the nature of the functions in

which the agency is engaged, so as to hold it liable if proprietary and not suable

if they are governmental. The test in every case is the nature of primaryfunctions.

Take note:This non-suability of the State is available to the agency

even if it shown that it is engaged not only in governmental functions,

but also, as a sideline, or incidentally, in proprietary enterprises.

Case: The Bureau of Printing is an instrumentality of the government

designed to meet the printing needs of the government. However, the

additional work it executes to private parties is merely incidental to its

function, and although such work may be deemed proprietary in

character.

-The BOC has no personality of its own apart from that of the national

government. Its primary function is governmental, that of assessing and

collecting lawful revenues from imported articles. To this function,

arrastre service is a necessary incident. Therefore, although said arrastre

function may be deemed proprietary, it is a necessary incident of the

primary and governmental function of the BOC, so that engaging in the

same does not necessarily render said Bureau liable for suit.

SUIT AGAINST PUBLIC OFFICIALS

-If the suit is against the officer of the government, it is important to determine if

the State is the real party in interest, that is, that the claim if proved will be a

direct liability of the State and not merely of the officer impleaded. If this is

shown, the action can be dismissed as a suit against the State unless it waives its

immunity from suit.

-The test is whether assuming the decision is rendered against the public

officer impleaded, enforcement thereof will require an affirmative act from the


8/53

State, such as the appropriation of the needed amount to satisfy the

judgment. If it does, the suit is one against the State. If, on the other hand, the

officer impleaded, may by himself alone comply with the decision of the court

without necessity of involving the State then the suit will not be considered as a

claim against the State.

-General Rule: The doctrine of state immunity from suit applies to government

officials for acts done in the performance of their duties. It is deemed to be a suit

against the state and therefore it should be dismissed invoking state

immunity unless there is a waiver.

-Exception: - This rule does not apply where the public official is sued in his

official capacity for acts that are unlawful and injurious to the right of others.

Neither does this rule apply when the public official is clearly being sued

not in his official capacity but in his personal capacity although the acts

complained of may have been committed while he occupies a public position.

Case: A group or farmers marched their way to Malacanang to stage a rally. In

the course of the rally, it became unruly and because of that it was dispersed

violently by the police resulting to numerous deaths and injuries. A task force

was created to investigate the incident. The task force said that although the

police officials initially performed their functions in accordance with law.

However, when during the dispersal operation they aimed their guns directly

against the demonstrators thereby causing those deaths and injuries they

exceeded their authority. They alone should be held liable. This is not a suit

against the state. This rule does not apply when the public official is sued in his

official capacity for acts that are unlawful and injurious to others. Public officials

are not exempt in their personal capacity for liability for acts committed in bad

faith. Neither does this rule apply when the public official is clearly being sued

not in his official capacity but in his personal capacity although the acts

complained of may have been committed while they occupy a public position.

(Republic vs. Sandoval)

EXECUTION TO SATISFY THE JUDGEMENT AGAINST THE STATE

-The situation contemplated here there is waiver of immunity from suit and after

trial there is a judgment rendered against the government and the judgment

already attained finality.


9/53

-The waiver of state immunity from suit extends only up to rendition of

judgment against the state. When it comes to execution of the judgment

against the State that will require another waiver. Hence, you cannot garnish the

money of the government or levy any of its properties to satisfy the judgment. It

is against public policy because you will paralyze the operations of thegovernment. Public funds should not be spent except in pursuance of a valid

appropriation law.

What is now the remedy available?

Make a necessary representation with the appropriate authority of the

Congress for it to appropriate the amount of the judgment against the

State.

-If despite your representation the Congress refuses to appropriate the

appropriate remedy is file a mandamus case. While it is true that the duty

to appropriate is discretionary and therefore may not be compelled by

mandamus, however, in this case there is already a judgment rendered

by the court in favor of the private claimant which judgement already

attained finality the government must be the first one to obey and follow

the decision of the court. Because of that, what otherwise was a

discretionary duty to appropriate is converted to a ministerial duty which

can now be compelled by mandamus. (Municipality of Makati vs. IAC)

Doctrine of State Immunity from Suit Cannot Serve as an Instrument for

Perpetrating Injustice

Case: 1. Amigable vs. Cuenca

2. Ministerio vs. CFI of Cebu

-In those cases plaintiff sued the government for recovery of the value of

her property which had been converted into public streets without

payment to her of just compensation. Although it was shown that

he had not previously filed a claim with the Auditor General, the SC

decided in her favor.


10/53

-Do not just invoke this doctrine indiscriminately because the

circumstances in those cases were very peculiar that led to said ruling.

CITIZENSHIP

-A persons citizenship is always determined by the Constitution at the time of his birth

-Citizenship is a matter to be exclusively determined by a countrys own law. Philippine

law are only allowed to determine who Filipino citizens are and who are not. They may

not state that a person is, for example, a Chinese or an American, they may only decree

that said person is NOT a Filipino.

NO JUDICIAL DECLARATION OF CITIZENSHIP

-A judicial declaration that a person is a Filipino citizen cannot be made in a

petition for naturalization for the reason that in this jurisdiction there can be no

independent action for judicial declaration of the citizenship of an individual.

Courts of justice exists for the settlement of justiciable controversies, which

imply a given right, legally demandable and enforceable, an act or omission

violative of said right, and a remedy granted by law for said breach of right.

-Thus, a declaration of Philippine citizenship cannot be made in an action for

declaratory relief or in a summary action for a change or correction in the Civil

Registry.

1. Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of thisConstitution. (February 2, 1987 the date of the plebiscite)

*Citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of 1987 Constitution

were those who were citizens under the 1973 Constitution. (Same as Sec. 1 of1987 Constitution)

*Citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of 1973 Constitution

were those who were citizens of the Philippines under 1935 Constitution


11/53

1. Those who are citizens of the Phil at the time of the adoption of the

1935 Constitution. (May 14, 1935)

2. Those born in the Phil Islands of Foreign parents who, before the

adoption of this Constitution, had been elected to public office in the Phil

Islands.

-the child is the Filipino citizen not the parents. However, his

children shall also acquire Philippine citizenship by virtue of

derivative citizenship.

3. Those whose fathers are Filipino citizens.

-whether legitimate or illegitimate (Fernando Poe case; Tecson vs.

Comelec)

4. Those, whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and, upon

reaching the age of majority, elect Philippine citizenship.

5. Those who are naturalized in accordance with law.

2. Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines. (regardless ofwhere he may be born)

-The Filipina must still be a Filipino citizen at the time of the birth of the child. If the

mother had already lost Philippine citizenship the child may only acquire citizenship

only by naturalization.

3. Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippinecitizenship upon reaching the age of majority (they are considered natural born

citizens)

-It is sufficient for the mother to have been a Filipino citizen at the time at least

of their marriage to an alien.

-The option to elect Philippine citizenship shall be expressed in a statement to be

signed and sworn by the party before any officer authorized to administer oath

and shall be filed with the nearest Civil Registry and accompanied by an oath of

allegiance to the Constitution and Government of the Phil.


12/53


13/53

QUALIFICATONS FOR NATURALIZATION (Substantive requirements)

1. The petitioner must not be less than 21 years of age on the date of thehearing of the petition.

-the requirement is at the date of the hearing of the petition; not the

date of the declaration of intention, nor even the date of the filing of the

petition.

2. He must have resided in the Philippines for a continuous period of not lessthan 10 years.

-not mere legal residence but actual and substantial residence

-still PHYSICAL presence is not necessarily required for the entire period

of residence required. Temporary absence of short duration is allowed.

-Residence requirement is REDUCED TO FIVE YEARS in the following cases

a. If the applicant has honorably held office under the Govt ofthe Phil or under any of the political subdivisions thereof.

b. If he has established a new industry or established a newinvention in the Phil.

c. If he is married to a Filipino woman.d. If he had been engaged as a teacher in a public or recognized

private school not established for the exclusive instruction of

children of persons of a particular nationality or race for a

period of two years.

e. If he was born in the Philippines.3. He must be of good moral character and believe in the principles

underlying the Phil Constitution and must have conducted himself in a

proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence

in the Phil in his relation with the constituted govt as well as with the

community he is living.

-regarding good morals there is no necessity for a criminal conviction for

a crime involving moral turpitude. Conviction is required in

disqualification but lack of conviction does not mean that the petitioner

is of good moral character.

-This requirement must be alleged in the petition otherwise the petition

contains a serious infirmity. The infirmity is jurisdictional.


14/53

4. He must own real estate in the Phil worth not less than 5,000 or must havesome lucrative trade, profession, or lawful occupation.

-the requirement is in the alternative.

-purpose is to forestall ones becoming an object of charity.

-the financial capability is determined at the time of the filing of the petition

5. He must be able to speak AND write English OR Spanish AND any one of theprincipal Philippine languages.

-If the applicant can understand but cannot speak and write he is not

qualified.

6. He must have enrolled his minor children of school age in any publicschools or private schools recognized by the DEPEd where Philippine

History, government, and civics are taught or prescribed as part of the

school curriculum during the entire period of the residence required of him,

prior to the hearing of his petition for naturalization.

NOTE An alien wife cannot independently of her husband apply for

naturalization for assuming she would become a Filipino, she would still be

under her husbands law, an alien, and there would be the dual citizenship

which is not allowed under our laws.

DISQUALIFICATIONS

1. Persons opposed to organize governments or affiliated with any associationor group of persons who uphold and teach doctrines opposing all organized

governments

2. Persons teaching or defending the propriety of violence, personal assault, orassassination for the success or predominance of their ideas.

3. Polygamists or believers of polygamy-mere belief in polygamy without practicing is enough to disqualify.


15/53

4. Persons convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.5. Persons suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious disease.

-disease must be both incurable and contagious

6. Persons who, during g the period of their residence in the Philippines havenot mingled socially with the Filipinos or who have not evinced a since desire

to learn and embrace the customs, traditions, and ideals of the Filipinos.

7. Citizens or subjects of nations with whom the United States and thePhilippines are at war.

8. Citizens or subjects of a foreign country other than the United States, whoselaws do not grant Filipinos the right to become naturalized citizens.

STEPS IN NATURALIZATION PROCEEDINGS (Procedural requirements)

1. Declaration of Intention-must be filed one year prior to the filing of the petition for

naturalization with the office of the Solicitor General a declaration under

oath that it is his bona fide intention to become citizen of the Philippines.

-petitioner must state in his petition the fact of his having filed or his

being exempt from making a declaration of intention, failure to do so is a

fatal defect in his petition.

Exempt from Making a Declaration of Intention

1. Persons born in the Phil and who have received their primary and

secondary in public schools or private schools recognized by the Govt and

not limited to any race or nationality.

2. Those who have resided continuously in the Philippines for a period of

30 years or more filing their application.

3. The widow or minor children of an alien who has declared his intention

to become citizen of the Phil and dies before he is actually naturalized.


16/53

2. Filing of Petition-after the lapse of one year from the filing of the declaration of intention

the petition for naturalization may be presented in court.

-the RTC of the province on which the petitioner has resided for at least 1

year immediately preceding the filing of the petition shall have exclusive

original jurisdiction.

-the petition must state specifically or one by one the fact that the

applicant has all the qualifications. A blanket allegation is not sufficient.

Supporting Affidavitthe affidavit of two credible persons must support

the petition for naturalization. Said person must state:

1. That they are citizens of the Phil.2. That they personally know the petitioner to be resident of the

Philippines for the period of time required by the

naturalization law.

3. The petitioner is a person of good repute and morallyirreproachable

4.

That he has, in their opinion, all the qualifications and none ofthe disqualifications.

3. Hearing and Initial Judgment-The petition must be published once a week for three consecutive weeks

in the Official Gazette and in one of the newspapers of general circulation

in the province where the petitioner resides.

-failure to publish his petition is fatal because this requirement isjurisdictional.

-No petition for Philippine citizenship shall be heard by the courts until

after 6 months from the publication of the application.


17/53

-If after hearing, it is proved that the applicant has all the qualifications

and none of the disqualifications the court will now grant the petition.

-In case of appeal by the Solicitor General it must be filed within 30 days

from receipt of decision.

4. Period of Probation-Even if the court approves the petition the decision will not be executory

until after two years from its promulgation and after the court on proper

hearing with the attendance of the Solicitor General or his

representatives is satisfied and finds that during the intervening time the

applicant:

1. Has not left the Philippines physical presence is required not mere

legal residence

2. Has dedicated himself continuously to a lawful calling or profession

3. Has not been convicted of any offense or violation of government

promulgated rules.

4. Or committed any act prejudicial to the nation or contrary to any

government announced policies.

-period of two years starts to run from the judgment of the trial court is

promulgated id the govt does not appeal; if the govt appeals from the

time the appellate court promulgate its judgment.

5. Rehearing and Final Judgment-After due hearing after two years by the same court that granted the

naturalization, the order of the court granting citizenship shall be

registered if the court is convinced that the conditions imposed duringthe period of probation shall have been fulfilled.

-The filing of the petition to take the oath must be filed within reasonable

time after the expiration of the two year period.


18/53

CANCELLATION OF NATURALIZATION/DENATURALIZATION

-Upon motion by the Solicitor General or his representatives or by the proper

Provincial Fiscal the Judge may cancel the naturalization certificate

1.

It is shown that the naturalization certificate was obtained fraudulently orillegally.

2. If the person naturalized shall within the five years next following theissuance of the naturalization certificate return to his native country or to

some foreign country and establish his permanent residence therein.

3. If the petition was made on an invalid declaration of intention.4. It is shown that the minor children of the person naturalized failed to

graduate from public or private schools recognized by the govt where Phil

history, goverment, civics are taught as part of the school curriculum through

the fault of their parents either by neglecting them or transferring them to

another school.

5. If it is shown that the naturalized citizen has allowed himself to be used as adummy in violation of the Constitution or legal provision requiring Philippine

citizenship for the exercise, use, or enjoyment of a right, franchise, or

privilege.

-A decision in a naturalization case can never be res judicata as to any of the

reasons or matters which would support a judgment cancelling the certificate of

naturalization for illegal procurement because a naturalization case is not a

judicial adversary proceeding.

-It is settled that a certificate of naturalization may be cancelled upon grounds

or conditions subsequent to the granting of the certificate of naturalization.

EFFECT OF NATURALIZATION ON MINOR CHILDREN

A. Minor child born before naturalization1. born in the Philippines Filipino2. born outside the Philippines

a. if dwelling in the Phil at the time of


19/53

the parents naturalization Filipino

b. if dwelling outside the Phil at the time ofthe parents naturalization is a Filipino only during his minority

unless he resides permanently in the Philippines when still a minor ,in which case he will continue to be a Philippine citizen even after

becoming of age.

B. Minor child born after naturalization1. born in the Philippines Filipino2. born outside the Philippines a Filipino, unless within one year after

reaching the age of majority he fails to register himself as a citizen of the

Philippines at the Philippine consulate of the country where he resides

and to take the necessary oath of allegiance.

EFFECT OF NATURALIZATION ON THE WIFE

-She becomes a Filipino citizen provided she shows in an administrative

procedure for the cancellation of her alien certificate of registration, that she has

none of the disqualifications found in C.A. No. 473.

ADMINISTRATIVE NATURALIZATION LAW (R.A. 9139 enacted in 2000)

1. The applicant must be born in the Philippines and residing therein sincebirth.

2. The applicant must not be less than 18 years of age, at the time of the filingof his/her petition.

3. He must be of good moral character and believe in the principles underlyingthe Phil Constitution and must have conducted himself in a proper andirreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence in the Phil in

his relation with the constituted govt as well as with the community he is

living.

4. The applicant must have received his/her primary and secondary educationin any public or private educational institution duly recognized by the Dept of


20/53

Education, where Philippine history, government and civics are taught and

prescribed as part of the school curriculum and where enrollment is not

limited to any race or nationality. Provided, that should he/she have minor

children of school age, he/she must have enrolled them in similar schools.

5. The applicant must have a known trade, business, profession or lawfuloccupation, from which he/she derives income sufficient for his/her support

and if he/she is married and/or has dependents, also that of his/her family.

Provided, however, That this shall not apply to applicants who are college

degree holders but who are unable to practice their profession because they

are disqualified to do so by reason of their citizenship.

6. The applicant must be able to read, write and speak Filipino or any of thedialects of the Philippines

7.

The applicant must have mingled with the Filipinos and evinced desire tolearn and embrace the customs, traditions and ideals of the Filipino people.

-How: The application under this law is handled through the Committee on

Naturalization chaired by the Solicitor General.

-Effect of naturalization of the husband: Applicants lawful wife and minor

children may file a petition for cancellation of their alien certificates of

registration with the Committee.

-Effect of Naturalization of the wife: Her administrative naturalization will

not benefit her alien husband but her minor children may file a petition for

cancellation of their alien certificate of registration.

HOW PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP MAY BE LOST

1. By naturalization in foreign countries.2. By express renunciation of citizenship.

- The question of whether a person has renounced his Philippine

citizenship should be heard before a trial court of law in adversary

proceedings.

-In order that Philippine citizenship may be lost by renunciation such

renunciation must be expressed. Mere holding of a foreign passport and

alien certificate of registration are not enough to constitute express


21/53

renunciation of Philippine citizenship. (Aznar vs. Comelec; Mercado vs.

Manzano; Valles vs. Comelec.

3. By subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the Constitution or laws ofa foreign country upon attaining 21 years of age or more.

4. By rendering service to, or accepting commission in the armed forces of aforeign country. Provided, that the rendering of service to, or acceptance of

such commission in the armed forces of a foreign country, and the taking of

an oath of allegiance, with the consent of the republic of the Philippines,

shall not divest a Filipino of his citizenship if either of the following

circumstances is present:

a. That the Philippines has a defensive and/or offensive alliance with saidforeign country.

b. The said foreign country maintains armed force in Phil territory with theconsent of the Republic of the Philippines, That the Filipino citizen

concerned, at the time of rendering said service, or acceptance of said

commission, and the taking of oath of allegiance incident thereto, states

that he does so only in connection with his service to said foreign

country. Upon discharge from the service of said foreign country, he shall

be automatically entitled to the full enjoyment of his civil and political

rights as a Filipino citizen.

5. Cancellation of certificate of naturalization.

HOW PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP MAY BE REACQUIRED

1. Naturalization2. Repatriation

REPATRIATION-It is the recovery of the original citizenship. If what was lost was naturalized

citizenship that is what will be recovered. If what was lost was natural born

citizenship that will be reacquired. (Bengzon vs. Cruz)

-This ruling does not amend the provision of Sec. 2 Art IV on defining who is a

natural born citizen as citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to

perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. . Because,


22/53

although in repatriation an act is performed but it is not for the purpose of

acquiring or perfecting Philippine citizenship but the purpose is to REACQUIRE

Philippine citizenship.

-WAYS OF ACCOMPLISHING REPATRIATION

1. For women who lost their citizenship through marriage to aliens, and fornatural born citizens, including their minor children, who lost citizenship on

account of economic or political necessity, and who are not disqualified,

repatriation is accomplished by taking the oath of allegiance to the Republic AND

registering in the proper Civil Registry and Bureau of Immigration. Processing of

application is done by the Special Committee on Naturalization.

2. For those who lost their citizenship by serving in the United States Armed

Forces, repatriation is accomplished by taking an oath of allegiance to the

Republic and registering the same in the local Civil Registry where he resides or

where he last resided. (R.A. 2630)

-The effective date of repatriation in case of former natural born citizens shall be

the date of application for repatriation not the date when repatriation is

approved.

-Repatriation of a mother shall entitle her minor children to a declaration that

they are entitled to Philippine citizenship.

EFFECT OF MARRIAGE OF FILIPINO CITIZENS TO FOREIGNERS (Sec. 4)

-You will not lose your Philippine Citizenship; in fact you will retain it, unless by their act

or omission they are deemed under the law to have renounced it.

-The 1973 Constitution made this applicable only to Filipino women, but the 1987

Constitution made this applicable not just to female citizens but also to male citizens

who marry aliens.

-There was no similar provision in 1935 Constitution. So what was followed wasinternational law which provides that the wife follows the citizenship of the husband. So

a Filipino woman who marries a foreigner during the 1935 Constitution loses his

Philippine citizenship and follows the citizenship of his alien husband.

Citizenship of a Foreign Woman who marries a Filipino


23/53

-An alien woman marrying a Filipino, natural born or naturalized, becomes ipso

facto a Filipino provided she is not disqualified to be a citizen of the Philippines

under Sec. 4 of Com. Act. No. 473.

-Moreover an alien woman married to an alien who is subsequently naturalized

here follows the Philippine citizenship of her husband the moment he takes his

oath as a Filipino citizen, provided she does not suffer from any of the

disqualifications under said Sec. 4.

-It is not necessary for an alien citizen to prove in a judicial proceeding that she

possesses all the qualifications set forth in Sec. 2 and none of the

disqualifications under Sec. 4

DUAL CITIZENSHIP

-Dual allegiance is different from dual citizenship. Dual citizenship arises

when as a result of concurrent application of the laws of two or more states a

person is considered a national by the said states. On the other hand dual

allegiance when a person by some positive act simultaneously owes loyalty to

two or more states. Dual citizenship is involuntary while dual allegiance is a

result of the individuals own volition.

-What is really prohibited by the Constitution is dual allegiance.

-For those with dual citizenships who run in election, it is enough that that they

elect Philippine citizenship upon the filing of their certificate of candidacy, to

terminate their status as persons with dual citizenship. The filings of certificate

of candidacy sufficed to renounce foreign citizenship, effectively removing any

disqualification as a dual citizen. This is so because in the certificate of candidacy,

one declares that he/she is a Filipino citizen and that she/he support and defend

the Constitution of the Philippines and will maintain allegiance thereto.

- (R.A 9225) -This law allows NATURAL BORN Filipino citizens who have acquired

foreign citizenship by naturalization to have deemed reacquired their

Philippine citizenship by taking an oath of allegiance to the republic.


24/53

ACADEMIC FREEDOM (Sec. 5 Art XIV)

Academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning.

-Academic freedom is defined as the right of the school or college to decide for itself its

aims and objectives and how to attain them free from outside coercion or interferenceexception possibly when the overriding public interest.

-Four Essential Freedoms Sanctioned:

1. Who may teach? - Faculties

2. What may be taught? Courses to offer or subjects

3. How it shall be taught. Methods of teaching

4. Who may be admitted to study?

- The right of the school to discipline its students falls within the freedom to how it shall

be taught because the school cannot certainly function in an atmosphere of anarchy.

-Mandamus will not lie in those four freedoms. When youre entering you cannot

compel the school by mandamus to admit the student. However, once the school

admits the students there is now a contract between the school and the students and

that is not an ordinary contract. That is a contract imbued with paramount public

interest. So that in such cases the school may not arbitrarily, whimsically, capriciously

expel the student. It must be on just cause and there must be due process like a failinggrade or violation of school regulations. However, the school there must conduct an

investigation because of the requirement of due process.

-Duration of the contract between the student and the school the contract between

the school and the student is for the entire duration of the course. It is not on a

semester to semester basis.

-Demonstration in school - which results to disruption of classes, is not a just cause for

expelling the student from school because the freedom of expression of students does

not end at the gate of the school. If the demonstrations result to damage of schoolproperties it may be a just cause as long as the school conducts an investigation and it

establishes the culpability of the student because of the requirement of due process.

Case: UP Board of Regents vs. CA A foreign student took up his doctorate degree in

anthropology. During the defense of his dissertation, there were questions on the


25/53

authenticity of his dissertation. However, he was still allowed to graduate. Binawi ang

kanyang degree ng UP.

Supreme Court sustained the action of the university. SC said that if the

institution can decide who may study it certainly can determine on whom it can

confer the honor or distinction of being its graduate. When it is shown that the

conferment of honor or distinction was obtained through fraud a university has

the right to withdraw the honor or distinction it has thus conferred. This

academic freedom of the university does not end upon the graduation of the

student.

SEPARATION OF POWERS

-Observed in our country because it is a characteristic of republicanism and for the

reason that the major powers of government are actually distributed by the

Constitution among the several departments and the Constitutional Commissions.

Purposeto prevent a concentration of powers in one person or group of persons that

might lead to irreversible error or abuse of exercise to the detriment of our republican

institutions.

-But the keynote of conduct of the various agencies of the govt under this doctrine is

INTERDEPENDENCE not indepence.

Checks and Balances By means of which one department is allowed to resist

encroachments upon its prerogatives or to rectify mistakes or excesses committed by

other departments.

Illustration:

1. Lawmaking power of Congress is checked by the veto power of the President2. Congress may refuse to give concurrence to an amnesty proclaimed by the

President.

3. Senate may refuse to concur with a treaty concluded by the President4. President may nullify a conviction by pardoning the offender.5. The judiciary has the power to declare invalid the act done by the Congress,

the President and his subordinates


26/53

Blending of Powerspowers are not confined exclusively to one department but are in

fact assigned or shared by several departments

Illustration:

1. Enactment of general appropriations law which begins with the preparationof the President of the Budget, which becomes the basis of the bill of the

Congress and subsequently submitted by it to the President for approval.

2. Grant of amnesty which requires the approval of majority of all the membersof Congress.

The Role of the Judiciary

-It is the judiciary which sees to it that the constitutional distribution of powers

among the several departments of the govt is respected and observed.

-However, this does not mean that it is superior to the other departments, when

the Supreme Court mediates to allocate the constitutional boundaries or

invalidates the acts of a coordinate body, what is upholding is not its own

supremacy but the supremacy of the Constitution.

Criteria on How to Determine has been Validly Exercised by a Particular Department

-the test is not necessarily or always the nature of the power

1. Whether or not the power in question, regardless of its nature has been

constitutionally conferred upon the department claiming its exercise.

Illustration:

1. Power of impeachment and the power to try and decideimpeachment cases essentially judicial but are expressly lodged in

the Congress because the Constitution so provides.

2. The Supreme Court can exercise the executive power of removal overjudges of inferior courts although they have been appointed by the

President because it is provided in the Constitution.

3. Exercise of emergency and tariff powers of the President althoughboth legislative in nature, the Constitution permits it.

2. Doctrine of Implication -In the absence of express constitutional conferment,

the exercise of a given power may be justified under this doctrine that


27/53

the grant of express power carries with it all other powers that may be

reasonably inferred from it.

Illustration:

1. Power to punish contempt of the Congress althoughessentially judicial it is necessary for the effective exercise of

its power to conduct investigations in aid of legislations

3. Inherent or Incidental Poweralthough not expressly granted or by

implication can be justified under this doctrine

Political and Justiceable Questions

-The power of the judiciary to review official action is not terminated after it

ascertained if the action is granted by the Constitution but it could further

determine if the act in question had been performed in accordance with the

rules laid down by the Constitution.

Politicalrelates to the question affecting the wisdom, efficacy or practicability

of a law or in ordinary parlance a question of policy NOT legality.

-It refers to those questions which, under the Constitution, are to be decided by

the people in their sovereign capacity; or in regard to which full discretionary

authority has been delegated to the legislative or executive branch of the

government.

Illustration:

1. The interpretation of the phrase other high crimes as a ground forimpeachment

2. The suspension or expulsion of a member of Congress for disorderlybehavior. The determination of what constitutes disorderly behavior

is a political question but it may be nullified by the court if not

supported by the required number of vote.

Justiceablewhere the vortex of the controversy refers to the legality or validity

of the act


28/53

-New definition of judicial power, which now includes the duty to

determine whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion

amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or

instrumentality of the government.

-This suggests that this power is available even against the executive and

legislative in the exercise of their discretionary power.

DELEGATION OF POWERS

-It is based upon the principle that such delegated power constitutes not only a right but

a duty to be performed by the delegate. A further delegation of power, unless

permitted by the sovereign power, would constitute a negation of this duty in violation

of the trust reposed in the delegate.

-Applicable to three branches of the govt but essentially important in the case of

legislative power.

Permissible Delegation (P-E-T-A-L)

1. Delegation to the P-people-The rule is that, except in those cases where, by the Constitution, the people have

expressly reserved to themselves the power of decision, the function of legislation

cannot be exercised by them, even to the extent of accepting or rejecting a law.

-This is because the people have voluntarily surrendered that power when they

adopted the Constitution. In passing general laws the people act only through their

representatives. Referring the law to the people for their acceptance is plain

surrender of the law-making power.

Referendum a method of submitting an important legislative measure to a direct

vote of the people

Plebiscite a device to obtain the a direct popular vote on a matter that are

intended to work more permanent changes in the political structure, like proposal to

amend constitution.


29/53

2. Emergency Powers (majority vote of Congress)-Conferment of the power is not mandatory in Congress. Congress may choose to

hold on to its legislative power and refuse to delegate it.

Requisites:1. There must be war or national emergency.

-Emergency does not automatically confer emergency powers on the President.

President cannot exercise emergency power motu propio. There must be law.

-Emergency power is self-liquidating they will automatically cease upon the end

of the emergency.

2. The delegation must be for a limited period only.-No law is necessary to terminate the delegation. It can be terminated by mere

resolution of Congress. Such resolution does not need the approval of the

President.

-The limited period must be fixed in the law itself.

3. Subject to such restrictions and limitations may prescribe.4. Must be exercised to carry out a national policy declared by Congress.

3. Tariff Powers-The law here is found in the Tariff and Customs Code.

-Reason is the necessity of giving the chief executive the authority to act

immediately on certain matters affecting national economy lest delay result in

hardship to the people.

4. Administrative Bodies /Quasi-Legislative Power/Doctrine of SubordinateLegislation

Supplementary Regulations/Pieces of Subordinate Legislation such as the

implementing rules and regulations implementing the policy laid down in the statute

Contingent regulations are those that are dependent to some fact or state of

things upon which the enforcement of the law depends

5. Local Government Bodies


30/53

-Based on the recognition that local legislatures are more knowledgeable than

the national lawmaking body on matters of purely local concern.

-Not a grant of genera legislative power, but rather as the grant of authority to

prescribe local regulations

-Power of eminent domain and police power have been expressly delegated by

the legislature to the local lawmaking bodies. Power of taxation is derived

directly from the Constitution.

TEST OF DELAGATION

-There must be legislative restrictions otherwise the delegation is in effect an

abdication of legislative authority.

1. The Completeness Test means that the law must be complete in all its

essential terms and conditions when it leaves the legislature so that there

is nothing left for the delegate to do when it reaches him except enforce

it.

2. Sufficient Standard Test Even if the law does not spell out in detail the limits

of the delegates authority, it may still be sustained if the delegation is

subject to a sufficient standard. A sufficient standard is intended to map

out the boundaries of the delegates authority by defining the legislativepolicy and indicating the circumstances under which it is to be pursued

and effected.

-The sufficient standard is usually indicated in the law delegating

legislative power itself.

-Accepted standards are public interest, justice and equity, national

security, the sense and experience of men, economy and efficiency.

LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

- Bicameral Conference Committee - Since we have a bicameral congress we have the

it is a mechanism for compromising the differences between the Senate and the House

of Representatives


31/53

-By the nature of its functions the Bicameral Conference Committee is capable of

producing unexpected results that may sometimes go beyond its own mandate.

Congressional Oversight Powers and Functions undertaken by Congress to enhanceits understanding over the implementation of legislation it enacted, to determine if it

is properly administered, to eliminate executive dishonesty, to prevent usurpation of

legislative power.

-This power is intrinsic to the grant of legislative power to the Congress and integral

Three Categories of Oversight Power and Functions S-I-S

1. Legislative Scrutinya. During budget hearing following the doctrine of separation of power of

appropriation belongs to the Congress but actually under Sec. 22 of Art.

VII or the budgetary power of the President the one who really prepares

the budget is the President through the Department of Budget and

Management. The moment the proposed budget is submitted to the

Congress, Congress will now conduct budget hearings. This time the

oversight function comes in. During this budget heating if you happen to

be a head of the department or agency of the government your

appearance may be required by Congress to defend your proposal.

b. Question hour under Sec. 22 of Art VI This section provides that headsof departments may upon their own initiative, with the consent of the

President, or upon the request of either house, appear before and heard

by such House on any matter pertaining to their department. This is not

a regular feature of a presidential form of government, this is merely a

borrowed concept from the parliamentary form of government

c. during confirmation process in the Commission on Appointments. -

serves as a check on the appointing power of the President. If the

appointment of the President is disapproved by Congress you can no longer

be appointed because the disapproval by the Congress is a judgment on the

qualifications of the official, but if the Congress merely bypassed the

appointment it is not a judgment on the qualifications of the official, thus the

President can still reappoint the official.


32/53

2. Legislative Investigation (Sec. 21 Art. VI) this refers to the power of theSenate or House of Representatives, or any of its Committees to conduct

inquiries in aid of legislation.

-This power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation is intrinsic to the grant of

legislative power. (Arnault vs. Nazareno). In other words even if thisprovision is not found in the Constitution you cannot deny Congress of this

power.

3. Legislative Supervision the most encompassing form by which theCongress exercises its oversight function. Supervision connotes the

continuing awareness of the Congress or its committees regarding certain

operations in _. Congressional supervision allows Congress to scrutinize the

exercise of delegated law making authority as a means for Congress to retain

part of the delegated authority. Congress exercises legislative supervision of

the executive agency through its veto power. This veto power is approval

by Congress of regulations promulgated by administrative agencies.

This finds application in the exercise of delegated legislative power to the

administrative bodies. The Congress can review the administrative

regulations issued by these administrative bodies.

-Recent Development: In the case of AbakadaGuro vs. Purisima on August

14, 2008 the Supreme Court declared that legislative veto is unconstitutional.

Congressional oversight must be limited to scrutiny and investigation. Any

action beyond that will undermine the separation of powers guaranteed by

the Constitution. Legislative vetoes fall into this class.

COMPOSITION OF THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

-the provision on Sec. 5 Art VI which provides that the number of members of House of

Representatives should not exceed 250 is no longer controlling because of the power of

the Congress to apportion legislative districts.

Case: The act of the Regional Assembly of ARMM in creating the province of Shariff

Kabunsuan was declared invalid. Only Congress may validly create provinces and cities.

The most that the Regional Assembly can do is to create municipalities and barangays.

If the act of the Regional Assembly will be allowed in effect it creates a new position for


33/53

Congressman. This will result to an absurd situation that an inferior body will change the

composition of a superior body the House of Representatives.

-Refer also to Sec. 10 Art 10 on the requirement for the creation of a new province,

cities, and municipalities. The provision only provides for two requirements that 1.) Itmust be in accordance with the criteria established in the Local Government Code and

2.) It requires the approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political

units directly affected. Another requirement was added by jurisprudence in the case of

Sima vs. COMELEC 3.) The creation must be contrary to the Constitution.

Number of District Representatives vis--vis Number of Party List Representatives-If in

the bar like for example you are given the number of district representatives and asked

to determine how many should be the number of party list representatives, simply

divide the number of district representatives to 4. If there is a fraction, disregard the

fraction. Fractional representation is not allowed. If you round it off it will violate the

constitutional provision that the number of party list representatives shall only

constitute 20% of the total number of representatives including those under the party

list.

PARTY LIST REPRESENTATIVES (R.A. 7941)

Question: What is the nature of the party list system? Is it open to all without

qualification?

The party list is a social justice tool designed not only give effect to the

social justice principle that those who have less in life should have more

in law but to empower them to participate directly in the enactment of

laws designed to benefit them. It intends to make the marginalized

sectors not to become mere passive recipients but as active participants

to the mainstream of representatives democracy. Thus, allowing all

interested groups, including those which now dominate district elections,

allowing them to participate in party-list elections that will run counter to

the lofty objectives of the party-list system. Thus, this is not open to all

without qualification. The intent of the law was not to allow all

associations to participate indiscriminately in the system but to limit the

system to parties or organizations representing the marginalized or

underprivileged. (Ang Bagong Bayani vs. COMELEC)


34/53

Guidelines for Screening Party- List Participants

1. Political parties, sectors, organizations or coalitions must representthe marginalized and underprivileged sectors as defined in Sec. 5 of

R.A 7941.

2.

Religious sectors and sects may not be registered as political parties.(Sec. 2 Par 5 Art IX-C)

But take note; there is no prohibition on religious leaders becoming

representatives.

3. The party or organization must not be an adjunct of or a partyorganized or an entity funded or assisted by the government.

4. The party must not only comply with the requirements of the law, itsnominees must likewise comply with the requirements of the law.

Four Parameters in Determining the Winners of Party List Election

1. The 20% percent allocation.The party-list representatives shall constitute 20% of the total numbers of

the members of the House including those under the party list system. Base

on this allocation the ration is 4:1.

2. The 2% threshold.For the parties, organizations, and coalitions top be entitled to at least one

seat it should received at least 2% of the total votes cast for the partly-list

system. The seat is called the qualifying seat.

3. Three Seat- LimitThere is a three-seat limit regardless of the actual number of votes. Meaning

to say one qualifying seat and two additional seats. The purpose of the three-

seat limit is to avoid the situation where a dominant party which is so strong

might get all the seats.

4. Proportional representationa qualified party shall be entitled only to suchadditional seats in proportion to their total number of votes

Case: In 1990 elections, there were 108 political parties that competed in the

elections. Of these, 108 political parties, only 13 qualified or obtained the 2%


35/53

threshold. Since there were 208 district representatives at that time so 52 party-

list representative position is available. 52-13 equals 39. And since the leading

party list obtained 5% of the total votes, an additional one seat was given to it.

There is now a remaining 38 vacant seats. The COMELEC allocated those 38 seats

to the parties that failed to qualified or those that did not obtained the 2%threshold. According to the COMELEC, it did so for democratic purpose so that

there will be more groups represented in the Congress.

The SC nullified the act of the COMELEC as grave abuse of discretion. The

law is clear that before it can be given a seat in the Congress, the party

list must obtained 2% of the total number of votes cast for the party-list.

Further, the SC said that the question of whether or not the particular

measure is more democratic or not is a matter to be determined by

the Congress because under Sec. 1 of Art. VI legislative power is vested in

the Congress not in the COMELEC.

The 38 remaining seats cannot likewise be given to the 13 parties that

obtained the 2% threshold because it will violate the rule on proportional

representation.

The Court likewise clarified that the 20% allocation is merely a ceiling. It is

not mandatory that all of those 20% allocated seats should be filled up all

the time. (Veterans Party vs. COMELEC)

Case: In this case the Supreme Court did not declare as unconstitutional the 2%

threshold, rather, what was declared unconstitutionalwas the

continuous application of 2% threshold in the allocation of additional

seats. In allocating the seats, there are two seats of computation. First

round of computation you lay down the entire party list and their

respective votes from highest to lowest. And base on that you determine

which parties qualified or those that obtained the 2% threshold. Those

that qualified will be allocated one seat or the so called qualifying seat.

In allocating the additional seat, in Veterans Party case the Supreme

Court applied the Panganiban formulawhere the additional seats will

also be based on the votes obtained by the parties. The 2% threshold was

still used in this formula. The Panganiban formula was abandoned in

this Banat Case. In this case, to determine the additional seats you lay

down again the parties and their votes and you compute based on the


36/53

percentage of their votes until the allocated seats are filled up. (Banat vs.

COMELEC)

Case: The issue here is what to do with the votes cast for disqualified party-listbecause they did not comply with the guidelines for screening party list

participants should they be considered stray votes or considered as valid

votes? Because if you consider them as stray votes you will deduct them from

the total votes cast for the party list system. For example 10 million voted for the

party list system. One party obtained 1 million votes but later on it was declared

disqualified by the Supreme Court. If you will declare the 1 million vote stray

votes you will deduct those votes from the 10 million. Thus, the basis now for

the 2% threshold is 9 million and not 10 million.On the other hand, if you

consider them as valid votes, 10 million would still be the basis for the 2%threshold.

The Supreme Court in resolving the issue referred on the Labo Doctrine in

election laws which provide that the votes cast for the disqualified

candidate should not considered as stray votes. Those are valid votes. The

second placer or the one who obtained the second highest number of

votes cannot take the place of the disqualified winning candidate because

according to the Supreme Court the second placer is just like that. He was

not chosen by the majority. This is the so-calledDoctrine of Rejection of

the Second Placer. The vice-mayor should assume the position of the

mayor following the rule on succession.

The Supreme Court held that the Labo Doctrine should not be applied in

list. Because it is provided in Sec. 10 of R.A 7941 that the votes cast for a

party, organization or coalition not entitled to be voted shall not be

counted. R.A 7941 is the controlling law in any matter pertaining thereto

Another reason for not applying the Labo Doctrine in party list is

that in Labo it involves a single elective post that of mayor unlike in party

list which involves the acquisition of a number congressional seatsdepending on total election results so that even those on second, third,

fourth and so forth places may be proclaimed winners depending on their

compliance with other requirements. (Second Ang Bayani Case)


37/53

INQUIRIES IN AID OF LEGISLATION

Requirements:

1. The inquiry must be in aid of legislation2. It must be conducted in accordance with duly published rules of procedures of the

Congress conducting the inquiry.

3. The rights of the persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall berespected.

-This power is inherent in the grant of legislative power to the Congress such that

even if it is not provided for in the Constitution the Congress can still exercise this

power.

Case: E.O No. 464 was promulgated by President Arroyo prohibiting members of the

Cabinet and other official of the executive branch including members of the armedforces from appearing in Congressional inquiries without her consent. (Senate vs.

Ermita)

In resolving this case the Supreme Court held that we should draw a line between

Sec. 21 of Art VI of the power of the Congress to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation

and Sec. 22 or the question hour. If what is exercised is inquiries in aid of legislation

members of the Cabinet and other officials in the executive branch including

members of the armed forces may not validly refuse to appear invoking E.O 464

otherwise if they refuse to appear they may be cited in contempt. This is because ifthey will not appear they will impair the works of the Congress. For how would the

Congress enact good laws if we deny them the information they need. Refusal to

appear will also violate the Constitutional provision of the right of the people to

information on matters of public concern because they were the duly elected

representatives of the people.

-Only the President or the Executive Secretary acting through the authority of the

President may refuse to appear. However, for them to validly refuse to appear they

have to invoke the executive privilege. Executive privilege is the right of the

President and other officers of the executive to withhold information to the Congress

and ultimately the public. The executive privilege must be asserted or claimed. It

cannot be implied. Because we are a democratic and republican state where the

general rule is disclosure of information not secrecy.


38/53

Further, there should be no blanket invocation of the executive privilege because the

privilege attaches not to the person but to the kind of information.

Three Kinds of Executive Privilege

1.

States secret privilege this is the one often invoke by the President on theground that the information is of such nature that its disclosure would

subvert necessary and crucial military and diplomatic objectives.

2. Informers privilege3. Privilege for internal deliberationsHowever, if what is invoked is the question hour under Sec. 22, members said

executive officials may refuse to appear without the consent of the President

invoking E.O 464 for after all this question hour in not a regular feature of a presidential

form of government so appearance is not really mandatory.

HOW DOES A BILL BECOME A LAW

-Sec. 24 of Art VI -which provides that the following bills must originate in the

House. (A-P-R-I-L)

1.A-ppropriation is one the primary and specific purpose is to authorize therelease of funds from the public treasury.

2. P-rivate bills illustrated by a bill granting honorary citizenship to a foreigner.

3.R-evenue or tariff bills revenueone that levies taxes and raises revenue.

Tariff-specifies the rates of duties to be imposed on imported articles

4. I-ncrease of public debt

5. L-ocal applicationinvolving purely municipal or local matters.

But the Senate may propose or concur with amendments. In other words the

amendments here may refer to amendment by substitution which may entirely replace

the bill initiated in the House of Representatives.. After all what is really required to

originate in the House is not the law itself but only the bill. (Tolentino vs. Sec.ofFinance)

- Sec.26 of Art. VI


39/53

One Subject One Title Rule Every bill passed by Congress shall embrace only

one subject which shall be expressed in the title thereof.

-The purpose is to prevent rider. A rider is a provision in a bill totally unrelated to

the main subject and which may be a proper subject of a separate legislation byitself.

Objectives:

1. To prevent hodge-podge or log rolling legislation.2. To prevent surprise or fraud upon the legislature3. To fairly apprise the people of the subjects of legislation that are being

considered.

-The Supreme Court here adopted a liberal interpretation that the title of the bill

need not be a complete catalogue of a bill. There is substantial compliance of the

requirement if the title expresses the general subject and all the provisions of

the statute are germane to that general subject.

Three Readings on Separate Days Rule No bill shall become a law unless it has

passed three readings on separate days and printed copies thereof in its final

form have been distributed to its members three days before its passage.

-All in all before a bill becomes a law it passes 6 readings. Three readings from

each House.

Exception to the Three Readings Rule: Except when the President certifies to the

necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency.

What constitutes a public calamity or emergency that justifies the issuance of

the certification of the President is a political question that may not be inquired

by the courts.

ENROLLED BILL DOCTRINE once a bill has already become an enrolled bill it

becomes conclusive upon the courts as to its due enactment and the tenor of its

provisions.. The court may no longer validly inquire into whether the bill hasbeen regularly and duly enacted.

The bill is enrolled when printed as finally approved by the Congress, thereafter

authenticated with the signature of the Senate president, the Speaker, and the

Secretaries of their respective chambers, and approved by the President.


40/53

-In case of conflict between the journal and enrolled bill, it is the latter that will

prevail except only as to matters which are under the constitution are required

to be entered in the journal because as to these matters they become conclusive

upon the courts. (Arroyo vs. De Venecia)

Matters that are required to be entered in the legislative journal1. Yeas and nays upon third reading of the bill. 2. Yeas and nays on any question upon request of 1/5 of the Members

present

3. Yeas and nays in repassing a bill over the veto of the President.4. Objections of the President on the bill he vetoed.

BICAMERAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE

Question: From the bicameral conference committee where will now the bill

go? Will it be submitted to the President for his signature?

Not yet, from the BCC it will be sent back to both Houses of Congress. But

it will not undergo the three readings rather it will be subjected to

votation. If the yeas prevail over the nays it will now be signed by the

Senate President and the Speaker of the House, certified to by the

respective Secretaries of both Houses as having been duly and regularly

enacted and then sent to the President for his signature. It is only then

that a bill becomes enrolled.

If on the other hand, if the during the votation the nays prevail the bill is

not killed. Another bicameral committee conference must be conveyeduntil it is able to craft a version that is acceptable to both Houses of

Congress.

RULE ON PRESENTMENT OF BILL TO THE PRESIDENT

Options available to the President

1. He signs the bill and the bill becomes a law.2. He vetoes the bill and returns the same to the House where it originated with

his objections where it originated. (General Veto)3. Inaction of the President 30 days after it shall have been presented to him

the bill automatically becomes a law.

-30 days is counted from the date of its receipt by him.

-Pocket veto is not recognized in the Philippines. Pocket veto is found

in American constitution where it provides that if a bill is not acted upon by the

President until the adjournment of the regular session of the Congress the bill


41/53

does not become a law. Here in the Philippines, it is the opposite. If the bill is not

acted by the President within 30 days after it is presented to him, the bill

becomes a law.

VETO POWER OF THE PRESIDENT (Sec. 27 Art VI)

1. General veto (1sr par.)2. item veto (2nd par)-Selective/Partial veto is not allowed. Either he signs it or it becomes a law or

vetoes it and it does not become a law.

Exception: Selective veto is allowed in an A-ppropriation, R-evenue, and T-ariff.

The veto shall not affect the item or items to which he does not object.

DOCTRINE OF INAAPROPRIATE PROVISION/RIDER IN THE GENERAL APPROPRIATION

BILL (Sec. 25 par 2) No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the general

appropriations bill unless it relates to specifically to some particular appropriations

therein.

-If it does not relate to some particular appropriations in the general

appropriations bill it becomes an inappropriate provision, thus it is now treatedas an item subject to the item veto in Sec. 27 par 2. (Gonzales vs. Macaraeg)

-Governors and Mayors have veto power while a Punong Brgy. does not have

veto power because he is the one who presides the session in a barangay. (Sec.

55 of the Local Govt Code.)

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency or Alter Ego Principle under this doctrine the

members of the Cabinet, the Cabinet Secretaries they are deemed to be the alter ego of

the President which means that any act or decision rendered by them in the regular

course of business are deemed to be the act or decision of the President himself unless

reprobated.

Qualifications:


42/53

COMMON

QUALIFICATIONS

CONGRESSMAN

DISTRICT/PARTY LISTSENATOR PRESIDENT

1. Citizenship Natural-born citizen Natural-borncitizen

Natural-born

citizen

2. EducationalBackground

Able to read and write Able to read and

write

Able to read and

write

3. RegisteredVoter

District

Registered voter in the

district to which he

shall be elected.

Party ListRegistered voter and

bona fide member of the

party or org which he

seeks to represent atleast 90 days preceding

the day of election

Registered Voter Registered Voter

DISTINCT

QUALIFICATIONS

1. Age 25 years old on the dayof election

Party List (youth sector)

At least 25 but not more

than 30 on the day of

the election.

35 years old on

the day of the

election

40 years old on

the day of

election

2. Residency DistrictResident of the district

to which he shall be

elected for at least 1

year immediately

preceding the day of

election

Party list

Resident of the Phil forat least 1 year

immediately preceding

the day of election

Resident of the

Phil. for at least 2

years immediately

preceding the day

of election

Resident of the

Phil. for at least

10 years

immediately

preceding the

day of election


43/53

PERMANENT VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT (Sec. 8)

-Vice President shall assume office not only as acting President but as President

to serve the unexpired term.

Four Situations: D-D- R- R (Double D Double R)

1. Death2. Disability permanent3. Removal4. Resignation in the case of Estrada vs. Desierto SC said that the elements of

resignation are: That there must be intent to resign and the intent must be

coupled with acts of relinquishment. The validity of resignation is not

governed by any requirement as to form. It can be oral or written; it can be

express or implied. In this case the Court used the Totality of Circumstances

Test which took into account all the prior, contemporaneous and posterior

acts and circumstances bearing on the question of Estradas resignation.

SPECIFIC POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT UNDER ART. VII

1. Appointing Power (Sec. 16)

Appointments which Require Confirmation by the Commission on Appointments

1. Heads of Executive Departments cabinet secretaries EXCEPT Vice President whenappointed as cabinet member

-Bureau head like a Commissioner of customs may be appointed without suchconfirmation

2. Ambassadors other public ministers and consuls diplomatic and consular services3. Officers of the armed forces from the rank or naval captain PNP officers are not

included

4. Other officers whose appointments are vested in him in the Constitution-Like the members of the Constitutional Commission Chairman and Commissionersof CSC, COMELEC and COA

-EXCEPT members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower courts, Ombudsman

and his deputies although appointment is vested in the President it is removed

from the confirming power of the Commission on Appointment since it is the Judicial

and Bar council which makes the necessary screening.


44/53

-Members of the Commission of Human Rights need no confirmation by the

Commission on Appointments.

5. Regular members of the Judicial and Bar Councila. representatives of the IBP

b. professor of lawc. retired member of the Supreme Court

d. representative of the private sector

Take note: The list of officers whose appointments requires confirmation by

Commission on Appointments is exclusive. The list may not be expanded by

mere statutory legislation. (Calderon vs. Carale)

AD INTERIM APPOINTMENT VIS A VIS REGULAR APPOINTMENT

Ad Interim appointmentsappointment made by the President when the

Congress is not in session or in recess. This refers only to positions which need

confirmation by the Commission on Appointments.

Regular appointment appointment made by the President when Congress is in

session.

-The real distinction between the two lies in the effectivity of appointment . If the

appointment is ad interim the appointment takes effect immediately and the appointee

may immediately assume office subject only to the resolutory condition when the

appointment is confirmed by the Commission on Appointments. On the other hand,

regular appointment it does not take effect immediately that is why the appointee maynot assume office immediately. He can only assume office if the appointment is already

confirmed by the Comm. on Appointments. In ad interim appointment the President

appoints, in regular appointment the President nominates.

Question: A Regional Director of DepEd was appointed by the President as Sec. of

Education. Congress was in session. Can he assume office immediately?

No. That is a regular appointment. It does not take effect immediately. It

will only take effect upon confirmation by the Commission.

Case: Manual Roxas who was then a Congressman of Capiz was appointed by thePres.Estrada as DTI Secretary. Since the Co

state immunity, citizenship, art vi, vii and viii

Documents