Political Law by Atty Sandoval 2 PDF
Political Law by Atty Sandoval 2 PDF
Political Law by Atty Sandoval 2 PDF
“The traditional rule of immunity The rule does not apply where the public
exempts a State from being sued in the official is charged in his official capacity for
courts of another State without its acts that are unlawful and injurious to the
consent or waiver. This rule is a rights of others. Public officials are not
necessary consequence of the principle exempt, in their personal capacity, from
of independence and equality of States. liability arising from acts committed in bad
However, the rules of International Law faith.
are not petrified; they are constantly
developing and evolving. And because Neither does it apply where the public official
the activities of states have multiplied, it is clearly being sued not in his official
has been necessary to distinguish them - capacity but in his personal capacity,
between sovereign and governmental although the acts complained of may have
acts (jure imperii) and private, been committed while he occupied a public
commercial and proprietary acts (jure position. (Amado J. Lansang v. CA, G.R.
gestionis). The result is that State No. 102667, Feb. 23, 2000, 2nd Div.
immunity now extends only to acts jure [Quisumbing])
imperii. The restrictive application of
State immunity is now the rule in the 2. As early as 1954, this Court has
United States, the United Kingdom and pronounced that an officer cannot shelter
other states in Western Europe. himself by the plea that he is a public agent
acting under the color of his office when his
Xxx acts are wholly without authority. Until
recently in 1991 (Chavez v. Sandiganbayan,
The restrictive application of 193 SCRA 282 [1991]), this doctrine still
State immunity is proper only when the found application, this Court saying that
proceedings arise out of commercial immunity from suit cannot institutionalize
transactions of the foreign sovereign, its irresponsibility and non-accountability nor
commercial activities or economic affairs. grant a privileged status not claimed by any
Stated differently, a State may be said to other official of the Republic. (Republic v.
have descended to the level of an Sandoval, 220 SCRA 124, March 19, 1993,
individual and can thus be deemed to En Banc [Campos, Jr.])
have tacitly given its consent to be sued
only when it enters into business
contracts. It does not apply where the 12. State instances when a suit against the
contracts relate to the exercise of its State is proper.
sovereign functions. In this case the
projects are an integral part of the naval Held: Some instances when a suit against
base which is devoted to the defense of the State is proper are:
both the United States and the 1) When the Republic is sued by name;
Philippines, indisputably a function of the 2) When the suit is against an
government of the highest order; they unincorporated government agency;
are not utilized for nor dedicated to 3) When the suit is on its face against a
commercial or business government officer but the case is
purposes.”(Department of Agriculture such that ultimate liability will belong
v. NLRC, 227 SCRA 693, Nov. 11, 1993 not to the officer but to the
[Vitug]) government. Republic v. Sandoval,
220 SCRA 124, March 19, 1993, En
Banc [Campos, Jr.])
11. When is a suit against a public official
deemed to be a suit against the State? 13. Has the government waived its immunity
Discuss. from suit in the Mendiola massacre, and,
therefore, should indemnify the heirs and
Held: 1. The doctrine of state immunity victims of the Mendiola incident?
from suit applies to complaints filed against Consequently, is the suit filed against the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 4
Republic by petitioners in said case the government with the people.”
really a suit against the State? Moreover, petitioners rely on President
Aquino‟s speech promising that the
Held: Petitioners x x x advance the government would address the grievances of
argument that the State has impliedly waived the rallyists. By this alone, it cannot be
its sovereign immunity from suit. It is their inferred that the State has admitted any
considered view that by the recommendation liability, much less can it be inferred that it
made by the Commission for the government has consented to the suit.
to indemnify the heirs and victims of the
Mendiola incident and by the public Although consent to be sued may be given
addresses made by then President Aquino in impliedly, still it cannot be maintained that
the aftermath of the killings, the State has such consent was given considering the
consented to be sued. circumstances obtaining in the instant case.
Firstly, the recommendation made by the While the Republic in this case is sued by
Commission regarding indemnification of the name, the ultimate liability does not pertain
heirs of the deceased and the victims of the to the government. Although the military
incident by the government does not in any officers and personnel, then party
way mean that liability automatically attaches defendants, were discharging their official
to the State. It is important to note that A.O. functions when the incident occurred, their
11 expressly states that the purpose of functions ceased to be official the moment
creating the Commission was to have a body they exceeded their authority. Based on the
that will conduct an “investigation of the Commission findings, there was lack of
disorder, deaths and casualties that took justification by the government forces in the
place.” In the exercise of its functions, A.O. use of firearms. Moreover, the members of
11 provides guidelines, and what is relevant the police and military crowd dispersal units
to Our discussion reads: committed a prohibited act under B.P. Blg.
880 as there was unnecessary firing by them
“1. Its conclusions regarding the in dispersing the marchers.
existence of probable cause for the
commission of any offense and of the As early as 1954, this Court has pronounced
persons probably guilty of the same shall be that an officer cannot shelter himself by the
sufficient compliance with the rules on plea that he is a public agent acting under
preliminary investigation and the charges the color of his office when his acts are
arising therefrom may be filed directly with wholly without authority. Until recently in
the proper court.” 1991 (Chavez v. Sandiganbayan, 193 SCRA
282 [1991]), this doctrine still found
In effect, whatever may be the findings of the application, this Court saying that immunity
Commission, the same shall only serve as from suit cannot institutionalize
the cause of action in the event that any irresponsibility and non-accountability nor
party decides to litigate his/her claim. grant a privileged status not claimed by any
Therefore, the Commission is merely a other official of the Republic. The military
preliminary venue. The Commission is not and police forces were deployed to ensure
the end in itself. Whatever recommendation that the rally would be peaceful and orderly
it makes cannot in any way bind the State as well as to guarantee the safety of the very
immediately, such recommendation not people that they are duty-bound to protect.
having become final and executory. This is However, the facts as found by the trial court
precisely the essence of it being a fact- showed that they fired at the unruly crowd to
finding body. disperse the latter.
Secondly, whatever acts or utterances that While it is true that nothing is better settled
then President Aquino may have done or than the general rule that a sovereign state
said, the same are not tantamount to the and its political subdivisions cannot be sued
State having waived its immunity from suit. in the courts except when it has given its
The President‟s act of joining the marchers, consent, it cannot be invoked by both the
days after the incident, does not mean that military officers to release them from any
there was an admission by the State of any liability, and by the heirs and victims to
liability. In fact to borrow the words of demand indemnification from the
petitioner x x x, “it was an act of solidarity by government. The principle of state immunity
from suit does not apply, as in this case,
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 5
when the relief demanded by the suit Under both organic acts, all inhabitants of
requires no affirmative official action on the the Philippines who were Spanish subjects
part of the State nor the affirmative discharge on April 11, 1899 and resided therein
of any obligation which belongs to the State including their children are deemed to be
in its political capacity, even though the Philippine citizens. Private respondent‟s
officers or agents who are made defendants father, Telesforo Ybasco, was born on
claim to hold or act only by virtue of a title of January 5, 1879 in Daet, Camarines Norte, a
the state and as its agents and servants. fact duly evidenced by a certified true copy of
This Court has made it quite clear that even an entry in the Registry of Births. Thus,
a “high position in the government does not under the Philippine Bill of 1902 and the
confer a license to persecute or recklessly Jones Law, Telesforo Ybasco was deemed
injure another.” to be a Philippine citizen. By virtue of the
same laws, which were the laws in force at
The inescapable conclusion is that the State the time of her birth, Telesforo‟s daughter,
cannot be held civilly liable for the deaths herein private respondent Rosalind Ybasco
that followed the incident. Instead, the Lopez, is likewise a citizen of the Philippines.
liability should fall on the named defendants
in the lower court. In line with the ruling of The signing into law of the 1935 Philippine
this Court in Shauf v. Court of Appeals (191 Constitution has established the principle of
SCRA 713 [1990]), herein public officials, jus sanguinis as basis for the acquisition of
having been found to have acted beyond the Philippine citizenship x x x. So also, the
scope of their authority, may be held liable principle of jus sanguinis, which confers
for damages. (Republic v. Sandoval, 220 citizenship by virtue of blood relationship,
SCRA 124, March 19, 1993, En Banc was subsequently retained under the 1973
[Campos, Jr.]) and 1987 Constitutions. Thus, the herein
private respondent, Rosalind Ybasco Lopez,
is a Filipino citizen, having been born to a
Filipino father. The fact of her being born in
Citizenship Australia is not tantamount to her losing her
Philippine citizenship. If Australia follows the
principle of jus soli, then at most, private
14. To what citizenship principle does the
respondent can also claim Australian
Philippines adhere to? Explain, and give citizenship resulting to her possession of
illustrative case. dual citizenship. (Valles v. COMELEC, 337
SCRA 543, Aug. 9, 2000, En Banc
Held: The Philippine law on citizenship [Purisima])
adheres to the principle of jus sanguinis.
Thereunder, a child follows the nationality or
citizenship of the parents regardless of the 15. What are the ways of acquiring
place of his/her birth, as opposed to the
citizenship? Discuss.
doctrine of jus soli which determines
nationality or citizenship on the basis of
Held: There are two ways of acquiring
place of birth.
citizenship: (1) by birth, and (2) by
naturalization. These ways of acquiring
Private respondent Rosalind Ybasco Lopez
citizenship correspond to the two kinds of
was born on May 16, 1934 in Napier
citizens: the natural-born citizen, and the
Terrace, Broome, Western Australia, to the
naturalized citizen. A person who at the time
spouses, Telesforo Ybasco, a Filipino citizen
of his birth is a citizen of a particular country,
and native of Daet, Camarines Norte, and
is a natural-born citizen thereof.
Theresa Marquez, an Australian.
Historically, this was a year before the 1935
As defined in the x x x Constitution, natural-
Constitution took into effect and at that time,
born citizens “are those citizens of the
what served as the Constitution of the
Philippines from birth without having to
Philippines were the principal organic acts by
perform any act to acquire or perfect his
which the United States governed the
Philippine citizenship.”
country. These were the Philippine Bill of
July 1, 1902 and the Philippine Autonomy
On the other hand, naturalized citizens are
Act of August 29, 1916, also known as the
those who have become Filipino citizens
Jones Law.
through naturalization, generally under
Commonwealth Act No. 473, otherwise
Among others, these laws defined who
known as the Revised Naturalization Law,
were deemed to be citizens of the Philippine
which repealed the former Naturalization
Islands. x x x
Law (Act No. 2927), and by Republic Act No.
530. (Antonio Bengson III v. HRET, G.R.
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 6
No. 142840, May 7, 2001, En Banc public schools or private schools
[Kapunan]) recognized by the Bureau of Private
Schools of the Philippines where
Philippine history, government and
16. To be naturalized, what must an civic are taught or prescribed as part
applicant prove? When and what are of the school curriculum, during the
the conditions before the decision entire period of the residence in the
granting Philippine citizenship becomes Philippines required of him prior to
the hearing of his petition for
executory?
naturalization as Philippine citizen.
(Antonio Bengson III v. HRET,
Held: To be naturalized, an applicant has to
G.R. No. 142840, May 7, 2001, En
prove that he possesses all the qualifications
Banc [Kapunan])
and none of the disqualifications provided by
law to become a Filipino citizen. The
decision granting Philippine citizenship
becomes executory only after two (2) years
18. What are the disqualifications under
from its promulgation when the court is Section 4, Act 473, in an application for
satisfied that during the intervening period, naturalization?
the applicant has (1) not left the Philippines;
(2) has dedicated himself to a lawful calling Held: Section 4, Act 473, provides the
or profession; (3) has not been convicted of following disqualifications:
any offense or violation of government
promulgated rules; or (4) committed any act (a) He must not be opposed to
prejudicial to the interest of the nation or organized government or affiliated
contrary to any government announced with any association or group of
policies (Section 1, R.A. 530). (Antonio persons who uphold and teach
Bengson III v. HRET, G.R. No. 142840, doctrines opposing all organized
May 7, 2001, En Banc [Kapunan]) governments;
(b) He must not be defending or
teaching the necessity or propriety
17. What qualifications must be possessed of violence, personal assault, or
by an applicant for naturalization? assassination for the success and
predominance of their ideas;
Held: Section 2, Act 473 provides the (c) He must not be a polygamist or
following qualifications: believer in the practice of polygamy;
(d) He must not have been convicted of
(a) He must be not less than 21 years of any crime involving moral turpitude;
age on the day of the hearing of the (e) He must not be suffering from
petition; mental alienation or incurable
(b) He must have resided in the contagious diseases;
Philippines for a continuous period (f) He must have, during the period of
of not less than ten years; his residence in the Philippines (or
(c) He must be of good moral character not less than six months before filing
and believes in the principles his application), mingled socially
underlying the Philippine with the Filipinos, or who have not
Constitution, and must have evinced a sincere desire to learn
conducted himself in a proper and and embrace the customs, traditions
irreproachable manner during the and ideals of the Filipinos;
entire period of his residence in the (g) He must not be a citizen or subject
Philippines in his relation with the of a nation with whom the
constituted government as well as Philippines is at war, during the
with the community in which he is period of such war;
living; (h) He must not be a citizen or subject
(d) He must own real estate in the of a foreign country whose laws do
Philippines worth not less than five not grant Filipinos the right to
thousand pesos, Philippine become naturalized citizens or
currency, or must have some known subjects thereof. (Antonio Bengson
lucrative trade, profession, or lawful III v. HRET, G.R. No. 142840, May
occupation; 7, 2001, En Banc [Kapunan])
(e) He must be able to speak and write
English or Spanish and any of the 19. Can a legitimate child born under the
principal languages; and 1935 Constitution of a Filipino mother
(f) He must have enrolled his minor and an alien father validly elect
children of school age, in any of the Philippine citizenship fourteen (14) years
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 7
after he has reached the age of tantamount to acts of renunciation of
majority? Philippine citizenship?
Held: Under Article IV, Section 1(3) of the Held: Petitioner also contends that
1935 Constitution, the citizenship of a even on the assumption that the private
legitimate child born of a Filipino mother and respondent is a Filipino citizen, she has
an alien father followed the citizenship of the nonetheless renounced her Philippine
father, unless, upon reaching the age of citizenship. To buttress this contention,
majority, the child elected Philippine petitioner cited private respondent‟s
citizenship. C.A. No. 625 which was enacted application for an alien Certificate of
pursuant to Section 1(3), Article IV of the Registration (ACR) and Immigrant Certificate
1935 Constitution, prescribes the procedure of Residence (ICR), on September 19, 1988,
that should be followed in order to make a and the issuance to her of an Australian
valid election of Philippine citizenship. passport on March 3, 1988.
However, the 1935 Constitution and C.A. No.
625 did not prescribe a time period within Xxx
which the election of Philippine citizenship
should be made. The 1935 Charter only In order that citizenship may be lost by
provides that the election should be made renunciation, such renunciation must be
“upon reaching the age of majority.” The age express. Petitioner‟s contention that the
of majority then commenced upon reaching application of private respondent for an alien
twenty-one (21) years. In the opinions of the certificate of registration, and her Australian
Secretary of Justice on cases involving the passport, is bereft of merit. This issue was
validity of election of Philippine citizenship, put to rest in the case of Aznar v. COMELEC
this dilemma was resolved by basing the (185 SCRA 703 [1990]) and in the more
time period on the decisions of this Court recent case of Mercado v. Manzano and
prior to the effectivity of the 1935 COMELEC (G.R. No. 135083, 307 SCRA
Constitution. In these decisions, the proper 630, May 26, 1999).
period for electing Philippine citizenship was,
in turn, based on the pronouncements of the In the case of Aznar, the Court ruled that the
Department of State of the United States mere fact that he is an American did not
Government to the effect that the election mean that he is no longer a Filipino, and that
should be made within a “reasonable time” an application for an alien certificate of
after attaining the age of majority. The registration was not tantamount to
phrase “reasonable time” has been renunciation of his Philippine citizenship.
interpreted to mean that the election should
be made within three (3) years from reaching And, in Mercado v. Manzano and
the age of majority. COMELEC, it was held that the fact that
respondent Manzano was registered as an
The span of fourteen (14) years that lapsed American citizen in the Bureau of
from the time that person reached the age of Immigration and Deportation and was
majority until he finally expressed his holding an American passport on April 22,
intention to elect Philippine citizenship is 1997, only a year before he filed a certificate
clearly way beyond the contemplation of the of candidacy for vice-mayor of Makati, were
requirement of electing “upon reaching the just assertions of his American nationality
age of majority.” before the termination of his American
citizenship.
Philippine citizenship can never be treated
like a commodity that can be claimed when Thus, the mere fact that private respondent
needed and suppressed when convenient. Rosalind Ybasco Lopez was a holder of an
One who is privileged to elect Philippine Australian passport and had an alien
citizenship has only an inchoate right to such certificate of registration are not acts
citizenship. As such, he should avail of the constituting an effective renunciation of
right with fervor, enthusiasm and citizenship and do not militate against her
promptitude. (Re: Application for claim of Filipino citizenship. For renunciation
Admission to the Philippine Bar, Vicente to effectively result in the loss of citizenship,
D. Ching, Bar Matter No. 914, Oct. 1, 1999, the same must be express. As held by this
En Banc [Kapunan]) Court in the aforecited case of Aznar, an
application for an alien certificate of
registration does not amount to an express
20. How may Philippine citizenship be renunciation or repudiation of one‟s
renounced? Is the application for an citizenship. The application of the herein
alien certificate of registration, and the private respondent for an alien certificate of
possession of foreign passport, registration, and her holding of an Australian
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 8
passport, as in the case of Mercado v. Forces of the United States at any other
Manzano, were mere acts of assertion of her time (Sec. 1, Republic Act No. 2630 [1960]);
Australian citizenship before she effectively (4) marriage of a Filipino woman to an alien
renounced the same. Thus, at the most, (Sec. 1, Republic Act No. 8171 [1995]); and
private respondent had dual citizenship – (5) political and economic necessity (Ibid).
she was an Australian and a Filipino, as well.
As distinguished from the lengthy process of
Moreover, under Commonwealth Act 63, the naturalization, repatriation simply consists of
fact that a child of Filipino parent/s was born the taking of an oath of allegiance to the
in another country has not been included as Republic of the Philippines and registering
a ground for losing one‟s Philippine said oath in the Local Civil Registry of the
citizenship. Since private respondent did not place where the person concerned resides or
lose or renounce her Philippine citizenship, last resided.
petitioner‟s claim that respondent must go
through the process of repatriation does not In Angat v. Republic (314 SCRA 438
hold water. (Valles v. COMELEC, 337 [1999]), we held:
SCRA 543, Aug. 9, 2000, En Banc
[Purisima]) [P]arenthetically, under these
statutes (referring to RA Nos. 965 and
2630), the person desiring to reacquire
21. How may Filipino citizens who lost their Philippine citizenship would not even be
citizenship reacquire the same? required to file a petition in court, and all
that he had to do was to take an oath of
Answer: Filipino citizens who have lost their allegiance to the Republic of the
citizenship may x x x reacquire the same in Philippines and to register that fact with
the manner provided by law. the civil registry in the place of his
Commonwealth Act No. 63 enumerates the residence or where he had last resided
three modes by which Philippine citizenship in the Philippines.
may be reacquired by a former citizen: (1)
by naturalization, (2) by repatriation, and (3) Moreover, repatriation results in the recovery
by direct act of Congress. (Frivaldo v. of the original nationality. This means that a
COMELEC, 257 SCRA 727, June 28, 1996, naturalized Filipino who lost his citizenship
En Banc [Panganiban]; Antonio Bengson will be restored to his prior status as a
III v. HRET, G.R. No. 142840, May 7, 2001, naturalized Filipino citizen. On the other
En Banc [Kapunan]) hand, if he was originally a natural-born
citizen before he lost his Philippine
citizenship, he will be restored to his former
22. Distinguish naturalization from status as a natural-born Filipino. (Antonio
repatriation. Bengson III v. HRET, G.R. No. 142840,
May 7, 2001, En Banc [Kapunan])
Held: Naturalization is a mode for both
acquisition and reacquisition of Philippine 23. Who may validly avail of repatriation
citizenship. As a mode of initially acquiring under R.A. No. 8171?
Philippine citizenship, naturalization is
governed by Commonwealth Act No. 473, as Held: R.A. No. 8171, which has lapsed into
amended. On the other hand, naturalization law on October 23, 1995, is an act providing
as a mode for reacquiring Philippine for the repatriation (a) of Filipino women who
citizenship is governed by Commonwealth have lost their Philippine citizenship by
Act No. 63 (An Act Providing for the Ways in marriage to aliens and (b) of natural-born
Which Philippine Citizenship May Be Lost or Filipinos who have lost their Philippine
Reacquired [1936]). Under this law, a former citizenship on account of political or
Filipino citizen who wishes to reacquire economic necessity. (Gerardo Angat v.
Philippine citizenship must possess certain Republic, G.R. No. 132244, Sept. 14, 1999
qualifications and none of the [Vitug])
disqualifications mentioned in Section 4 of
C.A. 473. 24. Before what agency should application
for repatriation under R.A 8171 be filed?
Repatriation, on the other hand, may be had
under various statutes by those who lost Held: Under Section 1 of P.D. No. 725,
their citizenship due to: (1) desertion of the dated June 5, 1975, amending C.A. No. 63,
armed forces (Section 4, C.A. No. 63); (2) an application for repatriation could be filed
service in the armed forces of the allied with the Special Committee on Naturalization
forces in World War II (Section 1, Republic chaired by the Solicitor General with the
Act No. 965 [1953]); (3) service in the Armed Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs and the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 9
Director of the National Intelligence
Coordinating Agency as the other members. Petitioner‟s contention that respondent Cruz
Although the agency was deactivated by is no longer a natural-born citizen since he
virtue of President Corazon C. Aquino‟s had to perform an act to regain his
Memorandum of March 27, 1987, it was not, citizenship is untenable. [T]he term “natural-
however, abrogated. The Committee was born citizen” was first defined in Article III,
reactivated on June 8, 1995. Hence, the Section 4 of the 1973 Constitution as follows:
application should be filed with said Agency,
not with the Regional Trial Court. (Gerardo Section 4. A natural-born citizen
Angat v. Republic, G.R. No. 132244, Sept. is one who is a citizen of the Philippines
14, 1999 [Vitug]) from birth without having to perform any
act to acquire or perfect his Philippine
25. May a natural-born Filipino who became citizenship.
an American citizen still be considered a
natural-born Filipino upon his Two requisites must concur for a person to
reacquisition of Philippine citizenship be considered as such: (1) a person must be
a Filipino citizen from birth and (2) he does
and, therefore, qualified to run for
not have to perform any act to obtain or
Congressman? perfect his Philippine citizenship.
Held: Repatriation results in the recovery of Under the 1973 Constitution definition, there
the original nationality. This means that a were two categories of Filipino citizens which
naturalized Filipino who lost his citizenship were not considered natural-born: (1) those
will be restored to his prior status as a who were naturalized and (2) those born
naturalized Filipino citizen. On the other before January 17, 1973 (the date of
hand, if he was originally a natural-born effectivity of the 1973 Constitution), of
citizen before he lost his Philippine Filipino mothers who, upon reaching the age
citizenship, he will be restored to his former of majority, elected Philippine citizenship.
status as a natural-born Filipino. Those “naturalized citizens” were not
considered natural-born obviously because
In respondent Cruz‟s case, he lost his they were not Filipinos at birth and had to
Filipino citizenship when he rendered service perform an act to acquire Philippine
in the Armed Forces of the United States. citizenship. Those born of Filipino mothers
However, he subsequently reacquired before the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution
Philippine citizenship under R.A. No. 2630, were likewise not considered natural-born
which provides: because they also had to perform an act to
perfect their Philippine citizenship.
Section 1. Any person who had
lost his Philippine citizenship by The present Constitution, however, now
rendering service to, or accepting considers those born of Filipino mothers
commission in, the Armed Forces of the before the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution
United States, or after separation from and who elected Philippine citizenship upon
the Armed Forces of the United States, reaching the majority age as natural-born.
acquired United States citizenship, may After defining who are natural-born citizens,
reacquire Philippine citizenship by taking Section 2 of Article IV adds a sentence:
an oath of allegiance to the Republic of “Those who elect Philippine citizenship in
the Philippines and registering the same accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1
with Local Civil Registry in the place hereof shall be deemed natural-born
where he resides or last resided in the citizens.” Consequently, only naturalized
Philippines. The said oath of allegiance Filipinos are considered not natural-born
shall contain a renunciation of any other citizens. It is apparent from the enumeration
citizenship. of who are citizens under the present
Constitution that there are only two classes
Having thus taken the required oath of of citizens: (1) those who are natural-born
allegiance to the Republic and having and (2) those who are naturalized in
registered the same in the Civil Registry of accordance with law. A citizen who is not a
Mangatarem, Pangasinan in accordance with naturalized Filipino, i.e., did not have to
the aforecited provision, respondent Cruz is undergo the process of naturalization to
deemed to have recovered his original status obtain Philippine citizenship, necessarily is a
as a natural-born citizen, a status which he natural-born Filipino. Noteworthy is the
acquired at birth as the son of a Filipino absence in the said enumeration of a
father. It bears stressing that the act of separate category for persons who, after
repatriation allows him to recover, or return losing Philippine citizenship, subsequently
to, his original status before he lost his reacquire it. The reason therefore is clear:
Philippine citizenship. as to such persons, they would either be
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 10
natural-born or naturalized depending on the as persons with dual citizenship
reasons for the loss of their citizenship and considering that their condition is the
the mode prescribed by the applicable law unavoidable consequence of conflicting laws
for the reacquisition thereof. As respondent of different states.
Cruz was not required by law to go through
naturalization proceedings in order to By electing Philippine citizenship, such
reacquire his citizenship, he is perforce a candidates at the same time forswear
natural-born Filipino. As such, he possessed allegiance to the other country of which they
all the necessary qualifications to be elected are also citizens and thereby terminate their
as member of the House of Representatives. status as dual citizens. It may be that, from
(Antonio Bengson III v. HRET, G.R. No. the point of view of the foreign state and of
142840, May 7, 2001, En Banc [Kapunan]) its laws, such an individual has not
effectively renounced his foreign citizenship.
26. Distinguish dual citizenship from dual That is of no moment. (Mercado v.
allegiance. Manzano, G.R. No. 135083, 307 SCRA 630,
May 26, 1999 [Mendoza])
Held: Dual citizenship arises when, as a
result of the concurrent application of the 28. Cite instances when a citizen of the
different laws of two or more states, a person Philippines may possess dual citizenship
is simultaneously considered a national by considering the citizenship clause
the said states. For instance, such a (Article IV) of the Constitution.
situation may arise when a person whose
parents are citizens of a state which adheres Held:
to the principle of jus sanguinis is born in a 1) Those born of Filipino fathers and/or
state which follows the doctrine of jus soli. mothers in foreign countries which
Such a person, ipso facto and without any follow the principle of jus soli;
voluntary act on his part, is concurrently 2) Those born in the Philippines of
considered a citizen of both states. Filipino mothers and alien fathers if
by the laws of their father‟s country
Dual allegiance, on the other hand, refers to such children are citizens of that
a situation in which a person simultaneously country;
owes, by some positive act, loyalty to two or 3) Those who marry aliens if by the
more states. While dual citizenship is laws of the latter‟s country the former
involuntary, dual allegiance is the result of an are considered citizens, unless by
individual‟s volition. (Mercado v. Manzano, their act or omission they are
307 SCRA 630, May 26, 1999, En Banc deemed to have renounced
[Mendoza]) Philippine citizenship.
(Mercado v. Manzano, G.R. No.
27. What is the main concern of Section 5, 135083, 307 SCRA 630, May 26,
Article IV, 1987 Constitution, on 1999 [Mendoza])
citizenship? Consequently, are persons
with mere dual citizenship disqualified to 29. Does res judicata apply in cases
run for elective local positions under hinging on the issue of citizenship?
Section 40(d) of the Local Government
Code? Held: Petitioner maintains further that when
citizenship is raised as an issue in judicial or
Held: In including Section 5 in Article IV on administrative proceedings, the resolution or
citizenship, the concern of the Constitutional decision thereon is generally not considered
Commission was not with dual citizens per res judicata in any subsequent proceeding
se but with naturalized citizens who maintain challenging the same; citing the case of Moy
their allegiance to their countries of origin Ya Lim Yao v. Commissioner of Immigration
even after their naturalization. Hence, the (41 SCRA 292 [1971]). He insists that the
phrase “dual citizenship” in R.A. No. 7160, same issue of citizenship may be threshed
Section 40(d) (Local Government Code) out anew.
must be understood as referring to “dual
allegiance.” Consequently, persons with Petitioner is correct insofar as the general
mere dual citizenship do not fall under this rule is concerned, i.e., the principle of res
disqualification. Unlike those with dual judicata generally does not apply in cases
allegiance, who must, x x x, be subject to hinging on the issue of citizenship. However,
strict process with respect to the termination in the case of Burca v. Republic (51 SCRA
of their status, for candidates with dual 248 [1973]), an exception to this general rule
citizenship, it should suffice if, upon the filing was recognized. The Court ruled in that
of their certificate of candidacy, they elect case that in order that the doctrine of res
Philippine citizenship to terminate their status
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 11
judicata may be applied in cases of argued that military authority is supreme
citizenship, the following must be present: over civilian authority.
During the deliberations in the Constitutional 49. Who are the marginalized and
Commission, Comm. Christian S. Monsod underrepresented sectors to be
pointed out that the participants in the party- represented under the party-list system?
list system may “be a regional party, a
sectoral party, a national party, UNIDO, Held: The marginalized and
Magsasaka, or a regional party in underrepresented sectors to be represented
Mindanao.” x x x. under the party-list system are enumerated
in Section 5 of RA 7941 x x x.
Indeed, Commissioner Monsod stated that
the purpose of the party-list provision was to While the enumeration of marginalized and
open up the system, in order to give a underrepresented sectors is not exclusive, it
chance to parties that consistently place third demonstrates the clear intent of the law that
or fourth in congressional district elections to not all sectors can be represented under the
win a seat in Congress. He explained: “The party-list system. X x x
purpose of this is to open the system. In the
past elections, we found out that there were [W]e stress that the party-list system seeks
certain groups or parties that, if we count to enable certain Filipino citizens –
their votes nationwide, have about 1,000,000 specifically those belonging to marginalized
or 1,500,000 votes. But they were always and underrepresented sectors, organizations
third or fourth place in each of the districts. and parties – to be elected to the House of
So, they have no voice in the Assembly. But Representatives. The assertion x x x that
this way, they would have five or six the party-list system is not exclusive to the
representatives in the assembly even if they marginalized and underrepresented
would not win individually in legislative disregards the clear statutory policy. Its
districts. So, that is essentially the claim that even the super-rich and
mechanics, the purpose and objective of the overrepresented can participate desecrates
party-list system.” the spirit of the party-list system.
For its part, Section 2 of RA 7941 also Indeed, the law crafted to address the
provides for “a party-list system of registered peculiar disadvantage of Payatas hovel
national, regional and sectoral parties or dwellers cannot be appropriated by the
organizations or coalitions thereof, x x x.” mansion owners of Forbes Park. The
Section 3 expressly states that a “party” is interests of these two sectors are manifestly
“either a political party or a sectoral party or disparate; hence, the x x x position to treat
a coalition of parties.” More to the point, the them similarly defies reason and common
law defines “political party” as “an organized sense. X x x
group of citizens advocating an ideology or
platform, principles and policies for the While the business moguls and the mega-
general conduct of government and which, rich are, numerically speaking, a tiny
as the most immediate means of securing minority, they are neither marginalized nor
their adoption, regularly nominates and underrepresented, for the stark reality is that
supports certain of its leaders and members their economic clout engenders political
as candidates for public office.” power more awesome than their numerical
limitation. Traditionally, political power does
Furthermore, Section 11 of RA 7941 leaves not necessarily emanate from the size of
no doubt as to the participation of political one‟s constituency; indeed, it is likely to arise
parties in the party-list system. X x x more directly from the number and amount of
one‟s bank accounts.
Indubitably, therefore, political parties – even
the major ones – may participate in the It is ironic, therefore, that the marginalized
party-list elections. and underrepresented in our midst are the
majority who wallow in poverty, destitution
That political parties may participate in the and infirmity. It was for them that the party-
party-list elections does not mean, however, list system was enacted – to give them not
that any political party – or any organization
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 20
only genuine hope, but genuine power; to
give them opportunity to be elected and to
represent the specific concerns of their 50. Section 5(2), Article VI of the
constituencies; and simply to give them a Constitution provides that "[t]he party-list
direct vote in Congress and in the larger representatives shall constitute twenty
affairs of the State. In its noblest sense, the per centum of the total number of
party-list system truly empowers the masses
representatives including those under
and ushers a new hope for genuine change.
Verily, it invites those marginalized and
the party-list." Does the Constitution
underrepresented in the past – the farm require all such allocated seats to be
hands, the fisher folk, the urban poor, even filled up all the time and under all
those in the underground movement – to circumstances?
come out and participate, as indeed many of
them came out and participated during the Held: The Constitution simply states that
last elections. The State cannot now "[t]he party-list representatives shall
disappoint and frustrate them by disabling constitute twenty per centum of the total
the desecrating this social justice vehicle. number of representatives including those
under the party-list."
Because the marginalized and
underrepresented had not been able to win Xxx
in the congressional district elections
normally dominated by traditional politicians We rule that a simple reading of Section 5,
and vested groups, 20 percent of the seats in Article VI of the Constitution, easily conveys
the House of Representatives were set aside the equally simple message that Congress
for the party-list system. In arguing that even was vested with the broad power to define
those sectors who normally controlled 80 and prescribe the mechanics of the party-list
percent of the seats in the House could system of representation. The Constitution
participate in the party-list elections for the explicitly sets down only the percentage of
remaining 20 percent, the OSG and the the total membership in the House of
Comelec disregard the fundamental Representatives reserved for party-list
difference between the congressional district representatives.
elections and the party-list elections.
In the exercise of its constitutional
As earlier noted, the purpose of the party-list prerogative, Congress enacted RA 7941. As
provision was to open up the system, in said earlier, Congress declared therein a
order to enhance the chance of sectoral policy to promote "proportional
groups and organizations to gain representation" in the election of party-list
representation in the House of representatives in order to enable Filipinos
Representatives through the simplest belonging to the marginalized and
scheme possible. Logic shows that the underrepresented sectors to contribute
system has been opened to those who have legislation that would benefit them. It
never gotten a foothold within it – those who however deemed it necessary to require
cannot otherwise win in regular elections and parties, organizations and coalitions
who therefore need the “simplest scheme participating in the system to obtain at least
possible” to do so. Conversely, it would be two percent of the total votes cast for the
illogical to open the system to those who party-list system in order to be entitled to a
have long been within it – those privileged party-list seat. Those garnering more than
sectors that have long dominated the this percentage could have "additional seats
congressional district elections. in proportion to their total number of votes."
Furthermore, no winning party, organization
Xxx or coalition can have more than three seats
in the House of Representatives. X x x
Verily, allowing the non-marginalized and
overrepresented to vie for the remaining Considering the foregoing statutory
seats under the party-list system would not requirements, it will be shown x x x that
only dilute, but also prejudice the chance of Section 5(2), Article VI of the Constitution is
the marginalized and underrepresented, not mandatory. It merely provides a ceiling
contrary to the intention of the law to for party-list seats in Congress. (Veterans
enhance it. The party-list system is a tool for Federation Party v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
the benefit of the underprivileged; the law 136781, Oct. 6, 2000, En Banc
could not have given the same tool to others, [Panganiban])
to the prejudice of the intended beneficiaries.
(Ang Bagong Bayani – OFW Labor Party
v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 147589, June 26,
2001, En Banc [Panganiban])
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 21
51. What are the inviolable parameters to Constitution to participate in the party-list
determine the winners in a Philippine- system, they must comply with the declared
style party-list election? statutory policy of enabling “Filipino citizens
belonging to marginalized and
Held: To determine the winners in a underrepresented sectors x x x to be elected
Philippine-style party-list election, the to the House of Representatives.” In other
Constitution and Republic Act No. 7941 words, while they are not disqualified merely
mandate at least four inviolable parameters. on the ground that they are political parties,
These are: they must show, however, that they
represent the interests of the marginalized
First, the twenty percent allocation - the and underrepresented. X x x.
combined number of all party-list
congressmen shall not exceed twenty Third, in view of the objections directed
percent of the total membership of the House against the registration of Ang Buhay
of Representatives, including those elected Hayaang Yumabong, which is allegedly a
under the party list. religious group, the Court notes the express
constitutional provision that the religious
Second, the two percent threshold - only sector may not be represented in the party-
those garnering a minimum of two percent of list system. x x x
the total valid votes cast for the party-list
system are "qualified" to have a seat in the Furthermore, the Constitution provides that
House of Representatives. “religious denominations and sects shall not
be registered.” (Sec. 2 [5], Article IX [C]) The
Third, the three seat limit - each qualified prohibition was explained by a member of
party, regardless of the number of votes it the Constitutional Commission in this wise:
actually obtained, is entitled to a maximum of “[T]he prohibition is on any religious
three seats; that is, one "qualifying" and two organization registering as a political party. I
additional seats. do not see any prohibition here against a
priest running as a candidate. That is not
Fourth, proportional representation - the prohibited here; it is the registration of a
additional seats which a qualified party is religious sect as a political party.”
entitled to shall be computed "in proportion to
their total number of votes." (Veterans Fourth, a party or an organization must not
Federation Party v. COMELEC, G.R. No. be disqualified under Section 6 of RA 7941,
136781 and Companion Cases, Oct. 6, which enumerates the grounds for
2000, En Banc [Panganiban]) disqualification as follows:
Second, while even major political parties Note should be taken of paragraph 5, which
are expressly allowed by RA 7941 and the disqualifies a party or group for violation of or
failure to comply with election laws and
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 22
regulations. These laws include Section 2 of bailable offense. He contended that
RA 7941, which states that the party-list his reelection being an expression of
system seeks to “enable Filipino citizens popular will cannot be rendered infutile
belonging to marginalized and by any ruling, giving priority to any right
underrepresented sectors, organizations and
or interest – not even the police power of
parties x x x to become members of the
House of Representatives.” A party or the State. Resolve.
organization, therefore, that does not comply
Held: The immunity from arrest or detention
with this policy must be disqualified.
of Senators and members of the House of
Fifth, the party or organization must not be Representatives x x x arises from a provision
an adjunct of, or a project organized or an of the Constitution. The history of the
entity funded or assisted by, the government. provision shows that the privilege has always
By the very nature of the party-list system, been granted in a restrictive sense. The
the party or organization must be a group of provision granting an exemption as a special
citizens, organized by citizens and operated privilege cannot be extended beyond the
by citizens. It must be independent of the ordinary meaning of its terms. It may not be
government. The participation of the extended by intendment, implication or
government or its officials in the affairs of a equitable considerations.
party-list candidate is not only illegal and
unfair to other parties, but also deleterious to The 1935 Constitution provided in its
the objective of the law: to enable citizens Article VI on the Legislative Department:
belonging to marginalized and
underrepresented sectors and organization Sec. 15. The Senators and
to be elected to the House of Members of the House of
Representatives. Representatives shall in all cases except
treason, felony, and breach of the peace,
Sixth, the party must not only comply with be privileged from arrest during their
the requirements of the law; its nominees attendance at the sessions of Congress,
must likewise do so. x x x and in going to and returning from the
same; x x x.
Seventh, not only the candidate party or
organization must represent marginalized Because of the broad coverage of felony and
and underrepresented sectors; so also must breach of the peace, the exemption applied
its nominees. To repeat, under Section 2 of only to civil arrests. A congressman like the
RA 7941, the nominees must be Filipino accused-appellant, convicted under Title
citizens “who belong to marginalized and Eleven of the Revised Penal Code could not
underrepresented sectors, organizations and claim parliamentary immunity from arrest.
parties.” Surely, the interests of the youth He was subject to the same general laws
cannot be fully represented by a retiree; governing all persons still to be tried or
neither can those of the urban poor or the whose convictions were pending appeal.
working class, by an industrialist. To allow
otherwise is to betray the State policy to give The 1973 Constitution broadened the
genuine representation to the marginalized privilege of immunity as follows:
and underrepresented.
Article VIII, Sec. 9. A Member of
Eighth, x x x while lacking a well-defined the Batasang Pambansa shall, in all
political constituency, the nominee must offenses punishable by not more than six
likewise be able to contribute to the years imprisonment, be privileged from
formulation and enactment of appropriate arrest during his attendance at its
legislation that will benefit the nation as a sessions and in going to and returning
whole. x x x (Ang Bagong Bayani – OFW from the same.
Labor Party v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
147589, June 26, 2001, En Banc For offenses punishable by more than six
[Panganiban]) years imprisonment, there was no immunity
from arrest. The restrictive interpretation of
immunity and the intent to confine it within
53. Accused-appellant Congressman
carefully defined parameters is illustrated by
Romeo G. Jalosjos filed a motion before the concluding portion of the provision, to wit:
the Court asking that he be allowed to
fully discharge the duties of a X x x but the Batasang
Congressman, including attendance at Pambansa shall surrender the member
legislative sessions and committee involved to the custody of the law within
meetings despite his having been twenty four hours after its adjournment
convicted in the first instance of a non- for a recess or for its next session,
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 23
otherwise such privilege shall cease confinement pending appeal is not
upon its failure to do so. removal. He remains a Congressman unless
expelled by Congress or, otherwise,
The present Constitution adheres to the disqualified.
same restrictive rule minus the obligation of
Congress to surrender the subject One rationale behind confinement, whether
Congressman to the custody of the law. The pending appeal or after final conviction, is
requirement that he should be attending public self-defense. Society must protect
sessions or committee meetings has also itself. It also serves as an example and
been removed. For relatively minor warning to others.
offenses, it is enough that Congress is in
session. A person charged with crime is taken into
custody for purposes of the administration of
The accused-appellant argues that a justice. As stated in United States v. Gustilo
member of Congress‟ function to attend (19 Phil. 208, 212), it is the injury to the
sessions is underscored by Section 16(2), public which State action in criminal law
Article VI of the Constitution which states seeks to redress. It is not the injury to the
that – complainant. After conviction in the Regional
Trial Court, the accused may be denied bail
(2) A majority of each House and thus subjected to incarceration if there is
shall constitute a quorum to do business, risk of his absconding.
but a smaller number may adjourn from
day to day and may compel the The accused-appellant states that the plea of
attendance of absent Members in such the electorate which voted him into office
manner, and under such penalties, as cannot be supplanted by unfounded fears
such House may provide. that he might escape eventual punishment if
permitted to perform congressional duties
However, the accused-appellant has not outside his regular place of confinement.
given any reason why he should be
exempted from the operation of Section 11, It will be recalled that when a warrant for
Article VI of the Constitution. The members accused-appellant‟s arrest was issued, he
of Congress cannot compel absent members fled and evaded capture despite a call from
to attend sessions if the reason for the his colleagues in the House of
absence is a legitimate one. The Representatives for him to attend the
confinement of a Congressman charged with sessions ands to surrender voluntarily to the
a crime punishable by imprisonment of more authorities. Ironically, it is now the same
than six years is not merely authorized by body whose call he initially spurned which
law, it has constitutional foundations. accused-appellant is invoking to justify his
present motion. This can not be
Accused-appellant‟s reliance on the ruling in countenanced because, x x x aside from its
Aguinaldo v. Santos (212 SCRA 768, at 773 being contrary to well-defined Constitutional
[1992]), which states, inter alia, that – restrains, it would be a mockery of the aims
of the State‟s penal system.
The Court should never remove
a public officer for acts done prior to his Accused-appellant argues that on several
present term of office. To do otherwise occasions, the Regional Trial Court of Makati
would be to deprive the people of their granted several motions to temporarily leave
right to elect their officers. When the his cell at the Makati City Jail, for official or
people have elected a man to office, it medical reasons x x x.
must be assumed that they did this with
the knowledge of his life and character, He also calls attention to various instances,
and that they disregarded or forgave his after his transfer at the New Bilibid Prison in
fault or misconduct, if he had been guilty Muntinlupa City, when he was likewise
of any. It is not for the Court, by reason allowed/permitted to leave the prison
of such fault or misconduct, to practically premises x x x.
overrule the will of the people.
There is no showing that the above
will not extricate him from his predicament. It privileges are peculiar to him or to a member
can be readily seen x x x that the Aguinaldo of Congress. Emergency or compelling
case involves the administrative removal of a temporary leaves from imprisonment are
public officer for acts done prior to his allowed to all prisoners, at the discretion of
present term of office. It does not apply to the authorities or upon court orders.
imprisonment arising from the enforcement
of criminal law. Moreover, in the same way What the accused-appellant seeks is not of
that preventive suspension is not removal, an emergency nature. Allowing accused-
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 24
appellant to attend congressional sessions the subjects of legislation that are
and committee meetings for five (5) days or being considered, in order that they
more in a week will virtually make him a free may have opportunity of being heard
man with all the privileges appurtenant to his thereon by petition or otherwise if
position. Such an aberrant situation not only they shall so desire.
elevates accused-appellant‟s status to that of
a special class, it also would be a mockery of Section 26(1) of Article VI of the 1987
the purposes of the correction system. X x x Constitution is sufficiently complied with
where x x x the title is comprehensive
The accused-appellant avers that his enough to embrace the general objective it
constituents in the First District of seeks to achieve, and if all the parts of the
Zamboanga del Norte want their voices to be statute are related and germane to the
heard and that since he is treated as bona subject matter embodied in the title or so
fide member of the House of long as the same are not inconsistent with or
Representatives, the latter urges a co-equal foreign to the general subject and title.
branch of government to respect his (Agripino A. De Guzman, Jr., et al. v.
mandate. He also claims that the concept of COMELEC, G.R. No. 129118, July 19,
temporary detention does not necessarily 2000, en Banc [Purisima])
curtail his duty to discharge his mandate and
that he has always complied with the
conditions/restrictions when he is allowed to 55. Section 44 of R.A. No. 8189 (The Voter's
leave jail. Registration Act of 1996) which provides
for automatic transfer to a new station of
We remain unpersuaded. any Election Officer who has already
served for more than four years in a
Xxx
particular city or municipality was
When the voters of his district elected the assailed for being violative of Section
accused-appellant to Congress, they did so 26(1) of Article VI of the Constitution
with full awareness of the limitations on his allegedly because it has an isolated and
freedom of action. They did so with the different subject from that of RA 8189
knowledge that he could achieve only such and that the same is not expressed in
legislative results which he could accomplish the title of the law. Should the challenge
within the confines of prison. To give a more be sustained?
drastic illustration, if voters elect a person
with full knowledge that he is suffering from a Held: Section 44 of RA 8189 is not isolated
terminal illness, they do so knowing that at considering that it is related and germane to
any time, he may no longer serve his full the subject matter stated in the title of the
term in office. (People v. Jalosjos, 324 law. The title of RA 8189 is "The Voter's
SCRA 689, Feb. 3, 2000, En Banc [Ynares- Registration Act of 1996" with a subject
Santiago]) matter enunciated in the explanatory note as
"AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A GENERAL
REGISTRATION OF VOTERS, ADOPTING
54. Discuss the objectives of Section 26(1), A SYSTEM OF CONTINUING
Article VI of the 1987 Constitution, that REGISTRATION, PRESCRIBING THE
"[e]very bill passed by the Congress PROCEDURES THEREOF AND
shall embrace only one subject which AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF
shall be expressed in the title thereof." FUNDS THEREFOR." Section 44, which
provides for the reassignment of election
Held: The objectives of Section 26(1), officers, is relevant to the subject matter of
Article VI of the 1987 Constitution are: registration as it seeks to ensure the integrity
of the registration process by providing
1) To prevent hodge-podge or log- guideline for the COMELEC to follow in the
rolling legislation; reassignment of election officers. It is not an
2) To prevent surprise or fraud upon alien provision but one which is related to the
the legislature by means of conduct and procedure of continuing
provisions in bills of which the titles registration of voters. In this regard, it bears
gave no information, and which stressing that the Constitution does not
might therefore be overlooked and require Congress to employ in the title of an
carelessly and unintentionally enactment, language of such precision as to
adopted; and mirror, fully index or catalogue, all the
3) To fairly apprise the people, through contents and the minute details therein.
such publication of legislative (Agripino A. De Guzman, Jr., et al. v.
proceedings as is usually made, of
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 25
COMELEC, G.R. No. 129118, July 19, the two houses. Even where the
2000, En Banc [Purisima]) conference committee is not by rule limited in
its jurisdiction, legislative custom severely
limits the freedom with which new subject
56. Do courts have the power to inquire into matter can be inserted into the conference
allegations that, in enacting a law, a bill. But occasionally a conference
House of Congress failed to comply with committee produces unexpected results,
its own rules? results beyond its mandate. These
excursions occur even where the rules
Held: The cases, both here and abroad, in impose strict limitations on conference
varying forms of expression, all deny to the committee jurisdiction. This is symptomatic
courts the power to inquire into allegations of the authoritarian power of conference
that, in enacting a law, a House of Congress committee. (Philippine Judges Association
failed to comply with its own rules, in the v. Prado, 227 SCRA 703, Nov. 11, 1993, En
absence of showing that there was a Banc [Cruz])
violation of a constitutional provision or the
right of private individuals. In Osmena v.
Pendatun (109 Phil. At 870-871), it was held: 58. Discuss the Enrolled Bill Doctrine.
“At any rate, courts have declared that „the
rules adopted by deliberative bodies are Held: Under the enrolled bill doctrine, the
subject to revocation, modification or waiver signing of H. Bill No. 7189 by the Speaker of
at the pleasure of the body adopting them.‟ the House and the President of the Senate
And it has been said that „Parliamentary and the certification by the secretaries of
rules are merely procedural, and with their both Houses of Congress that it was passed
observance, the courts have no concern. on November 21, 1996 are conclusive of its
They may be waived or disregarded by the due enactment. x x x To be sure, there is
legislative body.‟ Consequently, „mere no claim either here or in the decision in the
failure to conform to parliamentary usage will EVAT cases (Tolentino v. Secretary of
not invalidate that action (taken by a Finance) that the enrolled bill embodies a
deliberative body) when the requisite number conclusive presumption. In one case
of members have agreed to a particular (Astorga v. Villegas, 56 SCRA 714 [1974])
measure.‟” we “went behind” an enrolled bill and
consulted the Journal to determine whether
It must be realized that each of the three certain provisions of a statute had been
departments of our government has its approved by the Senate.
separate sphere which the others may not
invade without upsetting the delicate balance But, where as here there is no evidence to
on which our constitutional order rests. Due the contrary, this Court will respect the
regard for the working of our system of certification of the presiding officers of both
government, more than mere comity, Houses that a bill has been duly passed.
compels reluctance on the part of the courts Under this rule, this Court has refused to
to enter upon an inquiry into an alleged determine claims that the three-fourths vote
violation of the rules of the House. Courts needed to pass a proposed amendment to
must accordingly decline the invitation to the Constitution had not been obtained,
exercise their power. (Arroyo v. De because “a duly authenticated bill or
Venecia, 277 SCRA 268, Aug. 14, 1997 resolution imports absolute verity and is
[Mendoza]) binding on the courts.” x x x
"The State shall establish 72. Distinguish the President‟s power to call
and maintain one police force, which out the armed forces as their
shall be national in scope and Commander-in-Chief in order to prevent
civilian in character to be or suppress lawless violence, invasion or
administered and controlled by a rebellion, from his power to proclaim
national police commission. The martial and suspend the privilege of the
authority of local executives over the writ of habeas corpus. Explain why the
police units in their jurisdiction shall former is not subject to judicial review
be provided by law."
while the latter two are.
To so distinguish the police force from the
Held: There is a clear textual commitment
armed forces, Congress enacted Republic
under the Constitution to bestow on the
Act 6975 x x x.
President full discretionary power to call out
the armed forces and to determine the
Thereunder, the police force is different from
necessity for the exercise of such power.
and independent of the armed forces and the
Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution,
ranks in the military are not similar to those
which embodies the powers of the President
in the Philippine National Police. Thus,
as Commander-in-Chief, provides in part:
directors and chief superintendents of the
PNP x x x do not fall under the first category
The President shall be the
of presidential appointees requiring
Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces
confirmation by the Commission on
of the Philippines and whenever it
Appointments. (Manalo v. Sistoza, 312
becomes necessary, he may call out
SCRA 239, Aug. 11, 1999, En Banc
such armed forces to prevent or
[Purisima])
suppress lawless violence, invasion or
rebellion. In case of invasion or
rebellion, when the public safety requires
it, he may, for a period not exceeding
sixty days, suspend the privilege of the
71. To what types of appointments is writ of habeas corpus, or place the
Section 15, Article VII of the 1987
Constitution (prohibiting the President
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 33
Philippines or any part thereof under If the petitioner fails, by way of proof, to
martial law. support the assertion that the President
acted without factual basis, then this Court
The full discretionary power of the President cannot undertake an independent
to determine the factual basis for the investigation beyond the pleadings. The
exercise of the calling out power is also factual necessity of calling out the armed
implied and further reinforced in the rest of forces is not easily quantifiable and cannot
Section 18, Article VII x x x. be objectively established since matters
considered for satisfying the same is a
Under the foregoing provisions, Congress combination of several factors which are not
may revoke such proclamations (of martial always accessible to the courts. Besides the
law) or suspension (of the privilege of the absence of textual standards that the court
writ of habeas corpus) and the Court may may use to judge necessity, information
review the sufficiency of the factual basis necessary to arrive at such judgment might
thereof. However, there is no such also prove unmanageable for the courts.
equivalent provision dealing with the Certain pertinent information might be
revocation or review of the President's action difficult to verify, or wholly unavailable to the
to call out the armed forces. The distinction courts. In many instances, the evidence
places the calling out power in a different upon which the President might decide that
category from the power to declare martial there is a need to call out the armed forces
law and the power to suspend the privilege may be of a nature not constituting technical
of the writ of habeas corpus, otherwise, the proof.
framers of the Constitution would have
simply lumped together the three powers and On the other hand, the President as
provided for their revocation and review Commander-in-Chief has a vast intelligence
without any qualification. Expressio unios network to gather information, some of which
est exclusio alterius. X x x. That the intent may be classified as highly confidential or
of the Constitution is exactly what its letter affecting the security of the state. In the
says, i.e., that the power to call is fully exercise of the power to call, on-the-spot
discretionary to the President, is extant in the decisions may be imperatively necessary in
deliberation of the Constitutional emergency situations to avert great loss of
Commission x x x. human lives and mass destruction of
property. Indeed, the decision to call out the
The reason for the difference in the military to prevent or suppress lawless
treatment of the aforementioned powers violence must be done swiftly and decisively
highlights the intent to grant the President if it were to have any effect at all. Such a
the widest leeway and broadest discretion in scenario is not farfetched when we consider
using the power to call out because it is the present situation in Mindanao, where the
considered as the lesser and more benign insurgency problem could spill over the other
power compared to the power to suspend parts of the country. The determination of
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus and the necessity for the calling out power if
the power to impose martial law, both of subjected to unfettered judicial scrutiny could
which involve the curtailment and be a veritable prescription for disaster, as
suppression of certain basic civil rights and such power may be unduly straitjacketed by
individual freedoms, and thus necessitating an injunction or a temporary restraining order
safeguards by Congress and review by this every time it is exercised.
Court.
Thus, it is the unclouded intent of the
Moreover, under Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution to vest upon the President, as
Constitution, in the exercise of the power to Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces,
suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas full discretion to call forth the military when in
corpus or to impose martial law, two his judgment it is necessary to do so in order
conditions must concur: (1) there must be an to prevent or suppress lawless violence,
actual invasion or rebellion and, (2) public invasion or rebellion. Unless the petitioner
safety must require it. These conditions are can show that the exercise of such discretion
not required in the case of the power to call was gravely abused, the President's exercise
out the armed forces. The only criterion is of judgment deserves to be accorded respect
that "whenever it becomes necessary," the from this Court. (Integrated Bar of the
President may call the armed forces "to Philippines v. Hon. Ronaldo B. Zamora,
prevent or suppress lawless violence, G.R. No. 141284, Aug. 15, 2000, En Banc
invasion or rebellion." The implication is that [Kapunan])
the President is given full discretion and wide
latitude in the exercise of the power to call as
compared to the two other powers.
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 34
73. By issuing a TRO on the date convicted consent to the terms stipulated in this
rapist Leo Echegaray is to be executed contract, the pardonee has thereby placed
by lethal injection, the Supreme Court himself under the supervision of the Chief
was criticized on the ground, among Executive or his delegate who is duty-bound
to see to it that the pardonee complies with
others, that it encroached on the power
the terms and conditions of the pardon.
of the President to grant reprieve under Under Section 64(i) of the Revised
Section 19, Article VII, 1987 Constitution. Administrative Code, the Chief Executive is
Justify the SC's act. authorized to order “the arrest and re-
incarceration of any such person who, in his
Held: Section 19, Article VII of the 1987 judgment, shall fail to comply with the
Constitution is simply the source of power of condition, or conditions of his pardon, parole,
the President to grant reprieves, or suspension of sentence.” It is now a well-
commutations, and pardons and remit fines entrenched rule in this jurisdiction that this
and forfeitures after conviction by final exercise of presidential judgment is beyond
judgment. This provision, however, cannot judicial scrutiny. The determination of the
be interpreted as denying the power of violation of the conditional pardon rests
courts to control the enforcement of their exclusively in the sound judgment of the
decisions after the finality. In truth, an Chief Executive, and the pardonee, having
accused who has been convicted by final consented to place his liberty on conditional
judgment still possesses collateral rights and pardon upon the judgment of the power that
these rights can be claimed in the has granted it, cannot invoke the aid of the
appropriate courts. For instance, a death courts, however erroneous the findings may
convict who becomes insane after his final be upon which his recommitment was
conviction cannot be executed while in a ordered.
state of insanity (See Article 79 of the
Revised Penal Code). The suspension of It matters not that the pardonee has
such a death sentence is undisputably an allegedly been acquitted in two of the three
exercise of judicial power. It is not criminal cases filed against him subsequent
usurpation of the presidential power of to his conditional pardon, and that the third
reprieve though its effect is the same – the remains pending for thirteen (13) years in
temporary suspension of the execution of the apparent violation of his right to a speedy
death convict. In the same vein, it cannot be trial.
denied that Congress can at any time amend
R.A. No. 7659 by reducing the penalty of Ultimately, solely vested in the Chief
death to life imprisonment. The effect of Executive, who in the first place was the
such an amendment is like that of exclusive author of the conditional pardon
commutation of sentence. But by no stretch and of its revocation, is the corollary
of the imagination can the exercise by prerogative to reinstate the pardon if in his
Congress of its plenary power to amend laws own judgment, the acquittal of the pardonee
be considered as a violation of the from the subsequent charges filed against
President‟s power to commute final him, warrants the same. Courts have no
sentences of conviction. The powers of the authority to interfere with the grant by the
Executive, the Legislative and the Judiciary President of a pardon to a convicted criminal.
to save the life of a death convict do not It has been our fortified ruling that a final
exclude each other for the simple reason that judicial pronouncement as to the guilt of a
there is no higher right than the right to life. pardonee is not a requirement for the
(Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, 301 President to determine whether or not there
SCRA 96, Jan. 19, 1999, En Banc [Puno]) has been a breach of the terms of a
conditional pardon. There is likewise nil a
basis for the courts to effectuate the
74. Discuss the nature of a conditional pardon. reinstatement of a conditional pardon
Is its grant or revocation by the President revoked by the President in the exercise of
subject to judicial review? powers undisputably solely and absolutely in
his office. (In Re: Wilfredo Sumulong
Held: A conditional pardon is in the nature Torres, 251 SCRA 709, Dec. 29, 1995
of a contract between the sovereign power or [Hermosisima])
the Chief Executive and the convicted
criminal to the effect that the former will
release the latter subject to the condition that 75. Who has the power to ratify a treaty?
if he does not comply with the terms of the
pardon, he will be recommitted to prison to Held: In our jurisdiction, the power to ratify
serve the unexpired portion of the sentence is vested in the President and not, as
or an additional one (Alvarez v. Director of commonly believed, in the legislature. The
Prisons, 80 Phil. 50). By the pardonee‟s role of the Senate is limited only to giving or
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 35
withholding its consent, or concurrence, to appropriate case; (2) a personal and
the ratification. (BAYAN [Bagong substantial interest of the party raising the
Alyansang Makabayan] v. Executive constitutional question; (3) the exercise of
Secretary Ronaldo Zamora, G.R. No. judicial review is pleaded at the earliest
138570, Oct. 10, 2000, En Banc [Buena]) opportunity; and (4) the constitutional
question is the lis mota of the case.
(Integrated Bar of the Philippines v. Hon.
76. What is the power of impoundment of Ronaldo B. Zamora, G.R. No. 141284,
the President? What are its principal Aug. 15, 2000, En Banc [Kapunan])
sources?
Held: Impoundment refers to the refusal of 78. What is an "actual case or controversy"?
the President, for whatever reason, to spend
funds made available by Congress. It is the Held: An "actual case or controversy"
failure to spend or obligate budget authority means an existing case or controversy which
of any type. is both ripe for resolution and susceptible of
judicial determination, and that which is not
Proponents of impoundment have invoked at conjectural or anticipatory, or that which
least three principal sources of the authority seeks to resolve hypothetical or feigned
of the President. Foremost is the authority to constitutional problems. A petition raising a
impound given to him either expressly or constitutional question does not present an
impliedly by Congress. Second is the "actual controversy," unless it alleges a legal
executive power drawn from the President‟s right or power. Moreover, it must show that
role as Commander-in-Chief. Third is the a conflict of rights exists, for inherent in the
Faithful Execution Clause. term "controversy" is the presence of
opposing views or contentions. Otherwise,
The proponents insist that a faithful the Court will be forced to resolve issues
execution of the laws requires that the which remain unfocused because they lack
President desist from implementing the law if such concreteness provided when a question
doing so would prejudice public interest. An emerges precisely framed from a clash of
example given is when through efficient and adversary arguments exploring every aspect
prudent management of a project, of a multi-faceted situation embracing
substantial savings are made. In such a conflicting and demanding interests. The
case, it is sheer folly to expect the President controversy must also be justiciable; that is,
to spend the entire amount budgeted in the it must be susceptible of judicial
law. (PHILCONSA v. Enriquez, 235 SCRA determination. (Integrated Bar of the
506, Aug. 9, 1994 [Quiason]) Philippines v. Hon. Ronaldo B. Zamora,
G.R. No. 141284, Aug. 15, 2000, En Banc
[Kapunan])
THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
79. Petitioners Isagani Cruz and Cesar
77. What are the requisites before the Court Europa brought a suit for prohibition and
can exercise the power of judicial
mandamus as citizens and taxpayers,
review? assailing the constitutionality of certain
Held: 1. The time-tested standards for the provisions of Republic Act No. 8371,
exercise of judicial review are: (1) the otherwise known as the Indigenous
existence of an appropriate case; (2) an Peoples Rights Act of 1997 (IPRA), and
interest personal and substantial by the party its Implementing Rules and Regulations.
raising the constitutional question; (3) the A preliminary issue resolved by the SC
plea that the function be exercised at the was whether the petition presents an
earliest opportunity; and (4) the necessity actual controversy.
that the constitutional question be passed
upon in order to decide the case (Separate Held: Courts can only decide actual
Opinion, Kapunan, J., in Isagani Cruz v. controversies, not hypothetical questions or
Secretary of Environment and Natural cases. The threshold issue, therefore, is
Resources, et al., G.R. No. 135385, Dec. 6, whether an "appropriate case" exists for the
2000, En Banc) exercise of judicial review in the present
case.
2. When questions of constitutional
significance are raised, the Court can In the case at bar, there exists a live
exercise its power of judicial review only if controversy involving a clash of legal rights.
the following requisites are complied with, A law has been enacted, and the
namely: (1) the existence of an actual and
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 36
Implementing Rules and Regulations Resources, et al., G.R. No. 135385, Dec.
approved. Money has been appropriated 6, 2000, En Banc)
and the government agencies concerned
have been directed to implement the statute.
It cannot be successfully maintained that we 81. Asserting itself as the official
should await the adverse consequences of organization of Filipino lawyers tasked
the law in order to consider the controversy with the bounden duty to uphold the rule
actual and ripe for judicial resolution. It is of law and the Constitution, the
precisely the contention of the petitioners
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
that the law, on its face, constitutes an
unconstitutional abdication of State
filed a petition before the SC questioning
ownership over lands of the public domain the validity of the order of the President
and other natural resources. Moreover, commanding the deployment and
when the State machinery is set into motion utilization of the Philippine Marines to
to implement an alleged unconstitutional assist the Philippine National Police
statute, this Court possesses sufficient (PNP) in law enforcement by joining the
authority to resolve and prevent imminent latter in visibility patrols around the
injury and violation of the constitutional metropolis. The Solicitor General
process. (Separate Opinion, Kapunan, J., questioned the legal standing of the IBP
in Isagani Cruz v. Secretary of
to file the petition? Resolve.
Environment and Natural Resources, et
al., G.R. No. 135385, Dec. 6, 2000, En
Held: In the case at bar, the IBP primarily
Banc)
anchors its standing on its alleged
responsibility to uphold the rule of law and
the Constitution. Apart from this declaration,
80. What is the meaning of "legal standing" however, the IBP asserts no other basis in
or locus standi? support of its locus standi. The mere
invocation by the IBP of its duty to preserve
Held: "Legal standing" or locus standi has the rule of law and nothing more, while
been defined as a personal and substantial undoubtedly true, is not sufficient to clothe it
interest in the case such that the party has with standing in this case. This is too
sustained or will sustain direct injury as a general an interest which is shared by other
result of the governmental act that is being groups and the whole citizenry. Based on
challenged. The term "interest" means a the standards above-stated, the IBP has
material interest, an interest in issue affected failed to present a specific and substantial
by the decree, as distinguished from mere interest in the resolution of the case. Its
interest in the question involved, or a mere fundamental purpose which, under Section
incidental interest. The gist of the question 2, Rule 139-A of the Rules of Court, is to
of standing is whether a party alleges "such elevate the standards of the law profession
personal stake in the outcome of the and to improve the administration of justice is
controversy as to assure that concrete alien to, and cannot be affected by the
adverseness which sharpens the deployment of the Marines. x x x Moreover,
presentation of issues upon which the court the IBP x x x has not shown any specific
depends for illumination of difficult injury which it has suffered or may suffer by
constitutional questions." (Integrated Bar of virtue of the questioned governmental act.
the Philippines v. Hon. Ronaldo B. Indeed, none of its members, whom the IBP
Zamora, G.R. No. 141284, Aug. 15, 2000) purportedly represents, has sustained any
form of injury as a result of the operation of
In addition to the existence of an actual case the joint visibility patrols. Neither is it alleged
or controversy, a person who assails the that any of its members has been arrested or
validity of a statute must have a personal that their civil liberties have been violated by
and substantial interest in the case, such the deployment of the Marines. What the
that, he has sustained, or will sustain, a IBP projects as injurious is the supposed
direct injury as a result of its enforcement. "militarization" of law enforcement which
Evidently, the rights asserted by petitioners might threaten Philippine democratic
as citizens and taxpayers are held in institutions and may cause more harm than
common by all the citizens, the violation of good in the long run. Not only is the
which may result only in a "generalized presumed "injury" not personal in character,
grievance". Yet, in a sense, all citizen's and it is likewise too vague, highly speculative
taxpayer's suits are efforts to air generalized and uncertain to satisfy the requirement of
grievances about the conduct of government standing. Since petitioner has not
and the allocation of power. (Separate successfully established a direct and
Opinion, Kapunan, J., in Isagani Cruz v. personal injury as a consequence of the
Secretary of Environment and Natural questioned act, it does not possess the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 37
personality to assail the validity of the An action is considered “moot” when it no
deployment of the Marines. This Court, longer presents a justiciable controversy
however, does not categorically rule that the because the issues involved have become
IBP has absolutely no standing to raise academic or dead. Under E.O. No. 43, the
constitutional issues now or in the future. PCCR was instructed to complete its task on
The IBP must, by way of allegations and or before June 30, 1999. However, on
proof, satisfy this Court that it has sufficient February 19, 1999, the President issued
stake to obtain judicial resolution of the Executive Order No. 70 (E.O. No. 70), which
controversy. (Integrated Bar of the extended the time frame for the completion
Philippines v. Hon. Ronaldo B. Zamora, of the commission‟s work x x x. The PCCR
G.R. No. 141284, Aug. 15, 2000, En Banc submitted its recommendations to the
[Kapunan]) President on December 20, 1999 and was
dissolved by the President on the same day.
It had likewise spent the funds allocated to it.
82. Considering the lack of requisite Thus, the PCCR has ceased to exist, having
standing of the IBP to file the petition lost its raison d‟être. Subsequent events
questioning the validity of the order of have overtaken the petition and the Court
the President to deploy and utilize the has nothing left to resolve.
Philippine Marines to assist the PNP in
The staleness of the issue before us is made
law enforcement, may the Court still more manifest by the impossibility of granting
properly take cognizance of the case? the relief prayed for by petitioner. Basically,
petitioner asks this Court to enjoin the PCCR
Held: Having stated the foregoing, it must from acting as such. Clearly, prohibition is
be emphasized that this Court has the an inappropriate remedy since the body
discretion to take cognizance of a suit which sought to be enjoined no longer exists. It is
does not satisfy the requirement of legal well-established that prohibition is a
standing when paramount interest is preventive remedy and does not lie to
involved. In not a few cases, the Court has restrain an act that is already fait accompli.
adopted a liberal attitude on the locus standi At this point, any ruling regarding the PCCR
of a petitioner where the petitioner is able to would simply be in the nature of an advisory
craft an issue of transcendental significance opinion, which is definitely beyond the
to the people. Thus, when the issues raised permissible scope of judicial power.
are of paramount importance to the public, (Gonzales v. Narvasa, 337 SCRA 733,
the Court may brush aside technicalities of Aug. 14, 2000, En Banc [Gonzaga-Reyes])
procedure. In this case, a reading of the
petition shows that the IBP has advanced 2. The petition which was filed by private
constitutional issues which deserve the respondents before the trial court sought the
attention of this Court in view of their issuance of a writ of mandamus, to
seriousness, novelty and weight as command petitioners to admit them for
precedents. Moreover, because peace and enrolment. Taking into account the
order are under constant threat and lawless admission of private respondents that they
violence occurs in increasing tempo, have finished their Nursing course at the
undoubtedly aggravated by the Mindanao Lanting College of Nursing even before the
insurgency problem, the legal controversy promulgation of the questioned decision, this
raised in the petition almost certainly will not case has clearly been overtaken by events
go away. It will stare us in the face again. It, and should therefore be dismissed.
therefore, behooves the Court to relax the However, the case of Eastern Broadcasting
rules on standing and to resolve the issue Corporation (DYRE) v. Dans, etc., et al.,
now, rather than later. (Integrated Bar of G.R. No. 59329, July 19, 1985, 137 SCRA
the Philippines v. Hon. Ronaldo B. 628 is the authority for the view that "even if
Zamora, G.R. No. 141284, Aug. 15, 2000) a case were moot and academic, a
statement of the governing principle is
appropriate in the resolution of dismissal for
83. When is an action considered “moot”? the guidance not only of the parties but of
May the court still resolve the case once others similarly situated.” We shall adhere to
it has become moot and academic? this view and proceed to dwell on the merits
of this petition. (University of San Agustin,
Held: 1. It is alleged by respondent that, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 230 SCRA 761,
with respect to the PCCR [Preparatory 770, March 7, 1994 [Nocon])
Commission on Constitutional Reform], this
case has become moot and academic. We
agree. 84. In connection with the May 11, 1998
elections, the COMELEC issued a
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 38
resolution prohibiting the conduct of exit stance in entertaining so-called taxpayer's
polls on the ground, among others, that it suits, especially when important issues are
might cause disorder and confusion involved. A closer examination of the facts
considering the randomness of selecting of this case would readily demonstrate that
petitioner's standing should not even be
interviewees, which further makes the
made an issue here, "since standing is a
exit polls unreliable. The constitutionality concept in constitutional law and here no
of this resolution was challenged by constitutional question is actually involved."
ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation as
violative of freedom of expression. The In the case at bar, disbursement of
Solicitor General contends that the public funds was only made in 1975 when
petition has been rendered moot and the Province bought the lands from Ortigas
academic because the May 11, 1998 at P110.00 per square meter in line with the
election has already been held and done objectives of P.D. 674. Petitioner never
with and, therefore, there is no longer referred to such purchase as an illegal
disbursement of public funds but focused on
any actual controversy to be resolved.
the alleged fraudulent reconveyance of said
Resolve. property to Ortigas because the price paid
was lower than the prevailing market value of
Held: While the assailed Resolution referred neighboring lots. The first requirement,
specifically to the May 11, 1998 election, its therefore, which would make this petition a
implications on the people‟s fundamental taxpayer's suit is absent. The only remaining
freedom of expression transcend the past justification for petitioner to be allowed to
election. The holding of periodic elections is pursue this action is whether it is, or would
a basic feature of our democratic be, directly affected by the act complained
government. By its very nature, exit polling of. As we stated in Kilosbayan, Inc. v.
is tied up with elections. To set aside the Morato (supra.),
resolution of the issue now will only postpone
a task that could well crop up again in future "Standing is a special concern in
elections. constitutional law because in some
cases suits are brought not by parties
In any event, in Salonga v. Cruz Pano (134 who have been personally injured by the
SCRA 438, 463, Feb. 18, 1985), the Court operation of a law or by official action
had occasion to reiterate that it “also has the taken, but by concerned citizens,
duty to formulate guiding and controlling taxpayers or voters who actually sue in
constitutional principles, precepts, doctrines, the public interest. Hence the question
or rules. It has the symbolic function of in standing is whether such parties have
educating bench and bar on the extent of 'alleged such a personal stake in the
protection given by constitutional outcome of the controversy as to assure
guarantees.” Since the fundamental that concrete adverseness which
freedoms of speech and of the press are sharpens the presentation of issues
being invoked here, we have resolved to upon which the court so largely depends
settle, for the guidance of posterity, whether for illumination of difficult constitutional
they likewise protect the holding of exit polls questions.' (Citing Baker v. Carr, 369
and the dissemination of data derived U.S. 186, 7l. Ed. 2d 633 [1962])"
therefrom. (ABS-CBN Broadcasting
Corporation v. COMELEC, G.R. No. Undeniably, as a taxpayer, petitioner would
133486, Jan. 28, 2000, En Banc somehow be adversely affected by an illegal
[Panganiban]) use of public money. When, however, no
such unlawful spending has been shown, as
in the case at bar, petitioner, even as a
85. Discuss the nature of a taxpayer‟s suit. taxpayer, cannot question the transaction
When may it be allowed? validly executed by and between the
Province and Ortigas for the simple reason
Held: 1. Petitioner and respondents agree that it is not privy to said contract. In other
that to constitute a taxpayer's suit, two words, petitioner has absolutely no cause of
requisites must be met, namely, that public action, and consequently no locus standi, in
funds are disbursed by a political subdivision the instant case. (The Anti-Graft League of
or instrumentality and in doing so, a law is the Philippines, Inc. v. San Juan, 260
violated or some irregularity is committed, SCRA 250, 253-255, Aug. 1, 1996, En Banc
and that the petitioner is directly affected by [Romero])
the alleged ultra vires act. The same
pronouncement was made in Kilosbayan, 2. A taxpayer is deemed to have the
Inc. v. Guingona, Jr., (232 SCRA 110 [1994], standing to raise a constitutional issue when
where the Court also reiterated its liberal it is established that public funds have been
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 39
disbursed in alleged contravention of the law organization – had standing as taxpayers
or the Constitution. Thus, a taxpayer‟s to question the constitutionality of Republic
action is properly brought only when there is Act No. 3836 insofar as it provides for
an exercise by Congress of its taxing or retirement gratuity and commutation of
spending power (Flast v. Cohen, 392 US 83, vacation and sick leaves to Senators and
20 L Ed 2d 947, 88 S Ct 1942). This was our Representatives and to the elective officials
ruling in a recent case wherein petitioners of both houses of Congress (Philippine
Telecommunications and Broadcast Constitution Association, Inc. v. Gimenez, 15
Attorneys of the Philippines (TELEBAP) and SCRA 479 [1965]). And in Pascual v.
GMA Network, Inc. questioned the validity of Secretary of Public Works (110 Phil. 331
Section 92 of B.P. Blg. 881 (otherwise known [1960]), the Court allowed petitioner to
as the “Omnibus Election Code”) requiring maintain a taxpayer‟s suit assailing the
radio and television stations to give free air constitutional soundness of Republic Act No.
time to the Commission on Elections during 920 appropriating P85,000 for the
the campaign period (Telecommunications construction, repair and improvement of
and Broadcast Attorneys of the Philippines, feeder roads within private property. All
Inc. v. Commission on Elections, 289 SCRA these cases involved the disbursement of
337 [1998]). The Court held that petitioner public funds by means of a law.
TELEBAP did not have any interest as a
taxpayer since the assailed law did not Meanwhile, in Bugnay Construction and
involve the taxing or spending power of Development Corporation v. Laron (176
Congress. SCRA 251 [1989]), the Court declared that
the trial court was wrong in allowing
Many other rulings have premised the grant respondent Ravanzo to bring an action for
or denial of standing to taxpayers upon injunction in his capacity as a taxpayer in
whether or not the case involved a order to question the legality of the contract
disbursement of public funds by the of lease covering the public market entered
legislature. In Sanidad v. Commission on into between the City of Dagupan and
Elections (73 SCRA 333 [1976]), the petitioner. The Court declared that Ravanzo
petitioners therein were allowed to bring a did not possess the requisite standing to
taxpayer‟s suit to question several bring such taxpayer‟s suit since “[o]n its face,
presidential decrees promulgated by then and there is no evidence to the contrary, the
President Marcos in his legislative capacity lease contract entered into between
calling for a national referendum, with the petitioner and the City shows that no public
Court explaining that – funds have been or will be used in the
construction of the market building.”
X x x [i]t is now an ancient rule
that the valid source of a statute – Coming now to the instant case, it is readily
Presidential Decrees are of such nature apparent that there is no exercise by
– may be contested by one who will Congress of its taxing or spending power.
sustain a direct injury as a result of its The PCCR was created by the President by
enforcement. At the instance of virtue of E.O. No. 43, as amended by E.O.
taxpayers, laws providing for the No. 70. Under Section 7 of E.O. No. 43, the
disbursement of public funds may be amount of P3 million is "appropriated" for its
enjoined, upon the theory that the operational expenses "to be sourced from
expenditure of public funds by an officer the funds of the Office of the President.” x x
of the State for the purpose of executing x. The appropriations for the PCCR were
an unconstitutional act constitutes a authorized by the President, not by
misapplication of such funds. The Congress. In fact, there was no
breadth of Presidential Decree No. 991 appropriation at all. “In a strict sense,
carries an appropriation of Five Million appropriation has been defied „as nothing
Pesos for the effective implementation of more than the legislative authorization
its purposes. Presidential Decree No. prescribed by the Constitution that money
1031 appropriates the sum of Eight may be paid out of the Treasury,‟ while
Million Pesos to carry out its provisions. appropriation made by law refers to „the act
The interest of the aforenamed of the legislature setting apart or assigning to
petitioners as taxpayers in the lawful a particular use a certain sum to be used in
expenditure of these amounts of public the payment of debt or dues from the State
money sufficiently clothes them with that to its creditors.‟” The funds used for the
personality to litigate the validity of the PCCR were taken from funds intended for
Decrees appropriating said funds x x x. the Office of the President, in the exercise of
the Chief Executive‟s power to transfer funds
In still another case, the Court held that pursuant to Section 25 (5) of Article VI of the
petitioners – the Philippine Constitution Constitution.
Association, Inc., a non-profit civic
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 40
In the final analysis, it must be stressed that to involve a political question is found a
the Court retains the power to decide textually demonstrable constitutional
whether or not it will entertain a taxpayer‟s commitment of the issue to a coordinate
suit. In the case at bar, there being no political department; or a lack of judicially
exercise by Congress of its taxing or discoverable and manageable standards for
spending power, petitioner cannot be resolving it; or the impossibility of deciding
allowed to question the creation of the PCCR without an initial policy determination of a
in his capacity as a taxpayer, but rather, he kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion; or the
must establish that he has a “personal and impossibility of a court's undertaking
substantial interest in the case and that he independent resolution without expressing
has sustained or will sustain direct injury as a lack of the respect due coordinate branches
result of its enforcement.” In other words, of government; or an unusual need for
petitioner must show that he is a real party in unquestioning adherence to a political
interest – that he will stand to be benefited or decision already made; or the potentiality of
injured by the judgment or that he will be embarrassment from multifarious
entitled to the avails of the suit. Nowhere in pronouncements by various departments on
his pleadings does petitioner presume to the one question."
make such a representation. (Gonzales v.
Narvasa, 337 SCRA 733, Aug. 14, 2000, En The 1987 Constitution expands the concept
Banc [Gonzaga-Reyes]) of judicial review by providing that "(T)he
Judicial power shall be vested in one
Supreme Court and in such lower courts as
86. What is a justiciable controversy? What may be established by law. Judicial power
are political questions? includes the duty of the courts of justice to
settle actual controversies involving rights
Held: As a general proposition, a which are legally demandable and
controversy is justiciable if it refers to a enforceable, and to determine whether or not
matter which is appropriate for court review. there has been a grave abuse of discretion
It pertains to issues which are inherently amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on
susceptible of being decided on grounds the part of any branch or instrumentality of
recognized by law. Nevertheless, the Court the Government." (Article VIII, Sec. 1 of the
does not automatically assume jurisdiction 1987 Constitution) Under this definition, the
over actual constitutional cases brought Court cannot agree x x x that the issue
before it even in instances that are ripe for involved is a political question beyond the
resolution. One class of cases wherein the jurisdiction of this Court to review. When the
Court hesitates to rule on are "political grant of power is qualified, conditional or
questions." The reason is that political subject to limitations, the issue of whether
questions are concerned with issues the prescribed qualifications or conditions
dependent upon the wisdom, not the legality, have been met or the limitations respected,
of a particular act or measure being assailed. is justiciable - the problem being one of
Moreover, the political question being a legality or validity, not its wisdom. Moreover,
function of the separation of powers, the the jurisdiction to delimit constitutional
courts will not normally interfere with the boundaries has been given to this Court.
workings of another co-equal branch unless When political questions are involved, the
the case shows a clear need for the courts to Constitution limits the determination as to
step in to uphold the law and the whether or not there has been a grave abuse
Constitution. of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction on the part of the official whose
As Tanada v. Angara (103 Phil. 1051 [1957]) action is being questioned.
puts it, political questions refer "to those
questions which, under the Constitution, are By grave abuse of discretion is meant simply
to be decided by the people in their capricious or whimsical exercise of judgment
sovereign capacity, or in regard to which full that is patent and gross as to amount to an
discretionary authority has been delegated to evasion of positive duty or a virtual refusal to
the legislative or executive branch of perform a duty enjoined by law, or to act at
government." Thus, if an issue is clearly all in contemplation of law, as where the
identified by the text of the Constitution as power is exercised in an arbitrary and
matters for discretionary action by a despotic manner by reason of passion or
particular branch of government or to the hostility. Under this definition, a court is
people themselves then it is held to be a without power to directly decide matters over
political question. In the classic formulation which full discretionary authority has been
of Justice Brennan in Baker v. Carr (369 U.S. delegated. But while this Court has no
186, 82 S Ct. 691, 7 L. Ed. 663, 678 [1962]), power to substitute its judgment for that of
"[p]rominent on the surface of any case held Congress or of the President, it may look into
the question of whether such exercise has
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 41
been made in grave abuse of discretion. A judicial review, but EDSA II is intra
showing that plenary power is granted either constitutional and the resignation of the
department of government may not be an sitting President that it caused and the
obstacle to judicial inquiry, for the succession of the Vice President as
improvident exercise or abuse thereof may President are subject to judicial review.
give rise to justiciable controversy. EDSA I presented a political question; EDSA
(Integrated Bar of the Philippines v. Hon. II involves legal questions. X x x
Ronaldo B. Zamora, G.R. No. 141284,
Aug. 15, 2000, En Banc [Kapunan]) Needless to state, the cases at bar pose
legal and not political questions. The
principal issues for resolution require the
87. Is the legitimacy of the assumption to the proper interpretation of certain provisions in
Presidency of President Gloria the 1987 Constitution, notably Section 1 of
Macapagal Arroyo a political question Article II, and Section 8 of Article VII, and the
and, therefore, not subject to judicial allocation of governmental powers under
Section 11 of Article VII. The issues likewise
review? Distinguish EDSA People
call for a ruling on the scope of presidential
Power I from EDSA People Power II. immunity from suit. They also involve the
correct calibration of the right of petitioner
Held: Respondents rely on the case of against prejudicial publicity. As early as the
Lawyers League for a Better Philippines 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison (1 Cranch
and/or Oliver A. Lozano v. President [5 US] 137, L Ed 60 [1803]), the doctrine has
Corazon C. Aquino, et al. and related cases been laid down that “it is emphatically the
to support their thesis that since the cases at province and duty of the judicial department
bar involve the legitimacy of the government to say what the law is x x x.” Thus,
of respondent Arroyo, ergo, they present a respondent‟s invocation of the doctrine of
political question. A more cerebral reading political question is but a foray in the dark.
of the cited cases will show that they are (Joseph E. Estrada v. Aniano Desierto,
inapplicable. In the cited cases, we held that G.R. Nos. 146710-15, March 2, 2001, En
the government of former President Aquino Banc [Puno])
was the result of a successful revolution by
the sovereign people, albeit a peaceful one.
No less than the Freedom Constitution
88. Is the President‟s power to call out the
declared that the Aquino government was
installed through a direct exercise of the
armed forces as their Commander-in-
power of the Filipino people “in defiance of Chief in order to prevent or suppress
the provisions of the 1973 Constitution, as lawless violence, invasion or rebellion
amended.” It is familiar learning that the subject to judicial review, or is it a
legitimacy of a government sired by a political question? Clarify.
successful revolution by people power is
beyond judicial scrutiny for that government Held: When the President calls the armed
automatically orbits out of the constitutional forces to prevent or suppress lawless
loop. In checkered contrast, the government violence, invasion or rebellion, he
of respondent Arroyo is not revolutionary in necessarily exercises a discretionary power
character. The oath that she took at the solely vested in his wisdom. This is clear
EDSA Shrine is the oath under the 1987 from the intent of the framers and from the
Constitution. In her oath, she categorically text of the Constitution itself. The Court,
swore to preserve and defend the 1987 thus, cannot be called upon to overrule the
Constitution. Indeed, she has stressed that President's wisdom or substitute its own.
she is discharging the powers of the However, this does not prevent an
presidency under the authority of the 1987 examination of whether such power was
Constitution. exercised within permissible constitutional
limits or whether it was exercised in a
In fine, the legal distinction between EDSA manner constituting grave abuse of
People Power I and EDSA People Power II discretion. In view of the constitutional intent
is clear. EDSA I involves the exercise of the to give the President full discretionary power
people power of revolution which overthrows to determine the necessity of calling out the
the whole government. EDSA II is an armed forces, it is incumbent upon the
exercise of people power of freedom of petitioner to show that the President's
speech and freedom of assembly to petition decision is totally bereft of factual basis. The
the government for redress of grievances present petition fails to discharge such heavy
which only affected the office of the burden as there is no evidence to support
President. EDSA I is extra constitutional and the assertion that there exists no justification
the legitimacy of the new government that for calling out the armed forces. There is,
resulted from it cannot be the subject of likewise, no evidence to support the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 42
proposition that grave abuse was committed SCRA 135, 139-140, Aug. 4, 1994, En
because the power to call was exercised in Banc [Cruz])
such a manner as to violate the constitutional
provision on civilian supremacy over the
military. In the performance of this Court's 90. What cases are to be heard by the Supreme
duty of "purposeful hesitation" before Court en banc?
declaring an act of another branch as
unconstitutional, only where such grave Held: Under Supreme Court Circular No. 2-
abuse of discretion is clearly shown shall the 89, dated February 7, 1989, as amended by
Court interfere with the President's judgment. the Resolution of November 18, 1993:
To doubt is to sustain. (Integrated Bar of X x x, the following are considered en
the Philippines v. Hon. Ronaldo B. banc cases:
Zamora, G.R. No. 141284, Aug. 15, 2000,
En Banc [Kapunan]) 1) Cases in which the constitutionality
or validity of any treaty, international
or executive agreement, law,
89. Do lower courts have jurisdiction to executive order, or presidential
consider the constitutionality of a law? If decree, proclamation, order,
so, how should they act in the exercise instruction, ordinance, or regulation
of this jurisdiction? is in question;
2) Criminal cases in which the
Held: We stress at the outset that the lower appealed decision imposes the
court had jurisdiction to consider the death penalty;
constitutionality of Section 187, this authority 3) Cases raising novel questions of
being embraced in the general definition of law;
the judicial power to determine what are the 4) Cases affecting ambassadors, other
valid and binding laws by the criterion of their public ministers and consuls;
conformity to the fundamental law. 5) Cases involving decisions,
Specifically, BP 129 vests in the regional trial resolutions or orders of the Civil
courts jurisdiction over all civil cases in which Service Commission, Commission
the subject of the litigation is incapable of on Elections, and Commission on
pecuniary estimation (Sec. 19[1]), even as Audit;
the accused in a criminal action has the right 6) Cases where the penalty to be
to question in his defense the imposed is the dismissal of a judge,
constitutionality of a law he is charged with officer or employee of the judiciary,
violating and of the proceedings taken disbarment of a lawyer, or either the
against him, particularly as they contravene suspension of any of them for a
the Bill of Rights. Moreover, Article VIII, period of more than one (1) year or a
Section 5(2), of the Constitution vests in the fine exceeding P10,000.00 or both;
Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over 7) Cases where a doctrine or principle
final judgments and orders of lower courts in laid down by the court en banc or in
all cases in which the constitutionality or division may be modified or
validity of any treaty, international or reversed;
executive agreement, law, presidential 8) Cases assigned to a division which
decree, proclamation, order, instruction, in the opinion of at least three (3)
ordinance, or regulation is in question. members thereof merit the attention
of the court en banc and are
In the exercise of this jurisdiction, lower acceptable to a majority of the actual
courts are advised to act with the utmost membership of the court en banc;
circumspection, bearing in mind the and
consequences of a declaration of 9) All other cases as the court en banc
unconstitutionality upon the stability of laws, by a majority of its actual
no less than on the doctrine of separation of membership may deem of sufficient
powers. As the questioned act is usually the importance to merit its attention.
handiwork of the legislative or the executive (Firestone Ceramics, Inc. v.
departments, or both, it will be prudent for Court of Appeals, 334 SCRA
such courts, if only out of a becoming 465, 471-472, June 28, 2000,
modesty, to defer to the higher judgment of En Banc [Purisima])
this Court in the consideration of its validity,
which is better determined after a thorough 91. What is fiscal autonomy? The fiscal
deliberation by a collegiate body and with the autonomy clause?
concurrence of the majority of those who
participated in its discussion (Art. VIII, Sec. Held: As envisioned in the Constitution, the
4[2], Constitution) (Drilon v. Lim, 235 fiscal autonomy enjoyed by the Judiciary, the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 43
Civil Service Commission, the Commission judge for a violation of Arts. 204 and 205
on Audit, the Commission on Elections, and (knowingly rendering an unjust judgment or
the Office of the Ombudsman contemplates order) can be entertained, there must first be
a guarantee of full flexibility to allocate and “a final and authoritative judicial declaration”
utilize their resources with the wisdom and that the decision or order in question is
dispatch that their needs require. It indeed “unjust.” The pronouncement may
recognizes the power and authority to levy, result from either:
assess and collect fees, fix rates of
compensation not exceeding the highest (a) an action of certiorari or prohibition
rates authorized by law for compensation in a higher court impugning the
and pay plans of the government and validity of the judgment; or
allocate and disburse such sums as may be (b) an administrative proceeding in the
provided by law or prescribed by them in the Supreme Court against the judge
course of the discharge of their functions. precisely for promulgating an unjust
judgment or order.
Fiscal autonomy means freedom from
outside control. The Judiciary, the Likewise, the determination of whether a
Constitutional Commissions, and the judge has maliciously delayed the disposition
Ombudsman must have the independence of the case is also an exclusive judicial
and flexibility needed in the discharge of their function (In Re: Borromeo, supra, at 461).
constitutional duties. The imposition of
restrictions and constraints on the manner “To repeat, no other entity or
the independent constitutional offices official of the government, not the
allocate and utilize the funds appropriated for prosecution or investigation service of
their operations is anathema to fiscal any other branch, not any functionary
autonomy and violative not only of the thereof, has competence to review a
express mandate of the Constitution but judicial order or decision – whether final
especially as regards the Supreme Court, of and executory or not – and pronounce it
the independence and separation of powers erroneous so as to lay the basis for a
upon which the entire fabric of our criminal or administrative complaint for
constitutional system is based. (Bengzon v. rendering an unjust judgment or order.
Drilon, 208 SCRA 133, April 15, 1992, En That prerogative belongs to the courts
Banc [Gutierrez]) alone.
Held: Taxes cannot be subject to In his treatise on taxation, Mr. Justice Jose
compensation for the simple reason that the C. Vitug concurs, stating that "[t]he tax
government and the taxpayer are not exemption covers property taxes only."
creditors and debtors of each other. There is (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. CA,
a material distinction between a tax and 298 SCRA 83, Oct. 14, 1998 [Panganiban])
debt. Debts are due to the Government in its
corporate capacity, while taxes are due to 108. Under Article XIV, Section 4,
the Government in its sovereign capacity. It paragraph 3 of the 1987 Constitution,
must be noted that a distinguishing feature of "[A]ll revenues and assets of non-stock,
a tax is that it is compulsory rather than a non-profit educational institutions used
matter of bargain. Hence, a tax does not actually, directly, and exclusively for
depend upon the consent of the taxpayer. If educational purposes shall be exempt
any taxpayer can defer the payment of taxes
from taxes and duties." YMCA alleged
by raising the defense that it still has a
pending claim for refund or credit, this would
that it "is a non-profit educational
adversely affect the government revenue institution whose revenues and assets
system. A taxpayer cannot refuse to pay his are used actually, directly and
taxes when they fall due simply because he exclusively for educational purposes so it
has a claim against the government or that is exempt from taxes on its properties
the collection of a tax is contingent on the and income."
result of the lawsuit it filed against the
government. (Philex Mining Corporation v. Held: We reiterate that private respondent
Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 294 is exempt from the payment of property
SCRA 687, Aug. 28, 1998 [Romero]) tax, but not income tax on the rentals from
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 53
its property. The bare allegation alone that (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v.
it is a non-stock, non-profit educational CA, 298 SCRA 83, Oct. 14, 1998
institution is insufficient to justify its [Panganiban])
exemption from the payment of income
tax.
110. May the PCGG validly commit to
[L]aws allowing tax exemption are exempt from all forms of taxes the
construed strictissimi juris. Hence, for the properties to be retained by the Marcos
YMCA to be granted the exemption it heirs in a Compromise Agreement
claims under the abovecited provision, it
between the former and the latter?
must prove with substantial evidence that
(1) it falls under the classification non-
Held: The power to tax and to grant
stock, non-profit educational institution;
exemptions is vested in the Congress and,
and (2) the income it seeks to be
to a certain extent, in the local legislative
exempted from taxation is used actually,
bodies. Section 28(4), Article VI of the
directly, and exclusively for educational
Constitution, specifically provides: “No law
purposes. However, the Court notes that
granting any tax exemption shall be
not a scintilla of evidence was submitted
passed without the concurrence of a
by private respondent to prove that it met
majority of all the members of the
the said requisites. (Commissioner of
Congress.” The PCGG has absolutely no
Internal Revenue v. CA, 298 SCRA 83,
power to grant tax exemptions, even under
Oct. 14, 1998 [Panganiban])
the cover of its authority to compromise ill-
gotten wealth cases.
109. Is the YMCA an educational Even granting that Congress enacts a law
institution within the purview of Article exempting the Marcoses from paying taxes
XIV, Section 4, par. 3 of the on their properties, such law will definitely
Constitution? not pass the test of the equal protection
clause under the Bill of Rights. Any
Held: We rule that it is not. The term special grant of tax exemption in favor only
"educational institution" or "institution of of the Marcos heirs will constitute class
learning" has acquired a well-known legislation. It will also violate the
technical meaning, of which the members constitutional rule that “taxation shall be
of the Constitutional Commission are uniform and equitable.” (Chavez v.
deemed cognizant. Under the Education PCGG, 299 SCRA 744, Dec. 9, 1998
Act of 1982, such term refers to schools. [Panganiban])
The school system is synonymous with
formal education, which "refers to the
hierarchically structured and 111. Discuss the purpose of tax treaties?
chronologically graded learnings organized
and provided by the formal school system Held: The RP-US Tax Treaty is just one of
and for which certification is required in a number of bilateral treaties which the
order for the learner to progress through Philippines has entered into for the
the grades or move to the higher levels." avoidance of double taxation. The
The Court has examined the "Amended purpose of these international agreements
Articles of Incorporation" and "By-Laws" of is to reconcile the national fiscal
the YMCA, but found nothing in them that legislations of the contracting parties in
even hints that it is a school or an order to help the taxpayer avoid
educational institution. simultaneous taxation in two different
jurisdictions. More precisely, the tax
Furthermore, under the Education Act of conventions are drafted with a view
1982, even non-formal education is towards the elimination of international
understood to be school-based and juridical double taxation x x x.
"private auspices such as foundations and (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v.
civic-spirited organizations" are ruled out. S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc., 309 SCRA
It is settled that the term "educational 87, 101-102, June 25, 1999, 3rd Div.
institution," when used in laws granting tax [Gonzaga-Reyes])
exemptions, refers to a "x x x school
seminary, college or educational
establishment x x x." (84 CJS 566) 112. What is "international juridical double
Therefore, the private respondent cannot taxation"?
be deemed one of the educational
institutions covered by the constitutional Held: It is defined as the imposition of
provision under consideration. comparable taxes in two or more states on
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 54
the same taxpayer in respect of the same residence, the tax paid in the former is
subject matter and for identical periods. credited against the tax levied in the latter.
(Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. The basic difference between the two
S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc., 309 SCRA methods is that in the exemption method,
87, 102, June 25, 1999) the focus is on the income or capital itself,
whereas the credit method focuses upon
the tax. (Commissioner of Internal
113. What is the rationale for doing away Revenue v. S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc.,
with international juridical double 309 SCRA 87, 102-103, June 25, 1999)
taxation? What are the methods
resorted to by tax treaties to eliminate
double taxation? 114. What is the rationale for reducing the
tax rate in negotiating tax treaties?
Held: The apparent rationale for doing
away with double taxation is to encourage Held: In negotiating tax treaties, the
the free flow of goods and services and the underlying rationale for reducing the tax
movement of capital, technology and rate is that the Philippines will give up a
persons between countries, conditions part of the tax in the expectation that the
deemed vital in creating robust and tax given up for this particular investment
dynamic economies. Foreign investments is not taxed by the other country.
will only thrive in a fairly predictable and (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v.
reasonable international investment S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc., 309 SCRA
climate and the protection against double 87, 103, June 25, 1999)
taxation is crucial in creating such a
climate.
B. THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Double taxation usually takes place when
a person is resident of a contracting state The Due Process Clause
and derives income from, or owns capital
in, the other contracting state and both
states impose tax on that income or 115. Discuss the Due Process Clause.
capital. In order to eliminate double Distinguish substantive due process
taxation, a tax treaty resorts to several from procedural due process.
methods. First, it sets out the respective
rights to tax of the state of source or situs Held: Section 1 of the Bill of Rights lays
and of the state of residence with regard to down what is known as the "due process
certain classes of income or capital. In clause" of the Constitution.
some cases, an exclusive right to tax is
conferred on one of the contracting states; In order to fall within the aegis of this
however, for other items of income or provision, two conditions must concur,
capital, both states are given the right to namely, that there is a deprivation and that
tax, although the amount of tax that may such deprivation is done without proper
be imposed by the state of source is observance of due process. When one
limited. speaks of due process of law, however, a
distinction must be made between matters of
The second method for the elimination of procedure and matters of substance. In
double taxation applies whenever the state essence, procedural due process "refers to
of source is given a full or limited right to the method or manner by which the law is
tax together with the state of residence. In enforced," while substantive due process
this case, the treaties make it incumbent "requires that the law itself, not merely the
upon the state of residence to allow relief procedures by which the law would be
in order to avoid double taxation. There enforced, is fair, reasonable, and just."
are two methods of relief - the exemption (Corona v. United Harbor Pilots
method and the credit method. In the Association of the Phils., 283 SCRA 31,
exemption method, the income or capital Dec. 12, 1997 [Romero])
which is taxable in the state of source or
situs is exempted in the state of residence, 116. Respondents United Harbor Pilots
although in some instances it may be Association of the Philippines argue that due
taken into account in determining the rate process was not observed in the adoption of
of tax applicable to the taxpayer's PPA-AO No. 04-92 which provides that: “(a)ll
remaining income or capital. On the other existing regular appointments which have
hand, in the credit method, although the been previously issued by the Bureau of
income or capital which is taxed in the Customs or the PPA shall remain valid up to
state of source is still taxable in the state of 31 December 1992 only,” and “(a)ll
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 55
appointments to harbor pilot positions in all Pilotage, just like other professions, may
pilotage districts shall, henceforth, be only for be practiced only by duly licensed
a term of one (1) year from date of effectivity individuals. Licensure is “the granting of
subject to renewal or cancellation by the license especially to practice a profession.”
Philippine Ports Authority after conduct of a It is also “the system of granting licenses (as
rigid evaluation of performance,” allegedly for professional practice) in accordance with
because no hearing was conducted whereby established standards.” A license is a right
“relevant government agencies” and the or permission granted by some competent
harbor pilots themselves could ventilate their authority to carry on a business or do an act
views. They also contended that the sole which, without such license, would be illegal.
and exclusive right to the exercise of harbor
pilotage by pilots has become vested and Before harbor pilots can earn a license to
can only be “withdrawn or shortened” by practice their profession, they literally have to
observing the constitutional mandate of due pass through the proverbial eye of a needle
process of law. by taking, not one but five examinations,
each followed by actual training and practice.
Held: They are obviously referring to the Xxx
procedural aspect of the enactment.
Fortunately, the Court has maintained a clear Their license is granted in the form of an
position in this regard, a stance it has appointment which allows them to engage in
stressed in the recent case of Lumiqued v. pilotage until they retire at the age of 70
Hon. Exevea (G.R. No. 117565, November years. This is a vested right. Under the
18, 1997), where it declared that “(a)s long terms of PPA-AO No. 04-92, “[a]ll existing
as a party was given the opportunity to regular appointments which have been
defend his interests in due course, he cannot previously issued by the Bureau of Customs
be said to have been denied due process of or the PPA shall remain valid up to 31
law, for this opportunity to be heard is the December 1992 only,” and “(a)ll
very essence of due process. Moreover, this appointments to harbor pilot positions in all
constitutional mandate is deemed satisfied if pilotage districts shall, henceforth, be only for
a person is granted an opportunity to seek a term of one (1) year from date of effectivity
reconsideration of the action or ruling subject to renewal or cancellation by the
complained of.” Authority after conduct of a rigid evaluation
of performance.”
In the case at bar, respondents questioned
PPA-AO No. 04-92 no less than four times It is readily apparent that PPA-AO No. 04-92
before the matter was finally elevated to this unduly restricts the right of harbor pilots to
Tribunal. Their arguments on this score, enjoy their profession before their
however, failed to persuade. X x x compulsory retirement. In the past, they
enjoyed a measure of security knowing that
Neither does the fact that the pilots after passing five examinations and
themselves were not consulted in any way undergoing years of on-the-job training, they
taint the validity of the administrative order. would have a license which they could use
As a general rule, notice and hearing, as the until their retirement, unless sooner revoked
fundamental requirements of procedural due by the PPA for mental or physical unfitness.
process, are essential only when an Under the new issuance, they have to
administrative body exercises its quasi- contend with an annual cancellation of their
judicial function. In the performance of its license which can be temporary or
executive or legislative functions, such as permanent depending on the outcome of
issuing rules and regulations, an their performance evaluation. Veteran pilots
administrative body need not comply with the and neophytes alike are suddenly confronted
requirements of notice and hearing. with one-year terms which ipso facto expire
at the end of that period. Renewal of their
Upon the other hand, it is also contended license is now dependent on a “rigid
that the sole and exclusive right to the evaluation of performance” which is
exercise of harbor pilotage by pilots is a conducted only after the license has already
settled issue. Respondents aver that said been cancelled. Hence, the use of the term
right has become vested and can only be “renewal.” It is this pre-evaluation
“withdrawn or shortened” by observing the cancellation which primarily makes PPA-AO
constitutional mandate of due process of law. No. 04-92 unreasonable and constitutionally
Their argument has thus shifted from the infirm. In a real sense, it is a deprivation of
procedural to one of substance. It is here property without due process of law.
where PPA-AO No. 04-92 fails to meet the (Corona v. United Harbor Pilots
condition set by the organic law. Association of the Phils., 283 SCRA 31,
December 12, 1997 [Romero])
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 56
allegedly suffer is weak, we accord greater
117. Does the due process clause weight to the interests espoused by the
encompass the right to be assisted by government thru the petitioner Secretary of
counsel during an administrative inquiry? Justice. X x x
Held: The right to counsel, which cannot be In tilting the balance in favor of the interests
waived unless the waiver is in writing and in of the State, the Court stresses that it is not
the presence of counsel, is a right afforded a ruling that the private respondent has no
suspect or an accused during custodial right to due process at all throughout the
investigation. It is not an absolute right and length and breadth of the extradition
may, thus, be invoked or rejected in a proceedings. Procedural due process
criminal proceeding and, with more reason, requires a determination of what process is
in an administrative inquiry. In the case at due, when it is due, and the degree of what
bar, petitioners invoke the right of an is due. Stated otherwise, a prior
accused in criminal proceedings to have determination should be made as to whether
competent and independent counsel of his procedural protections are at all due and
own choice. Lumiqued, however, was not when they are due, which in turn depends on
accused of any crime in the proceedings the extent to which an individual will be
below. The investigation conducted by the "condemned to suffer grievous loss." We
committee x x x was for the sole purpose of have explained why an extraditee has no
determining if he could be held right to notice and hearing during the
administratively liable under the law for the evaluation stage of the extradition process.
complaints filed against him. x x x As such, As aforesaid, P.D. No. 1069 which
the hearing conducted by the investigating implements the RP-US Extradition Treaty
committee was not part of a criminal affords an extraditee sufficient opportunity to
prosecution. X x x meet the evidence against him once the
petition is filed in court. The time for the
While investigations conducted by an extraditee to know the basis of the request
administrative body may at times be akin to a for his extradition is merely moved to the
criminal proceeding, the fact remains that filing in court of the formal petition for
under existing laws, a party in an extradition. The extraditee's right to know is
administrative inquiry may or may not be momentarily withheld during the evaluation
assisted by counsel, irrespective of the stage of the extradition process to
nature of the charges and of the accommodate the more compelling interest
respondent's capacity to represent himself, of the State to prevent escape of potential
and no duty rests on such a body to furnish extraditees which can be precipitated by
the person being investigated with counsel. premature information of the basis of the
In an administrative proceeding x x x a request for his extradition. No less
respondent x x x has the option of engaging compelling at that stage of the extradition
the services of counsel or not. x x x Thus, proceedings is the need to be more
the right to counsel is not imperative in deferential to the judgment of a co-equal
administrative investigations because such branch of the government, the Executive,
inquiries are conducted merely to determine which has been endowed by our Constitution
whether there are facts that merit disciplinary with greater power over matters involving our
measures against erring public officers and foreign relations. Needless to state, this
employees, with the purpose of maintaining balance of interests is not a static but a
the dignity of government service. moving balance which can be adjusted as
the extradition process moves from the
The right to counsel is not indispensable to administrative stage to the judicial stage and
due process unless required by the to the execution stage depending on factors
Constitution or the law. X x x. (Lumiqued v. that will come into play. In sum, we rule that
Exevea, 282 SCRA 125, Nov. 18, 1997 the temporary hold on private respondent's
[Romero]) privilege of notice and hearing is a soft
restraint on his right to due process which
will not deprive him of fundamental fairness
118. Does an extraditee have the right to should he decide to resist the request for his
extradition to the United States. There is no
notice and hearing during the evaluation
denial of due process as long as
stage of an extradition proceeding? fundamental fairness is assured a party.
(Secretary of Justice v. Hon. Ralph C.
Held: Considering that in the case at bar, Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, Oct. 17, 2000,
the extradition proceeding is only at its En Banc [Puno])
evaluation stage, the nature of the right
being claimed by the private respondent is
nebulous and the degree of prejudice he will
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 57
The Equal Protection Clause to current as well as future conditions, the
classification may not be impugned as
violating the Constitution's equal protection
119. Explain and discuss the equal
guarantee. A distinction based on real and
protection of the law clause. reasonable considerations related to a
proper legislative purpose x x x is neither
Held: 1. The equal protection of the law is unreasonable, capricious nor unfounded.
embraced in the concept of due process, as (Himagan v. People, 237 SCRA 538, Oct.
every unfair discrimination offends the 7, 1994, En Banc [Kapunan])
requirements of justice and fair play. It has
nonetheless been embodied in a separate
clause in Article III, Sec. 1, of the
120. Congress enacted R.A. No. 8189 which
Constitution to provide for a more specific
provides, in Section 44 thereof, that "No
guaranty against any form of undue
Election Officer shall hold office in a
favoritism or hostility from the government.
particular city or municipality for more than
Arbitrariness in general may be challenged
four (4) years. Any election officer who,
on the basis of the due process clause. But
either at the time of the approval of this Act
if the particular act assailed partakes of an
or subsequent thereto, has served for at
unwarranted partiality or prejudice, the
least four (4) years in a particular city or
sharper weapon to cut it down is the equal
municipality shall automatically be
protection clause.
reassigned by the Commission to a new
station outside the original congressional
According to a long line of decisions, equal
district." Petitioners, who are City and
protection simply requires that all persons or
Municipal Election Officers, theorize that
things similarly situated should be treated
Section 44 of RA 8189 is violative of the
alike, both as to rights conferred and
"equal protection clause" of the 1987
responsibilities imposed. Similar subjects, in
Constitution because it singles out the City
other words, should not be treated
and Municipal Election Officers of the
differently, so as to give undue favor to some
COMELEC as prohibited from holding office
and unjustly discriminate against others.
in the same city or municipality for more than
four (4) years. They maintain that there is no
The equal protection clause does not require
substantial distinction between them and
the universal application of the laws on all
other COMELEC officials, and therefore,
persons or things without distinction. This
there is no valid classification to justify the
might in fact sometimes result in unequal
objective of the provision of law under attack.
protection, as where, for example, a law
Resolve.
prohibiting mature books to all persons,
regardless of age, would benefit the morals
Held: The Court is not persuaded by
of the youth but violate the liberty of adults.
petitioners' arguments. The "equal
What the clause requires is equality among
protection clause" of the 1987 Constitution
equals as determined according to a valid
permits a valid classification under the
classification. By classification is meant the
following conditions:
grouping of persons or things similar to each
other in certain particulars and different from
1) The classification must rest on
all others in these same particulars.
substantial distinction;
(Philippine Judges Association v. Prado,
2) The classification must be germane
227 SCRA 703, 711-712, Nov. 11, 1993, En
to the purpose of the law;
Banc [Cruz])
3) The classification must not be limited
to existing conditions only; and
2. The equal protection clause exists to
4) The classification must apply equally
prevent undue favor or privilege. It is
to all members of the same class.
intended to eliminate discrimination and
oppression based on inequality.
After a careful study, the ineluctable
Recognizing the existence of real difference
conclusion is that the classification under
among men, the equal protection clause
Section 44 of RA 8189 satisfies the
does not demand absolute equality. It
aforestated requirements.
merely requires that all persons shall be
treated alike, under like circumstances and
The singling out of election officers in order
conditions both as to the privileges conferred
to "ensure the impartiality of election officials
and liabilities enforced. Thus, the equal
by preventing them from developing
protection clause does not absolutely forbid
familiarity with the people of their place of
classifications x x x. If the classification is
assignment" does not violate the equal
based on real and substantial differences; is
protection clause of the Constitution.
germane to the purpose of the law; applies to
all members of the same class; and applies
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 58
In Lutz v. Araneta (98 Phil. 148, 153 [1955]), Inc. v. COMELEC, 289 SCRA 337, April
it was held that "the legislature is not 21, 1998 [Mendoza])
required by the Constitution to adhere to a
policy of 'all or none'". This is so for
underinclusiveness is not an argument 122. Does the death penalty law (R.A. No.
against a valid classification. It may be true 7659) violate the equal protection clause
that all other officers of COMELEC referred considering that, in effect, it punishes only
to by petitioners are exposed to the same people who are poor, uneducated, and
evils sought to be addressed by the statute. jobless?
However, in this case, it can be discerned
that the legislature thought the noble Held: R.A. No. 7659 specifically provides
purpose of the law would be sufficiently that “[T]he death penalty shall be imposed if
served by breaking an important link in the the crime of rape is committed x x x when
chain of corruption than by breaking up each the victim is a religious or a child below
and every link thereof. Verily, under Section seven (7) years old.” Apparently, the death
3(n) of RA 8189, election officers are the penalty law makes no distinction. It applies
highest officials or authorized to all persons and to all classes of persons –
representatives of the COMELEC in a city or rich or poor, educated or uneducated,
municipality. It is safe to say that without the religious or non-religious. No particular
complicity of such officials, large-scale person or classes of persons are identified
anomalies in the registration of voters can by the law against whom the death penalty
hardly be carried out. (Agripino A. De shall be exclusively imposed. The law
Guzman, Jr., et al. v. COMELEC (G.R. No. punishes with death a person who shall
129118, July 19, 2000, en Banc [Purisima]) commit rape against a child below seven
years of age. Thus, the perpetration of rape
against a 5-year old girl does not absolve or
121. Are there substantial distinctions exempt an accused from the imposition of
between print media and broadcast media to the death penalty by the fact that he is poor,
justify the requirement for the latter to give uneducated, jobless, and lacks catechetical
free airtime to be used by the Comelec to instruction. To hold otherwise will not
inform the public of qualifications and eliminate but promote inequalities.
program of government of candidates and
political parties during the campaign period? In Cecilleville Realty and Service Corporation
Discuss. v. CA, 278 SCRA 819 [1997]), the SC
clarified that compassion for the poor is an
Held: There are important differences in the imperative of every humane society but only
characteristics of the two media which justify when the recipient is not a rascal claiming an
their differential treatment for free speech undeserved privilege. (People v. Jimmy
purposes. Because of the physical Mijano y Tamora, G.R. No. 129112, July
limitations of the broadcast spectrum, the 23, 1999, En Banc [Per Curiam])
government must, of necessity, allocate
broadcast frequencies to those wishing to
use them. There is no similar justification for 123. The International School Alliance of
government allocation and regulation of the Educators (ISAE) questioned the point-of-
print media. hire classification employed by International
School, Inc. to justify distinction in salary
In the allocation of limited resources, rates between foreign-hires and local-hires,
relevant conditions may validly be imposed i.e., salary rates of foreign-hires are higher
on the grantees or licensees. The reason for by 25% than their local counterparts, as
this is that the government spends public discriminatory and, therefore, violates the
funds for the allocation and regulation of the equal protection clause. The International
broadcast industry, which it does not do in School contended that this is necessary in
the case of print media. To require radio and order to entice foreign-hires to leave their
television broadcast industry to provide free domicile and work here. Resolve.
airtime for the Comelec Time is a fair
exchange for what the industry gets. Held: That public policy abhors inequality
and discrimination is beyond contention. Our
From another point of view, the SC has also Constitution and laws reflect the policy
held that because of the unique and against these evils. X x x
pervasive influence of the broadcast media,
“[n]ecessarily x x x the freedom of television International law, which springs from general
and radio broadcasting is somewhat lesser in principles of law, likewise proscribes
scope than the freedom accorded to discrimination x x x. The Universal
newspaper and print media.” (TELEBAP, Declaration of Human Rights, the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 59
International Covenant on Economic, Social have similar functions and responsibilities,
and Cultural Rights, the International which they perform under similar working
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of conditions.
Racial Discrimination, the Convention
against Discrimination in Education, the The School cannot invoke the need to entice
Convention (No. 111) Concerning foreign-hires to leave their domicile to
Discrimination in Respect of Employment rationalize the distinction in salary rates
and Occupation - all embody the general without violating the principle of equal work
principle against discrimination, the very for equal pay.
antithesis of fairness and justice. The
Philippines, through its Constitution, has Xxx
incorporated this principle as part of its
national laws. While we recognize the need of the School
to attract foreign-hires, salaries should not be
[I]t would be an affront to both the spirit and used as an enticement to the prejudice of
letter of these provisions if the State, in spite local-hires. The local-hires perform the
of its primordial obligation to promote and same services as foreign-hires and they
ensure equal employment opportunities, ought to be paid the same salaries as the
closes its eyes to unequal and discriminatory latter. For the same reason, the "dislocation
terms and conditions of employment x x x. factor" and the foreign-hires' limited tenure
also cannot serve as valid bases for the
Discrimination, particularly in terms of distinction in salary rates. The dislocation
wages, is frowned upon by the Labor Code. factor and limited tenure affecting foreign-
Article 135, for example, prohibits and hires are adequately compensated by certain
penalizes the payment of lesser benefits accorded them which are not
compensation to a female employee as enjoyed by local-hires, such as housing,
against a male employee for work of equal transportation, shipping costs, taxes and
value. Article 248 declares it an unfair labor home leave travel allowances.
practice for an employer to discriminate in
regards to wages in order to encourage or The Constitution enjoins the State to "protect
discourage membership in any labor the rights of workers and promote their
organization. X x x welfare", "to afford labor full protection." The
State, therefore, has the right and duty to
The foregoing provisions impregnably regulate the relations between labor and
institutionalize in this jurisdiction the long capital. These relations are not merely
honored legal truism of "Equal pay for equal contractual but are so impressed with public
work." Persons who work with substantially interest that labor contracts, collective
equal qualifications, skill, effort and bargaining agreements included, must yield
responsibility, under similar conditions, to the common good. Should such contracts
should be paid similar salaries. This rule contain stipulations that are contrary to
applies to the School (International School, public policy, courts will not hesitate to strike
Inc.), its "international character" down these stipulations.
notwithstanding.
In this case, we find the point-of-hire
The School contends that petitioner has not classification employed by respondent
adduced evidence that local-hires perform School to justify the distinction in the salary
work equal to that of foreign-hires. The rates of foreign-hires and local-hires to be an
Court finds this argument a little cavalier. If invalid classification. There is no reasonable
an employer accords employees the same distinction between the services rendered by
position and rank, the presumption is that foreign-hires and local-hires. The practice of
these employees perform equal work. This the School of according higher salaries to
presumption is borne by logic and human foreign-hires contravenes public policy and,
experience. If the employer pays one certainly, does not deserve the sympathy of
employee less than the rest, it is not for that this Court. (International School Alliance
employee to explain why he receives less or of Educators (ISAE) v. Hon. Leonardo A.
why the others receive more. That would be Quisumbing, G.R. No. 128845, June 1,
st
adding insult to injury. The employer has 2000, 1 Div. [Kapunan])
discriminated against that employee; it is for
the employer to explain why the employee is 124. Accused-appellant Romeo G. Jalosjos
treated unfairly. filed a motion before the Court asking that he
be allowed to fully discharge the duties of a
The employer in this case failed to discharge Congressman, including attendance at
this burden. There is no evidence here that legislative sessions and committee meetings
foreign-hires perform 25% more efficiently or despite his having been convicted in the first
effectively than the local-hires. Both groups instance of a non-bailable offense. Does
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 60
being an elective official result in a are germane to the purposes of the law
substantial distinction that allows different and apply to all those belonging to the same
treatment? Is being a Congressman a class.
substantial differentiation which removes the
accused-appellant as a prisoner from the Xxx
same class as all persons validly confined
under law? It can be seen from the foregoing that
incarceration, by its nature, changes an
Held: In the ultimate analysis, the issue individual‟s status in society. Prison officials
before us boils down to a question of have the difficult and often thankless job of
constitutional equal protection. preserving the security in a potentially
explosive setting, as well as of attempting to
Xxx provide rehabilitation that prepare inmates
for re-entry into the social mainstream.
The performance of legitimate and even Necessarily, both these demands require the
essential duties by public officers has never curtailment and elimination of certain rights.
been an excuse to free a person validly in
prison. The duties imposed by the “mandate Premises considered, we are constrained to
of the people” are multifarious. The rule against the accused-appellant‟s claim
accused-appellant asserts that the duty to that re-election to public office gives priority
legislate ranks highest in the hierarchy of to any other right or interest, including the
government. The accused-appellant is only police power of the State. (People v.
one of 250 members of the House of Jalosjos, 324 SCRA 689, Feb. 3, 2000, En
Representatives, not to mention the 24 Banc [Ynares-Santiago])
members of the Senate, charged with the
duties of legislation. Congress continues to
function well in the physical absence of one The Right against Unreasonable
or a few of its members. Depending on the
exigency of Government that has to be Searches and Seizures
addressed, the President or the Supreme
Court can also be deemed the highest for 125. Discuss the constitutional requirement
that particular duty. The importance of a that a judge, in issuing a warrant of arrest,
function depends on the need for its must determine probable cause “personally.”
exercise. The duty of a mother to nurse her Distinguish determination of probable cause
infant is most compelling under the law of by the prosecutor and determination of
nature. A doctor with unique skills has the probable cause by the judge.
duty to save the lives of those with a
particular affliction. An elective governor has Held: It must be stressed that the 1987
to serve provincial constituents. A police Constitution requires the judge to determine
officer must maintain peace and order. probable cause “personally,” a requirement
Never had the call of a particular duty lifted a which does not appear in the corresponding
prisoner into a different classification from provisions of our previous constitutions. This
those others who are validly restrained by emphasis evinces the intent of the framers to
law. place a greater degree of responsibility upon
trial judges than that imposed under previous
A strict scrutiny of classifications is essential Constitutions.
lest wittingly or otherwise, insidious
discriminations are made in favor of or In Soliven v. Makasiar, this Court
against groups or types of individuals. pronounced:
Held: Such a change is proscribed by the 129. What is the “plain view” doctrine?
Constitution which requires inter alia the What are its requisites? Discuss.
search warrant to particularly describe the
place to be searched as well as the persons Held: 1. Objects falling in plain view of an
or things to be seized. It would concede to officer who has a right to be in the position to
police officers the power of choosing the have that view are subject to seizure even
place to be searched, even if it not be that without a search warrant and may be
delineated in the warrant. It would open introduced in evidence. The “plain view”
wide the door to abuse of the search doctrine applies when the following
process, and grant to officers executing a requisites concur:
search warrant that discretion which the (a) the law enforcement officer in search
Constitution has precisely removed from of the evidence has a prior justification
them. The particularization of the description for an intrusion or is in a position from
of the place to be searched may properly be which he can view a particular area;
done only by the Judge, and only in the
warrant itself; it cannot be left to the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 63
(b) the discovery of the evidence in plain evidence against the accused, but
view is inadvertent; inadvertently comes across an incriminating
object. Clearly, their discovery of the
(c) it is immediately apparent to the cannabis plants was not inadvertent. We
officer that the item he observes may be also note the testimony of SPO2 Tipay that
evidence of a crime, contraband or upon arriving at the area, they first had to
otherwise subject to seizure. The law “look around the area” before they could spot
enforcement officer must lawfully make the illegal plants. Patently, the seized
an initial intrusion or properly be in a marijuana plants were not “immediately
position from which he can particularly apparent” and “further search” was needed.
view the area. In the course of such In sum, the marijuana plants in question
lawful intrusion, he came inadvertently were not in “plain view” or “open to eye and
across a piece of evidence incriminating hand.” The “plain view” doctrine, thus,
the accused. The object must be open cannot be made to apply.
to eye and hand and its discovery
inadvertent. Nor can we sustain the trial court‟s
conclusion that just because the marijuana
It is clear that an object is in plain view if the plants were found in an unfenced lot,
object itself is plainly exposed to sight. The appellant could not invoke the protection
difficulty arises when the object is inside a afforded by the Charter against
closed container. Where the object seized unreasonable searches by agents of the
was inside a closed package, the object itself State. The right against unreasonable
is not in plain view and therefore cannot be searches and seizures is the immunity of
seized without a warrant. However, if the one‟s person, which includes his residence,
package proclaims its contents, whether by his papers, and other possessions. The
its distinctive configuration, its transparency, guarantee refers to “the right of personal
or if its contents are obvious to an observer, security” of the individual. X x x, what is
then the contents are in plain view and may sought to be protected against the State‟s
be seized. In other words, if the package is unlawful intrusion are persons, not places.
such that an experienced observer could To conclude otherwise would not only mean
infer from its appearance that it contains the swimming against the stream, it would also
prohibited article, then the article is deemed lead to the absurd logic that for a person to
in plain view. It must be immediately be immune against unreasonable searches
apparent to the police that the items that they and seizures, he must be in his home or
observe may be evidence of a crime, office, within a fenced yard or a private
contraband or otherwise subject to seizure. place. The Bill of Rights belongs as much to
(People v. Doria, 301 SCRA 668, Jan. 22, the person in the street as to the individual in
1999, En Banc [Puno, J.]) the sanctuary of his bedroom. (People v.
Abe Valdez, G.R. No. 129296, Sept. 25,
2. For the doctrine to apply, the following 2000, En Banc [Quisumbing])
elements must be present:
3. Considering its factual milieu, this case
a) a prior valid intrusion based on the falls squarely under the plain view doctrine.
valid warrantless arrest in which the X x x.
police are legally present in the
pursuit of their official duties; When Spencer wrenched himself free from
b) the evidence was inadvertently the grasp of PO2 Gaviola, he instinctively ran
discovered by the police who have towards the house of appellant. The
the right to be where they are; and members of the buy-bust team were justified
c) the evidence must be immediately in running after him and entering the house
apparent; and without a search warrant for they were hot in
d) plain view justified mere seizure of the heels of a fleeing criminal. Once inside
evidence without further search. the house, the police officers cornered
Spencer and recovered the buy-bust money
In the instant case, recall that PO2 Balut from him. They also caught appellant in
testified that they first located the marijuana flagrante delicto repacking the marijuana
plants before appellant was arrested without bricks which were in full view on top of a
a warrant. Hence, there was no valid table. X x x.
warrantless arrest which preceded the
search of appellant‟s premises. Note further Hence, appellant‟s subsequent arrest was
that the police team was dispatched to likewise lawful, coming as it is within the
appellant‟s kaingin precisely to search for purview of Section 5(a) of Rule 113 of the
and uproot the prohibited flora. The seizure 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure x x x.
of evidence in “plain view” applies only
where the police officer is not searching for
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 64
Section 5(a) is commonly referred to as the In admitting in evidence two guns seized
rule on in flagrante delicto arrests. Here two during the stop-and-frisk, the US Supreme
elements must concur: (1) the person to be Court held that what justified the limited
arrested must execute an overt act indicating search was the more immediate interest of
that he has just committed, is actually the police officer in taking steps to assure
committing, or is attempting to commit a himself that the person with whom he was
crime; and (2) such overt act is done in the dealing was not armed with a weapon that
presence or within the view of the arresting could unexpectedly and fatally be used
officer. Thus, when appellant was seen against him.
repacking the marijuana, the police officers
were not only authorized but also duty-bound It did not, however, abandon the rule that the
to arrest him even without a warrant. police must, whenever practicable, obtain
(People v. Elamparo, 329 SCRA 404, 414- advance judicial approval of searches and
415, March 31, 2000, 2nd Div. seizures through the warrant procedure,
[Quisumbing]) excused only by exigent circumstances.
(Manalili v. CA, 280 SCRA 400, Oct. 9,
1997 [Panganiban])
130. What is a “stop-and-frisk” search?
2. We now proceed to the justification for
Held: 1. In the landmark case of Terry v. and allowable scope of a “stop-and-frisk” as
Ohio (20 L Ed 2d 889; 88 S Ct 1868, 392 US a “limited protective search of outer clothing
1, 900, June 10, 1968), a stop-and-frisk was for weapons,” as laid down in Terry, thus:
defined as the vernacular designation of the
right of a police officer to stop a citizen on We merely hold today that where
the street, interrogate him, and pat him for a police officer observes unusual
weapon(s): conduct which leads him reasonably to
conclude in light of his experience that
“x x x (W)here a police officer criminal activity may be afoot and that
observes an unusual conduct which the persons with whom he is dealing
leads him reasonably to conclude in light may be armed and presently dangerous,
of his experience that criminal activity where in the course of investigating this
may be afoot and that the persons with behavior he identifies himself as a
whom he is dealing may be armed and policeman and makes reasonable
presently dangerous, where in the inquiries, and where nothing in the initial
course of investigating this behavior he stages of the encounter serves to dispel
identified himself as a policeman and his reasonable fear for his own or others‟
make reasonable inquiries, and where safety, he is entitled for the protection of
nothing in the initial stages of the himself and others in the area to conduct
encounter serves to dispel his a carefully limited search of the outer
reasonable fear for his own or others‟ clothing of such persons in an attempt to
safety, he is entitled for the protection of discover weapons which might be used
himself or others in the area to conduct a to assault him. Such a search is a
carefully limited search of the outer reasonable search under the Fourth
clothing of such persons in an attempt to Amendment (Terry, at 911. In fact, the
discover weapons which might be used Court noted that the „sole justification‟ for
to assault him. Such a search is a a stop-and-frisk was the „protection of
reasonable search under the Fourth the police officer and others nearby‟;
Amendment, and any weapon seized while the scope of the search conducted
may properly be introduced in evidence in the case was limited to patting down
against the person from whom they were the outer clothing of petitioner and his
taken.” (Herrera, A Handbook on Arrest, companions, the police officer did not
Search and Seizure and Custodial place his hands in their pockets nor
Investigation, 1995 ed., p. 185; and Terry under the outer surface of their garments
v. Ohio, supra, p. 911) until he had felt weapons, and then he
merely reached for and removed the
In allowing such a search, the United States guns. This did not constitute a general
Supreme Court held that the interest of exploratory search, Id.)
effective crime prevention and detection
allows a police officer to approach a person, Other notable points of Terry are that while
in appropriate circumstances and manner, probable cause is not required to conduct a
for purposes of investigating possible “stop-and-frisk,” it nevertheless holds that
criminal behavior even though there is mere suspicion or a hunch will not validate a
insufficient probable cause to make an actual “stop-and-frisk.” A genuine reason must
arrest. exist, in light of the police officer‟s
experience and surrounding conditions, to
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 65
warrant the belief that the person detained
has weapons concealed about him. Finally, The checkpoint herein conducted was in
a “stop-and-frisk” serves a two-fold interest: pursuance of the gun ban enforced by the
(1) the general interest of effective crime COMELEC. The COMELEC would be hard
prevention and detection, which underlies put to implement the ban if its deputized
the recognition that a police officer may, agents were limited to a visual search of
under appropriate circumstances and in an pedestrians. It would also defeat the
appropriate manner, approach a person for purpose for which such ban was instituted.
purposes of investigating possible criminal Those who intend to bring a gun during said
behavior even without probable cause; and period would know that they only need a car
(2) the more pressing interest of safety and to be able to easily perpetrate their malicious
self-preservation which permit the police designs.
officer to take steps to assure himself that
the person with whom he deals is not armed The facts adduced do not constitute a
with a deadly weapon that could ground for a violation of the constitutional
unexpectedly and fatally be used against the rights of the accused against illegal search
police officer. (Malacat v. Court of and seizure. PO3 Suba admitted that they
Appeals, 283 SCRA 159, Dec. 12, 1997 were merely stopping cars they deemed
[Davide]) suspicious, such as those whose windows
are heavily tinted just to see if the
passengers thereof were carrying guns. At
131. Are searches at checkpoints valid? best they would merely direct their flashlights
Discuss. inside the cars they would stop, without
opening the car‟s doors or subjecting its
Held: Accused-appellants assail the manner passengers to a body search. There is
by which the checkpoint in question was nothing discriminatory in this as this is what
conducted. They contend that the the situation demands.
checkpoint manned by elements of the
Makati Police should have been announced. We see no need for checkpoints to be
They also complain of its having been announced x x x. Not only would it be
conducted in an arbitrary and discriminatory impractical, it would also forewarn those who
manner. intend to violate the ban. Even so, badges of
legitimacy of checkpoints may still be
We take judicial notice of the existence of the inferred from their fixed location and the
COMELEC resolution imposing a gun ban regularized manner in which they are
during the election period issued pursuant to operated. (People v. Usana, 323 SCRA
Section 52(c) in relation to Section 26(q) of 754, Jan. 28, 2000, 1st Div. [Davide, CJ])
the Omnibus Election Code (Batas
Pambansa Blg. 881). The national and local
elections in 1995 were held on 8 May, the 132. Do the ordinary rights against
second Monday of the month. The incident, unreasonable searches and seizures apply
which happened on 5 April 1995, was well to searches conducted at the airport
within the election period. pursuant to routine airport security
procedures?
This Court has ruled that not all checkpoints
are illegal. Those which are warranted by Held: Persons may lose the protection of
the exigencies of public order and are the search and seizure clause by exposure
conducted in a way least intrusive to of their persons or property to the public in a
motorists are allowed. For, admittedly, manner reflecting a lack of subjective
routine checkpoints do intrude, to a certain expectation of privacy, which expectation
extent, on motorists‟ right to “free passage society is prepared to recognize as
without interruption,” but it cannot be denied reasonable. Such recognition is implicit in
that, as a rule, it involves only a brief airport security procedures. With increased
detention of travelers during which the concern over airplane hijacking and terrorism
vehicle‟s occupants are required to answer a has come increased security at the nation‟s
brief question or two. For as long as the airports. Passengers attempting to board an
vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants aircraft routinely pass through metal
subjected to a body search, and the detectors; their carry-on baggage as well as
inspection of the vehicle is limited to a visual checked luggage are routinely subjected to
search, said routine checks cannot be x-ray scans. Should these procedures
regarded as violative of an individual‟s right suggest the presence of suspicious objects,
against unreasonable search. In fact, these physical searches are conducted to
routine checks, when conducted in a fixed determine what the objects are. There is
area, are even less intrusive. little question that such searches are
reasonable, given their minimal
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 66
intrusiveness, the gravity of the safety comprehensive approach to health
interests involved, and the reduced privacy development which shall endeavor to make
expectations associated with airline travel. essential goods, health and other social
Indeed, travelers are often notified through services available to all people at affordable
airport public address systems, signs, and cost" (Article XIII, Section 11) cannot be
notices in their airline tickets that they are neglected. This is why "the State shall
subject to search and, if any prohibited establish and maintain an effective food and
materials or substances are found, such drug regulatory system." (Article XIII, Section
would be subject to seizure. These 12) The BFAD is the government agency
announcements place passengers on notice vested by law to make a mandatory and
that ordinary constitutional protections authoritative determination of the true
against warrantless searches and seizures therapeutic effect of drugs because it
do not apply to routine airport procedures. involves technical skill which is within its
special competence. The health of the
The packs of methamphetamine citizenry should never be compromised. To
hydrochloride having thus been obtained the layman, medicine is a cure that may lead
through a valid warrantless search, they are to better health.
admissible in evidence against the accused-
appellant herein. Corollarily, her subsequent If the seized 52 boxes of drugs are
arrest, although likewise without warrant, pharmaceutically correct but not properly
was justified since it was effected upon the documented, they should be promptly
discovery and recovery of “shabu” in her disposed of in the manner provided by law in
person in flagrante delicto. (People v. Leila order to ensure that the same do not fall into
Johnson, G.R. No. 138881, Dec. 18, 2000, the wrong hands who might use the drugs
2nd Div. [Mendoza]) underground. Private respondent cannot
rely on the statement of the trial court that
the applicant "failed to allege in the
133. May the constitutional protection application for search warrant that the
against unreasonable searches and subject drugs for which she was applying for
seizures be extended to acts committed search warrant were either fake,
by private individuals? misbranded, adulterated, or unregistered" in
order to obtain the return of the drugs. The
Held: As held in People v. Marti (193 SCRA policy of the law enunciated in R.A. No. 8203
57 [1991]), the constitutional protection is to protect the consumers as well as the
against unreasonable searches and seizures licensed businessmen. Foremost among
refers to the immunity of one's person from these consumers is the government itself
interference by government and it cannot be which procures medicines and distributes
extended to acts committed by private them to the local communities through direct
individuals so as to bring it within the ambit assistance to the local health centers or
of alleged unlawful intrusion. (People v. through outreach and charity programs.
Mendoza, 301 SCRA 66, Jan. 18, 1999, 1
st Only with the proper government sanctions
Div. [Melo]) can medicines and drugs circulate the
market. We cannot afford to take any risk,
for the life and health of the citizenry are as
precious as the existence of the State.
134. Should the seized drugs which are
(People v. Judge Estrella T. Estrada, G.R
pharmaceutically correct but not properly
No. 124461, June 26, 2000, Spcl. 2nd Div.
documented subject of an illegal search
[Ynares-Santiago])
because the applicant “failed to allege in the
application for search warrant that the
subject drugs for which she was applying for
search warrant were either fake, 135. Do Regional Trial Courts have
misbranded, adulterated, or unregistered,” competence to pass upon the validity or
be returned to the owner? regularity of seizure and forfeiture
proceedings conducted by the Bureau of
Held: With the State's obligation to protect Customs and to enjoin or otherwise interfere
and promote the right to health of the people with these proceedings?
and instill health consciousness among them
(Article II, Section 15, 1987 Constitution), in Held: In Jao v. Court of Appeals (249 SCRA
order to develop a healthy and alert citizenry 35, 42-43 [1995]), this Court, reiterating its
(Article XIV, Section 19[1]), it became rulings x x x said:
mandatory for the government to supervise
and control the proliferation of drugs in the There is no question that
market. The constitutional mandate that "the Regional Trial Courts are devoid of any
State shall adopt an integrated and competence to pass upon the validity or
regularity of seizure and forfeiture
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 67
proceedings conducted by the Bureau of or arrests provided by law and continue
Customs and to enjoin or otherwise with the administrative hearings. As the
interfere with these proceedings. The Court held in Ponce Enrile v. Vinuya (37
Collector of Customs sitting in seizure SCRA 381, 388-389 [1971], reiterated in Jao
and forfeiture proceedings has exclusive v. Court of Appeals, supra and Mison v.
jurisdiction to hear and determine all Natividad, 213 SCRA 734 [1992]):
questions touching on the seizure and
forfeiture of dutiable goods. The The governmental agency concerned, the
Regional Trial Courts are precluded from Bureau of Customs, is vested with exclusive
assuming cognizance over such matters authority. Even if it be assumed that in the
even through petitions of certiorari, exercise of such exclusive competence a
prohibition or mandamus. taint of illegality may be correctly imputed,
the most that can be said is that under
It is likewise well-settled that the certain circumstances the grave abuse of
provisions of the Tariff and Customs discretion conferred may oust it of such
Code and that of Republic Act No. 1125, jurisdiction. It does not mean however that
as amended, otherwise known as “An correspondingly a court of first instance is
Act Creating the Court of Tax Appeals,” vested with competence when clearly in the
specify the proper fora and procedure for light of the above decisions the law has not
the ventilation of any legal objections or seen fit to do so. The proceeding before the
issues raised concerning these Collector of Customs is not final. An appeal
proceedings. Thus, actions of the lies to the Commissioner of Customs and
Collector of Customs are appealable to thereafter to the Court of Tax Appeals. It
the Commissioner of Customs, whose may even reach this Court through the
decision, in turn, is subject to the appropriate petition for review. The proper
exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the ventilation of the legal issues raised is thus
Court of Tax Appeals and from there to indicated. Certainly a court of first instance
the Court of Appeals. is not therein included. It is devoid of
jurisdiction. (Bureau of Customs v. Ogario,
The rule that Regional Trial 329 SCRA 289, 296-298, March 30, 2000,
nd
Courts have no review powers over such 2 Div. [Mendoza])
proceedings is anchored upon the policy
of placing no unnecessary hindrance on
the government‟s drive, not only to The Privacy of Communications
prevent smuggling and other frauds upon
Customs, but more importantly, to render and Correspondence
effective and efficient the collection of
import and export duties due the State, 136. Private respondent Rafael S. Ortanez
which enables the government to carry filed with the Regional Trial Court of Quezon
out the functions it has been instituted to City a complaint for annulment of marriage
perform. with damages against petitioner Teresita
Salcedo-Ortanez, on grounds of lack of
Even if the seizure by the marriage license and/or psychological
Collector of Customs were illegal, x x x incapacity of the petitioner. Among the
we have said that such act does not exhibits offered by private respondent were
deprive the Bureau of Customs of three (3) cassette tapes of alleged telephone
jurisdiction thereon. conversations between petitioner and
unidentified persons. The trial court issued
Respondents cite the statement of the Court the assailed order admitting all of the
of Appeals that regular courts still retain evidence offered by private respondent,
jurisdiction “where, as in this case, for lack of including tape recordings of telephone
probable cause, there is serious doubt as to conversations of petitioner with unidentified
the propriety of placing the articles under persons. These tape recordings were made
Customs jurisdiction through and obtained when private respondent
seizure/forfeiture proceedings.” They allowed his friends from the military to wire
overlook the fact, however, that under the tap his home telephone. Did the trial court
law, the question of whether probable cause act properly when it admitted in evidence
exists for the seizure of the subject sacks of said tape recordings?
rice is not for the Regional Trial Court to
determine. The customs authorities do not Held: Republic Act No. 4200 entitled "An
have to prove to the satisfaction of the court Act to Prohibit and Penalize Wire Tapping
that the articles on board a vessel were and Other Related Violations of the Privacy
imported from abroad or are intended to be of Communication, and For Other Purposes"
shipped abroad before they may exercise the expressly makes such tape recordings
power to effect customs‟ searches, seizures, inadmissible in evidence. x x x.
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 68
makes a crime the violation of secrets by
Clearly, respondent trial court and Court of an officer, the revelation of trade and
Appeals failed to consider the afore-quoted industrial secrets, and trespass to dwelling.
provisions of the law in admitting in evidence Invasion of privacy is an offense in special
the cassette tapes in question. Absent a laws like the Anti-Wiretapping Law (R.A.
clear showing that both parties to the 4200), the Secrecy of Bank Deposits (R.A.
telephone conversations allowed the 1405) and the Intellectual Property Code
recording of the same, the inadmissibility of (R.A. 8293). The Rules of Court on
the subject tapes is mandatory under Rep. privileged communication likewise recognize
Act No. 4200. the privacy of certain information (Section
24, Rule 130[c], Revised Rules on
Additionally, it should be mentioned that the Evidence). (Ople v. Torres, G.R. No.
above-mentioned Republic Act in Section 2 127685, July 23, 1998 [Puno])
thereof imposes a penalty of imprisonment of
not less than six (6) months and up to six (6)
years for violation of said Act. (Salcedo- 139. Discuss why Administrative Order No.
Ortanez v. Court of Appeals, 235 SCRA 308 (issued by the President prescribing for
111, Aug. 4, 1994 [Padilla]) a National ID system for all citizens to
facilitate business transactions with
government agencies engaged in the
The Right to Privacy delivery of basic services and social security
provisions) should be declared
137. Is there a constitutional right to privacy? unconstitutional.
Held: The essence of privacy is the “right to Held: We prescind from the premise that the
be let alone.” In the 1965 case of Griswold right to privacy is a fundamental right
v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479, 14 l. ed. 2D guaranteed by the Constitution, hence, it is
510 [1965]), the United States Supreme the burden of government to show that A.O.
Court gave more substance to the right of No. 308 is justified by some compelling state
privacy when it ruled that the right has a interest and that it is narrowly drawn. A.O.
constitutional foundation. It held that there is No. 308 is predicated on two considerations:
a right of privacy which can be found within (1) the need to provide our citizens and
the penumbras of the First, Third, Fourth, foreigners with the facility to conveniently
Fifth and Ninth Amendments. In the 1968 transact business with basic service and
case of Morfe v. Mutuc (22 SCRA 424, 444- social security providers and other
445), we adopted the Griswold ruling that government instrumentalities and (2) the
there is a constitutional right to privacy. need to reduce, if not totally eradicate,
fraudulent transactions and
The SC clarified that the right of privacy is misrepresentations by persons seeking basic
recognized and enshrined in several services. It is debatable whether these
provisions of our Constitution. It is expressly interests are compelling enough to warrant
recognized in Section 3(1) of the Bill of the issuance of A.O. No. 308. But what is
Rights. Other facets of the right to privacy not arguable is the broadness, the
are protected in various provisions of the Bill vagueness, the overbreadth of A.O. No. 308
of Rights, i.e., Secs. 1, 2, 6, 8, and 17. which if implemented will put our people‟s
(Ople v. Torres, G.R. No. 127685, July 23, right to privacy in clear and present danger.
1998 [Puno])
The heart of A.O. No. 308 lies in its Section 4
which provides for a Population Reference
Number (PRN) as a “common reference
138. Identify the zones of privacy recognized
number to establish a linkage among
and protected in our laws.
concerned agencies” through the use of
“Biometrics Technology” and “computer
Held: The Civil Code provides that “[e]very
application designs.”
person shall respect the dignity, personality,
privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors
It is noteworthy that A.O. No. 308 does not
and other persons” and punishes as
state what specific biological characteristics
actionable torts several acts by a person of
and what particular biometrics technology
meddling and prying into the privacy of
shall be used to identify people who will seek
another. It also holds a public officer or
its coverage. Considering the banquet of
employee or any private individual liable for
options available to the implementors of A.O.
damages for any violation of the rights and
No. 308, the fear that it threatens the right to
liberties of another person, and recognizes
privacy of our people is not groundless.
the privacy of letters and other private
communications. The Revised Penal Code
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 69
A.O. No. 308 should also raise our antennas [T]he Court will not be true to its role as
for a further look will show that it does not the ultimate guardian of the people‟s liberty if
state whether encoding of data is limited to it would not immediately smother the sparks
biological information alone for identification that endanger their rights but would rather
purposes. X x x. Clearly, the indefiniteness wait for the fire that could consume them.
of A.O. No. 308 can give the government the
roving authority to store and retrieve [A]nd we now hold that when the integrity of
information for a purpose other than the a fundamental right is at stake, this Court will
identification of the individual through his give the challenged law, administrative order,
PRN. rule or regulation a stricter scrutiny. It will
not do for the authorities to invoke the
The potential for misuse of the data to be presumption of regularity in the performance
gathered under A.O. No. 308 cannot be of official duties. Nor is it enough for the
underplayed x x x. The more frequent the authorities to prove that their act is not
use of the PRN, the better the chance of irrational for a basic right can be diminished,
building a huge and formidable information if not defeated, even when the government
base through the electronic linkage of the does not act irrationally. They must
files. The data may be gathered for gainful satisfactorily show the presence of
and useful government purposes; but the compelling state interest and that the law,
existence of this vast reservoir of personal rule, or regulation is narrowly drawn to
information constitutes a covert invitation to preclude abuses. This approach is
misuse, a temptation that may be too great demanded by the 1987 Constitution whose
for some of our authorities to resist. entire matrix is designed to protect human
rights and to prevent authoritarianism. In
It is plain and we hold that A.O. No. 308 falls case of doubt, the least we can do is to lean
short of assuring that personal information towards the stance that will not put in danger
which will be gathered about our people will the rights protected by the Constitution.
only be processed for unequivocally
specified purposes. The lack of proper The right to privacy is one of the most
safeguards in this regard of A.O. No. 308 threatened rights of man living in a mass
may interfere with the individual‟s liberty of society. The threats emanate from various
abode and travel by enabling authorities to sources – governments, journalists,
track down his movement; it may also enable employers, social scientists, etc. In the case
unscrupulous persons to access confidential at bar, the threat comes from the executive
information and circumvent the right against branch of government which by issuing A.O.
self-incrimination; it may pave the way for No. 308 pressures the people to surrender
“fishing expeditions” by government their privacy by giving information about
authorities and evade the right against themselves on the pretext that it will facilitate
unreasonable searches and seizures. The delivery of basic services. Given the record-
possibilities of abuse and misuse of the keeping power of the computer, only the
PRN, biometrics and computer technology indifferent will fail to perceive the danger that
are accentuated when we consider that the A.O. No. 308 gives the government the
individual lacks control over what can be power to compile a devastating dossier
read or placed on his ID, much less verify the against unsuspecting citizens. X x x [W]e
correctness of the data encoded. They close with the statement that the right to
threaten the very abuses that the Bill of privacy was not engraved in our Constitution
Rights seeks to prevent. for flattery. (Ople v. Torres, G.R. No.
127685, July 23, 1998 [Puno])
The ability of a sophisticated data center to
generate a comprehensive cradle-to-grave
dossier on an individual and transmit it over 140. Should in camera inspection of bank
a national network is one of the most graphic accounts be allowed? If in the affirmative,
threats of the computer revolution. The under what circumstances should it be
computer is capable of producing a allowed?
comprehensive dossier on individuals out of
information given at different times and for Held: The issue is whether petitioner may
varied purposes. X x x. Retrieval of stored be cited for indirect contempt for her failure
data is simple. When information of a to produce the documents requested by the
privileged character finds its way into the Ombudsman. And whether the order of the
computer, it can be extracted together with Ombudsman to have an in camera
other data on the subject. Once extracted, inspection of the questioned account is
the information is putty in the hands of any allowed as an exception to the law on
person. The end of privacy begins. secrecy of bank deposits (R.A. No. 1405).
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 70
An examination of the secrecy of bank 4) In cases of impeachment,
deposits law (R.A. No. 1405) would reveal 5) Upon order of a competent court in
the following exceptions: cases of bribery or dereliction of duty
of public officials, or
1) Where the depositor consents in 6) In cases where the money deposited
writing; or invested is the subject matter of
2) Impeachment cases; the litigation”.
3) By court order in bribery or
dereliction of duty cases against In the case at bar, there is yet no pending
public officials; litigation before any court of competent
4) Deposit is subject of litigation; authority. What is existing is an investigation
5) Sec. 8, R.A. No. 3019, in cases of by the Office of the Ombudsman. In short,
unexplained wealth as held in the what the Office of the Ombudsman would
case of PNB v. Gancayco (122 Phil. wish to do is to fish for additional evidence to
503, 508 [1965]). formally charge Amado Lagdameo, et. al.,
with the Sandiganbayan. Clearly, there was
The order of the Ombudsman to produce for no pending case in court which would
in camera inspection the subject accounts warrant the opening of the bank account for
with the Union Bank of the Philippines, Julia inspection.
Vargas Branch, is based on a pending
investigation at the Office of the Ombudsman Zones of privacy are recognized and
against Amado Lagdameo, et. al. for protected in our laws. The Civil Code
violation of R.A. No. 3019, Sec. 3 (e) and (g) provides that “[e]very person shall respect
relative to the Joint Venture Agreement the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of
between the Public Estates Authority and mind of his neighbors and other persons”
AMARI. and punishes as actionable torts several acts
for meddling and prying into the privacy of
We rule that before an in camera inspection another. It also holds public officer or
may be allowed, there must be a pending employee or any private individual liable for
case before a court of competent jurisdiction. damages for any violation of the rights and
Further, the account must be clearly liberties of another person, and recognizes
identified, the inspection limited to the the privacy of letters and other private
subject matter of the pending case before communications. The Revised Penal Code
the court of competent jurisdiction. The bank makes a crime of the violation of secrets by
personnel and the account holder must be an officer, revelation of trade and industrial
notified to be present during the inspection, secrets, and trespass to dwelling. Invasion
and such inspection may cover only the of privacy is an offense in special laws like
account identified in the pending case. the anti-Wiretapping Law, the Secrecy of
Bank Deposits Act, and the Intellectual
In Union Bank of the Philippines v. Court of Property Code. (Lourdes T. Marquez v.
Appeals, we held that “Section 2 of the Law Hon. Aniano A. Desierto, G.R. No. 135882,
on Secrecy of Bank Deposits, as amended, June 27, 2001, En Banc [Pardo])
declares bank deposits to be „absolutely
confidential‟ except:
Freedom of Expression
1) In an examination made in the
course of a special or general
141. Distinguish “content-based
examination of a bank that is
specifically authorized by the restrictions” on free speech from
Monetary Board after being satisfied “content-neutral restrictions,” and give
that there is reasonable ground to example of each.
believe that a bank fraud or serious
irregularity has been or is being Held: Content-based restrictions are
committed and that it is necessary to imposed because of the content of the
look into the deposit to establish speech and are, therefore, subject to the
such fraud or irregularity, clear-and-present danger test. For example,
2) In an examination made by an a rule such as that involved in Sanidad v.
independent auditor hired by the Comelec (181 SCRA 529 [1990]), prohibiting
bank to conduct its regular audit columnists, commentators, and announcers
provided that the examination is for from campaigning either for or against an
audit purposes only and the results issue in a plebiscite must have compelling
thereof shall be for the exclusive use reason to support it, or it will not pass muster
of the bank, under strict scrutiny. These restrictions are
3) Upon written permission of the censorial and therefore they bear a heavy
depositor, presumption of constitutional invalidity. In
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 71
addition, they will be tested for possible of exit polls cannot undermine those of the
overbreadth and vagueness. elections, since the former is only part of the
latter. If at all, the outcome of one can only
Content-neutral restrictions, on the other be indicative of the other.
hand, like Sec. 11(b) of R.A. No. 6646, which
prohibits the sale or donation of print space The COMELEC‟s concern with the possible
and air time to political candidates during the noncommunicative effect of exit polls –
campaign period, are not concerned with the disorder and confusion in the voting centers
content of the speech. These regulations – does not justify a total ban on them.
need only a substantial governmental Undoubtedly, the assailed Comelec
interest to support them. A deferential Resolution is too broad, since its application
standard of review will suffice to test their is without qualification as to whether the
validity. The clear-and-present danger rule polling is disruptive or not. There is no
is inappropriate as a test for determining the showing, however, that exit polls or the
constitutional validity of laws, like Sec. 11(b) means to interview voters cause chaos in
of R.A. No. 6646, which are not concerned voting centers. Neither has any evidence
with the content of political ads but only with been presented proving that the presence of
their incidents. To apply the clear-and- exit poll reporters near an election precinct
present danger test to such regulatory tends to create disorder or confuse the
measures would be like using a voters.
sledgehammer to drive a nail when a regular
hammer is all that is needed. Moreover, the prohibition incidentally
prevents the collection of exit poll data and
The test for this difference in the level of their use for any purpose. The valuable
justification for the restriction of speech is information and ideas that could be derived
that content-based restrictions distort public from them, based on the voters‟ answers to
debate, have improper motivation, and are the survey questions will forever remain
usually imposed because of fear of how unknown and unexplored. Unless the ban is
people will react to a particular speech. No restrained, candidates, researchers, social
such reasons underlie content-neutral scientists and the electorate in general would
regulations, like regulation of time, place and be deprived of studies on the impact of
manner of holding public assemblies under current events and of election-day and other
B.P. Blg. 880, the Public Assembly Act of factors on voters‟ choices.
1985. (Osmena v. COMELEC, 288 SCRA
447, March 31, 1998 [Mendoza]) The absolute ban imposed by the Comelec
cannot, therefore, be justified. It does not
leave open any alternative channel of
142. Does the conduct of exit poll by ABS communication to gather the type of
CBN present a clear and present danger of information obtained through exit polling. On
destroying the credibility and integrity of the the other hand, there are other valid and
electoral process as it has the tendency to reasonable ways and means to achieve the
sow confusion considering the randomness Comelec end of avoiding or minimizing
of selecting interviewees, which further disorder and confusion that may be brought
makes the exit poll highly unreliable, to justify about by exit surveys.
the promulgation of a Comelec resolution
prohibiting the same? With foregoing premises, it is concluded that
the interest of the state in reducing disruption
Held: Such arguments are purely is outweighed by the drastic abridgment of
speculative and clearly untenable. First, by the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the
the very nature of a survey, the interviewees media and the electorate. Quite the
or participants are selected at random, so contrary, instead of disrupting elections, exit
that the results will as much as possible be polls – properly conducted and publicized –
representative or reflective of the general can be vital tools for the holding of honest,
sentiment or view of the community or group orderly, peaceful and credible elections; and
polled. Second, the survey result is not for the elimination of election-fixing, fraud
meant to replace or be at par with the official and other electoral ills. (ABS-CBN
Comelec count. It consists merely of the Broadcasting Corporation v. COMELEC,
opinion of the polling group as to who the G.R. No. 133486, Jan. 28, 2000, En Banc
electorate in general has probably voted for, [Panganiban])
based on the limited data gathered from
polled individuals. Finally, not at stake are
the credibility and the integrity of the
elections, which are exercises that are
separate and independent from the exit polls.
The holding and the reporting of the results
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 72
143. Section 5.4 of R.A. No. 9006 (Fair
Election Act) which provides: “Surveys Nor can the ban on election surveys be
affecting national candidates shall not be justified on the ground that there are other
published fifteen (15) days before an election countries x x x which similarly impose
and surveys affecting local candidates shall restrictions on the publication of election
not be published seven (7) days before an surveys. At best this survey is inconclusive.
election.” The Social Weather Stations, Inc. It is noteworthy that in the United States no
(SWS), a private non-stock, non-profit social restriction on the publication of election
research institution conducting surveys in survey results exists. It cannot be argued
various fields; and Kamahalan Publishing that this is because the United States is a
Corporation, publisher of the Manila mature democracy. Neither are there laws
Standard, a newspaper of general imposing an embargo on survey results,
circulation, which features newsworthy items even for a limited period, in other countries.
of information including election surveys, X x x.
challenged the constitutionality of aforesaid
provision as it constitutes a prior restraint on What test should then be employed to
the exercise of freedom of speech without determine the constitutional validity of
any clear and present danger to justify such Section 5.4? The United States Supreme
restraint. Should the challenge be Court x x x held in United States v. O‟ Brien:
sustained?
[A] government regulation is sufficiently
Held: For reason hereunder given, we hold justified (1) if it is within the constitutional
that Section 5.4 of R.A. No. 9006 constitutes power of the government; (2) if it furthers
an unconstitutional abridgment of freedom of an important or substantial governmental
speech, expression, and the press. interest; (3) if the governmental interest
is unrelated to the suppression of free
To be sure, Section 5.4 lays a prior restraint expression; and (4) if the incidental
on freedom of speech, expression, and the restriction on alleged First Amendment
press by prohibiting the publication of freedoms (of speech, expression and
election survey results affecting candidates press) is no greater than is essential to
within the prescribed periods of fifteen (15) the furtherance of that interest (391 U.S.
days immediately preceding a national 367, 20 L. Ed. 2d 692, 680 [1968]
election and seven (7) days before a local [bracketed numbers added]).
election. Because of the preferred status of
the constitutional rights of speech, This is so far the most influential test for
expression, and the press, such a measure distinguishing content-based from content-
is vitiated by a weighty presumption of neutral regulations and is said to have
invalidity. Indeed, “any system of prior “become canonical in the review of such
restraints of expression comes to this Court laws.” It is noteworthy that the O‟ Brien test
bearing a heavy presumption against its has been applied by this Court in at least two
constitutional validity x x x. The Government cases (Adiong v. Comelec, 207 SCRA 712
„thus carries a heavy burden of showing [1992]; Osmena v. Comelec, supra.).
justification for the enforcement of such
restraint.‟” There is thus a reversal of the Under this test, even if a law furthers an
normal presumption of validity that inheres in important or substantial governmental
every legislation. interest, it should be invalidated if such
governmental interest is “not unrelated to the
Nor may it be argued that because of Art. IX- suppression of free expression.” Moreover,
C, Sec. 4 of the Constitution, which gives the even if the purpose is unrelated to the
Comelec supervisory power to regulate the suppression of free speech, the law should
enjoyment or utilization of franchise for the nevertheless be invalidated if the restriction
operation of media of communication, no on freedom of expression is greater than is
presumption of invalidity attaches to a necessary to achieve the governmental
measure like Sec. 5.4. For as we have purpose in question.
pointed out in sustaining the ban on media
political advertisements, the grant of power Our inquiry should accordingly focus on
to the Comelec under Art. IX-C, Sec. 4 is these two considerations as applied to Sec.
limited to ensuring “equal opportunity, time, 5.4.
space, and the right to reply” as well as
uniform and reasonable rates of charges for First. Sec. 5.4 fails to meet criterion (3) of
the use of such media facilities for “public the O‟ Brien test because the causal
information campaigns and forums among connection of expression to the asserted
candidates.” governmental interest makes such interest
“not unrelated to the suppression of free
Xxx expression.” By prohibiting the publication of
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 73
election survey results because of the incidental. The prohibition may be for a
possibility that such publication might limited time, but the curtailment of the right of
undermine the integrity of the election, Sec. expression is direct, absolute, and
5.4 actually suppresses a whole class of substantial. It constitutes a total suppression
expression, while allowing the expression of of a category of speech and is not made less
opinion concerning the same subject matter so because it is only for a period of fifteen
by newspaper columnists, radio and TV (15) days immediately before a national
commentators, armchair theorists, and other election and seven (7) days immediately
opinion makers. In effect, Sec. 5.4 shows a before a local election.
bias for a particular subject matter, if not
viewpoint, by preferring personal opinion to This sufficiently distinguishes Sec. 5.4 from
statistical results. The constitutional R.A. No. 6646, Sec. 11(b), which this Court
guarantee of freedom of expression means found to be valid in National Press Club v.
that “the government has no power to restrict Comelec (supra.), and Osmena v. Comelec
expression because of its message, its (supra.). For the ban imposed by R.A. No.
ideas, its subject matter, or its contents.” 6646, Sec. 11(b) is not only authorized by a
The inhibition of speech should be upheld specific constitutional provision (Art. IX-C,
only if the expression falls within one of the Sec. 4), but it also provided an alternative so
few unprotected categories dealt with in that, as this Court pointed out in Osmena,
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire (315 U.S. there was actually no ban but only a
568, 571-572, 86 L. Ed. 1031, 1035 [1942]), substitution of media advertisements by the
thus: Comelec space, and Comelec hour.
While we take notice of the September 1990 Representatives of the press have no special
report of the United States Judicial standing to apply for a writ of mandate to
Conference Ad Hoc Committee on Cameras compel a court to permit them to attend a
in the Courtroom, still the current rule trial, since within the courtroom a reporter's
obtaining in the Federal Courts of the United constitutional rights are no greater than
States prohibits the presence of television those of any other member of the public.
cameras in criminal trials. Rule 53 of the Massive intrusion of representatives of the
Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure forbids news media into the trial itself can so alter or
the taking of photographs during the destroy the constitutionally necessary judicial
progress of judicial proceedings or radio atmosphere and decorum that the
broadcasting of such proceedings from the requirements of impartiality imposed by due
courtroom. A trial of any kind or in any court process of law are denied the defendant and
is a matter of serious importance to all a defendant in a criminal proceeding should
concerned and should not be treated as a not be forced to run a gauntlet of reporters
means of entertainment. To so treat it and photographers each time he enters or
deprives the court of the dignity which leaves the courtroom.
pertains to it and departs from the orderly
and serious quest for truth for which our Considering the prejudice it poses to the
judicial proceedings are formulated. defendant's right to due process as well as to
the fair and orderly administration of justice,
Courts do not discriminate against radio and and considering further that the freedom of
television media by forbidding the the press and the right of the people to
broadcasting or televising of a trial while information may be served and satisfied by
permitting the newspaper reporter access to less distracting, degrading and prejudicial
the courtroom, since a television or news means, live radio and television coverage of
reporter has the same privilege, as the news court proceedings shall not be allowed.
reporter is not permitted to bring his Video footages of court hearings for news
typewriter or printing press into the purposes shall be restricted and limited to
courtroom. shots of the courtroom, the judicial officers,
the parties and their counsel taken prior to
In Estes v. Texas (381 U.S. 532), the United the commencement of official proceedings.
States Supreme Court held that television No video shots or photographs shall be
coverage of judicial proceedings involves an permitted during the trial proper. (Supreme
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 78
Court En Banc Resolution Re: Live TV them directly and through the shaping of
and Radio Coverage of the Hearing of public opinion, it is a fact, nonetheless, that,
President Corazon C. Aquino's Libel indeed, it does so in so many ways and in
Case, dated Oct. 22, 1991) varying degrees. The conscious or
unconscious effect that such a coverage may
have on the testimony of witnesses and the
150. Should the Court allow live media decision of judges cannot be evaluated but, it
coverage of the anticipated trial of the can likewise be said, it is not at all unlikely
plunder and other criminal cases filed for a vote of guilt or innocence to yield to it.
against former President Joseph E. Estrada It might be farcical to build around them an
before the Sandiganbayan in order “to impregnable armor against the influence of
assure the public of full transparency in the the most powerful media of public opinion.
proceedings of an unprecedented case in
our history” as requested by the Kapisanan To say that actual prejudice should first be
ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas? present would leave to near nirvana the
subtle threats to justice that a disturbance of
Held: The propriety of granting or denying the mind so indispensable to the calm and
the instant petition involve the weighing out deliberate dispensation of justice can create.
of the constitutional guarantees of freedom The effect of television may escape the
of the press and the right to public ordinary means of proof, but it is not far-
information, on the one hand, and the fetched for it to gradually erode our basal
fundamental rights of the accused, on the conception of a trial such as we know it now.
other hand, along with the constitutional
power of a court to control its proceedings in An accused has a right to a public trial but it
ensuring a fair and impartial trial. is a right that belongs to him, more than
anyone else, where his life or liberty can be
When these rights race against one another, held critically in balance. A public trial aims
jurisprudence tells us that the right of the to ensure that he is fairly dealt with and
accused must be preferred to win. would not be unjustly condemned and that
his rights are not compromised in secret
With the possibility of losing not only the conclaves of long ago. A public trial is not
precious liberty but also the very life of an synonymous with publicized trial; it only
accused, it behooves all to make absolutely implies that the court doors must be open to
certain that an accused receives a verdict those who wish to come, sit in the available
solely on the basis of a just and seats, conduct themselves with decorum and
dispassionate judgment, a verdict that would observe the trial process. In the
come only after the presentation of credible constitutional sense, a courtroom should
evidence testified to by unbiased witnesses have enough facilities for a reasonable
unswayed by any kind of pressure, whether number of the public to observe the
open or subtle, in proceedings that are proceedings, not too small as to render the
devoid of histrionics that might detract from openness negligible and not too large as to
its basic aim to ferret veritable facts free from distract the trial participants from their proper
improper influence, and decreed by a judge functions, who shall then be totally free to
with an unprejudiced mind, unbridled by report what they have observed during the
running emotions or passions. proceedings.
Due process guarantees the accused a The courts recognize the constitutionally
presumption of innocence until the contrary embodied freedom of the press and the right
is proved in a trial that is not lifted above its to public information. It also approves of
individual settings nor made an object of media‟s exalted power to provide the most
public‟s attention and where the conclusions accurate and comprehensive means of
reached are induced not by any outside force conveying the proceedings to the public and
or influence but only by evidence and in acquainting the public with the judicial
argument given in open court, where fitting process in action; nevertheless, within the
dignity and calm ambiance is demanded. courthouse, the overriding consideration is
still the paramount right of the accused to
Witnesses and judges may very well be men due process which must never be allowed to
and women of fortitude, able to thrive in suffer diminution in its constitutional
hardy climate, with every reason to presume proportions. Justice Clark thusly
firmness of mind and resolute endurance, pronounced, “while a maximum freedom
but it must also be conceded that “television must be allowed the press in carrying out the
can work profound changes in the behavior important function of informing the public in a
of the people it focuses on.” Even while it democratic society, its exercise must
may be difficult to quantify the influence, or necessarily be subject to the maintenance of
pressure that media can bring to bear on absolute fairness in the judicial process.”
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 79
flag, sing the national anthem, and recite
Xxx the patriotic pledge, during a flag ceremony
on pain of being dismissed from one‟s job or
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines x x x of being expelled from school, is alien to the
expressed its own concern on the live conscience of the present generation of
television and radio coverage of the criminal Filipinos who cut their teeth on the Bill of
trials of Mr. Estrada; to paraphrase: Live Rights which guarantees their rights to free
television and radio coverage can negate the speech (The flag salute, singing the national
rule on exclusion of witnesses during the anthem and reciting the patriotic pledge are
hearings intended to assure a fair trial; at all forms of utterances.) and the free
stake in the criminal trial is not only the life exercise of religious profession and worship.
and liberty of the accused but the very
credibility of the Philippine criminal justice Religious freedom is a fundamental right
system, and live television and radio which is entitled to the highest priority and
coverage of the trial could allow the “hooting the amplest protection among human rights,
throng” to arrogate unto themselves the task for it involves the relationship of man to his
of judging the guilt of the accused, such that Creator (Chief Justice Enrique M.
the verdict of the court will be acceptable Fernando‟s separate opinion in German v.
only if popular; and live television and radio Barangan, 135 SCRA 514, 530-531).
coverage of the trial will not subserve the
ends of justice but will only pander to the “The right to religious profession
desire for publicity of a few grandstanding and worship has a two-fold aspect, viz.,
lawyers. freedom to believe and freedom to act on
one‟s belief. The first is absolute as long
Xxx as the belief is confined within the realm
of thought. The second is subject to
Unlike other government offices, courts do regulation where the belief is translated
not express the popular will of the people in into external acts that affect the public
any sense which, instead, are tasked to only welfare” (J. Cruz, Constitutional Law,
adjudicate controversies on the basis of what 1991 Ed., pp. 176-177).
alone is submitted before them. A trial is not
a free trade of ideas. Nor is a competing Petitioners stress x x x that while they do not
market of thoughts the known test of truth in take part in the compulsory flag ceremony,
a courtroom. (Re: Request Radio-TV they do not engage in “external acts” or
coverage of the Trial in the behavior that would offend their countrymen
Sandiganbayan of the Plunder Cases who believe in expressing their love of
against the former President Joseph E. country through the observance of the flag
Estrada, A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC, June 29, ceremony. They quietly stand at attention
2001, En Banc [Vitug]) during the flag ceremony to show their
respect for the rights of those who choose to
participate in the solemn proceedings. Since
Freedom of Religion they do not engage in disruptive behavior,
there is no warrant for their expulsion.
151. Discuss why the Gerona ruling
“The sole justification for a prior
(justifying the expulsion from public restraint or limitation on the exercise of
schools of children of Jehovah‟s religious freedom (according to the late
Witnesses who refuse to salute the flag Chief Justice Claudio Teehankee in his
and sing the national anthem during flag dissenting opinion in German v.
ceremony as prescribed by the Flag Barangan, 135 SCRA 514, 517) is the
Salute Law) should be abandoned. existence of a grave and present danger
of a character both grave and imminent,
Held: Our task here is extremely difficult, for of a serious evil to public safety, public
the 30-year old decision of this court in morals, public health or any other
Gerona upholding the flag salute law and legitimate public interest, that the State
approving the expulsion of students who has a right (and duty) to prevent.”
refuse to obey it, is not lightly to be trifled Absent such a threat to public safety, the
with. expulsion of the petitioners from the
schools is not justified.
It is somewhat ironic however, that after the
Gerona ruling had received legislative cachet The situation that the Court directly
by its incorporation in the Administrative predicted in Gerona that:
Code of 1987, the present Court believes
that the time has come to reexamine it. The “[T]he flag ceremony will
idea that one may be compelled to salute the become a thing of the past or perhaps
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 80
conducted with very few participants, “Furthermore, let it be noted
and the time will come when we would that coerced unity and loyalty even to the
have citizens untaught and uninculcated country, x x x – assuming that such unity
in and not imbued with reverence for the and loyalty can be attained through
flag and love of country, admiration for coercion – is not a goal that is
national heroes, and patriotism – a constitutionally obtainable at the
pathetic, even tragic situation, and all expense of religious liberty. A desirable
because a small portion of the school end cannot be promoted by prohibited
population imposed its will, demanded means.” (Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S.
and was granted an exemption.” 390, 67 L. ed. 1042, 1046)
has not come to pass. We are not Moreover, the expulsion of members of
persuaded that by exempting the Jehovah‟s Jehovah‟s Witnesses from the schools where
Witnesses from saluting the flag, singing the they are enrolled will violate their right as
national anthem and reciting the patriotic Philippine citizens, under the 1987
pledge, this religious group which admittedly Constitution, to receive free education, for it
comprises a “small portion of the school is the duty of the State to “protect and
population” will shake up our part of the promote the right of all citizens to quality
globe and suddenly produce a nation education x x x and to make such education
“untaught and uninculcated in and unimbued accessible to all” (Sec. 1, Art. XIV).
with reverence for the flag, patriotism, love of
country and admiration for national heroes. In Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope Workers‟
After all, what the petitioners seek only is Union, 59 SCRA 54, 72-75, we upheld the
exemption from the flag ceremony, not exemption of members of the Iglesia Ni
exclusion from the public schools where they Cristo, from the coverage of a closed shop
may study the Constitution, the democratic agreement between their employer and a
way of life and form of government, and union because it would violate the teaching
learn not only the arts, sciences, Philippine of their church not to join any labor group:
history and culture but also receive training
for a vocation or profession and be taught “x x x It is certain that not every
the virtues of “patriotism, respect for human conscience can be accommodated by all
rights, appreciation for national heroes, the the laws of the land; but when general
rights and duties of citizenship, and moral laws conflict with scruples of conscience,
and spiritual values (Sec. 3[2], Art. XIV, 1987 exemptions ought to be granted unless
Constitution) as part of the curricula. some „compelling state interests‟
Expelling or banning the petitioners from intervenes. (Sherbert v. Berner, 374 U.S.
Philippine schools will bring about the very 398, 10 L. Ed. 2d 965, 970, 83 S. Ct.
situation that this Court had feared in 1790).”
Gerona. Forcing a small religious group,
through the iron hand of the law, to We hold that a similar exemption may be
participate in a ceremony that violates their accorded to the Jehovah‟s Witnesses with
religious beliefs, will hardly be conducive to regard to the observance of the flag
love of country or respect for duly constituted ceremony out of respect for their religious
authorities. beliefs, however “bizarre” those beliefs may
seem to others. Nevertheless, their right not
As Mr. Justice Jackson remarked in to participate in the flag ceremony does not
West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943): give them a right to disrupt such patriotic
exercises. Paraphrasing the warning cited
“x x x To believe that patriotism by this Court in Non v. Dames II, 185 SCRA
will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies 523, 535, while the highest regard must be
are voluntary and spontaneous instead afforded their right to the free exercise of
of a compulsory routine is to make an their religion, “this should not be taken to
unflattering statement of the appeal of mean that school authorities are powerless
our institutions to free minds. x x x to discipline them” if they should commit
When they (diversity) are so harmless to breaches of the peace by actions that offend
others or to the State as those we deal the sensibilities, both religious and patriotic,
with here, the price is not too great. But of other persons. If they quietly stand at
freedom to differ is not limited to things attention during the flag ceremony while their
that do not matter much. That would be classmates and teachers salute the flag, sing
a mere shadow of freedom. The test of the national anthem and recite the patriotic
its substance is the right to differ as to pledge, we do not see how such conduct
things that touch the heart of the existing may possibly disturb the peace, or pose “a
order.” grave and present danger of a serious evil to
public safety, public morals, public health or
any other legitimate public interest that the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 81
State has a right (and duty) to prevent.” such criticisms, however unclean they
(Ebralinag v. The Division Superintendent may be. Under our constitutional scheme, it
of Schools of Cebu, 219 SCRA 256, 269- is not the task of the State to favor any
273, March 1, 1993, En Banc [Grino- religion by protecting it against an attack by
Aquino]) another religion. Religious dogma and
beliefs are often at war and to preserve
peace among their followers, especially the
152. A pre-taped TV program of the fanatics, the establishment clause of
Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC) was submitted to freedom of religion prohibits the State from
the MTRCB for review. The latter leaning towards any religion. Vis-à-vis
classified it as “rated X” because it was religious differences, the State enjoys no
banquet of options. Neutrality alone is its
shown to be attacking another religion.
fixed and immovable stance. In fine, the
The INC protested by claiming that its MTRCB cannot squelch the speech of the
religious freedom is per se beyond INC simply because it attacks another
review by the MTRCB. Should this religion. In a State where there ought to be
contention be upheld? no difference between the appearance and
the reality of freedom of religion, the remedy
Held: The right to religious profession and against bad theology is better theology. The
worship has a two-fold aspect, viz., freedom bedrock of freedom of religion is freedom of
to believe and freedom to act on one's belief. thought and it is best served by encouraging
The first is absolute as long as the belief is the marketplace of dueling ideas. When the
confined within the realm of thought. The luxury of time permits, the marketplace of
second is subject to regulation where the ideas demands that speech should be met
belief is translated into external acts that by more speech for it is the spark of opposite
affect the public welfare. speech, the heat of colliding ideas, that can
fan the embers of truth. (Iglesia Ni Cristo v.
The Iglesia Ni Cristo's postulate that its CA, 259 SCRA 529, July 26, 1996 [Puno])
religious freedom is per se beyond review by
the MTRCB should be rejected. Its public
broadcast on TV of its religious programs 154. Is solicitation for the construction of a
brings it out of the bosom of internal belief. church covered by P.D. No. 1564 and,
Television is a medium that reaches even therefore, punishable if done without
the eyes and ears of children. The exercise
the necessary permit for solicitation
of religious freedom can be regulated by the
State when it will bring about the clear and from the DSWD?
present danger of a substantive evil which
the State is duty-bound to prevent, i.e., Held: First. Solicitation of contributions for
serious detriment to the more overriding the construction of a church is not solicitation
interest of public health, public morals, or for "charitable or public welfare purpose" but
public welfare. A laissez faire policy on the for a religious purpose, and a religious
exercise of religion can be seductive to the purpose is not necessarily a charitable or
liberal mind but history counsels the Court public welfare purpose. A fund campaign for
against its blind adoption as religion is and the construction or repair of a church is not
continues to be a volatile area of concern in like fund drives for needy families or victims
our society today. "For sure, we shall of calamity or for the construction of a civic
continue to subject any act pinching the center and the like. Like solicitation of
space for the free exercise of religion to a subscription to religious magazines, it is part
heightened scrutiny but we shall not leave its of the propagation of religious faith or
rational exercise to the irrationality of man. evangelization. Such solicitation calls upon
For when religion divides and its exercise the virtue of faith, not of charity, save as
destroys, the State should not stand still." those solicited for money or aid may not
(Iglesia Ni Cristo v. CA, 259 SCRA 529, belong to the same religion as the solicitor.
July 26, 1996 [Puno]) Such solicitation does not engage the
philanthropic as much as the religious fervor
of the person who is solicited for contribution.
153. Did the MTRCB act correctly when it
Second. The purpose of the Decree is to
rated “X” the Iglesia Ni Cristo's pre-taped protect the public against fraud in view of the
TV program simply because it was found proliferation of fund campaigns for charity
to be "attacking" another religion? and other civic projects. On the other hand,
since religious fund drives are usually
Held: The MTRCB may disagree with the conducted among those belonging to the
criticisms of other religions by the Iglesia Ni same religion, the need for public protection
Cristo but that gives it no excuse to interdict against fraudulent solicitations does not exist
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 82
in as great a degree as does the need for commission of an offense against the
protection with respect to solicitations for person of his employer‟s duly authorized
charity or civic projects as to justify state representative. He filed an illegal termination
regulation. case against the SDA before the labor
arbiter. The SDA filed a motion to dismiss
Third. To require a government permit invoking the doctrine of separation of Church
before solicitation for religious purpose may and State. Should the motion be granted?
be allowed is to lay a prior restraint on the
free exercise of religion. Such restraint, if Held: Where what is involved is the
allowed, may well justify requiring a permit relationship of the church as an employer
before a church can make Sunday and the minister as an employee and has no
collections or enforce tithing. But in relation whatsoever with the practice of faith,
American Bible Society v. City of Manila (101 worship or doctrines of the church, i.e., the
Phil. 386 [1957]), we precisely held that an minister was not excommunicated or
ordinance requiring payment of a license fee expelled from the membership of the
before one may engage in business could congregation but was terminated from
not be applied to the appellant's sale of employment, it is a purely secular affair.
bibles because that would impose a Consequently, the suit may not be dismissed
condition on the exercise of a constitutional invoking the doctrine of separation of church
right. It is for the same reason that religious and the state. (Pastor Dionisio V. Austria
rallies are exempted from the requirement of v. NLRC, G.R. No. 124382, Aug. 16, 1999,
prior permit for public assemblies and other 1st Div. [Kapunan])
uses of public parks and streets (B.P. Blg.
880, Sec. 3[a]). To read the Decree,
therefore, as including within its reach The Right of the People to
solicitations for religious purposes would be
to construe it in a manner that it violates the Information on Matters of Public
Free Exercise of Religion Clause of the Concern
Constitution x x x. (Concurring Opinion,
Mendoza, V.V., J., in Centeno v. Villalon- 157. Discuss the scope of the right to
Pornillos, 236 SCRA 197, Sept. 1, 1994) information on matters of public concern.
155. What is a purely ecclesiastical affair
to which the State can not meddle? Held: In Valmonte v. Belmonte, Jr., the
Court emphasized that the information
Held: An ecclesiastical affair is “one that sought must be “matters of public concern,”
concerns doctrine, creed, or form of worship access to which may be limited by law.
of the church, or the adoption and Similarly, the state policy of full public
enforcement within a religious association of disclosure extends only to “transactions
needful laws and regulations for the involving public interest” and may also be
government of the membership, and the “subject to reasonable conditions prescribed
power of excluding from such associations by law.” As to the meanings of the terms
those deemed not worthy of membership.” “public interest” and “public concern,” the
Based on this definition, an ecclesiastical Court, in Legaspi v. Civil Service
affair involves the relationship between the Commission, elucidated:
church and its members and relate to
matters of faith, religious doctrines, worship “In determining whether or not a
and governance of the congregation. To be particular information is of public concern
concrete, examples of this so-called there is no rigid test which can be
ecclesiastical affairs to which the State applied. „Public concern‟ like „public
cannot meddle are proceedings for interest‟ is a term that eludes exact
excommunication, ordinations of religious definition. Both terms embrace a broad
ministers, administration of sacraments and spectrum of subjects which the public
other activities with attached religious may want to know, either because these
significance. (Pastor Dionisio V. Austria v. directly affect their lives, or simply
NLRC, G.R. No. 124382, Aug. 16, 1999, 1st because such matters naturally arouse
Div. [Kapunan]) the interest of an ordinary citizen. In the
final analysis, it is for the courts to
determine on a case by case basis
156. Petitioner is a religious minister of the whether the matter at issue is of interest
Seventh Day Adventist (SDA). He was or importance, as it relates to or affects
dismissed because of alleged the public.”
misappropriation of denominational funds,
willful breach of trust, serious misconduct, Considered a public concern in the above-
gross and habitual neglect of duties and mentioned case was the “legitimate concern
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 83
of citizens to ensure that government
positions requiring civil service eligibility are 158. What are some of the recognized
occupied only by persons who are eligibles.” restrictions to the right of the people to
So was the need to give the general public information on matters of public concern?
adequate notification of various laws that
regulate and affect the actions and conduct Held:
of citizens, as held in Tanada. Likewise did 1) National security matters and
the “public nature of the loanable funds of intelligence information. This
the GSIS and the public office held by the jurisdiction recognizes the common
alleged borrowers (members of the defunct law holding that there is a
Batasang Pambansa)” qualify the information governmental privilege against
sought in Valmonte as matters of public public disclosure with respect to
interest and concern. In Aquino-Sarmiento state secrets regarding military,
v. Morato (203 SCRA 515, 522-23, diplomatic and other national
November 13, 1991), the Court also held that security matters. Likewise,
official acts of public officers done in pursuit information on inter-government
of their official functions are public in exchanges prior to the conclusion of
character; hence, the records pertaining to treaties and executive agreements
such official acts and decisions are within the may be subject to reasonable
ambit of the constitutional right of access to safeguards for the sake of national
public records. interest;
2) Trade or industrial secrets (pursuant
Under Republic Act No. 6713, public officials to the Intellectual Property Code
and employees are mandated to “provide [R.A. No. 8293, approved on June 6,
information on their policies and procedures 1997] and other related laws) and
in clear and understandable language, [and] banking transactions (pursuant to
ensure openness of information, public the Secrecy of Bank Deposits Act
consultations and hearing whenever [R.A. No. 1405, as amended]);
appropriate x x x,” except when “otherwise 3) Criminal matters, such as those
provided by law or when required by the relating to the apprehension, the
public interest.” In particular, the law prosecution and the detention of
mandates free public access, at reasonable criminals, which courts may not
hours, to the annual performance reports of inquire into prior to such arrest,
offices and agencies of government and detention and prosecution;
government-owned or controlled 4) Other confidential information. The
corporations; and the statements of assets, Ethical Standards Act (R.A. No.
liabilities and financial disclosures of all 6713, enacted on February 20,
public officials and employees. 1989) further prohibits public officials
and employees from using or
In general, writings coming into the hands of divulging “confidential or classified
public officers in connection with their official information officially known to them
functions must be accessible to the public, by reason of their office and not
consistent with the policy of transparency of made available to the public.” (Sec.
governmental affairs. This principle is aimed 7[c], ibid.) Other acknowledged
at affording the people an opportunity to limitations to information access
determine whether those to whom they have include diplomatic correspondence,
entrusted the affairs of the government are closed door Cabinet meetings and
honestly, faithfully and competently executive sessions of either house of
performing their functions as public servants. Congress, as well as the internal
Undeniably, the essence of democracy lies deliberations of the Supreme Court.
in the free-flow of thought; but thoughts and (Chavez v. PCGG, 299 SCRA 744,
ideas must be well-informed so that the Dec. 9, 1998 [Panganiban])
public would gain a better perspective of vital
issues confronting them and, thus, be able to
criticize as well as participate in the affairs of
the government in a responsible, reasonable 159. Is the alleged ill-gotten wealth of the
and effective manner. Certainly, it is by Marcoses a matter of public concern subject
ensuring an unfettered and uninhibited to this right?
exchange of ideas among a well-informed
public that a government remains responsive Held: With such pronouncements of our
to the changes desired by the people. government, whose authority emanates from
(Chavez v. PCGG, 299 SCRA 744, Dec. 9, the people, there is no doubt that the
1998, [Panganiban]) recovery of the Marcoses' alleged ill-gotten
wealth is a matter of public concern and
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 84
imbued with public interest. We may also and heavily outweighed by the overriding
add that “ill-gotten wealth” refers to assets considerations of national security and the
and properties purportedly acquired, directly preservation of democratic institutions in this
or indirectly, by former President Marcos, his country." It cautioned, though, that "the need
immediate family, relatives and close for prudence and circumspection [cannot be
associates through or as a result of their overemphasized] in [the law's] enforcement,
improper or illegal use of government funds operating as it does in the sensitive area of
or properties; or their having taken undue freedom of expression and belief.")
advantage of their public office; or their use
of powers, influences or relationships, As regards the right to strike, the Constitution
“resulting in their unjust enrichment and itself qualifies its exercise with the proviso "in
causing grave damage and prejudice to the accordance with law." This is a clear
Filipino people and the Republic of the manifestation that the state may, by law,
Philippines.” Clearly, the assets and regulate the use of this right, or even deny
properties referred to supposedly originated certain sectors such right. Executive Order
from the government itself. To all intents and No. 180 (Issued by former President
purposes, therefore, they belong to the Corazon C. Aquino on June 1, 1987) which
people. As such, upon reconveyance they provides guidelines for the exercise of the
will be returned to the public treasury, right of government workers to organize, for
subject only to the satisfaction of positive instance, implicitly endorsed an earlier CSC
claims of certain persons as may be circular which "enjoins under pain of
adjudged by competent courts. Another administrative sanctions, all government
declared overriding consideration for the officers and employees from staging strikes,
expeditious recovery of ill-gotten wealth is demonstrations, mass leaves, walkouts and
that it may be used for national economic other forms of mass action which will result
recovery. in temporary stoppage or disruption of public
service" (CSC Memorandum Circular No. 6,
We believe the foregoing disquisition settles s. 1987, dated April 21, 1987) by stating that
the question of whether petitioner has a right the Civil Service law and rules governing
to respondents' disclosure of any agreement concerted activities and strikes in the
that may be arrived at concerning the government service shall be observed.
Marcoses‟ purported ill-gotten wealth.
(Chavez v. PCGG, 299 SCRA 744, Dec. 9, It is also settled in jurisprudence that, in
1998 [Panganiban]) general, workers in the public sector do not
enjoy the right to strike. Alliance of
Concerned Government Workers v. Minister
Freedom of Association of Labor and Employment (124 SCRA 1,
August 3, 1983, also per Gutierrez, Jr., J.)
rationalized the proscription thus:
160. Does the right of civil servants to
organize include their right to strike? Clarify.
"The general rule in the past and
up to the present is that the 'terms and
Held: Specifically, the right of civil servants
conditions of employment in the
to organize themselves was positively
Government, including any political
recognized in Association of Court of
subdivision or instrumentality thereof are
Appeals Employees (ACAE) v. Ferrer-Calleja
governed by law.' X x x. Since the terms
(203 SCRA 596, November 15, 1991). But,
and conditions of government
as in the exercise of the rights of free
employment are fixed by law,
expression and of assembly, there are
government workers cannot use the
standards for allowable limitations such as
same weapons employed by the workers
the legitimacy of the purposes of the
in the private sector to secure
association, the overriding considerations of
concessions from their employers. The
national security and the preservation of
principle behind labor unionism in private
democratic institutions (People v. Ferrer, 48
industry is that industrial peace cannot
SCRA 382, December 27, 1972, per Castro,
be secured through compulsion by law.
J., where the Court, while upholding the
Relations between private employers
validity of the Anti-Subversion Act which
and their employees rest on an
outlawed the Communist Party of the
essentially voluntary basis. Subject to
Philippines and other "subversive"
the minimum requirements of wage laws
organizations, clarified, "Whatever interest in
and other labor and welfare legislation,
freedom of speech and freedom of
the terms and conditions of employment
association is infringed by the prohibition
in the unionized private sector are settled
against knowing membership in the
through the process of collective
Communist Party of the Philippines, is so
bargaining. In government employment,
indirect and so insubstantial as to be clearly
however, it is the legislature and, where
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 85
properly given delegated power, the denied that they engaged in “strike” but
administrative heads of government claimed that they merely exercised a
which fix the terms and conditions of constitutionally guaranteed right – the right to
employment. And this is effected peaceably assemble and petition the
through statutes or administrative government for redress of grievances - and,
circulars, rules, and regulations, not therefore, should not have been penalized.
through collective bargaining Should their contention be upheld?
agreements." (Ibid., p. 13)
Held: Petitioners, who are public
After delving into the intent of the framers of schoolteachers and thus government
the Constitution, the Court affirmed the employees, do not seek to establish that they
above rule in Social Security System have a right to strike. Rather, they
Employees Association (SSSEA) v. Court of tenaciously insist that their absences during
Appeals (175 SCRA 686, July 28, 1989) and certain dates in September 1990 were a
explained: valid exercise of their constitutional right to
"Government employees may, engage in peaceful assembly to petition the
therefore, through their unions or government for a redress of grievances.
associations, either petition the They claim that their gathering was not a
Congress for the betterment of the terms strike, therefore, their participation therein
and conditions of employment which are did not constitute any offense. MPSTA v.
within the ambit of legislation or Laguio (Supra, per Narvasa, J., now CJ.)
negotiate with the appropriate and ACT v. Carino (Ibid.), in which this Court
government agencies for the declared that "these 'mass actions' were to
improvement of those which are not fixed all intents and purposes a strike; they
by law. If there be any unresolved constituted a concerted and unauthorized
grievances, the dispute may be referred stoppage of, or absence from, work which it
to the Public Sector Labor-Management was the teachers' duty to perform,
Council for appropriate action. But undertaken for essentially economic
employees in the civil service may not reasons," should not principally resolve the
resort to strikes, walkouts and other present case, as the underlying facts are
temporary work stoppages, like workers allegedly not identical.
in the private sector, to pressure the
Government to accede to their demands. Strike, as defined by law, means any
As now provided under Sec. 4, Rule III of temporary stoppage of work done by the
the Rules and Regulations to Govern the concerted action of employees as a result of
Exercise of the Right of Government an industrial or labor dispute. A labor
Employees to Self-Organization, which dispute includes any controversy or matter
took effect after the instant dispute concerning terms and conditions of
arose, '[t]he terms and conditions of employment; or the association or
employment in the government, including representation of persons in negotiating,
any political subdivision or fixing, maintaining, changing or arranging the
instrumentality thereof and government- terms and conditions of employment,
owned and controlled corporations with regardless of whether the disputants stand in
original charters are governed by law the proximate relation of employers and
and employees therein shall not strike for employees. With these premises, we now
the purpose of securing changes evaluate the circumstances of the instant
[thereto].'' (Ibid., p. 698) (Jacinto v. petition.
Court of Appeals, 281 SCRA 657, Nov.
14, 1997, En Banc [Panganiban]) It cannot be denied that the mass action or
assembly staged by the petitioners resulted
161. Petitioners public school teachers in the non-holding of classes in several
walked out of their classes and engaged in public schools during the corresponding
mass actions during certain dates in period. Petitioners do not dispute that the
September 1990 protesting the alleged grievances for which they sought redress
unlawful withholding of their salaries and concerned the alleged failure of public
other economic benefits. They also raised authorities - essentially, their "employers" - to
national issues, such as the removal of US fully and justly implement certain laws and
bases and the repudiation of foreign debts, in measures intended to benefit them materially
their mass actions. They refused to return to x x x. And probably to clothe their action
work despite orders to do so and with permissible character (In justifying their
subsequently were found guilty of conduct mass actions, petitioners liken their activity to
prejudicial to the best interests of the service the pro-bases rally led by former President
for having absented themselves without Corazon C. Aquino on September 10, 1991,
proper authority, from their schools during participated in, as well, by public school
regular school days, and penalized. They teachers who consequently absented
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 86
themselves from their classes. No which have been greatly enhanced and
administrative charges were allegedly expanded in the 1987 Constitution by placing
instituted against any of the participants.), them under a separate Article (Article XIII).
they also raised national issues such as the The Article on Social Justice was aptly
removal of the U.S. bases and the described as the "heart of the new Charter"
repudiation of foreign debt. In Balingasan v. by the President of the 1986 Constitutional
Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 124678, July 31, Commission, retired Justice Cecilia Munoz
1997, per Regalado, J.), however, this Court Palma. Social justice is identified with the
said that the fact that the conventional term broad scope of the police power of the state
"strike" was not used by the participants to and requires the extensive use of such
describe their common course of action was power. X x x.
insignificant, since the substance of the
situation, and not its appearance, was The constitutional prohibition against
deemed controlling. impairing contractual obligations is not
absolute and is not to be read with literal
Moreover, the petitioners here x x x were not exactness. It is restricted to contracts with
penalized for the exercise of their right to respect to property or some object of value
assemble peacefully and to petition the and which confer rights that may be asserted
government for a redress of grievances. in a court of justice; it has no application to
Rather, the Civil Service Commission found statutes relating to public subjects within the
them guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best domain of the general legislative powers of
interest of the service for having absented the State and involving the public rights and
themselves without proper authority, from public welfare of the entire community
their schools during regular school days, in affected by it. It does not prevent a proper
order to participate in the mass protest, their exercise by the State of its police power by
absence ineluctably resulting in the non- enacting regulations reasonably necessary
holding of classes and in the deprivation of to secure the health, safety, morals, comfort,
students of education, for which they were or general welfare of the community, even
responsible. Had petitioners availed though contracts may thereby be affected,
themselves of their free time - recess, after for such matters cannot be placed by
classes, weekends or holidays - to dramatize contract beyond the power of the State to
their grievances and to dialogue with the regulate and control them.
proper authorities within the bounds of law,
no one - not the DECS, the CSC or even this Verily, the freedom to contract is not
Court - could have held them liable for the absolute; all contracts and all rights are
valid exercise of their constitutionally subject to the police power of the State and
guaranteed rights. As it was, the temporary not only may regulations which affect them
stoppage of classes resulting from their be established by the State, but all such
activity necessarily disrupted public services, regulations must be subject to change from
the very evil sought to be forestalled by the time to time, as the general well-being of the
prohibition against strikes by government community may require, or as the
workers. Their act by their nature was circumstances may change, or as
enjoined by the Civil Service law, rules and experience may demonstrate the necessity.
regulations, for which they must, therefore, And under the Civil Code, contracts of labor
be made answerable. (Jacinto v. CA, 281 are explicitly subject to the police power of
SCRA 657, Nov. 14, 1997, En Banc the State because they are not ordinary
[Panganiban]) contracts but are impressed with public
interest. Article 1700 thereof expressly
provides:
2. Petitioners pray that the present action In truth, the Contract Clause has never been
should be barred, because private thought as a limitation on the exercise of the
respondents have voluntarily executed State's power of taxation save only where a
quitclaims and releases and received their tax exemption has been granted for a valid
separation pay. Petitioners claim that the consideration. X x x. (Tolentino v.
present suit is a "grave derogation of the Secretary of Finance, 235 SCRA 630, 685-
fundamental principle that obligations arising 686, Aug. 25, 1994, En Banc [Mendoza])
from a valid contract have the force of law
between the parties and must be complied 4. Since timber licenses are not contracts,
with in good faith." the non-impairment clause x x x cannot be
invoked.
The Court disagrees. Jurisprudence holds
that the constitutional guarantee of non- X x x, even if it is to be assumed that the
impairment of contract is subject to the police same are contracts, the instant case does
power of the state and to reasonable not involve a law or even an executive
legislative regulations promoting health, issuance declaring the cancellation or
morals, safety and welfare. Not all modification of existing timber licenses.
quitclaims are per se invalid or against public Hence, the non-impairment clause cannot as
policy, except (1) where there is clear proof yet be invoked. Nevertheless, granting
that the waiver was wangled from an further that a law has actually been passed
unsuspecting or gullible person, or (2) where mandating cancellations or modifications, the
the terms of settlement are unconscionable same cannot still be stigmatized as a
on their face. In these cases, the law will violation of the non-impairment clause. This
step in to annul the questionable is because by its very nature and purpose,
transactions. Such quitclaim and release such a law could have only been passed in
agreements are regarded as ineffective to the exercise of the police power of the state
bar the workers from claiming the full for the purpose of advancing the right of the
measure of their legal rights. people to a balanced and healthful ecology,
promoting their health and enhancing their
In the case at bar, the private respondents general welfare. X x x.
agreed to the quitclaim and release in
consideration of their separation pay. Since In short, the non-impairment clause must
they were dismissed allegedly for business yield to the police power of the state.
losses, they are entitled to separation pay
under Article 283 of the Labor Code. And Finally, it is difficult to imagine x x x how the
since there was thus no extra consideration non-impairment clause could apply with
for the private respondents to give up their respect to the prayer to enjoin the
employment, such undertakings cannot be respondent Secretary from receiving,
allowed to bar the action for illegal dismissal. accepting, processing, renewing or
(Bogo-Medellin Sugarcane Planters approving new timber license for, save in
Association, Inc. v. NLRC, 296 SCRA 108, cases of renewal, no contract would have as
124, [Panganiban]) yet existed in the other instances. Moreover,
with respect to renewal, the holder is not
3. Only slightly less abstract but nonetheless entitled to it as a matter of right. (Oposa v.
hypothetical is the contention of CREBA that Factoran, Jr., 224 SCRA 792 [1993])
the imposition of the VAT on the sales and
leases of real estate by virtue of contracts 5. Anent petitioners' contention that the
entered prior to the effectivity of the law forcible refund of incentive benefits is an
would violate the constitutional provision that unconstitutional impairment of a contractual
"No law impairing the obligation of contracts obligation, suffice it to state that "[n]ot all
shall be passed." It is enough to say that the contracts entered into by the government will
parties to a contract cannot, through the operate as a waiver of its non-suability;
exercise of prophetic discernment, fetter the distinction must be made between its
exercise of the taxing power of the State. sovereign and proprietary acts. The acts
For not only are existing laws read into involved in this case are governmental.
contracts in order to fix obligations as Besides, the Court is in agreement with the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 88
Solicitor General that the incentive pay or services of a lawyer, one will be
benefit is in the nature of a bonus which is provided for him; and that a lawyer
not a demandable or enforceable obligation. may also be engaged by any person
(Blaquera v. Alcala, 295 SCRA 366, 446, in his behalf, or may be appointed
Sept. 11, 1998, En Banc [Purisima]) by the court upon petition of the
person arrested or one acting on his
behalf;
The In-Custodial Investigation 5) That whether or not the person
arrested has a lawyer, he must be
Rights of an Accused Person informed that no custodial
investigation in any form shall be
163. State the procedure, guidelines and conducted except in the presence of
duties which the arresting, detaining, inviting, his counsel of after a valid waiver
or investigating officer or his companions has been made;
must do and observe at the time of making 6) The person arrested must be
an arrest and again at and during the time of informed that, at any time, he has
the custodial interrogation. the right to communicate or confer
by the most expedient means -
Held: Lastly, considering the heavy penalty telephone, radio, letter or
of death and in order to ensure that the messenger - with his lawyer (either
evidence against an accused were obtained retained or appointed), any member
through lawful means, the Court, as guardian of his immediate family, or any
of the rights of the people lays down the medical doctor, priest or minister
procedure, guidelines and duties which the chosen by him or by any one from
arresting, detaining, inviting, or investigating his immediate family or by his
officer or his companions must do and counsel, or be visited by/confer with
observe at the time of making an arrest and duly accredited national or
again at and during the time of the custodial international non-government
interrogation in accordance with the organization. It shall be the
Constitution, jurisprudence and Republic Act responsibility of the officer to ensure
No. 7438 (An Act Defining Certain Rights of that this is accomplished;
Person Arrested, Detained or Under 7) He must be informed that he has the
Custodial Investigation as well as the Duties right to waive any of said rights
of the Arresting, Detaining, and Investigating provided it is made voluntarily,
Officers and Providing Penalties for knowingly and intelligently and
Violations Thereof). It is high-time to ensure that he understood the
educate our law-enforcement agencies who same;
neglect either by ignorance or indifference 8) In addition, if the person arrested
the so-called Miranda rights which had waives his right to a lawyer, he must
become insufficient and which the Court be informed that it must be done in
must update in the light of new legal writing and in the presence of
developments: counsel, otherwise, he must be
warned that the waiver is void even
1) The person arrested, detained, if he insist on his waiver and
invited or under custodial chooses to speak;
investigation must be informed in a 9) That the person arrested must be
language known to and understood informed that he may indicate in any
by him of the reason for the arrest manner at any time or stage of the
and he must be shown the warrant process that he does not wish to be
of arrest, if any. Every other questioned with warning that once
warnings, information or he makes such indication, the police
communication must be in a may not interrogate him if the same
language known to and understood had not yet commenced, or the
by said person; interrogation must cease if it has
2) He must be warned that he has a already begun;
right to remain silent and that any 10) The person arrested must be
statement he makes may be used informed that his initial waiver of his
as evidence against him; right to remain silent, the right to
3) He must be informed that he has the counsel or any of his rights does not
right to be assisted at all times and bar him from invoking it at any time
have the presence of an during the process, regardless of
independent and competent lawyer, whether he may have answered
preferably of his own choice; some questions or volunteered
4) He must be informed that if he has some statements;
no lawyer or cannot afford the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 89
11) He must also be informed that any “x x x [T]he lawyer called to be
statement or evidence, as the case present during such investigation should
may be, obtained in violation of any be as far as reasonably possible, the
of the foregoing, whether inculpatory choice of the individual undergoing
or exculpatory, in whole or in part, questioning. If the lawyer were one
shall be admissible in evidence. furnished in the accused‟s behalf, it is
(People v. Mahinay, 302 SCRA important that he should be competent
455, Feb. 1, 1999, En Banc [Per Curiam]) and independent, i.e., that he is willing to
fully safeguard the constitutional rights of
the accused, as distinguished from one
164. Explain the kind of information that is who would merely be giving a routine,
required to be given by law enforcement peremptory and meaningless recital of
officers to suspect during custodial the individual‟s rights. In People v.
investigation. Basay (219 SCRA 404, 418), this Court
stressed that an accused‟s right to be
Held: [I]t is settled that one‟s right to be informed of the right to remain silent and
informed of the right to remain silent and to to counsel „contemplates the
counsel contemplates the transmission of transmission of meaningful information
meaningful information rather just the rather than just the ceremonial and
ceremonial and perfunctory recitation of an perfunctory recitation of an abstract
abstract constitutional principle. It is not constitutional principle.‟
enough for the interrogator to merely repeat
to the person under investigation the “Ideally therefore, a lawyer
provisions of Section 12, Article III of the engaged for an individual facing
1987 Constitution; the former must also custodial investigation (if the latter could
explain the effects of such provision in not afford one) „should be engaged by
practical terms – e.g., what the person under the accused (himself), or by the latter‟s
investigation may or may not do – and in a relative or person authorized by him to
language the subject fairly understands. The engage an attorney or by the court, upon
right to be informed carries with it a proper petition of the accused or person
correlative obligation on the part of the police authorized by the accused to file such
investigator to explain, and contemplates petition.‟ Lawyers engaged by the
effective communication which results in the police, whatever testimonials are given
subject‟s understanding of what is conveyed. as proof of their probity and supposed
Since it is comprehension that is sought to independence, are generally suspect, as
be attained, the degree of explanation in many areas, the relationship between
required will necessarily vary and depend on lawyers and law enforcement authorities
the education, intelligence, and other can be symbiotic.
relevant personal circumstances of the
person undergoing investigation. In further “x x x The competent or
ensuring the right to counsel, it is not enough independent lawyer so engaged should
that the subject is informed of such right; he be present from the beginning to end,
should also be asked if he wants to avail of i.e., at all stages of the interview,
the same and should be told that he could counseling or advising caution
ask for counsel if he so desired or that one reasonably at every turn of the
could be provided him at his request. If he investigation, and stopping the
decides not to retain a counsel of his choice interrogation once in a while either to
or avail of one to be provided for him and, give advice to the accused that he may
therefore, chooses to waive his right to either continue, choose to remain silent
counsel, such waiver, to be valid and or terminate the interview.”
effective, must still be made with the (People v. Espiritu, 302 SCRA 533,
assistance of counsel, who, under prevailing Feb. 2, 1999, 3rd Div. [Panganiban])
jurisprudence, must be a lawyer. (People v.
Canoy, 328 SCRA 385, March 17, 2000, 1st
Div. [Davide, CJ]) 166. Can a PAO lawyer be considered an
independent counsel within the
contemplation of Section 12, Article III,
165. What is the meaning of “competent 1987 Constitution?
counsel” under Section 12 of the Bill of
Rights? Held: In People v. Oracoy, 224 SCRA 759
[1993]; People v. Bandula, 232 SCRA 566
Held: The meaning of “competent [1994], the SC has held that a PAO lawyer
counsel” was explained in People v. can be considered an independent counsel
Deniega (251 SCRA 626, 637) as follows: within the contemplation of the Constitution
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 90
considering that he is not a special counsel, Vizcarra, 115 SCRA 743, 752 [1982],
public or private prosecutor, counsel of the where the accused, under custody, gave
police, or a municipal attorney whose interest spontaneous answers to a televised
is admittedly adverse to that of the accused- interview by several press reporters in the
appellant. Thus, the assistance of a PAO office of the chief of the CIS, it was held that
lawyer satisfies the constitutional statements spontaneously made by a
requirement of a competent and independent suspect to news reporters on a televised
counsel for the accused. (People v. Bacor, interview are deemed voluntary and are
306 SCRA 522, April 30, 1999, 2nd Div. admissible in evidence. In People v. Andan,
[Mendoza]) 269 SCRA 95, March 3, 1997, it was held
that appellant‟s confessions to the news
reporters were given free from any undue
167. Is the confession of an accused given influence from the police authorities. The
spontaneously, freely and voluntarily to the news reporters acted as news reporters
Mayor admissible in evidence, considering when they interviewed appellant. They were
that the Mayor has “operational supervision not acting under the direction and control of
and control” over the local police and may the police. They did not force appellant to
arguably be deemed a law enforcement grant them an interview and reenact the
officer? commission of the crime. In fact, they asked
his permission before interviewing him. The
Held: While it is true that a municipal mayor Supreme Court further ruled that appellant‟s
has “operational supervision and control” verbal confessions to the newsmen are not
over the local police and may arguably be covered by Section 12(1) and (3) of Article III
deemed a law enforcement officer for of the Constitution and, therefore, admissible
purposes of applying Section 12(1) and (3) of in evidence.
Article III of the Constitution, however,
appellant‟s confession to the mayor was not
made in response to any interrogation by the 169. Discuss the two kinds of involuntary or
latter. In fact, the mayor did not question the coerced confessions under Section 12,
appellant at all. No police authority ordered Article III of the 1987 Constitution. Illustrate
appellant to talk to the mayor. It was how the Court should appreciate said
appellant himself who spontaneously, freely involuntary or coerced confessions.
and voluntarily sought the mayor for a private
meeting. The mayor did not know that Held: There are two kinds of involuntary or
appellant was going to confess his guilt to coerced confessions treated in this
him. When appellant talked with the mayor constitutional provision: (1) those which are
as a confidant and not as a law enforcement the product of third degree methods such as
officer, his uncounselled confession to him torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation,
did not violate his constitutional rights. Thus, which are dealt with in paragraph 2 of
it has been held that the constitutional Section 12, and (2) those which are given
procedures on custodial investigation do not without the benefit of Miranda warnings,
apply to a spontaneous statement, not which are the subject of paragraph 1 of the
elicited through questioning by the same Section 12.
authorities, but given in an ordinary manner
whereby appellant orally admitted having Accused-appellant claims that his confession
committed the crime. What the Constitution was obtained by force and threat. Aside
bars is the compulsory disclosure of from this bare assertion, he has shown no
incriminating facts or confessions. The rights proof of the use of force and violence on him.
under Section 12 are guaranteed to preclude He did not seek medical treatment nor even
the slightest use of coercion by the State as a physical examination. His allegation that
would lead the accused to admit something the fact that he was made to sign the
false, not to prevent him from freely and confession five times is proof that he refused
voluntarily telling the truth. (People v. to sign it.
Andan, 269 SCRA 95, March 3, 1997)
Xxx
168. Are confessions made in response to We discern no sign that the confession was
questions by news reporters admissible in involuntarily executed from the fact that it
evidence? was signed by accused-appellant five times.
Held: The rule barring trial or sentence of an Held: There are two (2) principal legal and
insane person is for the protection of the philosophical schools of thought on how to
accused, rather than of the public. It has deal with the rain of unrestrained publicity
been held that it is inhuman to require an during the investigation and trial of high
accused disabled by God to make a just profile cases. The British approach the
defense for his life or liberty. To put a legally problem with the presumption that publicity
incompetent person on trial or to convict and will prejudice a jury. Thus, English courts
sentence him is a violation of the readily stay and stop criminal trials when the
constitutional rights to a fair trial; and this has right of an accused to fair trial suffers a
several reasons underlying it. For one, the threat. The American approach is different.
accuracy of the proceedings may not be US courts assume a skeptical approach
assured, as an incompetent defendant who about the potential effect of pervasive
cannot comprehend the proceedings may publicity on the right of an accused to a fair
not appreciate what information is relevant to trial. They have developed different strains
the proof of his innocence. Moreover, he is of tests to resolve this issue, i.e., substantial
not in a position to exercise many of the probability of irreparable harm, strong
rights afforded a defendant in a criminal likelihood, clear and present danger, etc.
case, e.g., the right to effectively consult with (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15,
counsel, the right to testify in his own behalf, March 2, 2001, En Banc [Puno])
and the right to confront opposing witnesses,
which rights are safeguards for the accuracy
of the trial result. Second, the fairness of the 183. Should the Ombudsman be stopped
proceedings may be questioned, as there from conducting the investigation of the
are certain basic decisions in the course of a cases filed against petitioner (former
criminal proceeding which a defendant is President) Estrada due to the barrage of
expected to make for himself, and one of prejudicial publicity on his guilt?
these is his plea. Third, the dignity of the
proceedings may be disrupted, for an Held: Petitioner x x x contends that the
incompetent defendant is likely to conduct respondent Ombudsman should be stopped
himself in the courtroom in a manner which from conducting the investigation of the
may destroy the decorum of the court. Even cases filed against him due to the barrage of
if the defendant remains passive, his lack of prejudicial publicity on his guilt. He submits
comprehension fundamentally impairs the that the respondent Ombudsman has
functioning of the trial process. A criminal developed bias and is all set to file the
proceeding is essentially an adversarial criminal cases in violation of his right to due
proceeding. If the defendant is not a process.
conscious and intelligent participant, the
adjudication loses its character as a Xxx
reasoned interaction between an individual
and his community and becomes and This is not the first time the issue of trial by
invective against an insensible object. publicity has been raised in this Court to stop
Fourth, it is important that the defendant the trials or annul convictions in high profile
knows why he is being punished, a criminal cases. In People v. Teehankee, Jr.
comprehension which is greatly dependent (249 SCRA 54 [1995]), later reiterated in the
upon his understanding of what occurs at case of Larranaga v. Court of Appeals, et al.
trial. An incompetent defendant may not (287 SCRA 581 at pp. 596-597 [1998]), we
realize the moral reprehensibility of his laid down the doctrine that:
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 98
that they might be, by the barrage of
“We cannot sustain appellant‟s publicity. In the case at bar, the records
claim that he was denied the right to do not show that the trial judge
impartial trial due to prejudicial publicity. developed actual bias against appellant
It is true that the print and broadcast as a consequence of the extensive
media gave the case at bar pervasive media coverage of the pre-trial and trial
publicity, just like all high profile and high of his case. The totality of
stake criminal trials. Then and now, we circumstances of the case does not
rule that the right of an accused to a fair prove that the trial judge acquired a fixed
trial is not incompatible to a free press. opinion as a result of prejudicial publicity
To be sure, responsible reporting which is incapable of change even by
enhances an accused‟s right to a fair trial evidence presented during the trial.
for, as well pointed out, a responsible Appellant has the burden to prove this
press has always been regarded as the actual bias and he has not discharged
handmaiden of effective judicial the burden.”
administration, especially in the criminal
field x x x. The press does not simply We expounded further on this doctrine in the
publish information about trials but subsequent case of Webb v. Hon. Raul de
guards against the miscarriage of justice Leon, etc. (247 SCRA 652 [1995]) and its
by subjecting the police, prosecutors, companion cases, viz.:
and judicial processes to extensive
public scrutiny and criticism. “Again, petitioners raise the
effect of prejudicial publicity on their right
Pervasive publicity is not per se to due process while undergoing
prejudicial to the right of an accused to preliminary investigation. We find no
fair trial. The mere fact that the trial of procedural impediment to its early
appellant was given a day-to-day, gavel- invocation considering the substantial
to-gavel coverage does not by itself risk to their liberty whole undergoing a
prove that the publicity so permeated the preliminary investigation.
mind of the trial judge and impaired his
impartiality. For one, it is impossible to Xxx
seal the minds of members of the bench
from pre-trial and other off-court publicity The democratic settings, media
of sensational criminal cases. The state coverage of trials of sensational cases
of the art of our communication system cannot be avoided and oftentimes, its
brings news as they happen straight to excessiveness has been aggravated by
our breakfast tables and right to our kinetic developments in the
bedrooms. These news form part of our telecommunications industry. For sure,
everyday menu of the facts and fictions few cases can match the high volume
of life. For another, our idea of a fair and and high velocity of publicity that
impartial judge is not that of a hermit who attended the preliminary investigation of
is out of touch with the world. We have the case at bar. Our daily diet of facts
not installed the jury system whose and fiction about the case continues
members are overly protected from unabated even today. Commentators
publicity lest they lose their impartiality. still bombard the public with views not
x x x. Our judges are learned in the law too many of which are sober and
and trained to disregard off-court sublime. Indeed, even the principal
evidence and on-camera performances actors in the case – the NBI, the
of parties to a litigation. Their mere respondents, their lawyers and their
exposure to publications and publicity sympathizers – have participated in this
stunts does not per se fatally infect their media blitz. The possibility of media
impartiality. abuses and their threat to a fair trial
notwithstanding, criminal trials cannot be
At best, appellant can only completely closed to the press and
conjure possibility of prejudice on the public. In the seminal case of Richmond
part of the trial judge due to the barrage Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, it was
of publicity that characterized the wisely held:
investigation and trial of the case. In
Martelino, et al. v. Alejandro, et al., we „x x x
rejected this standard of possibility of
prejudice and adopted the test of actual (a) The historical
prejudice as we ruled that to warrant a evidence of the evolution of the
finding of prejudicial publicity, there must criminal trial in Anglo-American
be allegation and proof that the judges justice demonstrates
have been unduly influenced, not simply conclusively that at the time this
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 99
Nation‟s organic laws were had long been open to the
adopted, criminal trials both here public at the time the First
and in England had long been Amendment was adopted.
presumptively open, thus giving Moreover, the right of assembly
assurance that the proceedings is also relevant, having been
were conducted fairly to all regarded not only as an
concerned and discouraging independent right but also as a
perjury, the misconduct of catalyst to augment the free
participants, or decisions based exercise of the other First
on secret bias or partiality. In Amendment rights with which it
addition, the significant was deliberately linked by the
community therapeutic value of draftsmen. A trial courtroom is a
public trials was recognized: public place where the people
when a shocking crime occurs, a generally – and representatives
community reaction of outrage of the media – have a right to be
and public protest often follows, present, and where their
and thereafter the open presence historically has been
processes of justice serve an thought to enhance the integrity
important prophylactic purpose, and quality of what takes place.
providing an outlet for
community concern, hostility, (c) Even though the
and emotion. To work Constitution contains no
effectively, it is important that provision which by its terms
society‟s criminal process guarantees to the public the right
„satisfy the appearance of to attend criminal trials, various
justice,‟ Offutt v. United States, fundamental rights, not
348 US 11, 14, 99 L Ed 11, 75 S expressly guaranteed, have
Ct 11, which can best be been recognized as
provided by allowing people to indispensable to the enjoyment
observe such process. From of enumerated rights. The right
this unbroken, uncontradicted to attend criminal trial is implicit
history, supported by reasons as in the guarantees of the First
valid today as in centuries past, Amendment: without the
it must be concluded that a freedom to attend such trials,
presumption of openness which people have exercised for
inheres in the very nature of a centuries, important aspects of
criminal trial under this Nation‟s freedom of speech and of the
system of justice, Cf., e.g., press could be eviscerated.‟
Levine v. United States, 362 US
610, 4 L Ed 2d 989, 80 S Ct Be that as it may, we recognize
1038. that pervasive and prejudicial publicity
under certain circumstances can deprive
(b) The freedoms of an accused of his due process right to
speech, press, and assembly, fair trial. Thus, in Martelino, et al. v.
expressly guaranteed by the Alejandro, et al., we held that to warrant
First Amendment, share a a finding of prejudicial publicity there
common core purpose of must be allegation and proof that the
assuring freedom of judges have been unduly influenced, not
communication on matters simply that they might be, by the barrage
relating to the functioning of of publicity. In the case at bar, we find
government. In guaranteeing nothing in the records that will prove that
freedoms such as those of the tone and content of the publicity that
speech and press, the First attended the investigation of petitioners
Amendment can be read as fatally infected the fairness and
protecting the right of everyone impartiality of the DOJ Panel. Petitioners
to attend trials so as give cannot just rely on the subliminal effects
meaning to those explicit of publicity on the sense of fairness of
guarantees; the First the DOJ Panel, for these are basically
Amendment right to receive unbeknown and beyond knowing. To be
information and ideas means, in sure, the DOJ Panel is composed of an
the context of trials, that the Assistant Chief State Prosecutor and
guarantees of speech and press, Senior State Prosecutors. Their long
standing alone, prohibit experience in criminal investigation is a
government from summarily factor to consider in determining whether
closing courtroom doors which they can easily be blinded by the klieg
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 100
lights of publicity. Indeed, their 26-page Sandiganbayan, 231 SCRA 783, 797-
Resolution carries no indubitable indicia 798, April 26, 1994, En Banc [Puno])
of bias for it does not appear that they
considered any extra-record evidence
except evidence properly adduced by the 185. Is the grant of immunity to an accused
parties. The length of time the willing to testify for the government a special
investigation was conducted despite it privilege and therefore must be strictly
summary nature and the generosity with construed against the accused?
which they accommodated the discovery
motions of petitioners speak well of their Held: [W]e reject respondent court‟s ruling
fairness. At no instance, we note, did that the grant of section 5 immunity must be
petitioners seek the disqualification of strictly construed against the petitioners. It
any member of the DOJ Panel on the simplistically characterized the grant as a
ground of bias resulting from their special privilege, as if it was gifted by the
bombardment of prejudicial publicity.” government, ex gratia. In taking this posture,
it misread the raison d‟ etre and the long
Applying the above ruling, we hold that there pedigree of the right against self-
is not enough evidence to warrant this Court incrimination vis-à-vis immunity statutes.
to enjoin the preliminary investigation of the
petitioner by the respondent Ombudsman. The days of inquisition brought about the
Petitioner needs to offer more than hostile most despicable abuses against human
headlines to discharge his burden of proof. rights. Not the least of these abuses is the
He needs to show more than weighty social expert use of coerced confessions to send to
science evidence to successfully prove the the guillotine even the guiltless. To guard
impaired capacity of a judge to render a bias- against the recurrence of this totalitarian
free decision. Well to note, the cases method, the right against self-incrimination
against the petitioner are still undergoing was ensconced in the fundamental laws of
preliminary investigation by a special panel all civilized countries. Over the years,
of prosecutors in the office of the respondent however, came the need to assist
Ombudsman. No allegation whatsoever has government in its task of containing crime for
been made by the petitioner that the minds peace and order is a necessary matrix of
of the members of this special panel have public welfare. To accommodate the need,
already been infected by bias because of the the right against self-incrimination was
pervasive prejudicial publicity against him. stripped of its absoluteness. Immunity
Indeed, the special panel has yet to come statutes in varying shapes were enacted
out with its findings and the Court cannot which would allow government to compel a
second guess whether its recommendation witness to testify despite his plea of the right
will be unfavorable to the petitioner. against self-incrimination. To insulate these
(Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15, statutes from the virus of unconstitutionality,
March 2, 2001, En Banc [Puno]) a witness is given what has come to be
known as transactional or a use-derivative-
use immunity x x x. Quite clearly, these
The Right against Self- immunity statutes are not a bonanza from
government. Those given the privilege of
Incrimination immunity paid a high price for it – the
surrender of their precious right to be silent.
184. Discuss the types of immunity statutes. Our hierarchy of values demands that the
Which has broader scope of protection? right against self-incrimination and the right
to be silent should be accorded greater
Held: Our immunity statutes are of respect and protection. Laws that tend to
American origin. In the United States, there erode the force of these preeminent rights
are two types of statutory immunity granted must necessarily be given a liberal
to a witness. They are the transactional interpretation in favor of the individual. The
immunity and the use-and-derivative-use government has a right to solve crimes but it
immunity. Transactional immunity is broader must do it, rightly. (Mapa, Jr. v.
in the scope of its protection. By its grant, a Sandiganbayan, 231 SCRA 783, 805-806,
witness can no longer be prosecuted for any April 26, 1994, En Banc [Puno])
offense whatsoever arising out of the act or
transaction. In contrast, by the grant of use-
and-derivative-use immunity, a witness is
only assured that his or her particular
The Right against Double
testimony and evidence derived from it will Jeopardy
not be used against him or her in a
subsequent prosecution. (Mapa, Jr. v. 186. Discuss the two kinds of double
jeopardy.
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 101
have been validly terminated; (3) the
Held: Our Bill of Rights deals with two (2) second jeopardy must be for the same
kinds of double jeopardy. The first sentence offense, or the second offense includes or is
of Clause 20, Section 1, Article III of the necessarily included in the offense charged
Constitution ordains that “no person shall be in the first information, or is an attempt to
twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the commit the same or is a frustration thereof.
same offense.” The second sentence of said
clause provides that “if an act is punishable Legal jeopardy attaches only: (1) upon a
by a law and an ordinance, conviction or valid indictment; (b) before a competent
acquittal under either shall constitute a bar to court; (c) after arraignment; (d) when a valid
another prosecution for the same act.” Thus, plea has been entered; and (e) the case was
the first sentence prohibits double jeopardy dismissed or otherwise terminated without
of punishment for the same offense whereas, the express consent of the accused.
the second contemplates double jeopardy of (Cuison v. CA, 289 SCRA 159, April 15,
punishment for the same act. Under the first 1998 [Panganiban])
sentence, one may be twice put in jeopardy
of punishment of the same act, provided that
he is charged with different offenses, or the 188. In its decision in a criminal case, the
offense charged in one case is not included Judge promulgated only the civil aspect of
in, or does not include, the crime charged in the case, but not the criminal. Will the
the other case. The second sentence promulgation of the criminal aspect later
applies, even if the offense charged are not constitute double jeopardy?
the same, owing to the fact that one
constitutes a violation of an ordinance and Held: Petitioner contends that "the
the other a violation of statute. If the two promulgation by Judge Ramos on April 4,
charges are based on one and the same act, 1995 of the Respondent Court's decision of
conviction or acquittal under either the law or June 30, 1991 by reading its dispositive
the ordinance shall bar a prosecution under portion has effectively terminated the
the other. Incidentally, such conviction or criminal cases against the petitioner x x x."
acquittal is not indispensable to sustain the In other words, petitioner claims that the first
plea of double jeopardy of punishment or the jeopardy attached at that point.
same offense. So long as jeopardy has
been attached under one of the informations The Court is not persuaded. As a rule, a
charging said offense, the defense may be criminal prosecution includes a civil action for
availed of in the other case involving the the recovery of indemnity. Hence, a decision
same offense, even if there has been neither in such case disposes of both the criminal as
conviction nor acquittal in either case. well as the civil liabilities of an accused.
Here, trial court promulgated only the civil
Elsewhere stated, where the offense aspect of the case, but not the criminal.
charged are penalized either by different
sections of the same statute or by different [T]he promulgation of the CA Decision was
statutes, the important inquiry relates to the not complete. In fact and in truth, the
identity of offenses charged. The promulgation was not merely incomplete; it
constitutional protection against double was also void. In excess of its jurisdiction,
jeopardy is available only where an identity is the trial judge rendered a substantially
shown to exist between the earlier and the incomplete promulgation on April 4, 1995,
subsequent offenses charged. The question and he repeated his mistake in his April 12,
of identity or lack of identity of offenses is 1996 Order. We emphasize that grave
addressed by examining the essential abuse of discretion rendered the
elements of each of the two offenses aforementioned act of the trial court void.
charged, as such elements are set out in the Since the criminal cases have not yet been
respective legislative definitions of the terminated, the first jeopardy has not yet
offenses involved. (People v. Quijada, 259 attached. Hence, double jeopardy cannot
SCRA 191, July 24, 1996) prosper as a defense.
In Taduran v. Civil Service Commission (131 Under the proximity rule, the occupant of a
SCRA 66 [1984]), the Court construed that particular position could be considered a
phrase to mean that the person next-in-rank confidential employee if the predominant
“would be among the first to be considered reason why he was chosen by the appointing
for the vacancy, if qualified.” In Santiago, Jr. authority was the latter‟s belief that he can
v. Civil Service Commission (178 SCRA 733 share a close intimate relationship with the
[1989]), the Court elaborated the import of occupant which ensures freedom of
the rule in the following manner: discussion without fear or embarrassment or
misgivings of possible betrayal of personal
“One who is next-in-rank is trust or confidential matters of state. Withal,
entitled to preferential consideration for where the position occupied is more remote
promotion to the higher vacancy but it from that of the appointing authority, the
does not necessarily follow that he and element of trust between them is no longer
no one else can be appointed. The rule predominant. (CSC v. Salas, 274 SCRA
neither grants a vested right to the holder 414, June 19, 1997)
nor imposes a ministerial duty on the
appointing authority to promote such
person to the next higher position x x x” 207. Does the Civil Service Law contemplate
(Abila v. CSC, 198 SCRA 102, June 3, a review of decisions exonerating officers or
1991, En Banc [Feliciano]) employees from administrative charges?
236. Distinguish a petition to declare failure of Fifth, the allegations in the petition decisively
elections from an election protest. determine its nature. Petitioner alleged that
the local elections for the office of vice-mayor
Held: While petitioner may have intended to in Paranaque City held on May 11, 1998,
institute an election protest by praying that denigrates the true will of the people as it
said action may also be considered an was marred with widespread anomalies on
election protest, in our view, petitioner‟s account of vote buying, flying voters and
action is a petition to declare a failure of glaring discrepancies in the election returns.
elections or annul election results. It is not He averred that those incidents warrant the
an election protest. declaration of a failure of elections.
First, his petition before the Comelec was Given these circumstances, public
instituted pursuant to Section 4 of Republic respondent cannot be said to have gravely
Act No. 7166 in relation to Section 6 of the erred in treating petitioner‟s action as a
Omnibus Election Code. Section 4 of RA petition to declare failure of elections or to
7166 refers to “postponement, failure of annul election results. (Banaga, Jr. v.
election and special elections” while Section COMELEC, 336 SCRA 701, July 31, 2000,
6 of the Omnibus Election Code relates to En Banc [Quisumbing])
“failure of election.” It is simply captioned as
“Petition to Declare Failure of Elections
and/or For Annulment of Elections.” 237. What are pre-proclamation cases, and
exceptions thereto? What Court has
Second, an election protest is an ordinary jurisdiction over pre-proclamation cases?
action while a petition to declare a failure of
elections is a special action under the 1993 Held: As a general rule, candidates and
Comelec Rules of Procedure as amended. registered political parties involved in an
An election protest is governed by Rule 20 election are allowed to file pre-proclamation
on ordinary actions, while a petition to cases before the Comelec. Pre-
declare failure of elections is covered by proclamation cases refer to any question
Rule 26 under special actions. pertaining to or affecting the proceedings of
the board of canvassers which may be
raised by any candidate or by any registered
political party or coalition of political parties
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 117
before the board or directly with the 238. Who has authority to rule on petitions
Commission, or any matter raised under for correction of manifest error in the
Sections 233, 234, 235 and 236 in relation to certificate of canvass or election returns?
the preparation, transmission, receipt,
custody and appreciation of election returns Held: The authority to rule on petitions for
(Section 241, Omnibus Election Code). The correction of manifest error is vested in the
Comelec has exclusive jurisdiction over all Comelec en banc. Section 7 of Rule 27 of
pre-proclamation controversies (Section 242, the 1993 COMELEC Rules of Procedure
supra). As an exception, however, to the (took effect on February 15, 1993) provides
general rule, Section 15 of Republic Act that if the error is discovered before
7166 prohibits candidates in the presidential, proclamation, the board of canvassers may
vice-presidential, senatorial and motu proprio, or upon verified petition by any
congressional elections from filing pre- candidate, political party, organization or
proclamation cases. It states: coalition of political parties, after due notice
and hearing, correct the errors committed.
“Sec. 15. Pre-Proclamation The aggrieved party may appeal the decision
Cases Not Allowed in Elections for of the board to the Commission and said
President, Vice-President, Senator, and appeal shall be heard and decided by the
Members of the House of Commission en banc. Section 5, however,
Representatives. - For purposes of the of the same rule states that a petition for
elections for President, Vice-President, correction of manifest error may be filed
Senator and Member of the House of directly with the Commission en banc
Representatives, no pre-proclamation provided that such errors could not have
cases shall be allowed on matters been discovered during the canvassing
relating to the preparation, transmission, despite the exercise of due diligence and
receipt, custody and appreciation of proclamation of the winning candidate had
election returns or the certificates of already been made. (Federico S. Sandoval
canvass, as the case may be. However, v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 133842, Jan. 26,
this does not preclude the authority of 2000 [Puno])
the appropriate canvassing body motu
proprio or upon written complaint of an
interested person to correct manifest 239. Distinguish Election Protest from Petition
errors in the certificate of canvass or for Quo Warranto.
election returns before it.”
Held: In Samad v. COMELEC, we explained
The prohibition aims to avoid delay in the that a petition for quo warranto under the
proclamation of the winner in the election, Omnibus Election Code raises in issue the
which delay might result in a vacuum in disloyalty or ineligibility of the winning
these sensitive posts. The law, nonetheless, candidate. It is a proceeding to unseat the
provides an exception to the exception. The respondent from office but not necessarily to
second sentence of Section 15 allows the install the petitioner in his place. An election
filing of petitions for correction of manifest protest is a contest between the defeated
errors in the certificate of canvass or election and winning candidates on the ground of
returns even in elections for president, vice- frauds or irregularities in the casting and
president and members of the House of counting of the ballots, or in the preparation
Representatives for the simple reason that of the returns. It raises the question of who
the correction of manifest error will not actually obtained the plurality of the legal
prolong the process of canvassing nor delay votes and therefore is entitled to hold the
the proclamation of the winner in the office. (Dumayas, Jr. v. COMELEC, G.R.
election. The rule is consistent with and Nos. 141952-53, April 20, 2001, En Banc
complements the authority of the Comelec [Quisumbing])
under the Constitution to "enforce and
administer all laws and regulations relative to
the conduct of an election, plebiscite, 240. What is a counter-protest? When should
initiative, referendum and recall" (Section it be filed?
2[1], Article IX-C, 1987 Constitution) and its
power to "decide, except those involving the Held: Under the Comelec Rules of
right to vote, all questions affecting Procedure, the protestee may incorporate in
elections." (Section 2[3], Article IX-C, supra) his answer a counter-protest. It has been
(Federico S. Sandoval v. COMELEC, G.R. said that a counter-protest is tantamount to a
No. 133842, Jan. 26, 2000 [Puno]) counterclaim in a civil action and may be
presented as a part of the answer within the
time he is required to answer the protest, i.e.,
within five (5) days upon receipt of the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 118
protest, unless a motion for extension is that those election returns were prepared
granted, in which case it must be filed before under “duress, force and intimidation.” In
the expiration of the extended time. the case of Una Kibad v. Comelec (23 SCRA
588 [1968]), the SC warned that the doctrine
As early as in the case of Arrieta v. of statistical improbability must be viewed
Rodriguez (57 Phil. 717), the SC had firmly restrictively, the utmost care being taken lest
settled the rule that the counter-protest must in penalizing the fraudulent and corrupt
be filed within the period provided by law, practices, innocent voters become
otherwise, the forum loses its jurisdiction to disenfranchised, a result which hardly
entertain the belatedly filed counter-protest. commends itself. Moreover, the doctrine of
(Kho v. COMELEC, 279 SCRA 463, Sept. statistical improbability involves a question of
25, 1997, En Banc [Torres]) fact and a more prudential approach
prohibits its determination ex parte. (Arthur
241. What is the effect of death of a party in V. Velayo v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 135613,
an election protest? Should it warrant the March 9, 2000, En Banc [Puno])
dismissal of the protest?
Held: An election protest involves both the 243. What Court has jurisdiction over election
private interests of the rival candidates and protests and quo warranto proceedings
the public interest in the final determination involving Sangguniang Kabataan (SK)
of the real choice of the electorate, and for elections?
this reason, an election contest necessarily
survives the death of the protestant or the Held: Any contest relating to the election of
protestee. It is true that a public office is members of the Sangguniang Kabataan
personal to the public officer and is not a (including the chairman) – whether pertaining
property transmissible to his heirs upon to their eligibility or the manner of their
death, thus, upon the death of the election – is cognizable by MTCs, MCTCs,
incumbent, no heir of his may be allowed to and MeTCs. Section 6 of Comelec
continue holding his office in his place. But Resolution No. 2824 which provides that
while the right to a public office is personal cases involving the eligibility or qualification
and exclusive to the public officer, an of SK candidates shall be decided by the
election protest is not purely personal and City/Municipal Election Officer whose
exclusive to the protestant or to the protestee decision shall be final, applies only to
such that after the death of either would oust proceedings before the election. Before
the court of all authority to continue the proclamation, cases concerning eligibility of
protest proceedings. An election contest, SK officers and members are cognizable by
after all, involves not merely conflicting the Election Officer. But after the election
private aspirations but is imbued with and proclamation, the same cases become
paramount public interests. The death of the quo warranto cases cognizable by MTCs,
protestant neither constitutes a ground for MCTCs, and MeTCs. The distinction is
the dismissal of the contest nor ousts the trial based on the principle that it is the
court of its jurisdiction to decide the election proclamation which marks off the jurisdiction
contest. (De Castro v. COMELEC, 267 of the courts from the jurisdiction of election
SCRA 806, Feb. 7, 1997) officials.
242. Does the fact that one or a few The case of Jose M. Mercado v. Board of
candidates in an election got zero votes in Election Supervisors (243 SCRA 423, G.R.
one or a few precincts adequately support a No. 109713, April 6, 1995), in which this
finding that the election returns are Court ruled that election protests involving
statistically improbable? SK elections are to be determined by the
Board of Election Supervisors was decided
Held: From experiences in past elections, it under the aegis of Comelec Resolution No.
is possible for one candidate or even a few 2499, which took effect on August 27, 1992.
candidates to get zero votes in one or a few However, Comelec Resolution No. 2824,
precincts. which took effect on February 6, 1996 and
was passed pursuant to R.A. 7808, in
Standing alone and without more, the bare relation to Arts. 252-253 of the Omnibus
fact that a candidate for public office Election Code, has since transferred the
received zero votes in one or two precincts cognizance of such cases from the Board of
can not adequately support a finding that the Election Supervisors to the MTCs, MCTCs
subject election returns are statistically and MeTCs. Thus, the doctrine of Mercado
improbable. A no-vote for a particular is no longer controlling. (Francis King L.
candidate in election returns is but one Marquez v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 127318,
strand in the web of circumstantial evidence Aug. 25, 1999, En Banc [Purisima])
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 119
validly exercise police power? How is it
distinguished from the former Metro Manila
THE LAW OF PUBLIC Council (MMC) created under PD No. 824?
CORPORATIONS Held: Metropolitan or Metro Manila is a
body composed of several local government
244. What is an autonomous region? units – i.e., twelve (12) cities and five (5)
municipalities x x x. With the passage of
Answer: An autonomous region consists of Republic Act No. 7924 in 1995, Metropolitan
provinces, cities, municipalities, and Manila was declared as a “special
geographical areas sharing common and development and administrative region” and
distinctive historical and cultural heritage, the Administration of “metrowide” basic
economic and social structures, and other services affecting the region placed under “a
relevant characteristics within the framework development authority” referred to as the
of the Constitution and the national MMDA.
sovereignty as well as the territorial integrity
of the Republic of the Philippines. (Sec. 15, The governing board of the MMDA is the
Art. X, 1987 Constitution) Metro Manila Council. The Council is
composed of the mayors of the component
12 cities and 5 municipalities, the president
of the Metro Manila Vice-Mayors‟ League
245. What are administrative regions? Are and the president of the Metro Manila
they considered territorial and political Councilors‟ League. The Council is headed
subdivisions of the State? Who has the by a Chairman who is appointed by the
power to create administrative regions? President and vested with the rank of cabinet
member. As the policy-making body of the
Held: Administrative regions are mere MMDA, the Metro Manila Council approves
groupings of contiguous provinces for metro-wide plans, programs and projects,
administrative purposes. They are not and issues the necessary rules and
territorial and political subdivisions like regulations for the implementation of said
provinces, cities, municipalities and plans; it approves the annual budget of the
barangays. While the power to merge MMDA and promulgates the rules and
administrative regions is not expressly regulations for the delivery of basic services,
provided for in the Constitution, it is a power collection of service and regulatory fees,
which has traditionally been lodged with the fines and penalties. X x x
President to facilitate the exercise of the
power of general supervision over local Clearly, the scope of the MMDA‟s function is
governments. (Abbas v. COMELEC, 179 limited to the delivery of the seven (7) basic
SCRA 287, Nov. 10, 1989, En Banc services. One of these is transport and
[Cortes]) traffic management x x x.
Under the 1987 Constitution, the local Clearly then, the MMC under P.D. No. 824 is
government units became primarily not the same entity as the MMDA under R.A.
responsible for the governance of their No. 7924. Unlike the MMC, the MMDA has
respective political subdivisions. The MMA‟s no power to enact ordinances for the welfare
jurisdiction was limited to addressing of the community. It is the local government
common problems involving basic services units, acting through their respective
that transcended local boundaries. It did not legislative councils, that possess legislative
have legislative power. Its power was power and police power. In the case at bar,
merely to provide the local government units the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Makati City
technical assistance in the preparation of did not pass any ordinance or resolution
local development plans. Any semblance of ordering the opening of Neptune Street,
legislative power it had was confined to a hence, its proposed opening by petitioner
“review [of] legislation proposed by the local MMDA is illegal x x x. (MMDA v. Bel-Air
legislative assemblies to ensure consistency Village Association, Inc., 328 SCRA 836,
among local governments and with the March 27, 2000, 1st Div. [Puno])
comprehensive development plan of Metro
Manila,” and to “advise the local
governments accordingly.” 248. Discuss the concept of local autonomy.
When R.A. No. 7924 took effect, Held: Autonomy is either decentralization of
Metropolitan Manila became a “special administration or decentralization of power.
development and administrative region” and There is decentralization of administration
the MMDA a “special development authority” when the central government delegates
whose functions were “without prejudice to administrative powers to political
the autonomy of the affected local subdivisions in order to broaden the base of
government units.” The character of the government and in the process to make local
MMDA was clearly defined in the legislative governments more responsive and
debates enacting its charter. accountable, and ensure their fullest
development as self-reliant communities and
Xxx make them more effective partners in the
pursuit of national development and social
Clearly, the MMDA is not a political unit of progress. At the same time, it relieves the
government. The power delegated to the central government of the burden of
MMDA is that given to the Metro Manila managing local affairs and enables it to
Council to promulgate administrative rules concentrate on national concerns. The
and regulations in the implementation of the President exercises general supervision over
MMDA‟s functions. There is no grant of them, but only to ensure that local affairs are
authority to enact ordinances and regulations administered according to law. He has no
for the general welfare of the inhabitants of control over their acts in the sense that he
the metropolis. This was explicitly stated in can substitute their judgments with his own.
the last Committee deliberations prior to the
bill‟s presentation to Congress. X x x Decentralization of power, on the other hand,
involves an abdication of political power in
It is thus beyond doubt that the MMDA is not favor of local government units declared
a local government unit or a public autonomous. In that case, the autonomous
corporation endowed with legislative power. government is free to chart its own destiny
It is not even a “special metropolitan political and shape its own future with minimum
subdivision” as contemplated in Section 11, intervention from central authorities.
Article X of the Constitution. The creation of According to a constitutional author,
a “special metropolitan political subdivision” decentralization of power amounts to “self-
requires the approval by a majority of the immolation,” since in that event, the
votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units autonomous government becomes
directly affected. R.A. No. 7924 was not accountable not to the central authorities but
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 122
to its constituency. (Limbona v. Mangelin, without need of any further action on the
170 SCRA 786, Feb. 28, 1989, En Banc part of the local government unit. They thus
[Sarmiento]) constitute income which the local
government can invariably rely upon as the
source of much needed funds.
249. What kind of local autonomy is
contemplated by the Constitution? What Xxx
about the kind of autonomy contemplated
insofar as the autonomous regions are [T]o reiterate, IRAs are a regular, recurring
concerned? item of income; nil is there a basis, too, to
classify the same as a special fund or
Held: 1. The principle of local autonomy transfer, since IRAs have a technical
under the 1987 Constitution simply means definition and meaning all its own as used in
“decentralization.” It does not make local the Local Government Code that
governments sovereign within the state or an unequivocally makes it distinct from special
“imperium in imperio.” Remaining to be an funds or transfers referred to when the Code
intra sovereign subdivision of one sovereign speaks of “funding support from the national
nation, but not intended, however, to be an government, its instrumentalities and
imperium in imperio,” the local government government-owned or controlled
unit is autonomous in the sense that it is corporations.”
given more powers, authority, responsibilities
and resources. Power which used to be Thus, Department of Finance Order No. 35-
highly centralized in Manila, is thereby 93 correctly encapsulizes the full import of
deconcentrated, enabling especially the the above disquisition when it defined
peripheral local government units to develop ANNUAL INCOME to be “revenues and
not only at their own pace and discretion but receipts realized by provinces, cities and
also with their own resources and assets. municipalities from regular sources of the
(Alvarez v. Guingona, Jr., 252 SCRA 695, Local General Fund including the internal
Jan. 31, 1996, En Banc [Hermosisima]) revenue allotment and other shares provided
for in Sections 284, 290 and 291 of the
2. The constitutional guarantee of local Code, but exclusive of non-recurring
autonomy in the Constitution refers to the receipts, such as other national aids, grants,
administrative autonomy of local government financial assistance, loan proceeds, sales of
units or, cast in more technical language, the fixed assets, and similar others”. Such
decentralization of government authority. order, constituting executive or
contemporaneous construction of a statute
On the other hand, the creation of by an administrative agency charged with the
autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao task of interpreting and applying the same, is
and the Cordilleras, which is peculiar to the entitled to full respect and should be
1987 Constitution, contemplates the grant of accorded great weight by the courts, unless
political autonomy and not just administrative such construction is clearly shown to be in
autonomy to these regions. Thus, the sharp conflict with the Constitution, the
provision in the Constitution for an governing statute, or other laws. (Alvarez v.
autonomous regional government with a Guingona, Jr., 252 SCRA 695, Jan. 31,
basic structure consisting of an executive 1996, En Banc [Hermosisima, Jr., J.])
department and a legislative assembly and
special courts with personal, family and
property law jurisdiction in each of the
autonomous regions. (Cordillera Broad 251. State the importance of drawing with
Coalition v. COA, 181 SCRA 495, Jan. 29, precise strokes the territorial boundaries of a
1990, En Banc [Cortes]) local government unit.
In sum, Lonzanida was not the duly elected In sum, while Section 1 of AO 372 may be
mayor and that he did not hold office for the upheld as an advisory effected in times of
full term; hence, his assumption of office national crisis, Section 4 thereof has no color
from May 1995 to March 1998 cannot be of validity at all. The latter provision
counted as a term for purposes of computing effectively encroaches on the fiscal
the three term limit. (Lonzanida v. autonomy of local governments.
COMELEC, 311 SCRA 602, July 28, 1999, Concededly, the President was well-
En Banc [Gonzaga-Reyes]) intentioned in issuing his Order to withhold
the LGUs‟ IRA, but the rule of law requires
that even the best intentions must be carried
262. May the President validly withhold a out within the parameters of the Constitution
portion of the internal revenue allotments of and the law. Verily, laudable purposes must
Local Government Units legally due them by be carried out by legal methods. (Pimentel,
administrative fiat? Jr. v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 132988, 336 SCRA
201, July 19, 2000, En Banc [Panganiban])
Held: The Constitution vests the President
with the power of supervision, not control, 263. What is meant by fiscal autonomy of
over local government units (LGUs). Such Local Governments? Does it rule out in any
power enables him to see to it that LGUs and manner national government intervention by
their officials execute their tasks in way of supervision in order to ensure that
accordance with law. While he may issue local programs are consistent with national
advisories and seek their cooperation in goals?
solving economic difficulties, he cannot
prevent them from performing their tasks and Held: Under existing law, local government
using available resources to achieve their units, in addition to having administrative
goals. He may not withhold or alter any autonomy in the exercise of their functions,
authority or power given them by the law. enjoy fiscal autonomy as well. Fiscal
Thus, the withholding of a portion of internal autonomy means that local governments
revenue allotments legally due them cannot have the power to create their own sources
be directed by administrative fiat. of revenue in addition to their equitable share
in the national taxes released by the national
Xxx government, as well as the power to allocate
their resources in accordance with their own
Section 4 of AO 372 cannot x x x be upheld. priorities. It extends to the preparation of
A basic feature of local fiscal autonomy is the their budgets, and local officials in turn have
automatic release of the shares of LGUs in to work within the constraints thereof. They
the National internal revenue. This is are not formulated at the national level and
mandated by no less than the Constitution. imposed on local governments, whether they
The Local Government Code (Sec. 286[a]) are relevant to local needs and resources or
specifies further that the release shall be not. Hence, the necessity of a balancing of
made directly to the LGU concerned within
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 128
viewpoints and the harmonization of various local leagues; and (3) the
proposals from both local and national corresponding recommendation of the
officials, who in any case are partners in the secretaries of the Department of Finance,
attainment of national goals. Interior and Local Government, and Budget
and Management. Furthermore, any
Local fiscal autonomy does not, however, adjustment in the allotment shall in no case
rule out any manner of national government be less than thirty percent (30%) of the
intervention by way of supervision, in order collection of national internal revenue taxes
to ensure that local programs, fiscal and of the third fiscal year preceding the current
otherwise, are consistent with national goals. one. (Pimentel, Jr. v. Aguirre, 336 SCRA
Significantly, the President, by constitutional 201, July 19, 2000, En Banc [Panganiban])
fiat, is the head of the economic and
planning agency of the government (Section
9, Article XII of the Constitution), primarily 265. Distinguish an ordinance from a mere
responsible for formulating and implementing resolution.
continuing, coordinated and integrated social
and economic policies, plans and programs Held: A municipal ordinance is different
(Section 3, Chapter 1, Subtitle C, Title II, from a resolution. An ordinance is a law, but
Book V, EO 292 [Administrative Code of a resolution is merely a declaration of the
1987]) for the entire country. However, sentiment or opinion of a lawmaking body on
under the Constitution, the formulation and a specific matter. An ordinance possesses a
the implementation of such policies and general and permanent character, but a
programs are subject to “consultations with resolution is temporary in nature.
the appropriate public agencies, various Additionally, the two are enacted differently –
private sectors, and local government units.” a third reading is necessary for an ordinance,
The President cannot do so unilaterally. but not for a resolution, unless decided
(Pimentel, Jr. v. Aguirre, 336 SCRA 201, otherwise by a majority of all the Sanggunian
July 19, 2000, En Banc [Panganiban]) members. (Municipality of Paranaque v.
V.M. Realty Corporation, 292 SCRA 678,
July 20, 1998 [Panganiban])
264. What are the requisites before the
President may interfere in local fiscal
matters? 266. On its first regular session, may the
Sanggunian transact business other than the
Held: x x x [T]he Local Government Code matter of adopting or updating its existing
provides (Sec. 284. See also Art. 379 of the rules or procedure?
Rules and Regulations Implementing the
Local Government Code of 1991): Held: We cannot infer the mandate of the
(Local Government) Code that no other
“x x x [I]n the event the national business may be transacted on the first
government incurs an unmanaged public regular session except to take up the matter
sector deficit, the President of the of adopting or updating rules. All that the law
Philippines is hereby authorized, upon requires is that “on the first regular session x
the recommendation of [the] Secretary of x x the sanggunian concerned shall adopt or
Finance, Secretary of the Interior and update its existing rules or procedures.”
Local Government and Secretary of There is nothing in the language thereof that
Budget and Management, and subject to restricts the matters to be taken up during
consultation with the presiding officers of the first regular session merely to the
both Houses of Congress and the adoption or updating of the house rules. If it
presidents of the liga, to make the were the intent of Congress to limit the
necessary adjustments in the internal business of the local council to such matters,
revenue allotment of local government then it would have done so in clear and
units but in no case shall the allotment unequivocal terms. But as it is, there is no
be less than thirty percent (30%) of the such intent.
collection of national internal revenue
taxes of the third fiscal year preceding Moreover, adopting or updating of house
the current fiscal year x x x” rules would necessarily entail work beyond
the day of the first regular session. Does this
There are therefore several requisites before mean that prior thereto, the local council's
the President may interfere in local fiscal hands were tied and could not act on any
matters: (1) an unmanaged public sector other matter? That would certainly be
deficit of the national government; (2) absurd for it would result in a hiatus and a
consultations with the presiding officers of paralysis in the local legislature's work which
the Senate and the House of could not have been intended by the law.
Representatives and the presidents of the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 129
(Malonzo v. Zamora, 311 SCRA 224, July 269. What is the ground for recall? Is this
27, 1999, En Banc [Romero]) subject to judicial inquiry?
267. May an incumbent Vice-Governor, while Held: Former Senator Aquilino Pimentel, Jr.,
concurrently the Acting Governor, continue a major author of the subject law in his book
to preside over the sessions of the The Local Government Code of 1991: The
Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP)? If no, who Key to National Development, stressed the
may preside in the meantime? same reason why the substantive content of
a vote of lack of confidence is beyond any
Held: Being the acting governor, the Vice- inquiry, thus:
governor cannot continue to simultaneously
exercise the duties of the latter office, since “There is only one ground for
the nature of the duties of the Provincial recall of local government officials: loss
Governor calls for a full-time occupant to of confidence. This means that the
discharge them. Such is not only consistent people may petition or the Preparatory
with but also appears to be the clear Recall Assembly may resolve to recall
rationale of the new (Local Government) any local elective official without
Code wherein the policy of performing dual specifying any particular ground except
functions in both offices has already been loss of confidence. There is no need for
abandoned. To repeat, the creation of a them to bring up any charge of abuse or
temporary vacancy in the office of the corruption against the local elective
Governor creates a corresponding vacancy officials who are subject of any recall
in the office of the Vice-Governor whenever petition.
the latter acts as Governor by virtue of such
temporary vacancy. This event constitutes In the case of Evardone v.
an “inability” on the part of the regular Commission on Elections, et al., 204
presiding officer (Vice-Governor) to preside SCRA 464, 472 (1991), the Court ruled
during the SP sessions, which thus calls for that „loss of confidence‟ as a ground for
the operation of the remedy set in Article recall is a political question. In the words
49(b) of the Local Government Code – of the Court, 'whether or not the
concerning the election of a temporary electorate of the municipality of Sulat has
presiding officer. The continuity of the Acting lost confidence in the incumbent mayor
Governor‟s (Vice-Governor) powers as is a political question.‟”
presiding officer of the SP is suspended so (Garcia v. COMELEC, 227 SCRA 108,
long as he is in such capacity. Under Oct. 5, 1993, En Banc [Puno])
Section 49(b), “in the event of the inability of
the regular presiding officer to preside at the
sanggunian session, the members present 270. The members of the Preparatory Recall
and constituting a quorum shall elect from Assembly (PRA) of the province of Bataan
among themselves a temporary presiding adopted a resolution calling for the recall of
officer.” (Gamboa, Jr. v. Aguirre, Jr., G.R. Governor Garcia. It was admitted, however,
No. 134213, July 20, 1999, En Banc by the proponents of the recall resolution that
[Ynares-Santiago]) only those members of the assembly inclined
to agree were notified of the meeting where
said resolution was adopted “as a matter of
268. What is recall? strategy and security.” They justified these
selective notices on the ground that the law
Held: Recall is a mode of removal of a (Local Government Code) does not
public officer by the people before the end of specifically mandate the giving of notice.
his term of office. The people's prerogative Should this submission be sustained?
to remove a public officer is an incident of
their sovereign power and in the absence of Held: We reject this submission of the
constitutional restraint, the power is implied respondents. The due process clause of the
in all governmental operations. Such power Constitution requiring notice as an element
has been held to be indispensable for the of fairness is inviolable and should always be
proper administration of public affairs. Not considered part and parcel of every law in
undeservedly, it is frequently described as a case of its silence. The need for notice to all
fundamental right of the people in a the members of the assembly is also
representative democracy. (Garcia v. imperative for these members represent the
COMELEC, 227 SCRA 108, Oct. 5, 1993, different sectors of the electorate of Bataan.
En Banc [Puno]) To the extent that they are not notified of the
meeting of the assembly, to that extent is the
sovereign voice of the people they represent
nullified. The resolution to recall should
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 130
articulate the majority will of the members of 273. Does the word “Recall” in paragraph
the assembly but the majority will can be (b) of Section 74 of the Local Government
genuinely determined only after all the Code include the convening of the
members of the assembly have been given a Preparatory Recall Assembly and the filing
fair opportunity to express the will of their by it of a recall resolution? Discuss.
constituents. Needless to stress, the
requirement of notice is mandatory for it is Held: Petitioner contends that the term
indispensable in determining the collective “recall” in Sec. 74 (b) refers to a process, in
wisdom of the members of the Preparatory contrast to the term “recall election” found in
Recall Assembly. Its non-observance is fatal Sec. 74 (a), which obviously refers to an
to the validity of the resolution to recall election. He claims that “when several
petitioner Garcia as Governor of the province barangay chairmen met and convened on
of Bataan. (Garcia v. COMELEC, G.R. No. May 19, 1999 and unanimously resolved to
111511, Sept. 21, 1993; 227 SCRA 100, initiate the recall, followed by the taking of
Oct. 5, 1993, En Banc [Puno]) votes by the PRA on May 29, 1999 for the
purpose of adopting a resolution „to initiate
the recall of Jovito Claudio as Mayor of
271. Will it be proper for the Commission on Pasay City for loss of confidence,‟ the
Elections to act on a petition for recall signed process of recall began” and, since May 29,
by just one person? 1999 was less than a year after he had
assumed office, the PRA was illegally
Held: A petition for recall signed by just one convened and all proceedings held
person is in violation of the statutory 25% thereafter, including the filing of the recall
minimum requirement as to the number of petition on July 2, 1999, were null and void.
signatures supporting any petition for recall.
Sec. 69(d) of the Local Government Code of The COMELEC, on the other hand,
1991 expressly provides that 'recall of any maintains that the process of recall starts
elective x x x municipal x x x official may also with the filing of the petition for recall and
be validly initiated upon petition of at least ends with the conduct of the recall election,
twenty-five percent (25%) of the total number and that, since the petition for recall in this
of registered voters in the local government case was filed on July 2, 1999, exactly one
unit concerned during the election in which year and a day after petitioner‟s assumption
the local official sought to be recalled was of office, the recall was validly initiated
elected.' The law is plain and unequivocal as outside the one-year prohibited period.
to what constitutes recall proceedings: only a
petition of at least 25% of the total number of Both petitioner Claudio and the COMELEC
registered voters may validly initiate recall thus agree that the term “recall” as used in
proceedings. (Angobung v. COMELEC, Sec. 74 refers to a process. They disagree
G.R. No. 126576, March 5, 1997) only as to when the process starts for
purpose of the one-year limitation in
paragraph (b) of Sec. 74.
272. Section 74 of the Local Government
Code provides that “no recall shall take place We can agree that recall is a process which
within one year x x x immediately preceding begins with the convening of the preparatory
a regular local election.” What does the term recall assembly or the gathering of the
“regular local election,” as used in this signatures at least 25% of the registered
section, mean? voters of a local government unit, and then
proceeds to the filing of a recall resolution or
Held: The term “regular local election” under petition with the COMELEC, the verification
Sec. 74 of the Local Government Code of of such resolution or petition, the fixing of the
1991 which provides that “no recall shall take date of the recall election, and the holding of
place within one (1) year x x x immediately the election on the scheduled date.
preceding a regular local election” refers to However, as used in paragraph (b) of Sec.
one where the position of the official sought 74, “recall” refers to the election itself by
to be recalled is to be actually contested and means of which voters decide whether they
filled by the electorate (Paras v. Comelec, should retain their local official or elect his
G.R. No. 123169, Nov. 4, 1996). The one- replacement.
year time bar will not apply where the local
official sought to be recalled is a Mayor and Xxx
the approaching election is a barangay
election. (Angobung v. COMELEC, G.R. To sum up, the term “recall” in paragraph (b)
No. 126576, March 5, 1997) refers to the recall election and not to the
preliminary proceedings to initiate recall –
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 131
1) Because Sec. 74 speaks of 276. Cite instances when the provincial
limitations on “recall” which, fiscal may be disqualified to represent in
according to Sec. 69, is a power court a particular municipality.
which shall be exercised by the
registered voters of a local Held: As held in Enriquez, Sr. v. Gimenez
government unit. Since the voters (107 Phil. 932 [1960]), the provincial fiscal
do not exercise such right except in may be disqualified to represent in court a
an election, it is clear that the particular municipality in the following
initiation of recall proceedings is not instances:
prohibited within the one-year period
provided in paragraph (b); 1) If and when original jurisdiction of
2) Because the purpose of the first case involving the municipality is
limitation in paragraph (b) is to vested in the Supreme Court;
provide voters a sufficient basis for 2) When the municipality is a party
judging an elective local official, and adverse to the provincial government
final judging is not done until the day or to some other municipality in the
of the election; and same province; and
3) Because to construe the limitation in 3) When, in a case involving the
paragraph (b) as including the municipality, he, or his wife, or child,
initiation of recall proceedings would is pecuniarily involved, as heir,
unduly curtail freedom of speech and legatee, creditor or otherwise.
of assembly guaranteed in the (Ramos v. CA, 269 SCRA 34,
Constitution. March 3, 1997)
(Jovito O. Claudio v. COMELEC,
G.R. No. 140560, May 4, 2000, En Banc
[Mendoza])
277. May a municipality be represented by a
private law firm which had volunteered its
274. Who has the legal authority to represent services gratis, in collaboration with the
a municipality in lawsuits? municipal attorney and the fiscal?
Held: Only the provincial fiscal, provincial Held: No. Such representation will be
attorney, and municipal attorney should violative of Section 1983 of the old
represent a municipality in its lawsuits. Only Administrative Code. This strict coherence
in exceptional instances may a private to the letter of the law appears to have been
attorney be hired by a municipality to dictated by the fact that “the municipality
represent it in lawsuits. (Ramos v. CA, 269 should not be burdened with expenses of
SCRA 34, March 3, 1997) hiring a private lawyer” and that “the interests
of the municipality would be best protected if
a government lawyer handles its litigations.”
275. What are the exceptional instances when
a private attorney may be validly hired by a Private lawyers may not represent
municipality in its lawsuits? municipalities on their own. Neither may
they do so even in collaboration with
Held: In Alinsug v. RTC Br. 58, San Carlos authorized government lawyers. This is
City, Negros Occidental (225 SCRA 553, anchored on the principle that only
Aug. 23, 1993), it was held that “the law accountable public officers may act for and in
allows a private counsel to be hired by a behalf of public entities and that public funds
municipality only when the municipality is an should not be expended to hire private
adverse party in a case involving the lawyers. (Ramos v. CA, 269 SCRA 34,
provincial government or another March 3, 1997)
municipality or city within the province. This
provision has its apparent origin in De Guia
v. The Auditor General (44 SCRA 169,
March 29, 1979) where the Court held that 278. May a municipality adopt the work
the municipality‟s authority to employ a already performed in good faith by a private
private attorney is expressly limited only to lawyer, which work proved beneficial to it?
situations where the provincial fiscal would
be disqualified to serve and represent it.” Held: Although a municipality may not hire a
(Ramos v. CA, 269 SCRA 34, March 3, private lawyer to represent it in litigations, in
1997) the interest of substantial justice, however, it
was held that a municipality may adopt the
work already performed in good faith by such
private lawyer, which work is beneficial to it
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 132
(1) provided that no injustice is thereby which there appears to be a conflict
heaped on the adverse party and (2) between a rule of international law and the
provided further that no compensation in any provisions of the Constitution or statute of
guise is paid therefor by said municipality to the local state. Efforts should first be exerted
the private lawyer. Unless so expressly to harmonize them, so as to give effect to
adopted, the private lawyer‟s work cannot both since it is to be presumed that municipal
bind the municipality. (Ramos v. CA, 269 law was enacted with proper regard for the
SCRA 34, March 3, 1997) generally accepted principles of international
law in observance of the Incorporation
Clause in Section 2, Article II of the
279. May the Punong Barangay validly Constitution. In a situation however, where
appoint or remove the barangay treasurer, the conflict is irreconcilable and a choice has
the barangay secretary, and other appointive to be made between a rule of international
barangay officials without the concurrence of law and municipal law, jurisprudence dictates
the majority of all the members of the that municipal law should be upheld by the
Sangguniang Barangay? municipal courts for the reason that such
courts are organs of municipal law and are
Held: The Local Government Code explicitly accordingly bound by it in all circumstances.
vests on the punong barangay, upon The fact that international law has been
approval by a majority of all the members of made part of the law of the land does not
the sangguniang barangay, the power to pertain to or imply the primacy of
appoint or replace the barangay treasurer, international law over national or municipal
the barangay secretary, and other appointive law in the municipal sphere. The doctrine of
barangay officials. Verily, the power of incorporation, as applied in most countries,
appointment is to be exercised conjointly by decrees that rules of international law are
the punong barangay and a majority of all given equal standing with, but are not
the members of the sangguniang barangay. superior to, national legislative enactments.
Without such conjoint action, neither an Accordingly, the principle of lex posterior
appointment nor a replacement can be derogat priori takes effect – a treaty may
effectual. repeal a statute and a statute may repeal a
treaty. In states where the Constitution is the
Applying the rule that the power to appoint highest law of the land, such as the Republic
includes the power to remove, the of the Philippines, both statutes and treaties
questioned dismissal from office of the may be invalidated if they are in conflict with
barangay officials by the punong barangay the Constitution. (Secretary of Justice v.
without the concurrence of the majority of all Hon. Ralph C. Lantion, G.R. No. 139465,
the members of the Sangguniang Barangay Jan. 18, 2000, En Banc [Melo])
cannot be legally justified. To rule otherwise
could also create an absurd situation of the
Sangguniang Barangay members refusing to 281. Is sovereignty really absolute and all-
give their approval to the replacements encompassing? If not, what are its
selected by the punong barangay who has restrictions and limitations?
unilaterally terminated the services of the
incumbents. It is likely that the legislature Held: While sovereignty has traditionally
did not intend this absurdity to follow from its been deemed absolute and all-
enactment of the law. (Ramon Alquizola, encompassing on the domestic level, it is
Sr. v. Gallardo Ocol, G.R. No. 132413, however subject to restrictions and
rd
Aug. 27, 1999, 3 Div. [Vitug]) limitations voluntarily agreed to by the
Philippines, expressly or impliedly, as a
member of the family of nations. By the
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW doctrine of incorporation, the country is
bound by generally accepted principles of
international law, which are considered to be
280. What is the doctrine of incorporation?
automatically part of our own laws. One of
How is it applied by local courts?
the oldest and most fundamental rules in
international law is pacta sunt servanda –
Held: Under the doctrine of incorporation,
international agreements must be performed
rules of international law form part of the law
in good faith. A state which has contracted
of the land and no further legislative action is
valid international obligations is bound to
needed to make such rules applicable in the
make in its legislations such modifications as
domestic sphere.
may be necessary to ensure the fulfillment of
the obligations.
The doctrine of incorporation is applied
whenever municipal tribunals (or local
By their inherent nature, treaties really limit
courts) are confronted with situations in
or restrict the absoluteness of sovereignty.
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 133
By their voluntary act, nations may surrender (Holy See, The v. Rosario, Jr., 238
some aspects of their state power in SCRA 524, 533-534, Dec. 1, 1994, En Banc
exchange for greater benefits granted by or [Quiason])
derived from a convention or pact. After all,
states, like individuals, live with coequals,
and in pursuit of mutually covenanted 283. Discuss the Status of the Vatican and
objectives and benefits, they also commonly the Holy See in International Law.
agree to limit the exercise of their otherwise
absolute rights. Thus, treaties have been Held: Before the annexation of the Papal
used to record agreements between States States by Italy in 1870, the Pope was the
concerning such widely diverse matters as, monarch and he, as the Holy See, was
for example, the lease of naval bases, the considered a subject of International Law.
sale or cession of territory, the termination of With the loss of the Papal States and the
war, the regulation of conduct of hostilities, limitation of the territory under the Holy See
the formation of alliances, the regulation of to an area of 108.7 acres, the position of the
commercial relations, the settling of claims, Holy See in International Law became
the laying down of rules governing conduct in controversial.
peace and the establishment of international
organizations. The sovereignty of a state In 1929, Italy and the Holy See entered into
therefore cannot in fact and in reality be the Lateran Treaty, where Italy recognized
considered absolute. Certain restrictions the exclusive dominion and sovereign
enter into the picture: (1) limitations imposed jurisdiction of the Holy See over the Vatican
by the very nature of membership in the City. It also recognized the right of the Holy
family of nations and (2) limitations imposed See to receive foreign diplomats, to send its
by treaty stipulations. (Tanada v. Angara, own diplomats to foreign countries, and to
272 SCRA 18, May 2, 1997 [Panganiban]) enter into treaties according to International
Law.
282. What must a person who feels aggrieved The Lateran Treaty established the
by the acts of a foreign sovereign do to statehood of the Vatican City “for the
espouse his cause? purpose of assuring to the Holy See absolute
and visible independence and of
Held: Under both Public International Law guaranteeing to it indisputable sovereignty
and Transnational Law, a person who feels also in the field of international relations.”
aggrieved by the acts of a foreign sovereign
can ask his own government to espouse his In view of the wordings of the Lateran Treaty,
cause through diplomatic channels. it is difficult to determine whether the
statehood is vested in the Holy See or in the
Private respondent can ask the Philippine Vatican City. Some writers even suggested
government, through the Foreign Office, to that the treaty created two international
espouse its claims against the Holy See. Its persons - the Holy See and Vatican City.
first task is to persuade the Philippine
government to take up with the Holy See the The Vatican City fits into none of the
validity of its claims. Of course, the Foreign established categories of states, and the
Office shall first make a determination of the attribution to it of “sovereignty” must be
impact of its espousal on the relations made in a sense different from that in which
between the Philippine government and the it is applied to other states. In a community
Holy See. Once the Philippine government of national states, the Vatican City
decides to espouse the claim, the latter represents an entity organized not for
ceases to be a private cause. political but for ecclesiastical purposes and
international objects. Despite its size and
According to the Permanent Court of object, the Vatican City has an independent
International Justice, the forerunner of the government of its own, with the Pope, who is
International Court of Justice: also head of the Roman Catholic Church, as
the Holy See or Head of State, in conformity
“By taking up the case of one of with its traditions, and the demands of its
its subjects and by resorting to mission in the world. Indeed, the world-wide
diplomatic action or international judicial interests and activities of the Vatican City are
proceedings on his behalf, a State is in such as to make it in a sense an
reality asserting its own rights – its right “international state.”
to ensure, in the person of its subjects,
respect for the rules of international law.” One authority wrote that the recognition of
(The Mavrommatis Palestine the Vatican City as a state has significant
Concessions, 1 Hudson, World Court implication - that it is possible for any entity
Reports 293, 302 [1924]) pursuing objects essentially different from
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 134
those pursued by states to be invested with decisions; besides, such subjection to
international personality. local jurisdiction would impair the capacity of
such body to discharge its responsibilities
Inasmuch as the Pope prefers to conduct impartially on behalf of its member-states.
foreign relations and enter into transactions (SEAFDEC-AQD v. NLRC, 206 SCRA 283,
as the Holy See and not in the name of the Feb. 4, 1992)
Vatican City, one can conclude that in the
Pope's own view, it is the Holy See that is
the international person. 286. Discuss the two conflicting concepts of
sovereign immunity from suit.
The Republic of the Philippines has
accorded the Holy See the status of a foreign Held: There are two conflicting concepts of
sovereign. The Holy See, through its sovereign immunity, each widely held and
Ambassador, the Papal Nuncio, has had firmly established. According to the classical
diplomatic representations with the Philippine or absolute theory, a sovereign cannot,
government since 1957. This appears to be without its consent, be made a respondent in
the universal practice in international the courts of another sovereign. According
relations. (Holy See, The v. Rosario, Jr., to the newer or restrictive theory, the
238 SCRA 524, 533-534, Dec. 1, 1994, En immunity of the sovereign is recognized only
Banc [Quiason]) with regard to public acts or acts jure imperii
of a state, but not with regard to private acts
or acts jure gestionis.
284. What are international organizations?
Discuss their nature. Some states passed legislation to serve as
guidelines for the executive or judicial
Held: International organizations are determination when an act may be
institutions constituted by international considered as jure gestionis. The United
agreement between two or more States to States passed the Foreign Sovereign
accomplish common goals. The legal Immunities Act of 1976, which defines a
personality of these international commercial activity as “either a regular
organizations has been recognized not only course of commercial conduct or a particular
in municipal law, but in international law as commercial transaction or act.” Furthermore,
well. the law declared that the “commercial
character of the activity shall be determined
Permanent international commissions and by reference to the nature of the course of
administrative bodies have been created by conduct or particular transaction or act,
the agreement of a considerable number of rather than by reference to its purpose.” The
States for a variety of international purposes, Canadian Parliament enacted in 1982 an Act
economic or social and mainly non-political. to Provide For State Immunity in Canadian
In so far as they are autonomous and Courts. The Act defines a “commercial
beyond the control of any one State, they activity” as any particular transaction, act or
have distinct juridical personality conduct or any regular course of conduct
independent of the municipal law of the State that by reason of its nature, is of a
where they are situated. As such, they are “commercial character.”
deemed to possess a species of international
personality of their own. (SEAFDEC-AQD v. The restrictive theory, which is intended to
NLRC, 206 SCRA 283, Feb. 14, 1992) be a solution to the host of problems
involving the issue of sovereign immunity,
has created problems of its own. Legal
285. Discuss the basic immunities of treatises and the decisions in countries
international organizations and the reason which follow the restrictive theory have
for affording them such immunities. difficulty in characterizing whether a contract
of a sovereign state with a private party is an
Held: One of the basic immunities of an act jure gestionis or an act jure imperii.
international organization is immunity from
local jurisdiction, i.e., that it is immune from The restrictive theory came about because of
legal writs and processes issued by the the entry of sovereign states into purely
tribunals of the country where it is found. commercial activities remotely connected
The obvious reason for this is that the with the discharge of governmental
subjection of such an organization to the functions. This is particularly true with
authority of the local courts would afford a respect to the Communist states which took
convenient medium through which the host control of nationalized business activities and
government may interfere in their operations international trading. (Holy See, The v.
or even influence or control its policies and Rosario, Jr., 238 SCRA 524, Dec. 1, 1994,
En Banc [Quiason])
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 135
activity in the regular course of business.
If the foreign state is not engaged regularly in
a business or trade, the particular act or
287. Cite some transactions by a foreign state transaction must then be tested by its nature.
with private parties that were considered by If the act is in pursuit of a sovereign activity,
the Supreme Court as acts “jure imperii” and or an incident thereof, then it is an act jure
acts “jure gestionis.” imperii, especially when it is not undertaken
for gain or profit.
Held: This Court has considered the
following transactions by a foreign state with As held in United States of America v. Guinto
private parties as acts jure imperii: (1) the (supra.):
lease by a foreign government of apartment
buildings for use of its military officers “There is no question that the
(Syquia v. Lopez, 84 Phil. 312 [1949]); (2) United States of America, like any other
the conduct of public bidding for the repair of state, will be deemed to have impliedly
a wharf at a United States Naval Station waived its non-suability if it has entered
(United States of America v. Ruiz, supra.); into a contract in its proprietary or private
and (3) the change of employment status of capacity. It is only when the contract
base employees (Sanders v. Veridiano, 162 involves its sovereign or governmental
SCRA 88 [1988]). capacity that no such waiver may be
implied.”
On the other hand, this Court has considered (Holy See, The v. Rosario, Jr., 238
the following transactions by a foreign state SCRA 524, Dec. 1, 1994, En Banc [Quiason])
with private parties as acts jure gestionis: (1)
the hiring of a cook in the recreation center,
consisting of three restaurants, a cafeteria, a
bakery, a store, and a coffee and pastry
shop at the John Hay Air Station in Baguio 289. May the Holy See be sued for selling the
City, to cater to American servicemen and land it acquired by donation from the
the general public (United States of America Archdiocese of Manila to be made site of its
v. Rodrigo, 182 SCRA 644 [1990]; and (2) mission or the Apostolic Nunciature in the
the bidding for the operation of barber shops Philippines but which purpose cannot be
in Clark Air Base in Angeles City (United accomplished as the land was occupied by
States of America v. Guinto, 182 SCRA 644 squatters who refused to vacate the area?
[1990]). The operation of the restaurants
and other facilities open to the general public Held: In the case at bench, if petitioner
is undoubtedly for profit as a commercial and (Holy See) has bought and sold lands in the
not a governmental activity. By entering into ordinary course of a real estate business,
the employment contract with the cook in the surely the said transaction can be
discharge of its proprietary function, the categorized as an act jure gestionis.
United States government impliedly divested However, petitioner has denied that the
itself of it sovereign immunity from suit. (Holy acquisition and subsequent disposal of Lot 5-
See, The v. Rosario, Jr., 238 SCRA 524, A were made for profit but claimed that it
Dec. 1, 1994, En Banc [Quiason]) acquired said property for the site of its
mission or the Apostolic Nunciature in the
Philippines. X x x
288. What should be the guidelines to Lot 5-A was acquired by petitioner as a
determine what activities and transactions donation from the Archdiocese of Manila.
shall be considered “commercial” and as The donation was made not for commercial
constituting acts “jure gestionis” by a foreign purpose, but for the use of petitioner to
state? construct thereon the official place of
residence of the Papal Nuncio. The right of
Held: In the absence of legislation defining a foreign sovereign to acquire property, real
what activities and transactions shall be or personal, in a receiving state, necessary
considered “commercial” and as constituting for the creation and maintenance of its
acts jure gestionis, we have to come out with diplomatic mission, is recognized in the 1961
our own guidelines, tentative they may be. Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
This treaty was concurred in by the
Certainly, the mere entering into a contract Philippine Senate and entered into force in
by a foreign state with a private party cannot the Philippines on November 15, 1965.
be the ultimate test. Such an act can only be
the start of the inquiry. The logical question In Article 31(a) of the Convention, a
is whether the foreign state is engaged in the diplomatic envoy is granted immunity from
the civil and administrative jurisdiction of the
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 136
receiving state over any real action relating Secretary of Foreign Affairs to request
to private immovable property situated in the the Solicitor General to make, in behalf of the
territory of the receiving state which the commander of the United States Naval Base
envoy holds on behalf of the sending state at Olongapo City, Zambales, a “suggestion”
for the purposes of the mission. If this to respondent Judge. The Solicitor General
immunity is provided for a diplomatic envoy, embodied the “suggestion” in a Manifestation
with all the more reason should immunity be and Memorandum as amicus curiae.
recognized as regards the sovereign itself,
which in this case is the Holy See. In the case at bench, the Department of
Foreign Affairs, through the Office of Legal
The decision to transfer the property and the Affairs moved with this Court to be allowed to
subsequent disposal thereof are likewise intervene on the side of petitioner. The
clothed with a governmental character. Court allowed the said Department to file its
Petitioner did not sell Lot 5-A for profit or memorandum in support of petitioner‟s claim
gain. It merely wanted to dispose off the of sovereign immunity.
same because the squatters living thereon
made it almost impossible for petitioner to In some cases, the defense of sovereign
use it for the purpose of the donation. (Holy immunity was submitted directly to the local
See, The v. Rosario, Jr., 238 SCRA 524, courts by the respondents through their
Dec. 1, 1994, En Banc [Quiason]) private counsels. In cases where the foreign
states bypass the Foreign Office, the courts
can inquire into the facts and make their own
290. How is sovereign or diplomatic immunity determination as to the nature of the acts
pleaded in a foreign court? and transactions involved. (Holy See, The
v. Rosario, Jr., 238 SCRA 524, Dec. 1,
Held: In Public International Law, when a 1994, En Banc [Quiason])
state or international agency wishes to plead
sovereign or diplomatic immunity in a foreign
court, it requests the Foreign Office of the 291. Is the determination of the executive
state where it is sued to convey to the court branch of the government that a state or
that said defendant is entitled to immunity. instrumentality is entitled to sovereign or
diplomatic immunity subject to judicial
In the United States, the procedure followed review, or is it a political question and
is the process of “suggestion,” where the therefore, conclusive upon the courts?
foreign state or the international organization
sued in an American court requests the Held: The issue of petitioner‟s (The Holy
Secretary of State to make a determination See) non-suability can be determined by the
as to whether it is entitled to immunity. If the trial court without going to trial in light of the
Secretary of State finds that the defendant is pleadings x x x. Besides, the privilege of
immune from suit, he, in turn, asks the sovereign immunity in this case was
Attorney General to submit to the court a sufficiently established by the Memorandum
“suggestion” that the defendant is entitled to and Certification of the Department of
immunity. In England, a similar procedure is Foreign Affairs. As the department tasked
followed, only the Foreign Office issues a with the conduct of the Philippines‟ foreign
certification to that effect instead of relations, the Department of Foreign Affairs
submitting a “suggestion”. has formally intervened in this case and
officially certified that the Embassy of the
In the Philippines, the practice is for the Holy See is a duly accredited diplomatic
foreign government or the international mission to the Republic of the Philippines
organization to first secure an executive exempt from local jurisdiction and entitled to
endorsement of its claim of sovereign or all the rights, privileges and immunities of a
diplomatic immunity. But how the Philippine diplomatic mission or embassy in this
Foreign Office conveys its endorsement to country. The determination of the executive
the courts varies. In International Catholic arm of government that a state or
Migration Commission v. Calleja, 190 SCRA instrumentality is entitled to sovereign or
130 (1990), the Secretary of Foreign Affairs diplomatic immunity is a political question
just sent a letter directly to the Secretary of that is conclusive upon the courts. Where
Labor and Employment, informing the latter the plea of immunity is recognized and
that the respondent-employer could not be affirmed by the executive branch, it is the
sued because it enjoyed diplomatic duty of the courts to accept this claim so as
immunity. In World Health Organization v. not to embarrass the executive arm of the
Aquino, 48 SCRA 242 (1972), the Secretary government in conducting the country‟s
of Foreign Affairs sent the trial court a foreign relations. As in International Catholic
telegram to that effect. In Baer v. Tizon, 57 Migration Commission and in World Health
SCRA 1 (1974), the U.S. Embassy asked the Organization, we abide by the certification of
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 137
the Department of Foreign Affairs. (Holy were committed, for trial and punishment.
See, The v. Rosario, Jr., 238 SCRA 524, This has been done generally by treaties x x
Dec. 1, 1994, En Banc [Quiason]) x Prior to these treaties, and apart from
them there was no well-defined obligation on
one country to deliver up such fugitives to
292. What is extradition? To whom does it another; and though such delivery was often
apply? made it was upon the principle of comity x x
x.” (Dissenting Opinion, Puno, J., in
Held: It is the “process by which persons Secretary of Justice v. Hon. Ralph C.
charged with or convicted of crime against Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, Jan. 18, 2000,
the law of a State and found in a foreign En Banc)
State are returned by the latter to the former
for trial or punishment. It applies to those
who are merely charged with an offense but 294. What is the nature of an extradition
have not been brought to trial; to those who proceeding? Is it akin to a criminal
have been tried and convicted and have proceeding?
subsequently escaped from custody; and
those who have been convicted in absentia. Held: [A]n extradition proceeding is sui
It does not apply to persons merely generis. It is not a criminal proceeding which
suspected of having committed an offense will call into operation all the rights of an
but against whom no charge has been laid or accused as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
to a person whose presence is desired as a To begin with, the process of extradition
witness or for obtaining or enforcing a civil does not involve the determination of the
judgment.” (Weston, Falk, D' Amato, guilt or innocence of an accused. His guilt or
International Law and Order, 2nd ed., p. innocence will be adjudged in the court of the
630 [1990], cited in Dissenting Opinion, state where he will be extradited. Hence, as
Puno, J., in Secretary of Justice v. Hon. a rule, constitutional rights that are only
Ralph C. Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, Jan. relevant to determine the guilt or innocence
18, 2000, En Banc) of an accused cannot be invoked by an
extraditee especially by one whose
extradition papers are still undergoing
293. Discuss the basis for allowing evaluation. As held by the US Supreme
extradition. Court in United States v. Galanis:
Held: Extradition was first practiced by the “An extradition proceeding is not
Egyptians, Chinese, Chaldeans and Assyro- a criminal prosecution, and the
Babylonians but their basis for allowing constitutional safeguards that
extradition was unclear. Sometimes, it was accompany a criminal trial in this country
granted due to pacts; at other times, due to do not shield an accused from extradition
plain good will. The classical commentators pursuant to a valid treaty.” (Wiehl,
on international law thus focused their early Extradition Law at the Crossroads: The
views on the nature of the duty to surrender Trend Toward Extending Greater
an extraditee --- whether the duty is legal or Constitutional Procedural Protections To
moral in character. Grotius and Vattel led Fugitives Fighting Extradition from the
the school of thought that international law United States, 19 Michigan Journal of
imposed a legal duty called civitas maxima to International Law 729, 741 [1998], citing
extradite criminals. In sharp contrast, United States v. Galanis, 429 F. Supp.
Puffendorf and Billot led the school of 1215 [D. Conn. 1977])
thought that the so-called duty was but an
"imperfect obligation which could become There are other differences between an
enforceable only by a contract or agreement extradition proceeding and a criminal
between states. proceeding. An extradition proceeding is
summary in natural while criminal
Modern nations tilted towards the view of proceedings involve a full-blown trial. In
Puffendorf and Billot that under international contradistinction to a criminal proceeding,
law there is no duty to extradite in the the rules of evidence in an extradition
absence of treaty, whether bilateral or proceeding allow admission of evidence
multilateral. Thus, the US Supreme Court in under less stringent standards. In terms of
US v. Rauscher (119 US 407, 411, 7 S Ct. the quantum of evidence to be satisfied, a
234, 236, 30 L. ed. 425 [1886]), held: “x x x it criminal case requires proof beyond
is only in modern times that the nations of reasonable doubt for conviction while a
the earth have imposed upon themselves the fugitive may be ordered extradited “upon
obligation of delivering up these fugitives showing of the existence of a prima facie
from justice to the states where their crimes case.” Finally, unlike in a criminal case
where judgment becomes executory upon
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 138
being rendered final, in an extradition trafficking. Extradition treaties provide
proceeding, our courts may adjudge an the assurance that the punishment of these
individual extraditable but the President has crimes will not be frustrated by the frontiers
the final discretion to extradite him. The of territorial sovereignty. Implicit in the
United States adheres to a similar practice treaties should be the unbending
whereby the Secretary of State exercises commitment that the perpetrators of these
wide discretion in balancing the equities of crimes will not be coddled by any signatory
the case and the demands of the nation's state.
foreign relations before making the ultimate
decision to extradite. It ought to follow that the RP-US Extradition
Treaty calls for an interpretation that will
As an extradition proceeding is not criminal minimize if not prevent the escape of
in character and the evaluation stage in an extraditees from the long arm of the law and
extradition proceeding is not akin to a expedite their trial. X x x
preliminary investigation, the due process
safeguards in the latter do not necessarily [A]n equally compelling factor to consider is
apply to the former. This we hold for the the understanding of the parties themselves
procedural due process required by a given to the RP-US Extradition Treaty as well as
set of circumstances “must begin with a the general interpretation of the issue in
determination of the precise nature of the question by other countries with similar
government function involved as well as the treaties with the Philippines. The rule is
private interest that has been affected by recognized that while courts have the power
governmental action.” The concept of due to interpret treaties, the meaning given them
process is flexible for “not all situations by the departments of government
calling for procedural safeguards call for the particularly charged with their negotiation
same kind of procedure.” (Secretary of and enforcement is accorded great weight.
Justice v. Hon. Ralph C. Lantion, G.R. No. The reason for the rule is laid down in
139465, Oct. 17, 2000, En Banc [Puno]) Santos III v. Northwest Orient Airlines, et al.
(210 SCRA 256, 261 [1992]), where we
stressed that a treaty is a joint executive-
295. Will the retroactive application of an legislative act which enjoys the presumption
extradition treaty violate the constitutional that “it was first carefully studied and
prohibition against "ex post facto" laws? determined to be constitutional before it was
adopted and given the force of law in the
Held: The prohibition against ex post facto country.” (Secretary of Justice v. Hon.
law applies only to criminal legislation which Ralph C. Lantion, G.R. No. 139465, Oct.
affects the substantial rights of the accused. 17, 2000, En Banc [Puno])
This being so, there is no merit in the
contention that the ruling sustaining an
extradition treaty‟s retroactive application 297. What is a Treaty? Discuss.
violates the constitutional prohibition against
ex post facto laws. The treaty is neither a Held: A treaty, as defined by the Vienna
piece of criminal legislation nor a criminal Convention on the Law of Treaties, is “an
procedural statute. (Wright v. CA, 235 international instrument concluded between
SCRA 341, Aug. 15, 1994 [Kapunan]) States in written form and governed by
international law, whether embodied in a
single instrument or in two or more related
296. Discuss the rules in the interpretation of instruments, and whatever its particular
extradition treaties. designation.” There are many other terms
used for a treaty or international agreement,
Held: [A]ll treaties, including the RP-US some of which are: act, protocol, agreement,
Extradition Treaty, should be interpreted in compromis d' arbitrage, concordat,
light of their intent. Nothing less than the convention, declaration, exchange of notes,
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to pact, statute, charter and modus vivendi. All
which the Philippines is a signatory provides writers, from Hugo Grotius onward, have
that “a treaty shall be interpreted in good pointed out that the names or titles of
faith in accordance with the ordinary international agreements included under the
meaning to be given to the terms of the general term treaty have little or no
treaty in their context and in light of its object significance. Certain terms are useful, but
and purpose.” X x x. It cannot be gainsaid they furnish little more than mere description
that today, countries like the Philippines
forge extradition treaties to arrest the Article 2(2) of the Vienna Convention
dramatic rise of international and provides that “the provisions of paragraph 1
transnational crimes like terrorism and drug regarding the use of terms in the present
Convention are without prejudice to the use
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 139
of those terms, or to the meanings which Held: A final act, sometimes called
may be given to them in the internal law of protocol de cloture, is an instrument which
the State.” (BAYAN [Bagong Alyansang records the winding up of the proceedings of
Makabayan] v. Executive Secretary a diplomatic conference and usually includes
Ronaldo Zamora, G.R. No. 138570, Oct. a reproduction of the texts of treaties,
10, 2000, En Banc [Buena]) conventions, recommendations and other
acts agreed upon and signed by the
plenipotentiaries attending the conference. It
298. Discuss the binding effect of treaties and is not the treaty itself. It is rather a summary
executive agreements in international law. of the proceedings of a protracted
conference which may have taken place over
Held: [I]n international law, there is no several years. It will not require the
difference between treaties and executive concurrence of the Senate. The documents
agreements in their binding effect upon contained therein are deemed adopted
states concerned, as long as the without need for ratification. (Tanada v.
functionaries have remained within their Angara, 272 SCRA 18, May 2, 1997
powers. International law continues to make [Panganiban])
no distinction between treaties and executive
agreements: they are equally binding
obligations upon nations. (BAYAN [Bagong
Alyansang Makabayan] v. Executive 301. What is the “most-favored-nation”
Secretary Ronaldo Zamora, G.R. No. clause? What is its purpose?
138570, Oct. 10, 2000, En Banc [Buena])
Answer: 1. The most-favored-nation clause
may be defined, in general, as a pledge by a
299. Does the Philippines recognize the contracting party to a treaty to grant to the
binding effect of executive agreements even other party treatment not less favorable than
without the concurrence of the Senate or that which has been or may be granted to
Congress? the “most favored” among other countries.
The clause has been commonly included in
Held: In our jurisdiction, we have treaties of commercial nature.
recognized the binding effect of executive
agreements even without the concurrence of There are generally two types of most-
the Senate or Congress. In Commissioner of favored-nation clause, namely, conditional
Customs v. Eastern Sea Trading (3 SCRA and unconditional. According to the clause
351, 356-357 [1961]), we had occasion to in its unconditional form, any advantage of
pronounce: whatever kind which has been or may in
future be granted by either of the contracting
“x x x the right of the Executive parties to a third State shall simultaneously
to enter into binding agreements without and unconditionally be extended to the other
the necessity of subsequent under the same or equivalent conditions as
Congressional approval has been those under which it has been granted to the
confirmed by long usage. From the third State. (Salonga & Yap, Public
earliest days of our history we have International Law, 5th Edition, 1992, pp.
entered into executive agreements 141-142)
covering such subjects as commercial
and consular relations, most-favored- 2. The purpose of a most favored nation
nation rights, patent rights, trademark clause is to grant to the contracting party
and copyright protection, postal and treatment not less favorable than that which
navigation arrangements and the has been or may be granted to the "most
settlement of claims. The validity of favored" among other countries. The most
these has never been seriously favored nation clause is intended to establish
questioned by our courts. " the principle of equality of international
(BAYAN [Bagong Alyansang treatment by providing that the citizens or
Makabayan] v. Executive Secretary subjects of the contracting nations may enjoy
Ronaldo Zamora, G.R. No. 138570, the privileges accorded by either party to
Oct. 10, 2000, En Banc [Buena]) those of the most favored nation
(Commissioner of Internal Revenue v.
S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc., 309 SCRA 87,
rd
107-108, June 25, 1999, 3 Div. [Gonzaga-
300. What is a "protocol de cloture"? Will it Reyes])
require concurrence by the Senate?
Political Law Reviewer by SANDOVAL 140
302. What is the essence of the principle the investor is not the same in the
behind the "most-favored-nation" clause as two countries. The similarity in the
applied to tax treaties? circumstances of payment of taxes is a
condition for the enjoyment of most
Held: The essence of the principle is to favored nation treatment precisely to
allow the taxpayer in one state to avail of underscore the need for equality of
more liberal provisions granted in another tax treatment.
treaty to which the country of residence of
such taxpayer is also a party provided that
the subject matter of taxation x x x is the 303. What is ratification? Discuss its function
same as that in the tax treaty under which in the treaty-making process.
the taxpayer is liable.
Held: Ratification is generally held to be an
In Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. executive act, undertaken by the head of
S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc., 309 SCRA 87, state or of the government, as the case may
June 25, 1999, the SC did not grant the be, through which the formal acceptance of
claim filed by S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc., a the treaty is proclaimed. A State may
non-resident foreign corporation based in the provide in its domestic legislation the
USA, with the BIR for refund of overpaid process of ratification of a treaty. The
withholding tax on royalties pursuant to the consent of the State to be bound by a treaty
most-favored-nation clause of the RP-US is expressed by ratification when: (a) the
Tax Treaty in relation to the RP-West treaty provides for such ratification, (b) it is
Germany Tax Treaty. It held: otherwise established that the negotiating
States agreed that ratification should be
Given the purpose underlying required, (c) the representative of the State
tax treaties and the rationale for the most has signed the treaty subject to ratification,
favored nation clause, the concessional or (d) the intention of the State to sign the
tax rate of 10 percent provided for in the treaty subject to ratification appears from the
RP-Germany Tax Treaty should apply full powers of its representative, or was
only if the taxes imposed upon royalties expressed during the negotiation. (BAYAN
in the RP-US Tax Treaty and in the RP- [Bagong Alyansang Makabayan] v.
Germany Tax Treaty are paid under Executive Secretary Ronaldo Zamora,
similar circumstances. This would mean G.R. No. 138570, Oct. 10, 2000, En Banc
that private respondent (S.C. Johnson [Buena])
and Son, Inc.) must prove that the RP-
US Tax Treaty grants similar tax reliefs
to residents of the United States in 304. Explain the “pacta sunt servanda” rule.
respect of the taxes imposable upon
royalties earned from sources within the Held: One of the oldest and most
Philippines as those allowed to their fundamental rules in international law is
German counterparts under the RP- pacta sunt servanda – international
Germany Tax Treaty. agreements must be performed in good faith.
“A treaty engagement is not a mere moral
The RP-US and the RP-West obligation but creates a legally binding
Germany Tax Treaties do not contain obligation on the parties x x x. A state which
similar provisions on tax crediting. has contracted valid international obligations
Article 24 of the RP-Germany Tax Treaty is bound to make in its legislations such
x x x expressly allows crediting against modifications as may be necessary to ensure
German income and corporation tax of the fulfillment of the obligations undertaken.”
20% of the gross amount of royalties (Tanada v. Angara, 272 SCRA 18, May 2,
paid under the law of the Philippines. On 1997 [Panganiban])
the other hand, Article 23 of the RP-US
Tax Treaty, which is the counterpart
provision with respect to relief for double 305. Explain the "rebus sic stantibus" rule
taxation, does not provide for similar (i.e., things remaining as they are). Does it
crediting of 20% of the gross amount of operate automatically to render a treaty
royalties paid. X x x inoperative?