[Constitutional Law 1] Attributes of the State - Eminent Domain Flashcards
True or false. The power of eminent domain is inherent in the citizens and an indispensable power of the Executive branch of Government.
False. The power of eminent domain is an inherent and indispensable power of the State.
How would you describe the power of eminent domain?
The power of eminent domain is described as “the highest and most exact idea of property remaining in the government” that may be acquired for some public purpose thorugh a method “in the nature of a compulsory sale to the State.”
Can the State exercise its power of eminent domain for the purpose of expropriating lots to the heads of each executive department?
No, the State cannot exercise its power of eminent domain for the benefit of the heads of the executive departments. The power of eminent domain may only be exercised for some public purpose.
What Constitutional provision provides for the limitation on the power of eminent domain?
Section 9 Article III of the 1987 Constitution which mandates that “private property shall not be taken for a public use without just compensation.”
Which branch of the Government exercises the power of eminent domain?
The power of eminent domain is exercised by the Legislature.
Can the Legislature delegate this power to other branches or deparment of Government?
Yes, the power of eminent domain may be delegated by Congress to the President, administrative bodies, local government units, and even private enterprises performing public services.
What are the requisites for the valid exercise of the power of eminent domain?
The requisites for the valid exercise of the power of eminent domain are:
(1) the property taken must be a private property;
(2) there must be genuine necessity to take the private property;
(3) the taking must be for public use;
(4) there must be payment of just compensation; and
(5) the taking must comply with due process of law.
In the case of Manapat v Court of Appeals, why did the Court allow the expropriation of properties when the said expropriation was only by virtue of a Presidential Decre, particularly PD 1072?
The Court allowed the expropriation of the properties in the case of Manapat v Court of Appeals because PD 1072 was an exercise of the legislative powers of then President Marcos, who had both executive and legislative powers under the 1973 Constitution.
In the case of TELEBAP v COMELEC, what case did the Supreme Court cite to affirm the validity of RA 6646?
The case of Osmena v COMELEC upheld Sec 11 (b) RA 6646 which prohibited the sale or donation of print space or air time for political ads, except to the COMELEC.
What was the contention of TELEBAP in the case of TELEBAP v COMELEC?
The contention was the use of airtime by COMELEC is unconstitutional as (1) it takes property without due process of law, (2) it denies radio and television broadcast companies equal protection of laws, (3) it is an excess of power given to COMELEC.
Do television and radio broadcast companies own the airwaves of their franchises?
No, television and radio broadcast companies do not own the airwaves. In the case of TELEBAP v COMELC, the Court held that “radio and television broadcasting companies do not own the airwaves and frequencies through which they transmit broadcast signals and images. They are merely given the temproary privilege of using them. Since a franchise is a mere privelege, the exercise of the privilege may reasonably be burdened with the performance by the grantee of some form of public service.”
What Constitutional provision did the Court say to uphold that validity of COMELEC Time and Space
1987 CONST Art XII Sec 6: The use of property bears a social function, and all economic agents shall contribute to the common good. Individuals and private groups, including corporations, cooperatives, and similar colelctive organizations, shall have the right to own, establish, and operate economic enterprises, subject to the duty of hte State to promote distributive justice and to intervene when the common good so demands.
It is the power inherent in sovereignty to appropriate and control individual property for the public benefit as the public safety, necessity, convenience or welfare demand.
Power of Eminent Domain
According to the dissent of Justice Romero in the TELEBAP case, what are the two limitations on the power of eminent domain?
The two limitations on the power of eminent domain, according to the dissent of Justice Romero, are (1) the purpose of taking must be for public use, and (2) just compensation must be given to the owner of the private property.
According to Justice Romero in his dissent in TELEBAP, what is the difference between Police Power and Power of Eminent Domain?
In police power, there is a restriction of property to promote public welfare or interest which involves no compensable taking while in the power of eminent domain, property interest is appropriated and applied to some public purpose, necessitating compensation therefor.
Police power = restriction of property for public good and no compensation is needed; Power of eminent domain = property is being appropriated for public good and thus needs compensation
