UP Consti1 Reviewer Flashcards
Political Law
Branch of public law which deals with the organization and operations of the governmental organs of the State and defines the relations of the State with the inhabitants of its territory.
Constitutional Law (MALCOLM)
A written instrument enacted by direct action of the people by which the fundamental powers of the government are established, limited, and defined, and those powers are distributed among the several departments for their safe and useful exercise, for the benefit of the body politic.
Date of Ratification of the 1987 Constitution
The 1987 Constitution was ratified on February 2, 1987
The Supremacy of the Constitution and the Role of the Courts
The Constitution is the fundamental law of the land to which every statute must conform; laws, statutes, or treaties may be nullified if in conflict with the Constitution
PARTS OF A CONSTITUTION
- Constitution of Government
- Constitution of Sovereignty
- Constitution of Liberty
PARTS OF A CONSTITUTION, explained
- Constitution of Government: establishes the structure of government, its branches and their operation; e.g. Art. VI, VII, VIII, IX
- Constitution of Sovereignty: Provides how the Constitution may be changed; i.e. Art. XVII
- Constitution of Liberty: states the fundamental rights of the people; e.g. Art. III [Lambino v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 174153. October 25, 2006]
WHAT IS AMENDMENT?
Amendments: An addition or change within the lines of the original constitution as will effect an improvement, or better carry out the purpose for which it was framed; a change that adds, reduces or deletes without altering the basic principles involved; affects only the specific provision being amended [Lambino v. COMELEC, supra].
WHAT IS REVISION
A change that alters a basic principle in the constitution, like altering the principle of separation of powers or the system of checks-and- balances; alters the substantial entirety of the constitution, as when the change affects substantial provisions of the constitution.
Difference: AMENDMENT & REVISION
Revision generally affects several provisions of the constitution, while amendment generally affects only the specific provision being amended [Id.]. This distinction is significant because the 1987 Constitution allows people’s initiative only for the purpose of amending, not revising, the Constitution [See Lambino v. COMELEC, supra].
2PART TEST
a. Quantitative test: The court examines only the number of provisions affected and does not consider the degree of the change.
b. Qualitative test: The court inquires into the qualitative effects of the proposed change in the constitution. The main inquiry is whether the change will “accomplish such far reaching changes in the nature of our basic governmental plan as to amount to a revision.” The changes include those to the “fundamental framework or the fundamental powers of its Branches,” and those that “jeopardize the traditional form of government and the system of check and balances.” Whether there is an alteration in the structure of government is a proper subject of inquiry [Lambino v. COMELEC, supra].
PROCEDURE: AMENDMENT & REVISION
a. Proposal: This refers to the adoption of the suggested change in the Constitution.
1. Congress (as a Constituent
Assembly) – a vote of 3/4 of ALL its
members.
2. Constitutional Convention –
Called into existence by (i) 2/3 of all members of Congress OR (ii) the electorate, in a referendum called for by a majority of all members of
Congress [Sec. 3, Art. XVII]
3. People (through a People’s Initiative) – petition of at least 12% of the total number of registered voters; every legislative district must be represented by at least 3% of the registered voters therein.
i. Limitation on Initiative: No amendment in this manner shall be authorized (1) within 5 years following the ratification of the 1987 Const. nor (2) more often than once every 5 years thereafter.
ii. Enabling Law: Constitutional provision on amendments via People’s Initiative are not self-executory. (Defensor-Santiago v. COMELEC, 270 SCRA 170 (1997)
b. Ratification: The Proposed Amendments shall be submitted to the people and shall be deemed ratified by the majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite, held not earlier than 60 days nor later than 90 days:
1. After approval of the proposal by Congress or ConCon;
2. After certification by the COMELEC of sufficiency of petition of the people.
Doctrine of Proper Submission
A plebiscite may be held on the same day as a regular election [Gonzales v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-28196 (1967)]. The entire Constitution must be submitted for ratification at one plebiscite only. The people must have a proper “frame of reference” [J. Barredo’s Dissent in Tolentino v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-34150 (1971)]. No “piecemeal submission” is allowed e.g. submission of age amendment ahead of other proposed amendments [Lambino v. COMELEC, supra].
Diff. in procedure Amendment v. Revision
Note: The process of revision is the same in all respects except that it cannot be proposed via a People’s Initiative [See Lambino v. COMELEC, supra]
Judicial Review of Amendments
The validity of the process of amendment is not a political question because the Court must review if constitutional processes were followed [See Lambino v. COMELEC, supra].
METHODS OF INTERPRETING THE CONSTITUTION
- Words given their ordinary meaning [Verba Legis]
- In case of ambiguity, the words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent of the framers [Ratio Legis Est Anima]
- Construction as a whole [Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam Pereat]
- Every part must be given effect
- Conflicting provisions harmonized
- Where one provision cannot be considered an exception to another, and there is conflict, the last in order of time and local position is deemed the latest expression of the will of the people.
Verba Legis
Words given their ordinary meaning
Ratio Legis Est Anima
In case of ambiguity, the words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent of the framers
Ut Magis Valeat Quam Pereat
This is on the theory that the document was prepared and intended as a consistent whole
Doctrine of Necessary Implication
Whatever is necessary to render effective a provision, whether a grant of power of right or prohibition or a restriction, must be deemed implied or intended in the provision itself.
The Philippines is a Democratic and Republican State
Section 1: The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.
Renunciation of War
Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.
Only refers to wars of aggression, not defensive war.
Adoption of Generally Accepted Principles of International Law
Under the 1987 Constitution, international law can become part of the sphere of domestic law either by transformation or incorporation.
Generally accepted principles of international law
Norms of general or customary international law which are binding on all states, i.e,
1. Renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy,
2. The principle of sovereign immunity,
3. A person’s right to life, liberty and due process,
4. Pacta sunt servanda (international agreements must be performed in good faith)
Civilian Supremacy
Section 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory.
Role of the Armed Forces
a. Protector of the people and the State
b. Secure the sovereignty of the State and the
integrity of the national territory
Compulsory military and civil service
Section 4. The prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people. The Government may call upon the people to defend the State and, in the fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by law, to render personal, military or civil service.
Maintenance of Peace and Promotion of General Welfare
Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy.
Separation of Church and State
The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.
Independent Foreign Policy
Section 7. The State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with other states, the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the right to self-determination.
Paramount Consideration
National sovereignty, territorial integrity, national interest, and the right to self-determination
Freedom from Nuclear Weapons
Section 8. The Philippines, consistent with the national interest, adopts and pursues a policy of freedom from nuclear weapons in its territory.
Right to a Balanced and Healthful Ecology
Section 16. The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
Priority to Education, Science, and Technology, Arts, Culture, and Sports
Section 17. The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human liberation and development.
Equal Access for Public Service and Prohibition of Political Dynasties
Section 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.
The state policy against political dynasties is not self-executing. It does not provide a judicially enforceable constitutional right but merely specifies a guideline for legislative or executive action. [Belgica v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 208566, Nov. 19, 2013]
Sovereignty
is the supreme and uncontrollable power inherent in the State by which the state is governed.
2 kinds of sovereignty
- Legal Sovereignty — authority which has
the power to issue final commands - Political Sovereignty — power behind the legal sovereign, or the sum total of all the
influences that operate upon it
Sovereignty may also be internal or external
- Internal Sovereignty — refers to the power
of the state to control its domestic or
internal affairs - External Sovereignty — the power of the
State to direct its relations with other states, also known as independence
Section 1, Article II
The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.
STATE IMMUNITY: General Rule
General Rule: The State cannot be sued
STATE IMMUNITY: Exception
When the State consents to be sued.
STATE IMMUNITY: How consent is given
- Express
a. General Law
b. Special Law - Implied
a. When the State enter into business contracts with individuals (performing proprietary functions);
b. When the State commences litigation and becomes vulnerable to counterclaim;
c. When it would be inequitable for the State to invoke immunity; and
d. In eminent domain cases.
Money claims
When a money judgment is given against the government, the ordinary rule for execution would not apply, for the consent of the government to be sued is only up to the point of judgment. If it does not pay, it cannot be compelled to pay by attachment or otherwise.
CONCEPTS of a STATE
A community of persons, more or less numerous, permanently occupying a definite portion of territory, independent of external control, and possessing a government to which a great body of the inhabitants render habitual obedience
Qualifications of a State
(a) a permanent population;
(b) a defined territory;
(c) government; and
(d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states [Art. 1, Montevideo Convention].
Section 3, Article XVI
The State may not be sued without its consent.
Two Theories of Sovereign Immunity
- Absolute Theory
- Restrictive Theory
The Philippines follows the restrictive theory.
Suits Against the State
A suit against the state will only prosper if the state gives its express consent.
When is a suit against the State?
- If it produces adverse consequences to public treasury in terms of disbursement as well as loss of government property, regardless of the defense;
- When the Republic is sued in its name;
- When the suit is against an unincorporated
government agency; and - Even when the suit, on its face, is against
an officer but liability will belong to/fall on the government.
When is a suit NOT against the State?
- When suits engage in matters partaking more of the nature of ordinary business
rather than functions of a governmental or
political character; - When the purpose of the suit is to compel
an officer charged with the duty of making payments pursuant to an appropriation made by law in favor of the plaintiff to make such payment, since the suit is intended to compel performance of a ministerial duty [Begosa v. Philippine Veterans Association, G.R. No. L-25916(1970)]; - When, from the allegations in the complaint, it is clear that the respondent is a public officer sued in a private capacity;
- When the action is not in personam with the government as the named defendant, but an action in rem that does not name the government in particular.
Action in personam v. Action in rem
- Action in personam — the government as the named defendant.
- Action in rem — does not name the government in particular.
Official Capacity v. Personal Capacity
The doctrine of non-suability applies only in cases wherein the complaint is against officials of state for acts performed in discharge of duties or his official capacity.
When officials abuse this authority gravely (like discriminatory behavior), this is no longer an official state act and the official may now be sued in his personal capacity.
Waiver of Immunity
When the State expressly states their consent to be sued through legislation (including treaties), it waives its immunity from suit. However, this waiver of immunity may be limited to certain legal actions
(i.e. under the VFA, there is a waiver of immunity by the US under criminal jurisdiction but not to civil actions) [Arigo v. Swift].
CONSENT TO BE SUED: Express Consent
Effected only by the will of the legislature through the medium of a duly enacted statute; may be embodied either in a general law or a special law.
CONSENT TO BE SUED: General Law
Authorizes any person who meets the conditions stated in the law to sue the government in accordance with the procedure in the law; e.g;
a. Money claims arising from contract express or implied
b. Torts
Special Agent
One who receives a definite and fixed order or commission, foreign to the exercise of the duties of his office if he is a special official.
[Merritt v. Government of the Philippine Islands, G.R. No. L- 11154(1916)].
Special Law
May come in the form of a private bill authorizing a named individual to bring suit on a special claim
Implied consent
a. In instances when the State takes private property for public use or purpose (eminent domain)
b. When the State enters into a business contract (in jure gestionis or proprietary functions)
c. When it would be inequitable for the State to invoke its immunity.
d. If the government files a complaint, the defendant may file a counterclaim against it. When the state files a complaint, suability will result only where the government is claiming affirmative relief from the defendant.
Suits against Government Agencies
Depends on whether the agency is incorporated (i.e. there is a separate charter) or unincorporated (i.e. no separate personality).
a. Incorporated
b. Unincorporated
Incorporated
If the charter provides that the agency can sue, then the suit will lie. The provision in the charter constitutes express consent.
Unincorporated
There must be an inquiry unto the principal functions of government.
i. If governmental: No suit without consent [Bureau of Printing v. Bureau of Printing Employees
Association (1961)].
ii. If proprietary: Suit will lie, because
when the state engages in principally proprietary functions, it descends to the level of a private individual, and may, therefore be vulnerable to suit.
[Civil Aeronautics Administration v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L- 51806 (1988)].
State may only be liable for proprietary acts (jure gestionis) and not for sovereign acts (jure imperii).
Incorporated v. Unincorporated
Incorporated - Governmental or proprietary
CAN be sued ONLY IF charter allows
Unincorporated:
Governmental - CANNOT be sued unless consent is given
Proprietary - CAN be sued
Suits against Public Officers: General Rule
General Rule: The doctrine of state immunity also applies to complaints filed against officials of the State for acts performed by them in the discharge of their duties within the scope of their authority.
Suits against Public Officers: Exception
Exception: The doctrine of immunity from suit will not apply and may not be invoked where the public official is being sued in his (1) private and personal capacity as an ordinary citizen, for (2) acts without authority or in excess of the powers vested in him [Lansang v. CA, G.R. No. 102667 (2000)].
Note: Acts done without authority are not acts of the State (see Beyond Scope of Authority).
Consent to be sued is not a concession of liability
Suability depends on the consent of the state to be sued, and liability on the applicable law and the established facts. The circumstance that a state is suable does not necessarily mean that it is liable, but it can never be held liable if it does not first consent to be sued. When the state does waive its sovereign immunity, it is only giving the plaintiff the chance to prove that it is liable.
ESTOPPEL: General Rule
The State cannot be put in estoppel by the mistakes or errors of its officials or agents.
ESTOPPEL: Exception
Estoppel may not be invoked where they would operate to defeat the effective operation of a policy adopted to protect the public, or in those special cases where the interest of justice clearly required it.
SEPARATION OF POWERS
Ordains that each of the 3 branches of government has exclusive cognizance of and is supreme in matters falling within its constitutionally allocated sphere.
Three (3) branches of government
- Legislative
- Executive; and
- Judiciary
Political Question Doctrine
A question of which a resolution has been vested by the Constitution exclusively in the people, or in which full discretionary authority has been delegated to a co-equal branch of the government (separation of powers) cannot be decided upon by the Courts.
This is as opposed to a justiciable question which deals with matters re: the law and its interpretation, not left to the wisdom of the people.
Belgica v. Ochoa
The Pork Barrel System violates the separation of powers because it is a form of post- enactment authority in the implementation or enforcement of the budget.