Judicial Review - Part 2 Flashcards
For courts to exercise the Power of Judicial Review, the following conditions must be present:
Actual Case, Locus Standi on the part of the Petitioner; Constitutional issue must be resolved at the earliest opportunity
Actual Controversy, Legal Standing on the part of all the parties to the case; Constitutional issue, which is the lis mota of the case, must be resolved at the earliest opportunity
Actual Controversy; Locus Standi on the part of the Respondent; Constitutional issue, which is the lis mota of the case, must be raised at the earliest opportunity
Actual Case; Legal Standing on the part of the Petitioner; Constitutional issue, the resolution of which is decisive of the case, must be raised at the earliest opportunity
Actual Case; Legal Standing on the part of the Petitioner; Constitutional issue, the resolution of which is decisive of the case, must be raised at the earliest opportunity
The following statements are true, except:
In the exercise of Judicial Review, courts are not allowed to issue advisory opinions.
Courts can never exercise Judicial Review on questions which are hypothetical, or moot and academic.
A question is ripe for judicial adjudication when the executive and legislative branches have accomplished or performed acts that present immediate or threatened injury to the Petitioner.
For an ‘actual case’ to exist, the questions presented before the court must overcome the requirement of ripeness.
Courts can never exercise Judicial Review on questions which are hypothetical, or moot and academic.
The following situations present an actual case or controversy, except:
A new law, containing penal provisions, under which no one has been charged with violating any of its provisions and that there is no showing that any of the petitioners’ rights has been adversely affected by its operation
A Presidential Proclamation, effective only for 8 days as it was sooner lifted by the same President, placing the country under a state of national emergency; and during which, several police abuses were committed by virtue of said proclamation
A General Appropriations Act (GAA), containing forms of pork barrel, passed into law, with subsequent statements from the President declaring that he has already abolished all forms of pork barrel
A new bill, filed by members of the House of Senate, which institutionalizes and legitimizes Oplan Tokhang
A new bill, filed by members of the House of Senate, which institutionalizes and legitimizes Oplan Tokhang
In the case of David vs. Arroyo, the Supreme Court resolved whether former PGMA’s subsequent issuance of Presidential Proclamation (PP) No. 1021 rendered the issues raised therein moot and academic. Did it?
No, because PP 1021 was not constitutional and, therefore, did not effectively lift the President’s declaration of a state of national emergency.
Yes, because PP 1017 was not, after all, a constitutional issuance.
Yes, because PP 1021 effectively lifted the President’s declaration of a state of national emergency.
No, because at the time of PP 1017’s effectivity, several illegal acts were committed in carrying it out.
No, because at the time of PP 1017’s effectivity, several illegal acts were committed in carrying it out.
In the following instances, courts may exercise the power of Judicial Review, except:
When there is a grave constitutional violation where no actual case exists
Not being ripe for judicial adjudication, the case is capable of repetition yet evading review
The case being moot and academic, a decision may serve as a guidance for the Bench and the Bar
None of the above
None of the above
The following statements are true, except:
Locus standi refers to a party’s personal and substantial interest in a case, arising from the direct injury it has sustained or will sustain as a result of the challenged governmental action.
Locus standi is defined as “a right of appearance in a court of justice on a given question.”
The interest required for purposes of legal standing is a material interest, an interest in issue affected by the decree, as distinguished from mere interest in the question involved, or a mere incidental interest.
Without the requisite legal standing, one can never ask the court to exercise Judicial Review.
Without the requisite legal standing, one can never ask the court to exercise Judicial Review.
Which among the following must be shown in order for a taxpayer to have legal standing?
A claim that a tax measure in inequitable.
A claim that public funds are not spent wisely.
A claim of illegal disbursement of public funds.
A claim that a government expenditure is made to support an unconstitutional program.
A claim of illegal disbursement of public funds.
Legislators have legal standing to question the following, except:
The President drawing up the General Appropriations Act.
The Department of Social of Welfare and Development issuing an IRR that expands the law which it implements.
The Supreme Court issuing a Circular that modifies the jurisdiction of the Municipal and Regional Trial Courts.
The People, directly proposing an amendment to the 1987 Constitution.
The People, directly proposing an amendment to the 1987 Constitution.
The following are determinants that a matter is of transcendental importance, except:
The involvement of high-ranking public officials
The character of the funds or other assets involved in the case
The lack of any other party with a more direct and specific interest in the questions being raised.
The presence of a clear case of disregard of a constitutional or statutory prohibition by the public respondent agency or instrumentality of the government
The involvement of high-ranking public officials
May minors, in asserting the right to a balanced and healthful ecology, bring a case on behalf of their generations and the generations yet unborn?
Yes, if they do so pursuant to the principles of intergenerational responsibility and intergenerational justice.
Yes, for as long as it is done through a class suit.
No, because these minors do not face an immediate or threatened injury, nor can they arrogate upon themselves any imagined harm to generations yet unborn.
No, because minors are not yet of age and cannot file a suit.
Yes, if they do so pursuant to the principles of intergenerational responsibility and intergenerational justice.
When is a constitutional issue considered to be raised at the earliest opportunity?
When it was raised during the oral arguments before the first adjudicatory body where a case was originally filed.
When it was raised in the pleadings before the first judicial body where a case was originally filed.
When it was raised during the oral arguments before the first judicial body where a case was originally filed.
When it was raised in the pleadings before the first adjudicatory body where a case was originally filed.
When it was raised in the pleadings before the first judicial body where a case was originally filed.
The following statements are true regarding the Orthodox View on the effect of an unconstitutional act, except:
It is stricken from the statute books and considered never to have existed from the time that it was judicially declared unconstitutional.
An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no right; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal contemplation, inoperative, as if it had not been passed.
Not only the parties but all persons are bound by the declaration of unconstitutionality, which means that no one may thereafter invoke it nor may the courts be permitted to apply it in subsequent cases.
It is a total nullity.
It is stricken from the statute books and considered never to have existed from the time that it was judicially declared unconstitutional.
The following statements are true regarding the Modern View on the effect of an unconstitutional act, except:
The court in passing upon the question of constitutionality does not annul or repeal the statute if it finds it in conflict with the Constitution.
The court simply refuses to recognize it and determines the rights of the parties just as if such statute had no existence.
The court may give its reasons for ignoring or disregarding the law, but the decision affects the parties only and there is no judgment against the statute.
The act, therefore, is constitutional.
The act, therefore, is constitutional.
The following statements are true regarding the Doctrine of Operative Fact on the effect of an unconstitutional act, except:
It has general application to acts which have been found unconstitutional by courts.
It provides an exception to the general rule that a void or unconstitutional law produces no effect.
It nullifies the void law or executive act but sustains its effects.
It recognizes the existence of the law or executive act prior to the determination of its unconstitutionality as an operative fact that produced consequences that cannot always be erased, ignored or disregarded.
It has general application to acts which have been found unconstitutional by courts.
