ARTICLE VIII - JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT Flashcards
T or F
The judicial power shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law.
True Sec 1 Art 8
T or F
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.
True. Sec 1 Art 8
What is judicial power?
It is the court’s authority to settle justiciable controversies or disputes involving rights that are enforceable and demandable before the courts of justice or the redress of wrongs for violations of such rights.
What is judicial review?
Judicial review refers to both the authority and duty of the courts to determine whether a branch or an instrumentality of government has acted beyond the scope of the latter’s constitutional powers.
What is grave abuse of discretion?
GAD implies such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction or where the power is exercised in an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility, which must be so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of positive duty or to a virtual refusal to perform the duty enjoined or to act at all in contemplation of law.
What are the pillars of limitations to judicial review?
- That there be absolute necessity of deciding a case
- That rules of constitutional law shall be formulated only as required by the facts of the case
- That judgment may not be sustained on some other ground
- That there be actual injury sustained by the party by reason of the operation of the statute
- That the parties are not in estoppel
- That the court upholds the presumption of constitutionality
What are the pillars of limitations to judicial review?
- That there be absolute necessity of deciding a case
- That rules of constitutional law shall be formulated only as required by the facts of the case
- That judgment may not be sustained on some other ground
- That there be actual injury sustained by the party by reason of the operation of the statute
- That the parties are not in estoppel
- That the court upholds the presumption of constitutionality
What are the functions of judicial review? Explain each.
- Checking - check on the different bodies of government if there is abuse
- Legitimating - validating an act of the branch of government
- Symbolic - duty to formulate guiding and controlling principles, precepts, doctrines or rules
What are the requisites of judicial review?
- There is an actual case or controversy
- Petitioners possess locus standi
- Question of constitutionality is raised at the earliest opportunity
- Issue of constitutionality is the lis mota of the case
What is actual case or controversy?
It involves a conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims, susceptible of judicial resolution as distinguished from a hypothetical or abstract difference or dispute.
In other words, there must be a contrariety of legal rights that can be interpreted and enforced on the basis of existing law and jurisprudence.
T or F
Controversy must be justiciable, definite and concrete, touching on the legal relations of parties having adverse legal interests, which may be resolved by a court of law through the application of a law.
True
T or F
For a dispute to be justiciable, a legally demandable and enforceable right must exist as basis and must be shown to have been violated.
True.
T or F
Whether a case actually exists depends on the pleaded allegations as affected by the elements of standing, as the status being a “real-party-in-interest” in criminal actions and as offended parties in special proceedings as interested parties.
True.
T or F
An actual case or controversy means an existing case or controversy that is appropriate or ripe for determination, not conjectural or anticipatory, lest the decision of the court would amount to an advisory opinion.
True.
T or F
The judicial power does not extend to hypothetical questions since any attempt at abstraction could only lead to dialectics and barren legal question and to sterile conclusions unrelated to actualities.
True.
What is facial as applied challenge?
A facial challenge is an examination of the entire law, pinpointing its flaws and defects, not only on the basis of its actual operation to the parties, but also on the assumption or prediction that its very existence may cause others not before the court to refrain from constitutionally protected speech or activities.
What are the two concepts that affect the existence of an actual case or controversy?
Ripeness and mootness
What are the two concepts that affect the existence of an actual case or controversy?
Ripeness and mootness
What is ripeness?
It relates to the premature filing of a case.
A question is ripe for adjudication when the act being challenged has had a direct adverse effect on the individual or entity challenging it.
What is mootness?
It pertains to a belated or unnecessary judgment on the issues.
A case or issue is considered moot and academic when it ceases to present a justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events, so that an adjudication of the case or a declaration on the issue would be of no practical value or use.
In such instance, there is no actual substantial relief which a petitioner would be entitled to, and which would be negated by the dismissal of the petition.
T or F
The moot and academic principle is not a magical formula that can automatically dissuade the courts in resolving a case.
True.
What are the instances wherein the SC will decide cases even if moot and academic?
- There is a grave violation of the Constitution
- The exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public interest is involved
- When constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, bar and the public.
- The case is capable of repetition yet evading review
What does “capable of repetition yet evading review” mean?
Two factors need to be considered:
- The challenged action was in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration
- There was a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party would be subjected to the same action.
What is locus standi?
Inextricably linked with the actual case or controversy requirement is that the party presenting the justiciable issue must have the STANDING to mount a challenge to the governmental act.
The necessity of a person’s standing to sue derives from the very definition of judicial power. Necessarily, the person availing a judicial remedy MUST SHOW THAT HE POSSESSES A LEGAL INTEREST OR RIGHT TO IT
It is defined as a personal and substantial interest in a case such that the party has sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result of the challenged governmental act.
T or F
The question of locus standi or legal standing focuses on the determination of whether those assailing the governmental act have the right of appearance to bring the matter to the court for adjudication.
True.
To show locus standi, what must a person demonstrate?
He must demonstrate that:
- He has personally suffered some actual or threatened injury because of the allegedly illegal conduct of the government
- The injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action
- The injury is likely to be redressed by the remedy being sought Otherwise he would not be allowed to litigate.
What does interest in a case mean?
It means a material interest in an issue affected by a decree as distinguished from mere interest in the question involved, or a mere incidental interest.
There must be a present substantial interest and not a mere expectancy or a future, contingent, subordinate or consequential interest.
What is the direct injury test?
It requires that the person who impugns the validity of a statute must have a personal and substantial interest in the case such that he has sustained, or will sustain direct injury as a result.
T or F
The rule on standing is a matter of procedure, hence, can be relaxed for nontraditional plaintiffs like ordinary citizens, taxpayers and legislators when the public interest so requires.
True.
T or F
Even for exceptional suits filed by taxpayers, legislators or concerned citizens, the party must claim some kind of injury-in-fact.
True.
T or F
For concerned citizens, there must be a showing that the issues raised are of transcendental importance which must be settled early.
True.
T or F
When suing as a citizen, the interest of the petitioner assailing the constitutionality of a statute must be direct and personal.
True.
T or F
Taxpayers must show sufficient interest in preventing the illegal expenditure of money raised by taxation.
True.
T or F
For taxpayers, there must be a claim of illegal disbursement of public funds or that the tax measure is unconstitutional.
True.
What is a taxpayer’s suit?
A taxpayer’s suit is allowed only when the petitioner has demonstrated the direct correlation of the act complained of and the disbursement of public funds in contravention of law or the Constitution, or has shown that the case involves the exercise of the spending or taxing power of Congress.
A taxpayer’s suit contemplates a situation in which there is already an appropriation or a disbursement of public funds.
T or F
Each member of Congress has a legal standing to sue even without an enabling resolution for that purpose so long as the questioned acts invade the powers, prerogatives and privileges of Congress.
True.
What is the concept of third party standing?
Under this concept, actions may be brought on behalf of 3rd parties provided the following criteria are met:
1. The party bringing the suit must have suffered an injury-in-fact, thus giving him or her a sufficiently concrete interest in the outcome of the issue in dispute.
- Party must have a close relation to 3rd party.
- There must exist some hindrance to the 3rd party’s ability to protect his own interest.
What are the requisites of transcendental importance?
- The character of the funds or other assets involved in the case.
- Presence of a clear case of disregard of a constitutional or statutory prohibition by the public respondent agency or instrumentality of the government
- Lack of any other party with a more direct and specific interest in raising the questions being raised.
When is the earliest opportunity to raise a constitutional issue?
The earliest opportunity is to raise the constitutional issue is during the pleadings before a competent court.
If it was not raised in the pleadings before a competent court, it cannot be considered at the trial and on appeal.
What does lis mota mean?
It means the cause of the suit or action.
The Court will not pass upon a question of unconstitutionality although properly presented, if the case can be disposed of on some other ground.
Explain lis mota as a requirement.
The lis mota requirement means that the petitioner who questions the constitutionality of a law must show that the case cannot be resolved unless the disposition of the constitutional question is unavoidable.
T or F
The petitioner must be able to show that the case cannot be legally resolved unless the constitutional question raised is determined.
True.
What is a political question?
A political question arises when:
- a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to coordinate a political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it;
- or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for non-judicial discretion;
- or the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government,
- or an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made, or the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on the one question.
T or F
The 1987 constitution expands the territory of justiciable questions and narrows the off-limits area of political questions.
True.
T or F
The constitutional framers deliberately expanded the Court’s power of judicial review to prevent courts from seeking refuge behind the political question doctrine and turning a blind eye to abuses committed by the other branches of government.
True.
T or F
Political questions are concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not the legality of a particular act or measure being assailed.
True.
T or F
Political questions refer 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.
True.
T or F
If an issue is clearly identified by the text of the Constitution as matters for discretionary action by a particular branch of government or to the people themselves, then it is held to be a political question.
True.
T or F
Under the “political question” doctrine arising from the principle of separation of powers, the Judicial Branch cannot decide questions “in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislative or executive branch of the government”
True.
T or F
In our jurisdiction, the determination of whether an issue involves a truly political and non-justiciable question lies in the answer to the question of “whether there are constitutionally imposed limits on powers or functions conferred upon political bodies.”
True.
T or F
When political questions are involved, the Constitution limits the determination as to whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the official whose action is being questioned.
True.
T or F
When political questions are involved, the Constitution limits the determination as to whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of the official whose action is being questioned.
True.
What are the 2 views on the effects of declaration of unconstitutionality?
- Orthodox view
2. Modern view (Nachura and Isagani Cruz)
Explain the orthodox view.
This view is reflected by the following provision:
“The general rule is that a void law or administrative act cannot be the source of legal rights or duties.”
T or F
Under the modern view, an unconstitutional act, whether legislative or executive, is not a law, confers no rights, imposes no duties, and affords no protection.
False, orthodox view.