Carlo Cruz

Supremacy of the Constitution- basic and paramount law which all other law must
conform. No act shall be valid if it conflicts with the constitution
Initiative, cannot propose revisions but only amendments
Three theories on COnCOn
Mabanag case, concon is at par with three branches of government and independent of
them. Most accepted theory
It is higher
It is lower than 3 branches as it is merely created
NB: Right to Information is self executing

Lambino vs Comelec
The constituents only saw a one page of the petition and not the whole body of the
petition. Such is not valid as it is essential for the people to know the petition. The
specific the proposed changes must be in the petition.

Also, the enabling law for initiative is not yet an enabling law

4 instances were there is plebiscites

1. Ratification proposals to amend, revise Constitution
2. Creation, division, merger of a political subdivision
a. Umali vs Comelec- if a component city is change to a highly urbanized
city, the province were such city be removed is part of the plebiscite. It has
economic and political effect
3. Sec 11 Art 10. If there were a law creating a metropolitan political subdivision.
Such law must be approved by the units affected
a. Ex. Number coding schemes in Makati, MM or Mandaluyong are still
different with each other
4. Creating the Autonomous Region on units affected
a. Datu Abbas case- Amendatory Laws in BARMM are not required to have
a plebiscite as there purpose is harmonizing
4 instances of referendum
1. Art 17, ConCOn
2. Ratification of proposition
 3. Art 16 Sec 2. If a law were to change a name of our country, national anthem or
national symbol it must be subject to referendum
4. Art 18 Sec 25 VFA
2 cases
Gonzales vs COMELEC
Can a Plebiscite for purposes of ratification be conducted concurrently or
simultaneously with local election? Yes
Tolentino vs Comelec- no piecemeal ratification
Another case: Can the president create ad hoc committees to see if there are anomalies
in previous administration
Faithful Execution clause- president should perform in good faith the law as it is his duty
Executive Order not valid as there are no substantial distinctions with the current and
previous administration. The Arroyo administration was singled out.

Oversees Absentee Voting Act- constitutional

To develop a system of voting for Filipinos including OFW and those with permanent
residence.
As long as there is animus revertendi
Grace Poe Llmanzares case
Foundlings are natural born citizen
Basis: In International cases, foundlings are considered as natural born citizen in the
country where they are found
Jus Cogens- peremptory norms of the law of nations
Reqs: 1. Must be uniformly and universally observed by the entire international
community
2. Psychological element: because there is a basic belief that there is a
requirement for its observance
Can a dual citizen be voted upon? No as there is a requirement of continuing
citizenship. Thus, under 9225, they must first renounce their foreign citizenship.

Self-executing provisions
Art 2 Sec 28 is “splendid symmetry” with Art 3 Sec 7
Bantay vs COMELEC- Art 2 Sec
Mandamus application of disclosure of party-list nominees.
Manila Prince Corp
60-40 self executing- “read into” every contract- Art 12
NB: if the provision is like this “as what law may provide” or “ as restricted by law” such
is not self executing
EX. Political dynasty is not self executing
2019 case – Sec 14 Art 12
Profession is reserved only for natural persons and not precludes foreign corporation to
engage in construction business.
NB: if natural persons be allowed to practice profession in our country, such requires
only amendments
Sec 19 Art 2- on 60-40 is not self executing
5 situations on prospectivity
1. Segovia vs Noel- the age limit shall only apply to those who will be appointed yet
and not to incumbent judges. Also, the following already had vested rights for a
later date.
2. Bicol Mining case- the mining rights prior to 1935 Constitution cannot be set
aside
3. Under 1935 Constitution, qualified filipino corporation can acquire and register
agricultural land. It was removed in 1973 Constitution. However their rights are
already vested with them and cannot anymore be removed
4. Fyfe vs PAL- Law shall not provide court with additional jurisdiction. However,
the limitation on jurisdiction shall be given prospective and shall not nullify
jurisdiction on other cases filed before the new law.
5. Rama vs Moises-1987 Consti, there is greater autonomy on local governments.
The provincial governer sought to enforce its right based on its old laws. Because
of the grater autonomy in the present Constitution , therefore it is prospective and
Constitutional no vested right
Civil Service Commission- not required lawyers
COMELEC
Majority must have been able to practice law
COA
Lawyers or CPA but at all times they shall be represented in the 3 Man
Ombudsman- appointed by the president not subject to Confirmation- deputy
Ombudsman are not required to practice law
NB: Congress can add requirements for candidates in lower courts

Lim Kai Chong case

Quo Warranto filed in Electoral Tribunal. Claim is that she was not a natural born
citizen. However it was filed beyond 10 days. Issue is whether or not Electoral Tribunal
can still rule on such? Yes, because citizenship is a continuing qualification
Second aspect of this case. It challenges the citizenship of the Father. However, such
cannot be tackeld in this case as it would be an indirect challenge on the Father.
Nangyari kasi dito yung tatay sinasabi invalid daw naturalization so yun tumatakbo anak
di daw valid natural born.
NB: All candidates must have all qualifications and none of the disqualifications
Jalosjos vs Angeles
He was disqualified because there was a penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification.
Congress has the right to prescribe the punishment for crimes
Moya vs Commissioner of immigration
The wife of an alien who became naturalized becomes a naturalized also if achieved all
qualifications and none of the disqualifications
In party list
Need your consent to be nominated and also a representative cannot be nominated if
he ran in the immediately preceding election
Impeachable officers- pres, vp, senate, HR
NB: Impeachement is different from removal. After Articles of Impeachment filed by
House of Representatives, respondent is considered impeached. It is only after
impeachment trial supported by 2/3 of Congress, it will lead to removal
Is the president immune drom suit?Absolutely?
Yes he is immune but not absolutely
Art 7 Sec 4- Quo Warranto and Election Protest is allowed against the President
Also, impeachment
On impeachment, Congress can give certain situations but not depart from what
constitution prescribes. Ex, violation of plunder law can be considered as a ground for
impeachment. Is it a seprate ground? No, it merely interprets it as covered by the
constitutional ground
Also the Pres can be imprisoned nationally
Is the pardanong power absolute?
2 perspective, for perspective of congressional, The Congress may not pass legislation
against pardoning power. However, Sec 19 prescribes limitation asa he may not pardon
until final conviction, impeachment proceedings and if amnesty requires majority of
Congress
Sandiganbayan- constitutionally mandated but not a constitutional court
Its creation was commanded but created by law. Being a statutory court, can the
Congress abolish it? It cannot be abolished by law because it was commanded by
Constitution. However, Sandiganbayan can be removed by impeachment . Reason. 1.
They are not included in list impeachable in Consti. They are considered as lower
courts, they are under SC

Sec 25 Art 6 par 5

Ombudsman and CHR are included in the general appropriations law- reason is that
they have fiscal autonomy or unconstitutional based on expression unius est exclusion
alterius
Commission on Human Rights Employee Assoc vs CHR
It considered CHR as fiscally autonomous. Beyond ths, it cannot exceed anymore on
such fiscal autonomy
ART 6 Sec 16 first 2 paragraphs
Ex, there must be a majority of the senate 13 out of 24. What is the Vote necessary?
Majority of the 13
2017 case Baguilat vs Alvarez
The majority block chose the minority floor leader. Court affirmed the selection of
Speaker Alvarez as such is a political question doctrine
Coercive Jurisdiction- Avelina vs Cuenco
They were only 22 in attendance. One sick one at abroad. The Senate President
suspended the proceeding with 9 the Senate left the floor leaving the other 12. SO
they oust Arino and be replaced by Cuenco. Can the 12 who remain constitute a
quorum?
Yes. Because one of them (Miriam) is outside the county, he cannot be compelled to
attend as there is no coercive jurisdiction. Thus majority is 12 of 23 is a quorum an
since all 12 unanimously nominated Cuenco, such is valid.

Sen. Leila De Lima was still a Senator, under a case she is not considered in
quorum because she cannot be compelled. Basis is principle of separation of
powers. The judge cannot remove de lima to attend hearing in Senate

Sec 11 Art 6 Parliamentary immunities

Does not cover imprisonment more than 6 years. It extends for the entire session of
Congress from 4th Monday of July up to Adjournmment and until for the next
commencement of Session

Pombre vs Santiago Sec 11Art 6

The court exonerated her because of parliamentary immunity as she committed the
crime when she was in her function.
Ex. For trillianes interview, such is outside the senate so he can be held liable
However, she may not be held liable “in any other places” such as Ombudsman, DOJ or
courts. Senator may still be held liable still in HoR or Senate place if determined by the
rules
Another case of Santiago vs 4th division of Sandiganbayan
The disclipinary power of Congress is different from basic judicial authority to provide for
orders pendente lite
Can she be place for violation as Immigration Commissioner even if she is now a
legislative as suspension. Yes she can be as long as public office
Casco Chemical vs Jimenez
Urea formaldehyde. In this case, they relied on the journal of the Congress. Such is not
sufficient. If you want to change the published law, make a new law.

Enrolled Bill Theory

Storga vs Villegas- Signature of the Bill by Senate President was invalid. Such shall
be given weight thus invalidates the bill. There is nothing sancrosanct in the certification
made by the presiding officers, it is for authentication only
NB: SC can only review Electoral Tribunals if there is grave abuse of discretion. It
cannot have appellate jurisdiction. Take noye in HRET, 1 justice is required to be in
attendance for the quorum. If 6 in attendance if all are legislators, such is not a quorum-
Reyes vs HRET
Sec 18 of Art 6 on Commission of Appointments
An adjunct of the Congress. Therefore if the Congress is in Session, the Commission of
Appointments is alive and can exercise its function. The vote required for the validity of
Commission of Appointments validity. Senate President votes only if there is a tie. 12
from each chamber. Requires majority of ALL the members, so 13 out of 24

When does war exist?

1. Declaration by other states
2. Actual hostilities commence
3. If one of the state parties imposed an ultimatum while the other rejects the
ultimatum
4. If one of the state-parties refuse to abide by peace
Such is a political question
Sec 26 Art 6
3 readings on 3 separate days and the distribution of copies before the last reading
Tolention vs Sec of Finance
Bicameral Conference Committee. The Committtee which finalizes the Bill. Should the
final version be submitted for 3 readings on 3 sep dates? No. Such is just a
reconciliation
Is the power to approve a presidential power? Yes. Is it a legislative act? Yes also
If vetoed, return to where it originated and a veto message as reason for its rejection.
Congress can still deliberate and if vote of 2/3 of all members done separely
NB: Yung bills na di naging batas after end of Session of Congress- functus
officio na so di na pede iapprove ng successor- better rule kesa approve within
30 days
Can the New Congress overwrite a veto with respect to bills it had nothing to do?

Sec 32 of Art 6- different from 12 and 3 as the latter is for Consti the former is
local laws etc