2018 BAR EXAMINATIONS POLITICAL LAW SUGGESTED ANSWER:

I  The law in question does not

Congress enacted a law to provide sanction abortion even in practical
Filipinos, especially the poor and the terms. In the case of Imbong v.
marginalized, access and information to a Ochoa (GR No. 204819, April 8,
full range of modern family planning 2014), the law on its face expressly
methods, including contraceptives, mentioned that abortion is  not
intrauterine devices, injectibles, non- permissible, and this was the
abortifacient hormonal contraceptives, determinative factor in making the
and family planning products and  ruling. In the same case, the Court
supplies, but expressly prohibited also found that the RH law was
abortion. To ensure its objectives, the law  replete with provisions that embody
made it mandatory for health providers to the policy of protecting the unborn
provide information on the full range  of from the moment of fertilization.
modern family planning methods, supplies
and services, for schools  to  provide In addition, the majority of the court
reproductive health education, for non- believes that the question of when life
governmental medical practitioners to starts is a scientific and medical issue;
render mandatory 48 on hours pro hence, the Court refused to make a ruling
bono reproductive health services as a on this issue.
condition to Philhealth accreditation, and
for couples desiring to marry attend a  Involuntary servitude denotes
family planning seminar prior to issuance compulsion or coercion to do
to a marriage license. It also punishes something either through force,
certain acts of refusal to carry out its threats, intimidation or other
mandates. The spouses Aguiluz, both means. The accreditation with the
Roman Catholics, filed a petition to PhilHealth, as ruled by the
declare the law as unconstitutional based Supreme Court in the case
on, among others, the following grounds: of Imbong v. Ochoa, should  be 
viewed as an incentive and not a
 It violates the right to life, since punishment. These health service
it practically sanctions abortion. providers also enjoy the liberty to
Despite express terms prohibiting choose which kind of health
abortion, petitioners claim that the service they wish to provide.
family planning products and Clearly, there is no compulsion,
supplies oppose the initiation of life force or threat upon them to render
which is fundamental human right, the pro bono services against their
and the sanction of contraceptive will.
use contravenes natural law and  What is prohibited in the
as an affront to the dignity of man. Constitution is the establishment of
 It violates the constitutional a state religion. While the
prohibition against  involuntary establishment clause in the
servitude because it requires Constitution restricts what the
medical practitioners to render 48 government can do with religion, it
hours of pro bono reproductive also limits what religious sects can
health services which may be or cannot do with the government.
against their will. They can neither cause the
 It violates the Freedom of government to adopt their
Religion, since petitioners’ religious particular doctrine as policy for
beliefs prevent them from using everyone, nor can they cause the
contraceptives, and that any State- government to restrict other
sponsored procurement of groups. To do so would cause the
contraceptives, funded by taxes, State to adhere to a particular
violates the guarantee of religious religion, and thus establish a state
freedom. religion (Imbong v. Ochoa, GR No.
204819, April 8, 2014).
Rule on each of the above objections.
(2.5% each) II

1
Agnes was allegedly picked up by a group appropriate interim and permanent
of military men headed by Gen. reliefs to the petitioner. It serves
Altamirano, and was brought to several both preventive and curative reliefs
military camps where she was in addressing extrajudicial
interrogated, beaten, mauled, tortured, abduction and torture. Temporary
and threatened with death if she would not protection orders are merely
confess her membership in the New intended to assist the Court before
People’s Army (NPA) and point to the it can arrive at a judicious
location of the NPA camps. She suffered determination of  the  amparo
for several days until she was released petition. A temporary protection
after she signed a document saying that order, being an interim relief, can
she was a surenderee, and was not only be granted before final
abducted or harmed by the military. After adjudication on the  amparo case
she was released, alleging that her rights is made. The privilege of the writ of
to life, liberty and security had been amparo, once granted, already
violated and continued to be  threatened entails the protection of the
by violation of such rights, she filed with aggrieved party. Thus, since the
the Supreme Court (the Court) a Petition writ of amparo was already granted
for the Writs of Amparo and Habeas and issued, there is no more need
Corpus with prayers for Temporary to issue a temporary protection
Protection Orders, Inspection of Place and order (Yano v. Sanchez, G.R. No.
Production of Documents and Personal 186640, Feb. 11, 2010; Rodriguez
Properties. The case was filed against v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. Nos.
President Amoyo (who was the President 191805 & 193160, Nov. 15, 2011).
of the Philippines when the abduction,
beating, mauling and life threats were  Will the president’s immunity
committed), General Altamirano, and from suit continue even after his
several military men whom Agnes was term has ended, considering that
able to recognize during her ordeal. The the events covered by the petition
Court, after finding the petition to be in took place during his terms?
order, issued the writ of amparo and the (2.5%)
writ of habeas data and directed the
respondents to file a verified return on the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
writs, and directed the Court of Appeals (b) No. The presidential immunity from
(CA) to hear the petition. The respondents suit exists only in  concurrence with the
duly filed their  return on the writs and President’s incumbency. A non-sitting
produced the documents in their President cannot claim immunity even if
possession. After  hearing, the CA ruled the acts complained of were committed
that there was no more need to issue the while he was still a sitting President. The
temporary protection orders since the writ reason for this is that if the immunity is not
of amparo had already been issued, and granted while he is in office, he might be
dismissed the petition against President spending all his time in attending to 
Amoyo on the ground the he was immune litigations. After his term, he can already
from suit during his incumbency as attend to them (Estrada v. Desierto, G..R
president. Agnes appealed the CA ruling Nos. 146710-15, 146738, April 3,
to the Court. The appeal was lodged after 2001;Rodriguez v. Macapagal-Arroyo,
President Amoyo’s terms had ended. G.R. Nos. 191805 & 193160, Nov. 15,
(a) Was the CA correct in saying that the 2011).
writ of amparo rendered unnecessary the III
issuance of the temporary protection What and whose vote is required for the
order? (2.5%) following acts: (2% each)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a)      the repeal of a tax exemption law;
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
 Yes. The writ of amparo is an (a) The Constitution is silent  on  the 
extraordinary and independent voting  requirement  for repealing a tax
remedy that provides rapid judicial exemption. However, it could be
relief, as it partakes of a summary considered that the voting requirement to
proceeding and requires only grant is also the  voting requirement  to
substantial evidence to make the

2
repeal; hence, the required vote is the Andres, a resident and registered voter of
majority of all the members of Congress. Cuatro municipality, ran and was elected
as member of Sangguniang Panlalawigan
 a declaration of the existence of (SP) of Amaya in the 2010 and 2013 local
a state of war; elections.
While Andres was serving his second
SUGGESTED ANSWER: term as SP member, a law was enacted
re-apportioning the four towns of Amaya
 Two-thirds of all members of into two legislative districts: Uno and Dos
Congress, voting comprising the First District, and Tres and
separately (Article VI, Section 23, Cuatro comprising the Second District.
1). In the 2016 local elections, Andres ran
and was elected as member of the SP of
(c )     The amendment of a constitutional Amaya representing Second district.
provisions through a constituent Andres seeks your legal advice regarding
assembly; his intention to run as a member of the SP
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of Amaya for the Second District in the
next local election in 2019. What will you
advise Andres? (2.5%)
 The proposal for the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
amendment shall be valid, upon a
My advise is for him not to run for SP
vote of three-fourths of all its
member, because doing so violates the
Members (Article XVII, Section 1,
limitation of three consecutive terms upon
1). For the effectivity of the
local elective officials. In the cases
amendment; however,  the vote
of Latasa v. COMELEC (G.R. 154289,
needed is  the majority of all those
December 10, 2003) and Naval v.
who voted (Article XVII, Section
COMELEC (G.R. No. 207851, July 8,
4). [Note: Any of these two
2014]), the Court ruled that  the three-
answers should be acceptable as
term limit applies notwithstanding any
the question is not clear on
reapportionment, renaming, or
whether it is asking for the voting
reclassification of any local government
requirement for the validity of the
unit. The clear intent of the framers of the
proposal or the effectivity of the
Constitution was to limit the term to three
amendment].
consecutive elections to the same
position.
 The resolution of a tie in a V
presidential election; and State whether or not the following acts are
constitutional: (2% each)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) A law prescribing as qualifications for 
appointment  to  any  court lower than the
 A majority of all the members of Supreme Court, Philippine citizenship,
both Houses of Congress, voting whether natural born or naturalized, 35
separately (Article VII, Section 4). years of age on the date of appointment,
and at least eight years as a member of
 The extension of the period for the Philippine Bar.
the suspension of the privilege of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the writ of habeas corpus?
 The law prescribing as a
SUGGESTED ANSWER: qualification for appointment to any
(e)     The Congress, voting jointly, by a lower court mere Philippine
vote of at least a majority of all its citizenship, whether natural-born or
Members in regular or special naturalized, would be
session (Article VII, Section 18). unconstitutional with respect to
IV appointments to collegiate
The Province of Amaya is one of the courts (CA, CTA,
smallest province in the Philippines with Sandiganbayan) because all
only one legislative district composed of appointees to these courts must be
four municipalities: Uno, Dos, Tres and natural-born citizens (Article VIII,
Cuatro. Section 7).

3
 A law requiring all candidates appointment. (Article XI, Section
for national or local elective offices 8).
to be college degree holders;
 The nomination by a national
SUGGESTED ANSWER: party-list of a person who is not
one of its bona fide members
 The law requiring all candidates
for national or local elective offices SUGGESTED ANSWER:
to be college degree holders (e) The nomination is invalid, because
should be considered as nominees of national parties must be
unconstitutional with respect to bona fide members of such parties (Atong
national elective offices, because it Paglaum v. Commission on Elections,
is not one of the qualifications 694 SCRA 477, G.R. No. 203766, April 2,
specifically required for these 2013).
offices. The qualifications for these VI
positions under the Constitution Ang Araw, a multi-sectoral party-list
are exclusive in character and the organization duly registered as such with
Congress would be incompetent to the Commission on Elections (Comelec),
prescribe this requirement as an was proclaimed as one of the winning
additional qualification for party-list groups in the last national
candidates for national elective elections. Its first nominee, Alejandro,
office. This additional requirement assumed office as the party-list
would, however, be valid with representative.
respect to candidates for local About one year after Alejandro assumed
elective posts (Social Justice office, the Interim Central Committee of
Society v. Dangerous Drugs Ang Araw expelled Alejandro from the
Board, 570 SCRA 410). party for disloyalty and replaced him with
Andoy, its second nominee. Alejandro
(c )     The    designation   by    the    questioned before the Comelec his
president   of    an    acting   Associate expulsion ad replacement by Andoy.
Commissioner of the Civil Service The Comelec considered Alejandro’s
Commission; petition as an intra-party dispute which it
SUGGESTED ANSWER: could resolve as an incident of its power
to register political parties; it proceeded to
 Such designation is uphold the expulsion.
unconstitutional because the Is the Comelec’s ruling correct? (5%)
Constitution provides that no SUGGESTED ANSWER:
person shall be appointed or Alejandro’s petition should be dismissed
designated in any of the for lack of jurisdiction. It is the HRET
constitutional commissions in a which has jurisdiction over the case,
temporary or acting because Alejandro is already a Member of
capacity (Articles IX-B, Section the House of Representatives (Lico v.
1(2), IX-C, Section 2 and IX-D, Commission on Elections, G.R. No.
Section 2). 205505, September 29, 2015).
VII
 The appointment by the The 2016 mayorality race in the City of
President as Deputy Ombudsman Ardania included Arnaldo and Anacleto as
of a lawyer who has been engaged contenders.
in the practice of law for five years; Arnaldo filed a petition with the Comelec
and to cancel Anacleto’s Certificate of
Candidacy (CoC) for misrepresenting
SUGGESTED ANSWER: himself as a Filipno citizen. Arnaldo
presented as evidence a copy of
Anacleto’s Spanish passport and a
 The appointment can be
certification from the Bureau of
upheld, because only  the
Immigration (BI) showing that Anacleto
Ombudsman is required under the
used the same passport several times to
Constitution to have been engaged
travel to and from Manila and Madrid or
in the practice of law for at least
Barcelona.
ten years prior to his
4
In his Comment, Anacleto claimed that, a with respect to dual citizens, their
year prior to filing his CoC, he had certificates of candidacy are void ab
complied with all the requirements of R.A. initio, because they possess “a
No. 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re- substantive [disqualifying circumstance] . .
acquisition of Act of 2003) to reacquire his .  [existing] prior to the filing of their
Philippine citizenship by taking an oath of certificate of candidacy. “Legally, they
allegiance and executing a sworn should not even be considered
renunciation of his Spanish citizenship.  candidates. The votes cast for them
He defended the use of  his Spanish should be considered stray and should not
passport subsequent to taking  his oath of be counted.
allegiance to the Philippines as a practical In cases of vacancies caused by those
necessity since he had yet  to obtain his with void ab initio certificates of
Philippine passport despite reacquiring his candidacy, the person legally entitled to
Philippine citizenship. Even after he the vacant position would be the
secured his Philippine passport, he said candidate who garnered the next highest
he had to wait for the issuance of a number of votes among those eligible; in
Schengen visa to allow him to travel to this case, it was Arnaldo (Chua v.
Spain to visit his wife and minor children. COMELEC, G.R. No. 216607, April 5,
(a)      Based on the allegations of the 2016).
parties, is there sufficient ground to cancel VIII
Anacleto’s CoC (2.5%) Two petitions for the cancellation of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Certification of Candidacy (CoC)/Denial of
Due Course were filed with the Comelec
 The sole act of using a foreign against two candidates running as
passport does not divest Anacleto municipal mayors of different towns.
of his Filipino citizenship which he The first petition was against Anselmo.
acquired by repatriation. By Years, ago, Anselmo was charged and
representing himself as a Spanish convicted of the crime of rape by final
citizen; however, Anacleto judgment, and was sentenced to suffer
voluntarily and effectively reverted the principal penalty of reclusion
to his earlier status as a dual perpetua  which carried the accessory
citizen. Such reversion was not penalty  of perpetual absolute
retroactive; it took place the instant disqualification. While Anselmo was in
Anacleto represented himself as a prison, the  President commuted his
Spanish citizen by using his sentenced and he was discharged for
Spanish passport. He is, thus, prison.
disqualified for being a dual citizen, The second petition was against
and his CoC should be Ambrosio. Ambrosio’s residency was
cancelled (Macquiling v. Comelec, questioned because he was allegedly a
G.R. No. 195649, April 16, 2013). “green card holder,” i.e. a permanent
resident of the US, as evidenced by a
[Note: The use of the foreign passport certification to this effect from the US
amounts to a recantation of the Oath of Embassy.
Renunciation required to qualify one to Acting on the recommendation of its Law
run for an elective position]. Department, the Comelec en banc, motu
proprio issued two resolutions granting the
 In case Anacleto’s CoC is petitions against Anselmo and Ambrosio.
properly cancelled, who should Both Anselmo and Ambrosio filed
serve as mayor of Ardania City: separate petitions with the Supreme Court
Arnaldo, who obtained the second assailing the resolutions cancelling their
highest number votes, or Andrea, respective CoCs. Both claimed  that the
the duly-elected Vice Mayor of the Comelec en banc acted with grave abuse
City? (2.5%) of discretion amounting to lack or excess
of jurisdiction because the petition should
SUGGESTED ANSWER: have first heard and resolved by one of
(b) The rule on succession would not  the Comelec’s Division.
apply  if  the  permanent  vacancy was Are Anselmo and Ambrosio correct? (5%)
caused by one whose certificate of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
candidacy was void ab initio. Specifically

5
Anselmo is incorrect. The rule is every Agripina is eligible to run as member of
quasi-judicial  matter must  first be tackled Congress.  Repatriation results in the
by a division subject to appeal by way of a recovery of a person’s original nationality.
Motion for Reconsideration to the This means that a naturalized Filipino who
COMELEC en banc. In Jalosjos v. lost his citizenship will be restored to his
COMELEC (G.R. No. 205033, June 18, prior status as a Filipino citizen. If she
2013), it was determined that a were originally a natural-born citizen
cancellation on the  basis of perpetual before she lost her Philippine citizenship,
disqualification is a matter that can be she would be restored to her former status
taken judicial notice of. When it cancels A as a natural-born Filipino (Bengson III vs.
CoC on that ground, it  is  acting  in HRET, G.R. No. 142840, May 7, 2001.
performance of an administrative function See also: Parreno v. Commission on
and, therefore, the rule in Article XI, Audit, G.R. No. 162224, June 7, 2007,
Section 3 does not apply. and Tabasa v. Commission on Elections,
Ambrosio, on the other hand, is correct G.R. Nos. 221697 & 221698-700, March
that the petition for the cancellation of his 8, 2016).
CoC should have been first heard and RA 9225 makes a distinction between
resolved by the Comelec Division. those natural-born Filipinos who became
Cancellation proceedings involve the foreign citizens before and after the
COMELEC’s quasi- judicial functions. The effectivity of RA No. 9225. For those who
Constitution mandates the COMELEC, in were naturalized in a foreign country, they
the exercise of its adjudicatory or quasi- shall be deemed to  have reacquired their
judicial powers, to hear and  decide cases Philippine citizenship which was lost
first by division and, upon motion for pursuant to CA
reconsideration, by the COMELEC en
banc (Bautista v. Comelec, G.R. Nos.  In the case of those who
154796-97, October 23, 2003). became foreign citizens after RA
IX 9225 took effect, they shall retain
In 1990, Agripina migrated to Canada and Philippine citizenship despite
acquired Canadian citizenship. having acquired  foreign
In 2008, Agripina retired and returned to citizenship, provided they take the
the Philippines to permanently reside in oath of allegiance under the new
her hometown of Angeles, Pampanga. A law.
month after returning to the Philippines,
Agripina took her oath of allegiance and Considering that petitioner was
executed a sworn renunciation of her naturalized as a Canadian citizen  prior to
Canadian citizenship in accordance with the effectivity of RA 9225, she belongs to
R.A. No. 9225. the first category of natural-born Filipinos
In 2009, Agripina filed her certificate of who lost their Philippine citizenship by
candidacy for Congress for the 2010 naturalization in a foreign country, under
elections. Agripina’s political rivals lost no the first paragraph of Section 3. As the
time in causing the filing of various actions new law allows dual citizenship, she was
to question her candidacy. They able to reacquire her Philippine citizenship
questioned her eligibility to run as member by taking the required oath of
of Congress. Since Agripina had to take allegiance (See Bengson v. HRET and as
an oath under RA No. 9225,  it meant that affirmed by Poe-Llamanzares v.
she needed to perform an act to perfect COMELEC, G.R. No. 221697, March 8,
her Philippine citizenship. 2016).
They claimed, therefore, that Agripina X
could not be considered a natural-born Ascertain the constitutionality of the
citizen. Agripina raised the defense that, following acts: (2.5% each)
having complied with the requirements of
RA No. 9225, she had reacquired, and  An investigation conducted by
was deemed never to have lost, her the Ombudsman against a
Philippine citizenship. Commissioner of the Commission
Is Agripina disqualified to run for on Audit for serious misconduct.
Congress for failing to meet the
citizenship requirement? (2.5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:

6
(a) The act is constitutional. Article XI, of concurrence by the Supreme Court,
Section 13(1) of the Constitution expressly such a law would be unconstitutional.
gives the Ombudsman the power to XI
investigate on its own or on complaint by Under Section 6 of Article V (on Criminal
any person, any act or omission of any Jurisdiction) of the Visiting Forces
public official, employee, office or agency, Agreement, (VFA), the custody of a
when such act or omission appears to be United States (US) personnel who
illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient. becomes subject to criminal prosecution
before a Philippine court shall be with the
 A law prohibiting any court, US military authorities, if the latter so
other than the Supreme Court, requests. The custody shall begin from
from issuing a writ of injunction the commission of the offense until the
against an investigation being completion of all judicial proceedings.
conducted by the Ombudsman. When requested, the US military
authorities, however, shall make the US
SUGGESTED ANSWER: personnel available to Philippine
authorities for any investigative or judicial
 The law is unconstitutional. The proceedings relating to the offense which
power to issue injunctive writs is the person has been charged. In the event
part of judicial power.  The rules that the Philippine judicial proceedings are
governing the exercise of  this not completed with one year,  the US shall
power are within the powers of the be relieved of any obligation under
Supreme Court to promulgate. The Section 6.
law therefore is an encroachment The constitutionality of Section 6, Article V
of the  Court’s rule-making of the VFA is challenged on two grounds:
power (Carpio-Morales v CA, GR (1) it nullifies the exclusive power of the
217126- 27, 10 Nov 2015). Supreme Court to adopt rules of
procedure for all courts in the Philippines;
(c ) A law prohibiting any appeal from the and (2) it violates the equal protection
decision or final order of the Ombudsman clause to the extent that it allows the
in an administrative proceeding, except transfer of the custody of an accused to a
through a petition for review foreign power as providing a different rule
on certiorari filed before the Supreme of procedure for that accused.
Court. Rule on the challenge. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The challenge is without merit.
The rule in international law is that foreign
 The law is unconstitutional.
armed forces allowed to enter one’s
In Fabian v. Desierto (G.R. No.
territory are immune from local
129742, 16 September 1998), the
jurisdiction, except to the extent agreed
Court invalidated Section 27 of
upon.            As a result, the situation
involved is not one in which the power of
R.A. No. 6770 insofar as it provided for
the Supreme Court to adopt rules of
appeal by certiorari under Rule 45 from
procedure is curtailed or violated, rather, it
the decisions or orders of the
is one in which, as is normally
Ombudsman in administrative cases.
encountered around the world, the laws
Section 27 of R.A. No. 6770 had the
(including rules of procedure) of one State
effect, not only of increasing the appellate
do not extend or Apply, except to the
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court without
extent agreed upon, to subjects of another
its advice and concurrence in violation of
State due to the recognition of
Section 30, Article VI of the Constitution; it
extraterritorial immunity given to such
is  also inconsistent with Section 1, Rule
bodies as visiting foreign armed forces.
45 of the Rules of Court which provides
Nothing in the Constitution prohibits such
that a petition for review on certiorari shall
agreements recognizing immunity from
apply only to a review of “judgments or
jurisdiction or some aspects of jurisdiction
final orders of the Court of Appeals, the
(such as custody), in relation to long-
Sandiganbayan, the Court of Tax
recognized subjects of such immunity, like
Appeals, the Regional Trial Court, or other
Heads of State, diplomats and members
courts authorized by law.” In the absence
of the armed forces contingents of a

7
foreign State allowed to enter another inquiries and on impeachment, while
State’s territory. The Constitution, on  the  these rules may be generally considered
contrary, states that the Philippines as political questions, when questioned
adopts the generally accepted principles before the courts in a proper case, they
of international law as part of the law of would nevertheless be subject to the
the land (Art. II, Sec. 2). power of judicial review under the second
The equal protection clause is not paragraph of Section 1, Article VIII of the
violated, either, because there is a Constitution, which authorizes it to review
substantial basis for a different treatment and annul all acts of any branch or
of foreign military armed forces allowed to instrumentality of the government which
enter our territory and all other accused may be tainted with grave abuse of
(Nicolas v. Romulo, G.R. No. 175888, discretion amounting to lack or excess of
February 11, 2009). jurisdiction.
XII XIII
Section 9 of PD No. 1606, as amended, PO1 Adrian Andal is known to have taken
provides that the Sandiganbayan may bribes from apprehended motorists who
adopt internal rules governing all allotment have violated traffic rules. The National
of cases among its divisions, the rotation Bureau of Investigation conducted an
of justices among them, and other matters entrapment operation where PO1 Adrian
relating to the internal operations of the was caught red-handed demanding and
court. taking PhP500.00 from a motorist who
Section 6 of Article IX-A of the supposedly beat a red light.
Constitution allows each of the After he was apprehended, PO1 Adrian
Constitutional Commissions “en banc [to] was required to submit a sample of his
promulgate its own rules concerning urine. The drug  test showed that he was
pleadings and practice before it or before positive for dangerous drugs.  Hence,
any of its offices. Such rules however PO1 Adrian was charged with violation of
shall not diminish, increase, or modify Section 15, Article II of RA No. 9165 or
substantive rights.” the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act
Section 16(3) of Article VI of the of 2002.
Constitution states that “Each House  may PO1 Adrian argues against the
determine the rules of its proceedings.” admissibility of the urine test results and
Section 21, Article VI of the Constitution seeks its exclusion. He claims that the
further provides that “[T]he Senate or the mandatory drug test under RA No. 9165 
House of Representatives or any of its is a violation of the accused’s right to
respective committees may conduct privacy and against self-incrimination.
inquiries… in accordance with its duly Are PO1 Adrian’s contentions correct?
published rules of procedure.” (2.5%)
Finally, Section 3(8) of Article XI of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Constitution declares that “[T]he Congress PO1 Adrian is correct that his rights to
shall promulgate its rules on impeachment privacy and against self- incrimination
to effectively carry out the purpose of this have been violated. The results of the
section. “confirmatory” urine test should therefore
Are the rules promulgated pursuant to be rejected as evidence against him.
these provisions subject to review and It should be noted that RA 9165 allows the
disapproval by the Supreme Court? (5%) conduct of urine tests only for persons
SUGGESTED ANSWER: arrested for acts prohibited under said
Section 5[5] of Article VIII of the law, such as, among others, the
Constitution clearly provides that  the manufacturing, sale, use or possession of
“[R]ules of procedure of special courts and illegal drugs, and not  for any unlawful act,
quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective like extortion, for which PO1 Adrian was
unless disapproved by the Supreme arrested (De la Cruz v. People, G.R. No.
Court;” accordingly, it  is clear that the 200748, July 23, 2014).
Supreme Court may review and reverse XIV
the rules of procedure of the Amoroso was charged with treason before
Sandiganbayan and the Constitutional a military court martial. He was acquitted.
Commissions. He was later charged with the same
With respect to the rules of procedure of offense before a Regional Trial Court.
Congress in its proceedings, legislative

8
He asks that the information be quashed Bureau or the Government did seem to
on the ground of double jeopardy. have complied with the demands of the
The prosecution objects, contending that deed of donation.
for purpose of double jeopardy, Compliance with the state immunity is
the military court martial cannot be essential for two reasons:
considered as a “competent court”.
Should the Regional Trial Court grant 1. It is required as a provision of
Amoroso’s motion to quash on the ground the Constitution; and
of double jeopardy? (2.5%) 2. Immunity is an essential
SUGGESTED ANSWER: element of state sovereignty.
Yes, the Motion to Dismiss should be
granted. XVI
A defendant, having been acquitted of a Five foreign nationals arrived at the NAIA
crime by a court martial of competent from Hong Kong. After retrieving their
jurisdiction proceeding under lawful checked-in luggage, they placed all their
authority, cannot be subsequently tried for bags in one pushcart and proceeded to
the same offense in a civil court. Express Lane 5. They were instructed to
It appearing that the offense charged in place their luggage on the examiner’s
the Court Martial and in the Regional Trial table for inspection.
Court is the same, that the military court The examiner found brown-colored boxes,
had jurisdiction to try the case and that similar in size to powdered  milk boxes,
both courts derive their powers from one underneath the clothes inside the
sovereignty, the acquittal by the military foreigners’ bags. The examiner
court should be a bar to Amoroso’s further discovered white crystalline substances
prosecution for the same offense in the inside the boxes that were the inspected
Regional Trial Court (Crisologo v. People, and proceeded to bundle all of the boxes
(G.R. No. L-6277, February 26, 1954); by putting masking tape around them. He
Marcos v. Chief of Staff (G.R. No. L-4663, thereafter handed the boxes over to
May 30, 1951); Garcia v. Executive Bureau of Customs agents. The agents
Secretary (G.R. 198554, July 30, 2012). called out the names of the foreigners one
XV by one and ordered them to sign their
Annika sued the Republic of the names on the masking tape placed on the
Philippines, represented by the Director of boxes recovered from their respective
the Bureau of Plant Industry, and asked bags. The contents of the boxes were
for the revocation of a deed of donation thereafter subjected to tests which
executed by her in favor of said Bureau.  confirmed that the substance was shabu.
She alleged that, contrary to the terms  of Can the shabu found inside the boxes
the donation, the donee failed to install admitted in evidence against the five
lighting facilities and a water system  on foreigners for the charge of illegal
the property donated, and to build an possession of drugs in violation of the
office building and parking lot thereon, Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
which should have been constructed and 2002? (2.5%)
made ready for occupancy on or before SUGGESTED ANSWER:
the date fixed in the deed of donation. Yes, shabu obtained in ordinary customs
The Republic invoked state immunity and searches such as those done in airport,
moved for the dismissal of the case on the which is a valid warrantless search, are
ground that it had not consented to be admissible in evidence (Dela Cruz v.
sued. Should the Republic’s motion be People G.R. 209387, January 11, 2016).
granted? (2.5%) XVII
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The police served a warrant of arrest on
The motion of the Republic should be Ariston who was suspected of raping and
granted. There appears to be no consent killing a female high school student. While
on the part of the State to be sued. on the way to the police station, one of the
In Section 3, Article XVI of the police officers who served the warrant
Constitution it is provided that: asked Ariston in the local dialect if he
“The State shall not be sued without its really raped and killed the students, and
consent.” Ariston nodded and said, “Opo.”
That no consent was given by the Upon arriving at the police station, Ariston
Republic is shown by the fact that  the saw the City Mayor, whom he approached

9
and asked if they could talk privately. The Two police teams monitored the payment
mayor led Ariston to his office and, while of ransom in a kidnapping case.
there in conversation with the Mayor, The bag containing the ransom money
Ariston broke down and admitted that he was placed inside an unlocked trunk of a
raped and killed the student. The mayor car which was parked at the Angola
thereafter opened the door of the room to Commercial Center in Mandaluyong City.
let the public and media representatives The first police team, stationed in an area
witness Ariston’s confession. In the near where the car was parked, witnessed
presence of the Mayor, the police and the the retrieval by the kidnappers on the bag
media, and in response to questions from the unlocked trunk.  The kidnappers
asked by some members of the media, thereafter boarded their car and
Ariston sorrowfully confessed his guilt and proceeded towards the direction of
sought forgiveness for his actions. Amorsolo St. in Makati City where the
Which of these extrajudicial confessions, if second police team was waiting.
any, would you consider as admissible in Upon confirmation by radio report from the
evidence against Ariston? (5%) first police team that the kidnappers were
SUGGESTED ANSWER: heading towards their direction, the
Ariston was already under custodial second police team proceeded to conduct
investigation when he confessed  to the surveillance on the car of the kidnappers,
police. It is admitted that the police failed eventually saw it enter Ayala Commercial
to inform him of his constitutional rights Center in Makati City, and the police team
when he was investigated and finally blocked it when it slowed down.
interrogated. His confession to the police The members of the second police team
is therefore inadmissible in evidence. approached the vehicle and proceeded to
His confession before the mayor, arrest the kidnappers.
however, is admissible. While it may be Is the warrantless arrest of the kidnappers
true that a mayor has “operational by the second police team lawful? (5%)
supervision and control” over the  local SUGGESTED ANSWER:
police and may arguably be deemed a law The warrantless arrest is lawful.
enforcement officer for purposes of There are two requirements before a
applying Section 12(1) and (3) of Article III warrantless arrest can be  effected under
of the Constitution, Ariston’s confession to Section 5(b), Rule 113, Rules of Court: (1)
the mayor, as described in the problem, an offense has just been committed, and
was not  made in response to any (2) the person making the arrest has
interrogation by the latter. In fact, the personal knowledge of facts indicating
mayor did not appear as having that the person to be arrested has
questioned Ariston at all. No police committed  it.
authority ordered Ariston to talk to the Both requirements are present in the
mayor. It was he himself who instant case. The first police team present
spontaneously,  freely  and voluntarily in the Angola Commercial Center was
sought the mayor for a private meeting. able to witness the pay-off which
The mayor did not know that he was going effectively consummated the crime of
to confess his guilt to him. When he talked kidnapping. Its team members all saw the
with the mayor as a confidant and not as a kidnappers take the money from the car
law enforcement officer, his uncounselled trunk. Such knowledge was then relayed
confession to the Mayor did not violate his to the other police officers comprising the
constitutional rights. second police team stationed in Amorsolo
His confession to the media can likewise St. where the kidnappers were expected
be properly admitted. The confessions to pass.
were made in response to questions by It is sufficient for the arresting team that
news reporters, not by the police or any they were monitoring the pay-off for a
other investigating officer. Statements number of hours long enough for them to
spontaneously made by suspects to news be informed as  to who the kidnappers
reporters during televised interviews are were. This is equivalent to  personal
deemed voluntary and are admissible in knowledge  based on probable
evidence (People v. Andan, G.R. No. cause (People v. Uyboco, G.R. No.
116437, March 3, 1997). 178039, January 19, 2011).
XVIII XIX

10
President Alfredo died during his third legal processes with respect to acts
year in office. In accordance with the performed by them in their official
Constitution, Vice President Anastasia capacity.
succeeded him. President Anastasia then (a)      Can the President’s act of deporting
nominated the late President Alfredo’s an undesirable alien be subjected to
Executive Secretary, Anna Maria, as her judicial review? (2.5%)
replacement as Vice President. The SUGGESTED ANSWER:
nomination was confirmed by a majority of
all the Members of the House of  The power to deport aliens is
Representatives and the Senate, voting an act of State, an act done by or
separately. under the authority of the
sovereign power. It is a police 
 Is Anna Maria’s assumption as measure against undesirable
Vice President valid? (2.5%) aliens whose continued presence
in the country is found to be
SUGGESTED ANSWER: injurious to the public good and the
No, Anna Maria’s assumption is domestic tranquility of the
unconstitutional, because only a member people (Rosas v. Montor, G.R.
of the Senate or House of No. 204105, October 14, 2015). An
Representatives may be nominated by a act of State is one done by the
successor-President as Vice President. sovereign power of a country, or by
(Article VII, Section 9). its delegate, within the limits of the
power vested in him. An act of
 Can Anastasia run as President State cannot be questioned or
in the next election? (2.5%) made the subject of legal
proceedings in a court of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: law (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th
Yes, Anastacia can still run as President ed., 44). With particular reference
in the next election since she has served to Political Law, an act of State is
for less than four years. Section 4, Article an act done by the political
VII provides that “no person who has departments of the government
succeeded as President and has served and not subject to judicial review.
as such for more than four years shall be
qualified for election to the same office at  Is Aristotle’s claim of diplomatic
any time.” immunity proper? (2.5%)
XX
Andreas and Aristotle are foreign SUGGESTED ANSWER:
nationals working with the Asian (b) The claim of diplomatic immunity is
Development Bank (ADB) in its improper. Courts cannot blindly adhere to
headquarters in Manila. Both were  and take on its face the communication
charged  with criminal acts before the from the DFA that Aristotle is covered by
local trial courts. an immunity. The DFA’s determination
Andreas was caught importing illegal that a certain person is covered by
drugs into the country as part of his immunity is only preliminary and has no
“personal effects” and was thus charged binding effect on courts. Besides,
with violation of Comprehensive slandering a person cannot possibly be
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. Before the covered by the immunity agreement
criminal proceedings  could  commence, because our laws do not allow the
the President had him deported as an commission of a crime, such as
undesirable alien. Aristotle was charged defamation, under the guise of official
with grave oral defamation for uttering duty. Under the Vienna Convention on
defamatory words against a colleague at Diplomatic Relations, a diplomatic agent
work. It his defense, Aristotle claim enjoys immunity from criminal jurisdiction
diplomatic immunity. He presented as of the receiving state except in the case of
proof a communication from the an action relating to any professional or
Department of Foreign Affairs stating that, commercial activity exercised by the
pursuant to the Agreement between the diplomatic agent outside his official
Philippine Government and the ADB, the functions in the receiving state. The
bank’s officers and staff are immune from commission of a crime is not part of

11
official duty (Liang vs. People, G.R. No.
125865, January 28, 2000).

12