8. SEPARATION OF POWERS 1.

Secure action;
2. Forestall over-action;
3. Prevent despotism; and
DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS
4. Obtain efficiency.

Legislation belongs to the Congress, implementation

NOTE: To prevent the concentration of authority in
to the executive, and settlement of legal controversies
one person or group of persons that might lead to
and adjudication of rights to the judiciary. Each is
irreparable error or abuse in its exercise to the
therefore prevented from invading the domain of the
detriment of republican institutions. The purpose
others.
was not to avoid friction, but, by means of the
inevitable friction incident to the distribution of
Under the principle of separation of powers, the
governmental powers among the three departments,
governmental powers are distributed among the
to save the people from autocracy.
three branches of the government - the legislature,
the executive and the judiciary.
The principle of separation of powers ordains that
each of the three great branches of government has
Congress as the repository of legislative power,
exclusive cognizance of and supreme in matters
enacts the laws, with the corollary authority to
falling within its own constitutionally allocated
amend or repeal them. On the other hand, the
President as the embodiment of executive power, EXECUTIV LEGISLATIV
executes and enforces the law, while the courts,
JUDICIARY
E E
vested with judicial power, have the prerogative to
interpret and apply the Constitution and the laws. Implementa Interpretation
Making of
tion of laws of laws (Power
The principle of separation does not necessarily laws (power of
(Power of of Judicial
imply or mandate the setting up of absolute, iron- the purse)
clad borders or walls, for, were that the case, the the sword) review)
State might end up with a dysfunctional government sphere.
unable to operate efficiently and effectively.
POWERS VESTED IN THE THREE
The rule is separation and cooperation, not mutual BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT
antagonism, “for, as others have said, the
Constitution ‘blends’ as well as ‘separates’ powers in
order to create a workable government.”
PRINCIPLE OF BLENDING OF POWERS
The separation of powers doctrine does not create a
Refers to an instance when powers are not confined
“hermetic division among the Branches” but a
exclusively within one department but are assigned
“carefully crafted system of checked and balanced
to or shared by several departments.
power within each Branch.”

EXAMPLES OF THE BLENDING OF

In Belgica vs. Ochoa, Jr., 710 SCRA 1 (2013), at 108, the
Court declared: “Broadly, there is a violation of the POWERS
separation of powers principle when one branch of
government unduly encroaches on the domain of a. Power of appointment which can be exercised by
another … In other words, there is a violation of the each department and be rightfully exercised by
principle when there is impermissible (a) each department over its own administrative
interference with and/or (b) assumption of another personnel;
department’s functions.” b. General Appropriations Law - President prepares
the budget which serves as the basis of the bill
Purposes of Separation of Powers adopted by Congress;

Page 1 of 8
c. Amnesty granted by the President requires the
concurrence of the majority of all the members of
the Congress; and
d. Power of the COMELEC to deputize law -
enforcement agencies and instrumentalities of the
government for the purpose of ensuring free,
orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections in
accordance with the power granted to it by the
Constitution to enforce and administer all laws
and regulations relative the conduct of elections.
[Art. IX-C, Sec. 2(1)] (Concurring and Dissenting
Opinion of Justice Puno, Macalintal v. COMELEC,
G.R. No. 157013, July 10, 2003).

9. POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE

Justiciable questions vs. Political questions
The doctrine that the power of judicial review cannot
be exercised when the issue is a political questions. It
constitutes another limitation on such power of the
judiciary. (Tañada vs. Cuenco, ibid).

Under this concept, courts should keep their hands

off in the resolution of questions or problems that are
basically entrusted to the political departments to
address. They should limit themselves to those
which are justiciable.

While the courts can look into questions of legality

and constitutionality, they should not intrude into
questions of policy or the wisdom of the enactments
and acts of the other branches because it is the latter
that such issues for resolution are vested.

Page 2 of 8
Effect of the expanded definition of judicial JUSTICIABLE POLITICAL
BASIS
power on the political question doctrine QUESTIONS QUESTIONS

The 1987 Constitution expands the concept of judicial Questions which

review. Under the expanded definition, the Court involve the
cannot agree that the issue involved is a political policy or the
question beyond the jurisdiction of the court to wisdom of the
review. When the grant of power is qualified,
law or act, of the
conditional or subject to limitations, the issue of
whether the prescribed qualifications or conditions morality or
have been met or the limitations respected is efficacy of the
justiciable—the problem being one of legality or same. Generally
validity, not its wisdom. Moreover, the jurisdiction to it cannot be
delimit constitutional boundaries has been given to
inquired by the
the SC. When political questions are involved, the
Constitution limits the delimitation as to whether or courts. Further,
Imply a given
not there has been a grave abuse of discretion these are
right legally
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the questions which
part of the official whose action is being questioned. demandable and
under the
enforceable, an
Constitution:
10. EMERGENCY POWERS act or omission
DEFINITI
violative of such
ON a. are decided
Even as emergency powers inherently belong to the right, and a
legislature, there may be occasions when they have by the people
remedy granted
to be exercised by the President since as the sole in their
and sanctioned
official upon whom executive power is vested, he sovereign
would be in a better position to respond in a timely by law for said
capacity; and
manner to emergencies and fast changing breach of right.
b. Where full
developments that are critical to the welfare, safety
or security of the nation. discretionary
authority has
The fundamental law provides that the delegation been
may done during war or other national emergency, delegated by
allowing the President to exercise such powers which
the
are necessary and proper to carry out a declared
national policy for a limited period and subject to Constitution
restrictions prescribed by Congress. either to the
executive or
If Congress does not expressly take back the powers legislative
by means of a resolution, the same shall cease upon
department.
its next adjournment.

Congressional grant of emergency powers to 1. There is War or other national emergency;

the President 2. The grant of emergency powers must be for a
Limited period;
3. The grant of emergency powers is subject to such
Under Art. VI. Sec. 23(2), Congress may grant the
Restrictions as Congress may prescribe; and
President emergency powers subject to the following
conditions: (WaLiReN)
Page 3 of 8
4. The emergency powers must be exercised to No law shall be passed exempting any entity of the
carry out a National policy declared by Congress. Government or its subsidiary in any guise
whatsoever, or any investment of public funds, form
Rationale: Problems in times of emergency must be the jurisdiction of the Commission on Audit.
solved within the shortest possible time to prevent
them from aggravating the difficulties of the nation. The mere fact that private auditors may audit
government agencies does not divest the COA of its
NOTE: Emergency powers are self-liquidating unless power to examine and audit the same government
sooner withdrawn. They will automatically cease agencies (Development Bank of the Philippines vs. COA,
upon the end of the emergency that justified their GR No. 88435, January 16, 2002)
delegation.
Audit jurisdiction of the COA on privatized,
Examples of other national emergencies: formerly government-owned banks
a. Rebellion
b. Economic crisis Since the PNB is no longer owned by the
c. Pestilence or epidemic Government, the COA no longer has jurisdiction to
d. Typhoon audit it as an institution. Under Sec. 2(2), Art. IX-D of
e. Flood the Constitution, it is a GOCC and their subsidiaries
f. Other similar catastrophe of nation-wide which are subject to audit by the COA. However, in
proportions accordance with Sec. 2(1), Art. IX-D, the COA can
(Cruz, Philippine Political Law, p. 163) audit the PNB with respect to its accounts because
the Government still has equity in it (Philippine
11. CLAIMS FILED WITH COA Airlines vs. COA, G.R. No. 91890, June 9, 1995).

The act of settling accounts is limited to liquidated Extent of COA’s audit jurisdiction over Manila
amounts, but not the adjudication on unliquidated
Economic and Cultural Office (MECO)
claims.

The MECO is not a GOCC or government

“The scope of the COA’s authority to take cognizance
instrumentality. It is a sui generis private entity
of claims is circumscribed, however, by an unbroken
especially entrusted by the government with the
line of cases holding statutes of similar import to
facilitation of unofficial relations with the people in
mean only liquidated claims, or those determined or
Taiwan without jeopardizing the country’s faithful
readily determinable from vouchers, invoices, and
commitment to the One China policy of the PROC.
such other papers within reach of accounting
However, despite its non-governmental character,
officers.”
the MECO handles government funds in the form of
the "verification fees" it collects on behalf of the
However, where the claim is claim for a fixed
DOLE and the "consular fees" it collects under
amount which is readily determinable from the
Section 2(6) of EO No. 15, s. 2001. Hence, under
receipts, invoices and other documents, or involves
existing laws, the accounts of the MECO pertaining
compliance with applicable auditing laws and rules
to its collection of such "verification fees" and
on procurement. the same “are not within the usual
"consular fees" should be audited by the COA (Funa
area of knowledge, experience and expertise of most
v. MECO and COA, G.R. No. 193462, February 4,
judges but within the special competence of COA
2014).
auditors and accountants.”

The COA cannot be divested of its power to

12. PARTY-LIST
examine and audit government agencies.
Under the system, the party, organization or
coalition is the one elected to Congress but it is their
nominees who get to sit as members. Also, it has
Page 4 of 8
been held that while the COMELEC is not required 2. National party – Its constituency is spread
by the law to indicate the name of the nominees in over the geographical territory of at least a
the Certified List posted at the polling places, this majority of regions.
does not authorize it to withhold the said names
from the public since knowing such individuals is 3. Regional party – Its constituency is spread
part of the right of the people to be adequately over the geographical territory of at least a
informed so that they can properly and intelligently majority of the cities and provinces
exercise their prerogative to choose who to send to comprising the region.
the legislature.
Mechanism of proportional representation in the 4. Sectoral party – Organized group of citizens
election of representatives to the HoR from national, belonging to any of the following sectors:
regional and sectoral parties or organizations or labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor,
coalitions thereof registered with the COMELEC. indigenous, cultural communities, elderly,
handicapped, women, youth, veterans,
NOTE: Party-list representatives shall constitute 20% overseas workers and professionals, whose
of the total number of representatives in the HoR principal advocacy pertains to the special
including those under the party list (1987 interest and concerns of their sectors.
Constitution, Art. Vi, Sec. 5, par.2)
5. Sectoral Organization – Refers to a group of
citizens who share similar physical attributes
or characteristics, employment, interest or
concerns.
Purpose of the party-list system
6. Coalition – Refers to an aggregation of duly
registered national, regional, sectoral parties
To make the marginalized and the underrepresented
or organizations for political and/or election
not merely passive recipients of the State’s
purposes.
benevolence, but active participants in the
mainstream of representative democracy (Ang
Composition of the party-list system
Bagong Bayani v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 147589, June 26,
1. National parties or organizations
2001).
2. Regional parties or organizations; and
To democratize political power by giving political
parties that cannot win in legislative district elections 3. Sectoral parties or organizations.
a chance to win seats int he HoR (Atong Paglaum vs.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 203766, April 2, 2013) National and regional parties or organizations are
different from sectoral parties or organizations.
Different parties under the party-list system National and regional parties or organizations need
not be organized along sectoral lines and need not
1. Political party– Organized group of citizens represent any particular sector.
advocating ideology or platform, principles
and policies for the general conduct of Nomination of party-list representatives
government and which, as the most
immediate means of securing their adoption, Each registered party, organization or coalition shall
regularly nominates and supports certain of submit to the COMELEC not later than 45 days
its leaders and members as candidate in before the election a list of names, not less than five
public office (Ang Bagong Bayani v. (5), from which party-list representative shall be
COMELEC and Bayan Muna v. COMELEC, chosen in case it obtains the required number of
G.R. Nos. 147589 and 147613, June 26, 2001, votes.
June 26, 2001).

Page 5 of 8
Limitations 5. Bona fide member of the party or
1. A person may be nominated in one (1) list only. organization which he seeks to represent at least 90
days preceding Election Day; and
2. Only persons who have given their consent
in NOTE: In the case of sectoral parties, to be a bona
writing may be names in the list fide party-list nominee, one must either belong to the
sector represented, or have a track record of
3. The list shall not include: advocacy for such sector (Atong Paglaum v.
COMELEC, ibid.).
a. any candidate for any elective office;
or 6. At least 25 years of age. (For youth
sector nominees, at least 25 years and not more than
b. a person who has lost his bid for 30 years of age)
elective office in the immediately
preceding NOTE: Any youth representative who attains the age
election; of 30 during his term shall be allowed to continue in
office until the expiration of his term.
4. No change shall be allowed after the list shall

have been submitted to the COMELEC.

Guidelines in the allocation of seats for party-
XPN: Change may be allowed in cases
list representatives under Sec. 11 of RA 7941
where:

a. nominees dies; 1. The parties, organizations, and coalitions

shall be ranked from the highest to the
b. withdraws in writing his lowest based on the number of votes they
nomination; garnered during the elections.
or
2. The parties, organizations, and coalitions
c. becomes incapacitated receiving at least 2% of the total votes cast for
the party-list system shall be entitled to one
NOTE: Incumbent sectoral representatives in the guaranteed seat each.
HoR who are nominated in the party-list system shall
not be considered resigned. 3. Those garnering sufficient number of votes,
Effect of Failure to Submit a List of Nominees according to the ranking in paragraph 1,
shall be entitled to additional seats in
proportion to their total number of votes
Failure to submit the list of five (5) nominees before
until all the additional seats are allocated.
the election warrants the cancellation of the party’s
registration (Cocofed-Philippines Coconut Producers
4. Each party, organization, or coalition shall be
Federation, Inc. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 207026, Aug. 6,
entitled to not more than 3 seats.
2013).
NOTE: In computing the additional seats, the
Qualifications of a party-list nominee guaranteed seats shall no longer be included because
1. Natural-born citizen of the they have already been allocated at one seat each to
Philippines; every two-percenter. Thus, the remaining available
2. Registered voter; seats for allocation as “additional seats”are the
3. Resident of the Philippines for at maximum seats reserved under the party-list system
least 1 year less the guaranteed seats. Fractional seats are
immediately preceding the day of the election; disregarded in the absence of a provision in RA 7941
4. Able to read and write;

Page 6 of 8
allowing for a rounding off of fractional seats preceding elections for the constituency in which
(BANAT v. COMELEC, Ibid.). it has registered

2% threshold as regards the allocation of 13. ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL

additional seats is not valid anymore
Composition of the Electoral Tribunal (ET)
The Court strikes down the 2% threshold only in
relation to the distribution of the additional seats as 1. 3 Supreme Court Justices designated by the
found in the 2nd clause of Sec. 11(b) of RA 7941. The Chief Justice;
2% threshold presents an unwarranted obstacle to
the full implementation of Sec. 5(2), Art. VI of the 2. 6 members of the Senate or the House of
Constitution and prevents the attainment of the Representatives. as the case may be, chosen
“broadest possible representation of party, sectoral or on the basis of proportional representation
group interests in the House of Representatives” from the political parties and from those
(BANAT v. COMELEC, Ibid.). registered under the party-list system
represented therein(1987 Constitution, Art.
NOTE: The 2% threshold is constitutional only VI, Sec. 17).
insofar as the determination of the guaranteed seat is
concerned. NOTE: The senior Justice in the Electoral Tribunal
shall be its Chairman.

Refusal and/or Cancellation of Registration Jurisdiction of the ETs

The COMELEC may, motu proprio or upon a Each electoral tribunal shall be the sole judge of all
verified complaint of any interested party, refuse or contests relating to the election, returns, and
cancel, after due notice and hearing, the registration qualifications of their respective members (1987
of any national, regional or sectoral party, Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 17). This includes
organization or coalition or any of the following determining the validity or invalidity of a
grounds: proclamation declaring a particular candidate as the
1. It is a religious sect or denomination, winner. Each ET is also vested with rule-making
organization or association organized for power (Lazatin v. HRET, G.R. No. L-84297, Dec. 8,
religious purposes; 1988).
2. It advocates violence or unlawful means to seek
its goals; NOTE: It is independent of the Houses of Congress
3. It is a foreign party or organization; and its decisions may be reviewed by the Supreme
4. It is receiving support from any foreign Court only upon showing of grave abuse of
government, foreign political party, foundation, discretion.
organization, whether directly or through any of
its officers or members, or indirectly through With regard to the issue of when the jurisdiction of
third parties, for partisan election purposes; the Commission on Elections ends and that of the
5. It violates or fails to comply with laws, rules or Electoral Commissions begin, Reyes vs. Commission
regulations relating to elections on Elections held that jurisdiction of the Electoral
6. It declares untruthful statements in its petition; Tribunals begins only after the candidate is
7. It has ceased to exist for at least one (1) year; considered a member of Congress, requiring a
8. It fails to participate in the last two (2) preceding concurrence of the following requisites: (1) a valid
elections; proclamation, (2) a proper oath, and (3) assumption
9. It fails to obtain at least 2% of the votes cast of office. And that means that one could not be
under the party-list system in the two (2) member of either House before the start of the term
for which he or she was not elected - noon of the 30th

Page 7 of 8
of June following the election. Before then, the already taken her oath of office for the position of
Commission of Elections still retains jurisdiction. member of the House of Representative of
REGINA ONGSIAKO Marinduque.
REYES,Petitioner,v.COMMISSION ON
ELECTIONSAND JOSEPH Held:
SOCORRO B. TAN,Respondents.G.R.
Yes, COMELEC retains jurisdiction because the
No. 207264, June 25, 2013
jurisdiction of the HRET begins only after the
candidate is considered a Member of the House of
Facts:
Representatives, as stated in Section 17, Article VI of
the 1987 Constitution. For one to be considered a
The petitioners assail through a Petition for
Member of the House of Representatives, there must
Certiorari with prayer for Temporary
be a concurrence of these requisites: (1) valid
Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction
proclamation; (2) proper oath, and (3) assumption of
resolution of the Commission on Election
office.
ordering the cancellation of the Certificate of
Candidacy of petitioner for the position of the
Thus the petitioner cannot be considered a member
Representative of the lone district of Marinduque.
of the HR yet as she has not assumed office yet.
Also, the 2nd requirement was not validly complied
On October 31. 2012, Joseph Socorro Tan filed with
with as a valid oath must be made (1) before the
the Comelec an Amended Petition to Deny Due
Speaker of the House of Representatives, and (2) in
Course or to Cancel the Certificate of Candidacy of
open session. Here, although she made the oath
Regina Ongsiako Reyes ,the petitioner, on the ground
before Speaker Belmonte, there is no indication that it
that it contained material representations. On March
was made during plenary or in open session and,
27, 2013, the COMELEC cancelled the certificate of
thus, it remains unclear whether the required oath of
candidacy of the petitioner. She filed an MR on April
office was indeed complied.
8, 2013. On May 14, 2013, COMELEC en banc denied
her MR.
Furthermore, petition for certiorari will prosper only
if grave abuse of discretion is alleged and proved to
However, on May 18, 2013, she was proclaimed
exist. For an act to be struck down as having been
winner of the May 13, 2013 Elections. On June 5,
done with grave abuse of discretion, the abuse of
2013, COMELEC declared the May 14, 2013
discretion must be patent and gross. Here, this Court
Resolution final and Executory. On the same day,
finds that petitioner failed to adequately and
petitioner took her oath of office before Feliciano
substantially show that grave abuse of discretion
Belmonte, the Speaker of the House of
exists.
Representatives. She has yet to assume office at that
time, as her term officially starts at noon of June 30,
2013. According to petitioner, the COMELEC was
ousted of its jurisdiction when she was duly
proclaimed because pursuant to Section 17, Article VI
of the 1987 Constitution, the HRET has the exclusive
jurisdiction to be the “sole judge of all contests
relating to the election, returns and qualifications” of
the Members of the House of
Representatives.

Issue:

Whether or not COMELEC has jurisdiction over the

petitioner who is proclaimed as winner and who has

Page 8 of 8