Amendment and Revision
Amendment and Revision
Amendment and Revision
• Congress, upon a vote of three-fourth of its members (Sec. 1(1), Art. XVII).
• Congress, upon a vote of three-fourth of its members (Sec. 1(1), Art. XVII).
• People through initiative upon a petition of at least twelve per centum of the total
number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by
at least three per centum of the registered voters therein (Sec. 2, Art. XVII).
What are the two ways by which the Constitution may be changed?
• Amendment
• Revision
• Revision broadly implies a change that alters a basic principle in the constitution. There is also
revision if the change alters the substantial entirety of the constitution.
• Amendment broadly refers to a change that adds, reduces, or deletes without altering the
basic principle involved. Revision generally affects several provisions of the constitution, while
amendment generally affects only the specific provision being amended (Lambino vs.
COMELEC, October 25, 2006).
Quantitative test -It inquires into the number of provision altered, deleted or changed.
Qualitative test - It inquires into the qualitative effect of the proposed changed.
• No. People’s initiative cannot be sued to revise the Constitution. The rationale for the answer
lies in the constitutional text.
• Section 1, Article XVII provides that amendment or revision may be proposed by Congress and
Constitutional Convention.
• While Section 2 provides that amendment may likewise be proposed by the people.
NATIONAL TERRITORY
Query: Is the definition of national territory under our Constitution internationally binding?
What is an archipelago?
• An archipelago is a body of water studded with islands.
• Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNLCOS III), archipelago is
defined as “a group of islands, including parts of islands, interconnecting waters and other
natural features which are so closely interrelated that such islands, waters and other natural
features form an intrinsic geographical, economic and political entity, or which historically have
been regarded as such” (Art. 46[b]).
• NO. archipelagic doctrine is not yet accepted under international law. The United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) does not treat the waters inside the baseline
as internal waters. UNCLOS III treats them as “archipelagic waters.”
• When a water is considered internal, it subject to the plenary jurisdiction of the state over
which it has sovereignty and jurisdiction. Such state can disallow the passage of foreign
vessels. Such vessels may only be allowed passage upon the consent of the controlling state.
• Archipelagic water are those waters inside the archipelagic baselines drawn joining the
outermost points of the outermost island of the archipelago. Under UNCLOS III, the
2 STRATEGIC LECTURE IN POLITICAL LAW
JUDGE GENER M. GITO,
archipelagic state has sovereignty over archipelagic water. The sovereignty extends to air
space, as well as to its sea bed and subsoil and resources contained therein. However, unlike
internal water, archipelagic water is subject to the right of innocent passage, which right is
provided by Article 52 of the UNCLOS III.
• (a) RA 9522 reduces Philippine maritime territory, and logically, the reach of the
Philippine state’s sovereign power, in violation of Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution,
embodying the terms of the Treaty of Paris and ancillary treaties, and
First Issue
• Baselines laws are nothing but statutory mechanisms for UNCLOS III States parties to
delimit with precision the extent of their maritime zones and continental shelves.
• In turn, this gives notice to the rest of the international community of the scope of the maritime
space and submarine areas within which States parties exercise treaty-based rights, namely,
the exercise of sovereignty over territorial waters (Article 2, UNCLOS III), the jurisdiction to
enforce customs, fiscal, immigration, and sanitation laws in the contiguous zone (Article 33,
UNLCOS III), and the right to exploit the living and non-living resources in the exclusive
economic zone (Article 56, UNCLOS III) and continental shelf (Article 77, UNCLOS III)
Second Issue
• The Baseline Law, by adopting UNCLOS “regime of islands” does not dismember Kalayaan
group of islands and Scarborough shoal from the national territory. The Philippine sovereignty
and jurisdiction were not diminished by the Baseline Law.
• Under UNCLOS, archipelagic state has the right to draw baselines but "[t]he drawing of such
baselines shall not depart to any appreciable extent from the general configuration of the
archipelago" (Article 47 (3) of UNCLOS III).
• Kalayaan Group of Islands are located at an appreciable distance from the nearest shoreline of
the Philippine archipelago.