lOMoARcPSD|47033074

KA-POLI Doctrines (Finals)

Constitutional law 1 (San Beda University)

Scan to open on Studocu

Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)
 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

KA-POLI NOTES in holding a fiesta and having a patron saint for the
barrio, then any activity intended to facilitate the worship
of the patron saint (such as the acquisition and display of
his image) cannot be branded as illegal. As noted in the
resolution, the barrio fiesta is a socioreligious affair. Its
celebration is an ingrained tradition in rural communities.
The fiesta relieves the monotony and drudgery of the
lives of the masses.
The Constitutional guaranty of free exercise and
American Bible Society enjoyment of religious profession and worship comes
vs. City of Manila with it the right to disseminate religious information. Any
G.R. No. L-9637 restraint can be justified by the clear and present danger
April 30, 1957 of any substantive evil which the State had the right to
prevent.
Public broadcast on TV of its religious program brings it
out of the bosom of internal belief. Television is a
medium that reaches even the eyes and ears of children.
The Court iterates the rule that the exercise of religious
freedom can be regulated by the State when it will bring
This reviewer is made out of love and fear for the law. Please do not hesitate to share about the clear and present danger of some substantive
this material because sharing is caring and karma always has its ways. #NoToCrabs evil which the State is duty bound to prevent. However, it
Iglesia ni Cristo vs.
is inappropriate to apply the clear and present danger
Court of Appeals
STAY THE COURSE; BLOCK OUT THE NOISE. ~ KOBE BRYANT. test to the case at bar because the issue involves the
G.R. No. 119673
content of speech and not the time, place or manner of
July 26, 1996
speech. The contention overlooks the fact that the case
Case Doctrine
at bar involves videotape that are pre-taped and hence,
Freedom of Religion
their speech content is known and not an X quantity.
What is granted by our Constitution is religious liberty,
Given the specific content of the speech, it is not
not mere religious toleration. Religious freedom as a
unreasonable to assume that the respondent Board, with
Aglipay vs. Ruiz constitutional mandate is not inhibition of profound
its expertise, can determine whether its sulphur will bring
G.R. No. 45459 reverence of religion and is not a denial of its influence in
about the substantive evil feared by the law.
March 13, 1937 human affairs. Religion as a profession of faith to an
Ebralinag vs. Division
active power that binds and elevates nab to his Creator is
Superintendent of It is the right of the public-school students to refuse to
recognized.
Cebu salute to the Philippine flag on account of their religious
The wooden image was purchased in connection with the
G.R. No. 95770 scruples.
celebration of the barrio fiesta honoring the patron saint,
March 1, 1993
San Vicente Ferrer, and not for the purpose of favoring
Garces vs. Estenzo The Compelling State Interest Test involves a three-step
any religion nor interfering with religious beliefs of the Estrada vs. Escritor
G.R. No. L-53487 process. We explained this process in detail, by showing
barrio residents. One of the highlights of the fiesta was A.M. No. P-02-1651
May 25, 1981 the questions which must be answered affirmatively and
the mass. Consequently, the image of the patron saint June 22, 2006
in sequence:
had to be placed in the church when the mass was
celebrated. If there is nothing unconstitutional or illegal

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

(1.) Has the statute or government action created a Leave Division Office
The exercise of one’s right to travel or the freedom to
burden on the free exercise of religion? vs. Heusdens
move from one place to another, as assured by the
(2.) Is there a sufficiently compelling state interest to A.M. No. P-11-2927
Constitution, is not absolute.
justify this infringement of religious liberty? December 11, 2007
(3.) 3. Has the state in achieving its legitimate purposes Right to Information
used the least intrusive means possible so that the In determining whether or not a particular information is
free exercise is not infringed any more than of public concern there is no rigid test which can be
necessary to achieve the legitimate goal of the applied. 'Public concern' like 'public interest' is a term
state? that eludes exact definition. Both terms embrace a broad
Legaspi vs. Civil
The principle of separation of Church and State is based spectrum of subjects which the public may want to know,
Service Commission
on mutual respect. The State cannot meddle in the either because these directly affect their lives, or simply
G.R. No. 72119
internal affairs of the Church, much less question its faith because such matters naturally arouse the interest of an
Imbong vs. Ochoa May 29, 1987
and dogmas or dictate upon it. On the other hand, the ordinary citizen. In the final analysis, it is for the courts to
G.R. No. 204819
Church cannot impose its beliefs and convictions on the determine on a case by case basis whether the matter at
April 8, 2014
State and the rest of the citizenry. It cannot demand that issue is of interest or importance, as it relates to or
the nation follow its beliefs, even if it sincerely believes affects the public.
that they are good for the country. (1.) The right to information is an essential premise of a
Liberty of Abode and Travel meaningful right to speech and expression. But this
The right to return to one's country is not among the is not to say that the right to information is merely
rights specifically guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, which an adjunct of and therefore restricted in application
Marcos vs. Manglapus
treats only of the liberty of abode and the right to travel, by the exercise of the freedoms of speech and of
G.R. No. 88211
The right to return to one's country is not among the the press. Far from it. The right to information goes
September 15, 1989
rights specifically guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, which hand-in-hand with the constitutional policies of full
treats only of the liberty of abode and the right to travel. public disclosure and honesty in the public service.
Manotoc vs. Court of The constitutional right to travel is not an absolute right. It is meant to enhance the widening role of the
Appeals The court may validly refuse to grant the accused citizenry in governmental decision-making as well in
G.R. No. L-62100 permission to travel abroad even if the accused is out on Valmonte vs. checking abuse in government.
May 30, 1986 bail. Belmonte, Jr. (2.) When the information requested from the
The condition imposed upon an accused on bail to make G.R. No. 74930 government intrudes into the privacy of a citizen, a
Silverio vs. Court of himself available at all times whenever the Court requires February 13, 1989 potential conflict between the rights to information
Appeals his presence operates as a valid restriction of his right to and to privacy may arise. The right to privacy
G.R. No. 94284 travel. A person facing criminal charges may be belongs to the individual in his private capacity, and
April 8, 1991 restrained by the Court from leaving the country or, if not to public and governmental agencies like the
abroad, compelled to return. GSIS. A corporation has no right to privacy since the
There is no law particularly providing for the authority of entire basis of the right to privacy is injury to the
the Secretary of Justice to curtail the exercise of the right feelings and sensibilities of the party and a
Genuino vs. De Lima to travel, in the interest of national security, public safety, corporation would have no such ground for relief.
G.R. No. 197930 or public health. Without the law to justify its action, the Neither can the GSIS through its General Manager,
April 17, 2018 issuance of a DOJ Circular is an unauthorized act of the respondent, invoke the right to privacy of its
empowering itself under the pretext of dire exigency or borrowers. The right is purely personal in nature.
urgent necessity.

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

(3.) The government, whether carrying out its sovereign members of society to cope with the exigencies of
attributes or running some business, discharges the their time, access to information of general interest
same function of service to the people. aids the people in democratic decision-making by
Consequently, that the GSIS, in granting the loans, giving them a better perspective of the vital issues
was exercising a proprietary function would not confronting the nation.
justify the exclusion of the transactions from the There are no specific laws prescribing the exact
coverage and scope of the right to information. limitations within which the right may be exercised or the
(4.) (4.) The consideration in guaranting access to correlative state duty may be obliged. However, the
information on matters of public concern does not Chavez vs. PCGG following are some of the recognized restrictions:
however, accord to citizen the right to compel G.R. No. 130716 (1.) National security matters and intelligence
custodian of public records to prepare lists, December 9, 1998 information;
abstracts, summaries and the like in their desire to (2.) Trade secrets and banking transactions;
acquire such information. (3.) Criminal matters; and
A consummated contract is not a requirement for the (4.) Other confidential information.
exercise of the right to information. Otherwise, the Deliberative process privilege: The rules on
people can never exercise the right if no contract is confidentiality will enable the Members of the Court to
consummated, and if one is consummated, it may be too "freely discuss the issues without fear of criticism for
Province of North
late for the public to expose its defects. Requiring a holding unpopular positions" or fear of humiliation for
Cotabato vs. GRP
consummated contract will keep the public in the dark one's comments. The privilege against disclosure of
Peace Panel on AD
until the contract, which may be grossly disadvantageous these kinds of information/communication is known as
G.R. No. 183591
to the government or even illegal, becomes fait accompli. deliberative process privilege, involving as it does the
October 14, 2008
This negates the State policy of full transparency on deliberative process of reaching a decision. The privilege
matters of public concern. Such a requirement will is intended "to prevent the chilling' of deliberative
prevent the citizenry from participating in the public communications."
discussion of any proposed contract.
(1.) Details of the procedure prior to, during and after To qualify for protection under the deliberative process
administering the lethal injection shall be set forth Corona Impeachment privilege, the agency must show that the document is
in a manual to be prepared by the Director. The February 14, 2012 both:
manual shall contain details of, among others, the (1.) predecisional; and
sequence of events before and after execution; (2.) deliberative.
procedures in setting up the intravenous line; the
Echagaray vs. administration of the lethal drugs; the A document is "predecisional" under the deliberative
Secretary of Justice pronouncement of death; and the removal of the process privilege if it precedes, in temporal sequence, the
G.R. No. 132601 intravenous system. Said manual shall be decision to which it relates. In other words,
October 12, 1998 confidential and its distribution shall be limited to communications are considered predecisional if they
authorized prison personnel." were made in the attempt to reach a final conclusion. A
(1.) (2.) The incorporation in the Constitution of a material is "deliberative," on the other hand, if it reflects
guarantee of access to information of public the give-and-take of the consultative process. The key
concern is a recognition of the essentiality of the question in determining whether the material is
free flow of ideas and information in a democracy. deliberative in nature is whether disclosure of the
In the same way that free discussion enables

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

information would discourage candid discussion within interest in elevating the quality of professional legal
the agency. services, may require that the cost of improving the
profession in this fashion be shared by the subjects and
If the disclosure of the information would expose the beneficiaries of the regulatory program — the lawyers.
government's decision-making process in a way that Eminent Domain
discourages candid discussion among the decision- See cases in the Midterms reviewer
makers (thereby undermining the courts' ability to Non-impairment Clause
perform their functions), the information is deemed Moratorium is a postponement of fulfillment of
privileged. obligations decreed by the state through the medium of
Right to Form Associations the courts or the legislature. Its essence is the application
The right to form an organization does not carry with it of the sovereign power." Moratorium laws were declared
the right to strike. Thus, Government employees may, constitutional. However, some courts have also declared
through their unions or associations, either petition the Rutter vs. Esteban that "such statutes are void as to contracts made before
SSS Employees Congress for the betterment of the terms and conditions G.R. No. L-3708 their passage where the suspension of remedies
Association vs. Court of employment which are within the ambit of legislation, May 18, 1953 prescribed is indefinite or unreasonable in duration". The
of Appeals or negotiate with the appropriate government agencies true test, therefore, of the constitutionality of a
G.R. No. 85279 for the improvement of those which are not fixed by law. moratorium statute lies in the determination of the
July 28, 1989 But, employees in the civil service may not resort to period of suspension of the remedy. It is required that
strikes, walkouts, and other temporary work stoppages, such suspension be definite and reasonable, otherwise it
like workers in the private sector, to pressure the would be violative of the constitution.
Government to accede to their demands. In order to promote the general welfare, the State may
Members of said religious sects cannot be compelled or interfere with personal liberty, with property, businesses,
coerced to join labor unions even when said unions have and occupations. Persons may be subjected to all kinds
Victoriano vs. Elizalde
closed shop agreements with the employers; that in spite of restraints and burdens, in order to secure the general
Rope Worker’s Union Ortigas vs. Feati Bank
of any closed shop agreement, members of said religious comfort, health, and prosperity of the State and to this
G.R. No. L-25246 G.R. No. L-24670
sects cannot be refused employment or dismissed from fundamental aim, the rights of the individual are
September 12, 1974 December 14, 1979
their jobs on the sole ground that they are not members subordinated. This is a legitimate response to a felt
of the collective bargaining union. public need, not whimsical, or oppressive, the non-
Integration does not make a lawyer a member of any impairment of contracts clause of the Constitution will
group of which he is not already a member. He becomes not bar the municipality’s proper exercise of the power.
a member of the Bar when he passed the Bar The freedom of contract which is constitutionally
examinations. All that integration actually does is to protected is freedom to enter into "lawful" contracts.
In Re: IBP Membership provide an official national organization for the well- Contracts which contravene public policy are not lawful.
Dues Delinquency of defined but unorganized and incohesive group of which Lozano vs. Martinez We must bear in mind that checks cannot be categorized
Atty. Marcial Edillon every lawyer is already a member. Bar integration does G.R. No. L-63419 as mere contracts. It is a commercial instrument which, in
A.C. No. 1928 not compel the lawyer to associate with anyone. He is December 18, 1986 this modern day and age, has become a convenient
August 3, 1978 free to attend or not attend the meetings of his substitute for money; it forms part of the banking system
Integrated Bar Chapter or vote or refuse to vote in its and therefore not entirely free from the regulatory power
elections as he chooses. The only compulsion to which of the state.
he is subjected is the payment of annual dues. The
Supreme Court, in order to further the State’s legitimate

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

Ganzon vs. Inserto Courts cannot change the obligations of the parties. just to repeat to the person under investigation the
G.R. No. L-56450 Court orders allowing substitution of mortgage with provisions of the Constitution. He is not only duty-bound
July 25, 1983 surety bond is violative of non-impairment clause. to tell the person the rights to which the latter is entitled;
Free Access to Courts he must also explain their effects in practical terms. Short
Re: Query of Mr. Roger A juridical person cannot be accorded the exemption of this, there is a denial of the right, as it cannot truly be
C. Prioreschi from legal and filing fees granted to indigent litigants said that the person has been "informed" of his rights. It
A.M. No. 09-6-9-SC under the free access clause even despite working for is the burden on prosecutor to establish that all
August 19, 2009 indigent and underprivileged people. constitutional rights here been accorded even without
Custodial Investigation objection.
Infraction of the rights of an accused during custodial Being already under custodial investigation while on
investigation or the so-called Miranda Rights render board the police patrol jeep on the way to the Police
Ho Wai Pang vs. inadmissible only the extrajudicial confession or Station where formal investigation may have been
People admission made during such investigation. “The conducted, appellant should have been informed of his
G.R. No. 176229 admissibility of other evidence, provided they are Constitutional rights under Article III, Section 12 of the
October 19, 2011 relevant to the issue and is not otherwise excluded by Constitution which explicitly provides:
law or rules, is not affected even if obtained or taken in (1) Any person under investigation for the commission
the course of custodial investigation." People vs. Bolanos of an offense shall have the right to remain silent
The police line-up (at least, in this case) was not part of G.R. No. 101808 and to have competent and independent preferably
the custodial inquest, hence, petitioner was not yet July 3, 1992 of his own choice.
entitled, at such stage, to counsel. When the petitioner (2) If the person cannot afford the service of counsel,
was identified by the complainant at the police line-up, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot
Gamboa vs. Cruz he had not been held yet to answer for a criminal be waived except in writing and in the presence of
G.R. No. L-56291 offense. The police line-up is not a part of the custodial counsel.
June 27, 1988 inquest; hence, he was not yet entitled to counsel. Thus, (3) (3) Any confession or admission obtained in
it was held that when the process had not yet shifted violation of this or the preceding section shall be
from the investigatory to the accusatory as when police inadmissible in evidence against him.
investigation does not elicit a confession, the accused (1.) The Constitution bars is the compulsory disclosure
may not yet avail of the services of his lawyer. of incriminating facts or confessions. Thus, the
People vs. Macam A police lineup is considered a critical stage of the constitutional procedure on custodial investigation
G.R. No. 91011-12 proceedings. Thus, the right to counsel attaches upon the do not apply to a spontaneous statement, not
November 24, 1994 start of an investigation. elicited through questioning by the authorities, but
People vs. Andan
People vs. Judge given in an ordinary manner whereby appellant
Rights during custodial investigation does not G.R. No. 116437
Ayson orally admitted having committed the crime.
encompass statements made during an administrative March 3, 1997
G.R. No. 85215 (2.) Verbal confessions to the newsmen are not covered
inquiry. by Section 12 (1) and (3) of Article III of the
July 7, 1989
A person under investigation "to be informed" of his Constitution. The Bill of Rights does not concern
right to remain silent and to counsel, it must be itself with the relation between a private individual
People vs. Pinlac and another individual.
presumed to contemplate the transmission of
G.R. No. 74123-24 Navallo vs.
meaningful information rather than just the ceremonial A person under a normal audit examination is not under
September 26, 1988 Sandiganbayan
and perfunctory recitation of an abstract constitutional custodial investigation.
principle. It would not be sufficient for a police officer G.R. No. 97214

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

July 18, 1994 the accused is strong for the purpose of enabling
Spontaneous Statement not elicited through questioning the court to exercise its sound discretion.
is not part of custodial investigation. The declaration of (3.) Decide whether the evidence of guilt of the accused
an accused acknowledging his guilt of the offense is strong based on the summary of evidence of the
charged may be given in evidence against him. It may in prosecution.
a sense be also regarded as part of the res gestae. The (4.) If the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge
rule is that, any person, otherwise competent as a the accused upon the approval of the bail bond.
People vs. Dy witness, who heard the confession, is competent to Otherwise, petition should be denied.
G.R. No. 74517 testify as to the substance of what he heard if he heard People vs. Judge
February 23, 1988 and understood all of it. An oral confession need not be Donato The right of the accused to bail is governed by the law at
repeated verbatim, but in such a case it must be given in G.R. No. 79269 the time the court resolved the petition to bail.
substance. What was told by the Accused to Pat. Padilla June 5, 1991
was a spontaneous statement not elicited through If an accused who is charged with a crime punishable by
questioning, but given in an ordinary manner. No written reclusion perpetua is convicted by the trial court and
People vs. Fortes
confession was sought to be presented in evidence as a sentenced to suffer such penalty, bail is neither a matter
G.R. No. 90643
result of formal custodial investigation. of right on the part of the accused not a matter of
June 25, 1993
Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine: It is not only the discretion on the part of the court - the application for
uncounseled confession that is condemned as bail must be denied.
inadmissible, but also evidence derived therefrom. The right to bail is not available to the members of the
According to this rule, once the primary source (the armed forces because of the unique structure of the
"tree") is shown to have been unlawfully obtained, any military men. It is vital to note that mutinous soldiers
Commendador vs. De
secondary or derivative evidence (the "fruit") derived operate within the framework of democratic system, are
Villa
from it is also inadmissible. Stated otherwise, illegally allowed the fiduciary use of firearms by the government
People vs. Alicando G.R. No. 93177
seized evidence is obtained as a direct result of the for the discharge of their duties and responsibilities and
G.R. No. 117487 August 2, 1991
illegal act, whereas the "fruit of the poisonous tree" is the are paid out of revenues collected from the people. All
December 12, 1995
indirect result of the same illegal act. The "fruit of the other insurgent elements carry out their activities outside
poisonous tree" is at least once removed from the of and against the existing political system.
illegally seized evidence, but it is equally inadmissible. Application for bail shall follow the 3-day motion rule.
The rule is based on the principle that evidence illegally The court rejects that time was of the essence, since the
Baylon vs. Judge Sison
obtained by the State should not be used to gain other ambient circumstances obtaining prior to the grant of
A.M. No. 92-7-360-0
evidence because the originally illegally obtained bail could not but have cautioned respondent judge to
April 6, 1995
evidence taints all evidence subsequently obtained. be more circumspect in entertaining and resolving the
Right to Bail petition therefore.
Duty of the courts (or of the trial judge) whenever an A court has the power to prohibit a person admitted to
application for bail is filed before them: bail from leaving the Philippines. This is a necessary
Manotoc vs. Court of
(1.) Notify the prosecutor of the hearing of the consequence of the nature and function of a bail bond.
Basco vs. Raptalo Appeals
application for bail, or require him to submit his The condition imposed upon petitioner to make himself
A.M. No. RTJ-96-1335 G.R. Ni. L-62100
recommendation. available at all times whenever the court requires his
March 5, 1997 May 30, 1986
(2.) Conduct a summary hearing of the application for presence operates as a valid restriction on his right to
bail, regardless of whether or not the prosecution travel. Indeed, if the accused were allowed to leave the
refuses to present evidence to show that the guilt of

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

Philippines without sufficient reason, he may be placed G.R. Nos. L-72335-39 case is violative of the constitutionally guaranteed right
beyond the reach of the courts. March 21, 1988 of the petitioner to due process and to a speedy
By the use of the word "conviction," a person has been disposition of the cases against him.
arrested and detained for violation of Philippine criminal The court’s decision of acquittal is one void of
laws. It does not apply to extradition proceedings, jurisdiction owing to its failure in observing due process
because extradition courts do not render judgments of during the trial therefore the judgment was also deemed
conviction or acquittal. The constitutional provision on void and double jeopardy cannot be invoked. More so
Galman vs.
bail will not apply to a case like extradition, where the the trial was one vitiated with lack of due process on the
Sandiganbayan
presumption of innocence is not at issue. account of collusion between the lower court and
U.S. vs. Judge G.R. No. 72670
Sandiganbayan for the rendition of a pre-determined
Purugnanan September 12, 1986
Exception – Bail may be applied for and granted as an verdict of the accused. The denial on the motion for
G.R. No. 148571
exception, only upon a clear and convincing showing: reconsideration of the petitioners by the court was set
December 17, 2002
(1.) that, once granted bail, the applicant will not be a aside and rendered the decision of acquittal of the
flight risk or a danger to the community; and accused null and void.
(2.) that there exist special, humanitarian and Jurisprudence acknowledges that due process in criminal
compelling circumstances including, as a matter of proceedings, in particular, require:
reciprocity, those cited by the highest court in the (1.) That the court or tribunal trying the case is properly
requesting state when it grants provisional liberty in clothed with judicial power to hear and determine
extradition cases therein. the matter before it;
A potential extraditee is entitled to bail. Being a (2.) That jurisdiction is lawfully acquired by it over the
Alonte vs. Savellano
Hong Kong vs. Olalia signatory to the ICCPR, the Philippines does not have any person of the accused;
G.R. No. 131652
G.R. No. 153675 right to diminish the right to deprive an extraditee of his (3.) That the accused is given an opportunity to be
March 9, 1998
April 19, 2007 right to apply for bail, provided that a certain standard heard; and
for the grant is satisfactorily met. (4.) That judgment is rendered only upon lawful
Bail for the provisional liberty of the accused, regardless hearing.
of the crime charged, should be allowed independently Mere silence of the holder of the right should not be so
of the merits of the charge, provided his continued construed as a waiver of right, and the courts must
incarceration is clearly shown to be injurious to his health indulge every reasonable presumption against waiver.
or to endanger his life. Indeed, denying him bail despite Presumption of Innocence
Enrile vs. imperiling his health and life would not serve the true Accusation is not, according to the fundamental law,
People vs. Dramayo
Sandiganbayan objective of preventive incarceration during the trial. synonymous with guilt. It is incumbent on the
G.R. No. L-21325
G.R. Ni. 213847 Moreover, unless the allowance of bail is forbidden by prosecution to demonstrate that culpability lies. Guilt
October 29, 1971
August 18, 2015 law in the particular case, the illness of the prisoner, must be shown beyond reasonable doubt.
independently of the merits of the case, is a No one may be condemned before such may be fully
circumstance, and the humanity of the law makes it a heard. A person disqualified to run for public office on
consideration which should, regardless of the charge and Dumlao vs. COMELEC the ground that charges have been filed against him is
the stage of the proceeding, influence the court to G.R. No. L-52245 virtually placed in the same category as a person already
exercise its discretion to admit the prisoner to bail. January 22, 1980 convicted of a crime. And although the filing of charges
Criminal Due Process is considered as but prima facie evidence, time
Tatad vs. The inordinate delay in terminating the preliminary constraints will prevent one charged with acts of
Sandiganbayan investigation and filing the information in the instant

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

disloyalty from offering contrary proof to overcome the An examination of related provisions in the Constitution
prima facie evidence against him. concerning the right to counsel, will show that the
In the face of the settled doctrine that flight is an "preference in the choice of counsel" pertains more aptly
Marquez vs. COMELEC indication of guilt, it may even be truly said that it is not and specifically to a person under investigation rather
G.R. No. 112889 the challenged disqualifying provision which overcomes than one who is the accused in a criminal prosecution.
April 18, 1995 the presumption of innocence but rather the disqualified Even if we were to extend the application of the concept
person himself who has proven his guilt. of "preference in the choice of counsel" to an accused in
The equipoise rule is when the pieces of evidence of a criminal prosecution, such preferential discretion
Corpus vs. People
both sides are equally balanced, the constitutional cannot partake of a discretion so absolute and arbitrary
G.R. No. 74259
presumption of innocence should tilt the scales in favor as would make the choice of counsel refer exclusively to
February 14, 1991
of the accused. the predilection of the accused. The Constitution does
Feeder International not convey the message that the choice of a lawyer by a
Line vs. Court of A corporate entity has no personality to invoke the right Amion vs. Judge person under investigation is exclusive as to preclude
Appeals to be presumed innocent which right is available only to Chiongson other equally competent and independent attorneys
G.R. No. 94262 an individual who is an accused in a criminal case. A.M. No. RTJ-97-1371 from handling his defense. If the rule were otherwise,
May 31, 1991 January 22, 1999 then, the tempo of a custodial investigation, will be
Right to be Hear by Himself and Counsel solely in the hands of the accused who can impede, nay,
The court has four important duties to comply with: obstruct the progress of the interrogation by simply
(1.) It must inform the defendant that it is his right to selecting a lawyer, who for one reason or another, is not
have attorney before being arraigned; available to protect his interest. Applying this principle
(2.) After giving him such information, the court must enunciated by the Court, we may likewise say that the
People vs. Holgado ask him if he desires the aid of an attorney; accused's discretion in a criminal prosecution with
G.R. No. L-2809 (3.) If he desires and is unable to employ attorney, the respect to his choice of counsel is not so much as to
March 22, 1950 court must assign attorney de officio to defend him; grant him a plenary prerogative which would preclude
and other equally competent and independent counsels from
(4.) If the accused desires to procure an attorney of his representing him. Otherwise, the pace of a criminal
own the court must grant him a reasonable time prosecution will be entirely dictated by the accused to
therefor. the detriment of the eventual resolution of the case.
The failure of the record to disclose affirmatively that the Right to be Informed of the Nature and Cause of the Accusation
trial judge advised the accused of his right to counsel is Evidence of conspiracy is not enough for an accused to
not sufficient ground to reverse conviction. The reason bear and to respond to all its grave legal consequences;
being that the trial court must be presumed to have it is equally essential that such accused has been
complied with the procedure prescribed by law for the apprised when the charge is made conformably with
People vs. Agbayani prevailing substantive and procedural requirements. In
hearing and trial of cases, and that such a presumption People vs. Quitlong
G.R. No. 122770 embodying the essential elements of the crime charged,
can only be overcome by an affirmative showing to the G.R. No. 121562
January 16, 1998 the information must set forth the facts and
contrary. Thus, it has been held that unless the contrary July 10, 1998
appears in the record, or that it is positively proved that circumstances that have a bearing on the culpability and
the trial court failed to inform the accused of his right to liability of the accused so that the accused can properly
counsel, it will be presumed that the accused was prepare for and undertake his defense. One such fact or
informed by the court of such right. circumstance in a complaint against two or more accused
persons is that of conspiracy.

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

The court presented the objectives of the right of the .) when unjustified postponements are asked for and
accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the secured; or
crime he is charged with as follows: .) when without cause or justifiable motive a long period of
(1.) To furnish the accused with such a description of time is allowed to elapse without the party having his
the charge against him as will enable him to make case tried.
Pecho vs. People
his defense; An accused person is entitled to a trial at the earliest
G.R. No. 111399
(2.) To avail himself of his conviction or acquittal for Flores vs. People opportunity. He cannot be oppressed by delaying the
September 27, 1996
protection against a further prosecution for the G.R. No. L-25769 commencement of trial for an unreasonable length of
same cause; and December 10, 1974 time. If the proceedings pending trial are deferred, the
(3.) To inform the court of the facts alleged, so that it trial itself is necessarily delayed.
may decide whether they are sufficient in law to Where a prosecuting officer, without good cause, secures
support a conviction, if one should be had. postponements of the trial of a defendant against his
Soriano vs. Conde vs. Rivera protest beyond a reasonable period of time, as in this
Sandiganbayan The description in the complaint or information controls G.R. No. 21741 instance for more than a year, the accused is entitled to
G.R. No. L-65952 over the designation of the offense. January 25, 1924 relief by a proceeding in mandamus to compel a
July 31, 1984 dismissal of the information, or if he be restrained of his
The accused needs to be arraigned so that he may be liberty, by habeas corpus to obtain his freedom.
Borja vs. Mendoza informed as to why he was indicted and what penal Due process of law requires a hearing before an impartial
G.R. No. L-45667 offense he has to face, to be convicted only on a showing and disinterested tribunal, and that every litigant is
June 20, 1977 that his guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt with full entitled to nothing less than the cold neutrality of an
opportunity to disprove the evidence against him. impartial judge. He should at all times manifest depth
Right to Speedy, Impartial, and Public Trial commitment and concern to the cause of justice
CONCEPT OF SPEEDY TRIAL. A speedy trial means a trial according to legal norms, a cerebral man who
Mateo vs. Villaluz
conducted according to the law of criminal procedure deliberately holds in check the tug and pull of purely
G.R. No. L-34756-59
and the rules and regulations, free from vexatious, personal preferences and prejudices which he shares with
March 31, 1973
capricious, and oppressive delays. The concept of speedy the rest of his fellow mortals. He should strive to be at all
trial is necessarily relative. A determination as to whether times wholly free, disinterested, impartial and
the right has been violated involves the weighing of independent. A judge has both the duty of rendering a
several factors such as the length of the delay, the reason just decision and the duty of doing it in a manner
for the delay, the conduct of the prosecution and the completely free from suspicion as to its fairness and as to
People vs. Tee accused, and the efforts exerted by the defendant to his integrity.
G.R. Nos. 140546-47 assert his right, as well as the prejudice and damage PUBLIC TRIAL — It possesses that character when anyone
January 20, 2003 caused to the accused. interested in observing the manner a judge conducts the
proceedings in his courtroom may do so. There is to be
WHEN IS THE RIGHT AVAILABLE? In determining the no ban on such attendance. His being a stranger to the
Garcia vs. Domingo
right of an accused to speedy trial, courts should do litigants is of no moment. No relationship to the parties
G.R. No. L-30104
more than a mathematical computation of the number of need be shown. The thought that lies behind this
July 25, 1973
postponements of the scheduled hearings of the case. safeguard is the belief that thereby the accused is
The right to a speedy trial is deemed violated only when: afforded further protection, that his trial is likely to be
.) the proceedings are attended by vexatious, capricious, conducted with regularity and not tainted with any
and oppressive delays; impropriety.

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

the witnesses face to face." The first reason is the right of
It is the usual course of events that individuals desirous crossexamination, and the second is that the tribunal
of being present are free to do so. There is the well- may have before it the department and appearance of
recognized exception though that warrants the exclusion the witness while testifying.
of the public where the evidence may be characterized as Talino vs. It is settled that if a separate trial is allowed to one of two
"offensive to decency or public morals." Sandiganbayan or more defendants, his testimony therein imputing guilt
People vs. Teehankee The right of an accused to a fair trial is not incompatible G.R. No. L-75511-14 to any of the co-accused is not admissible against the
Jr. to a free press. A responsible press has always been March 16, 1987 latter who was not able to cross-examine him.
G.R. No. 11206-08 regarded as the handmaiden of effective judicial Compulsory processes
October 6, 1995 administration. Before a subpoena duces tecum may issue, the court
An accused has a right to a public trial but it is a right must first be satisfied that the following requisites are
that belongs to him, more than anyone else, where his present:
Roco vs. Contreras
life or liberty can be held critically in balance. A public (1.) The books, documents or other things requested
G.R. No. 158275
trial aims to ensure that he is fairly dealt with and would must appear prima facie relevant to the issue
June 28, 2005
Re: request for live not be unjustly condemned and that his rights are not subject of the controversy (test of relevancy); and
radio and TV coverage compromised in secret conclaves of long ago. A public (2.) Such books must be reasonably described by the
of the trial in trial is not synonymous with publicized trial; it only parties to be readily identified (test of definiteness).
Sandiganbayan of the implies that the court doors must be open to those who Trial in Absentia
Plunder cases against wish to come, sit in the available seats, conduct Once an accused escape from prison or confinement or
former President themselves with decorum and observe the trial process. People vs. Mapalao jumps bail or flees to a foreign country, he loses his
Joseph Ejercito Estrada In the constitutional sense, a courtroom should have G.R. No. 92415 standing in court and unless he surrenders or submits to
A.M. No. 00-1-03-SC enough facilities for a reasonable number of the public May 14, 1991 the jurisdiction of the court he is deemed to have waived
September 13, 2001 to observe the proceedings, not too small as to render any right to seek relief from the court.
the openness negligible and not too large as to distract After the trial in absentia, the court can render judgment
the trial participants from their proper functions, who in the case and promulgation may be made by simply
shall then be totally free to report what they have People vs. Valeriano
recording the judgment in the criminal docket with a
observed during the proceedings. G.R. No. 103604-05
copy thereof served upon his counsel, provided that the
Re: Petition for radio September 23, 1993
notice requiring him to be present at the promulgation is
and television served through his bondsmen or warden and counsel.
coverage of the Suspension of the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus
multiple murder cases The factual basis of the declaration of martial law or the
An accused has a right to a public trial but it is a right Lansang vs. Garcia
against Maguindanao suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus
that belongs to him, more than anyone else, where his G.R. No. L-33964
Governor Zaldy is not a political question but precisely within the ambit
life or liberty can be held critically in balance. December 11, 1971
Ampatuan of judicial review.
A.M. No. 10-11-5-SC. The ultimate purpose of the writ of habeas corpus is to
June 14, 2011 relieve a person from unlawful restraint. It is essentially a
October 23, 2012 Jackson vs. Macalino writ of inquiry and is granted to test the right under
Right to Confrontation G.R. No. 139255 which he is detained.
US vs. Javier There are two principal reasons for the provision of the November 24, 2003
G.R. No. L-12990 Philippine Bill of Rights which says: "That in all criminal Even if the arrest of a person is illegal, supervening
January 21, 1918 prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to meet events may bar his release or discharge from custody.

10

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

What is to be inquired into is the legality of his detention to determine the period of the extension necessarily
as of, at the earliest, the filing of the application for a writ includes the power to shorten it. Furthermore,
of habeas corpus, for even if the detention is at its considering that this Court's
inception illegal, it may, by reason of same supervening judgment on the constitutionality of an extension is
events such as the instances mentioned in Section 4, Rule "transitory," or "valid at that certain point of time," any
102, be no longer illegal at the time of the filing of the citizen may petition the Court to review the sufficiency of
application. Any such supervening events are the the factual basis for its continued implementation should
issuance of a judicial process preventing the discharge of the President and the Congress fail or refuse to lift the
the detained person. imposition of martial law.
The absence of judicial warrant is no legal impediment to Sec. 18 of Art. VII of the Constitution grants the Congress
arresting or capturing persons committing over acts of the power to revoke the President's proclamation of
violence against government forces, or any other milder martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ
acts but equally in pursuance of the rebellious of habeas corpus and prescribes how the Congress may
movement. The arrest or capture is thus impelled by the exercise such power, i.e., by a vote of at least a majority
exigencies of the situation that involves the very survival of all its Members, voting jointly, in a regular or special
of society and its government and duly constituted session. The use of the word "may" in the provision —
In Re: The Issuance of
authorities. such that "the Congress may revoke such proclamation
the Writ of Habeas
or suspension"—is to be construed as permissive and
Corpus for Dr. Aurora
The arrest of persons involved in the rebellion whether as operating to confer discretion on the Congress on
Parong, et. Al. vs.
its fighting armed elements, or for committing non- whether or not to revoke, but in order to revoke, the
Ponce Enrile
violent acts but in furtherance of the rebellion, is more an same provision sets the requirement that at least a
G.R. No. L-61388
act of capturing them in the course of an armed conflict, Padilla vs. Congress majority of the Members of the Congress, voting jointly,
April 20, 1983
to quell the rebellion, than for the purpose of G.R. No. 231671 favor revocation.
immediately prosecuting them in court for a statutory July 25, 2017
offense. The arrest, therefore, need not follow the usual While it may be conceded, that the phrase "voting
procedure in the prosecution of offenses which requires jointly" shall already be understood to mean that the
the determination by a judge of the existence of joint voting will be done "in joint session," still, the
probable cause before the issuance of a judicial warrant requirement that "[t]he Congress, voting jointly, by a vote
of arrest and the granting of bail if the offense is bailable. of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or
The territorial scope of martial law in direct proportion to special session, x x x" explicitly applies only to the
the range of actual rebellion and public safety is difficult situation when the Congress revokes the President's
Lagman vs. Medialdea and impossible to fix. This is so because the President’s proclamation of martial law and/or suspension of the
G.R. No. 231658 duty to maintain peace and public safety is not limited privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. Simply put, the
July 4, 2017 only to the place where there is actual rebellion, so to provision only requires Congress to vote jointly on the
speak, as it may extend to other areas where the present revocation of the President's proclamation and/or
hostilities are in danger of spilling over. suspension.
Martial law is a law of necessity. "Necessity creates the Right to Speedy Disposition of Cases
Lagman vs. Pimentel conditions for martial law and at the same time limits the Padua vs. Ericta The desideratum of a speedy disposition of cases should
G.R. No. 923935 scope of martial law." This power emanates from the G.R. No. L-38570 not, if at all possible, result in the precipitate loss of a
February 6, 2018 Congress' authority, granted under the Constitution, to May 24, 1988 party s right to present evidence and either in plaintiff's
approve the extension and to fix its duration. The power

11

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

being nonsuited or the defendant's being pronounced altogether refuse to take the witness stand and refuse to
liable under an ex parte judgment. answer any and all questions.
Flores vs. People Whatever deficiency in the pleading may then be singled
G.R. No. L-25769 out, it cannot obscure the obvious disregard of one of A waiver, to be effective, must be certain and
December 10, 1974 the most important safeguards granted an accused. unequivocal; intelligently, understandably, and willingly
Right Against Self-Incrimination made. Such waiver follows only where liberty of choice
The prohibition of self-incrimination in the Bill of Rights has been fully accorded. After a claim, a witness cannot
is a prohibition of the use of physical or moral properly be held to have waived his privilege on vague
US vs. Tan Teng compulsion to extort communications from him, and not and uncertain evidence.
G.R. No. 7081 an exclusion of his body as evidence, when it may be The constitutional right of an accused against self-
September 7, 1912 material. It would be the same as if the offender incrimination proscribes the use of physical or moral
apprehended was a thief and the object stolen by him compulsion to extort communications from the accused
may be used as evidence against him. and not the inclusion of his body in evidence when it
The rule that no person shall be compelled in any may be material.
criminal case to be a witness against himself, is limited to People vs. Gallarde
Villaflor vs. Summers
a prohibition against compulsory testimonial self- G.R. No. 133025 Purely mechanical acts are not included in the
G.R> No. 16444
incrimination. The corollary to the proposition is that, an February 27, 2000 prohibition as the accused does not thereby speak his
September 8, 1920 guilt, hence the assistance and guiding hand of counsel
ocular inspection of the body of the accused is
permissible. is not required. The essence of the right against self-
This constitutional prohibition embraces the compulsory incrimination is testimonial compulsion, that is, the
preparation and creation by a witness of self- giving of evidence against himself through a testimonial
incriminatory evidence by means of a testimonial act. act.
"For though the disclosure thus sought" (the production Pascual vs. Board of
of documents and chattels) "be not oral in form, and Medical Examiners The principle against self-incrimination is equally
though the documents or chattels be already in existence G.R. No. L-25018 applicable to an administrative proceeding.
and not desired to be first written and created by a May 26, 1969
Beltran vs. Samson testimonial act or utterance of the person in response to Mapa Jr. vs. Immunity statutes in varying shapes were enacted which
G.R. No. 32025 the process, still no line can be drawn short of any Sandiganbayan would allow the government to compel a witness to
September 25, 1929 process which treats him as a witness; because in virtue G.R. No. 100295 testify despite his plea of the right against self-
of it he would be at any time liable to make oath to the April 26, 1994 incrimination.
identity or authenticity or origin of the articles Right Against Involuntary Servitude
produced." Writing is something more than moving the Philippine Refining Section 19 of Commonwealth Act No. 103 does not
body, or hand, or fingers; writing is not purely Company Worker’s offend against the constitutional inhibition proscribing
mechanical act; it requires the application of intelligence Union vs. Philippine involuntary servitude. An employee entering into a
and attention; writing means for the petitioner here to Refining Company contract of employment after said law went into effect,
furnish, through a testimonial act, evidence against G.R. No. L-1668 voluntarily accepts, among other conditions, those
Petitioner, as accused, occupies a different tier of March 29, 1948 prescribed in said section 19.
Chavez vs. Court of
protection from an ordinary witness. Whereas an In Re: for Writ of Compelling a court stenographer who had ceased to
Appeals
ordinary witness may be compelled to take the witness Habeas Corpus of work with the court, to transcribe his stenographic notes
G.R. No. L-29169
stand and claim the privilege as each question requiring Segifredo Aclaracion does not constitute involuntary servitude. Involuntary
August 19, 1968
an incriminating answer is shot at him, an accused may G.R. No. L-39115 servitude denotes a condition of enforced, compulsory

12

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

May 26, 1975 service of one to another or the condition of one who is by the Constitution. The power is more of a sacred duty
compelled by force, coercion, or imprisonment and which the Court has to discharge to assure the People
against his will, to labor for another, whether he is paid that the innocence of a citizen is the main concern
or not. especially in crimes that that shock the conscience. This
Prohibited Punishment concern cannot be diluted.
The power of the legislature to prohibit the possession of The death penalty per se is not a cruel, degrading or
deadly weapon carries with it the power to provide for inhuman punishment. In the oft-cited case of Harden vs.
the confiscation or forfeiture of weapons unlawfully used Director of Prisons, this Court held that "punishments are
or allowed by the licensed owner to be used. cruel when they involve torture or a lingering death; but
In this case, however, there was an intention to carry the the punishment of death is not cruel, within the meaning
firearm to shoot at wild chickens. It was not for the of that word as used in the constitution. It implies there
defense of anything. something inhuman and barbarous, something more
than the mere extinguishment of life."
People vs. Estoista Pursuant to the exercise of police power, the right to
G.R. No. L-5793 private property may be limited, restricted, and impaired Any infliction of pain in lethal injection is merely in
Echagaray vs.
August 27, 1953 so as to promote the general welfare, public order and carrying out the execution of the death penalty and does
Secretary of Justice
safety. not fall within the constitutional prescription against
G.R. No. 132601
cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment. "In a limited
October 12, 1998
Thus, the ownership or possession of firearms is not a sense, anything is cruel which is calculated to give pain
natural right protected by the Constitution. Above the or distress, and since punishment imports pain of
right to own property is the inherent attribute of suffering to the convict, it may be said that all
sovereignty—the police power of the state to protect its punishment is cruel. But of course, the Constitution does
citizens and to provide for the safety and good order of not mean that crime, for this reason, is to go
society. unpunished." The cruelty against which the Constitution
There is more wisdom in mandating the review by the protects a convicted man is cruelty inherent in the
Court of all death penalty cases, regardless of the wish of method of punishment, not the necessary suffering
the convict and regardless of the will of the Court. involved in any method employed to extinguish life
humanely.
Nothing less than life is at stake and any court decision Non-imprisonment for Debt
authorizing the State to take life must be as error-free as A warrant of arrest issued based on a criminal complaint
possible. An appellant may withdraw his appeal not Serafin vs. Lindayag where on its face no criminal offense has been
People vs. Esparas because he is guilty but because of his wrong perception A.M. No. 297-MJ committed save the failure to settle an obligation despite
G.R. No. 120034 of the law, or because he may want to avail of the September 30, 1975 demand is violative of the prohibition against
August 20, 1996 speedier remedy of pardon, or because of his frustration imprisonment for non-payment of debt.
and misapprehension that he will not get justice from the The gravamen of the offense punished by BP 22 is the act
authorities. Nor should the Court be influenced by the of making and issuing a worthless check or a check that
seeming repudiation of its jurisdiction when a convict Lozano vs. Martinez is dishonored upon its presentation for payment. It is not
plans to escape. G.R. No. L-63419 the non-payment of an obligation which the law
December 18, 1986 punishes. The law is not intended or designed to coerce
The Court has the duty to review all death penalty cases. a debtor to pay his debt. The thrust of the law is to
No litigant can repudiate this power which is bestowed prohibit, under pain of penal sanctions, the making of

13

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

worthless checks and putting them in circulation. is possible. But the grounds are exceptional and narrow
Because of its deleterious effects on the public interest, as when the court that absolved the accused gravely
the practice is proscribed by the law. The law punishes abused its discretion, resulting in loss of jurisdiction, or
the act not as an offense against property, but an offense when a mistrial has occurred. In any of such cases, the
against public order. State may assail the decision by special civil action of
Double Jeopardy certiorari under Rule 65.
The right against double jeopardy can be invoked if: It is settled that the existence of a plea is an essential
(1.) The accused is charged with the same offense in requisite to double jeopardy. In the present case, it is
two separate pending cases; true, the accused had first entered a plea of guilty.
PSB vs. Bermoy
(2.) The accused is prosecuted anew for the same Subsequently, however, he testified, in the course of
G.R. No. 151912
offense after he had been convicted or acquitted of being allowed to prove mitigating circumstances, that he
September 26, 2005
such offense; or acted in complete self-defense. Said testimony had the
(3.) The prosecution appeals from a judgment in the effect of vacating his plea of guilty and the court should
same case. have required him to plead anew on the charge, or at
The requisites of double jeopardy least direct that a new plea of not guilty be entered for
In order that the protection against double jeopardy may him. This was not done. It follows that in effect there
People vs. Balisacan
inure in favor of an accused, the following requisites having been no standing plea at the time the court a quo
G.R. No. L-26376
must have obtained in the original prosecution: rendered its judgment of acquittal, there can be no
August 31, 1996
(1.) A valid complaint or information; double jeopardy with respect to the appeal herein.
(2.) A competent court; Furthermore, the court a quo decided the case upon the
People vs. Obsania
(3.) The defendant had pleaded to the charge; and merits without giving the prosecution any opportunity to
G.R. No. L-24447
(4.) The defendant was acquitted, or convicted, or present its evidence or even to rebut the testimony of
June 29, 1968
the case against him was dismissed or the defendant. In doing so, it clearly acted without due
otherwise terminated without his express process of law. And for lack of this fundamental
consent. prerequisite its action is perforce null and void. The
An appeal by the prosecution in a criminal case is not acquittal, therefore, being a nullity for want of due
available if the defendant would thereby be placed in process, is no acquittal at all, and thus cannot constitute
double jeopardy. a proper basis for a claim of former jeopardy.
For double jeopardy to attach, the dismissal of the case The elements of double jeopardy are:
Paulin vs. Gimenez must be without the express consent of the accused. (1.) A valid information sufficient in form and substance
People vs. City Court
G.R. No. 103323 Where the dismissal was ordered upon motion or with to sustain a conviction of the crime charged;
of Silay
January 21, 1993 the express assent of the accused, he is deemed to have (2.) A court of competent jurisdiction; and
G.R. No. L-43790
waived his protection against double jeopardy. (3.) An unconditional dismissal of the complaint after
December 9, 1976
Icasiano vs. An administrative case is different from a criminal case, the prosecution had rested its case, amounting to
Sandiganbayan and being two different procedures, neither could adhere the acquittal of the accused.
G.R. No. 95642 to the requirement of double jeopardy which states that The dismissal of a criminal case upon motion of the
Esmena vs. Pogoy
May 28, 1992 such case must be one and the same. accused is a dismissal equivalent to an acquittal that
G.R. No. L-54110
To reconsider a judgment of acquittal places the accused would bar further prosecution of the defendant for the
Lejano vs. People February 20, 1981
twice in jeopardy of being punished for the crime of same offense.
G.R. No. 176389
which he has already been absolved. However, on
January 18, 2011
occasion, a motion for reconsideration after an acquittal

14

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

People vs. Pineda Prior conviction or acquittal of the case without the charged under a municipal ordinance while the other is
G.R. No. L-44205 consent of the accused is necessary to set in motion penalized by a statute, the critical inquiry is to the
February 16, 1993 double jeopardy. identity of the acts which the accused is said to have
People vs. Tampal Dismissal of a case based on erroneous application of the committed and which are alleged to have given rise to
G.R. No. 102485 right to speedy trial may be appealed without violating the two offenses: the constitutional protection against
May 22, 1995 the right against double jeopardy. double jeopardy is available so long as the acts which
It must be noticed that the protection of the constitute or have given rise to the first offense under a
Constitutional inhibition is against a second jeopardy for municipal ordinance are the same acts which constitute
the same offense, the only exception being, as stated in or have given rise to the offense charged under a statute.
the same Constitution, that "if an act is punished by a law The civil liability aspects of this case are another matter.
and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal under either The extinction of criminal liability whether by
shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for the prescription or by the bar of double jeopardy does not
same act." The phrase same offense, under the general carry with it the extinction of civil liability arising from
rule, has always been construed to mean not only that the offense charged.
the second offense charged is exactly the same as the Ex Post Facto Law and Bill of Attainder
one alleged in the first information, but also that the two A law imposing a new penalty, or a new liability or
offenses are identical. Under said Rules there is identity disability, or giving a new right of action, must not be
Melo vs. People between two offenses not only when the second offense US vs. Conde construed as having a retroactive effect. It is an
G.R. No. L-3580 is exactly the same as the first, but also when the second G.R. No. 18208 elementary rule of contract that the laws in force at the
March 22, 1950 offense is an attempt to commit the first or a frustration February 14, 1922 time the contract was made must govern its
thereof, or when it necessarily includes or is necessarily interpretation and application. Laws must be construed
included in the offense charged in the first information. prospectively and not retrospectively.
This rule of identity does not apply, however, when the Ex Post Facto Laws do not apply to:
second offense was not in existence at the time of the (1.) Remedial Laws - A person has no vested right in any
first prosecution, for the simple reason that in such case particular remedy, and a litigant cannot insist on the
there is no possibility for the accused, during the first application to the trial of his case, whether civil or
prosecution, to be convicted for an offense that was then criminal, of any other than the existing rules of
inexistent. Thus, where the accused was charged with procedure. Statutes making changes in the remedy
physical injuries and after conviction the injured person or procedure are laws within the discretion of the
dies, the charge for homicide against the same accused lawmaking power, and are valid so long as they do
does not put him twice in jeopardy. Concepcion vs. Garcia not deprive the accused of any substantial right, or
People vs. Adil When the second offense was not in existence at the G.R. No. L-32380 conflict with specific and applicable provisions of
G.R. No. L-41863 time of the first prosecution, there is no possibility to be November 29, 1929 the Federal Constitution.
April 22, 1977 convicted for an offense that was then inexistent. (2.) Civil Laws - The Act in question is not an ex post
Where the offenses charged are penalized either by facto law, as it is not penal in its nature. It has long
different sections of the same statute or by different been settled that the phrase 'ex post facto laws' is
People vs. Relova statutes, the important inquiry relates to the identity of not applicable to civil laws, but to penal and
G.R. NO. L-45129 offenses charged: the constitutional protection against criminal laws which punish a party for acts
March 6, 1987 double jeopardy is available only where an identity is antecedently done which were not punishable at all,
shown to exist between the earlier and the subsequent or not punishable to the extend or in the manner
offenses charged. In contrast, where one offense is prescribed. In short ex post facto laws relate to

15

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

penal and criminal proceedings, which impose then this should be sufficient to establish that he or she
punishment or forfeitures, and not to civil is a natural-born citizen.
proceedings, which affect private rights
retrospectively. On another level, the assumption should be that
A law can never be considered ex post facto as long as it foundlings are natural-born unless there is substantial
Nasi-Villar vs. People
operates prospectively since its strictures would cover evidence to the contrary. This is necessarily engendered
G.R. No. 176169
only offenses committed after and not before its by a complete consideration of the whole Constitution,
November 14, 2008
enactment. not just its provisions on citizenship. This includes its
An ex post facto law has been defined as one: mandate of defending the well-being of children,
(1.) Which makes an action done before the passing of guaranteeing equal protection of the law, equal access to
the law and which was innocent when done opportunities for public service, and respecting human
criminal, and punishes such action; rights, as well as its reasons for requiring natural-born
(2.) Which aggravates a crime or makes it greater than it status for select public offices.
was when committed;
(3.) Which changes the punishment and inflicts a Citizenship is a legal device denoting political affiliation.
greater punishment than the law annexed to the It is the "right to have rights." It is one's "personal and
crime when it was committed; permanent membership in a political community. The
(4.) Which alters the legal rules of evidence and receives core of citizenship is the capacity to enjoy political rights,
Salvador vs. Mapa, Jr.
less or different testimony than the law required at that is, the right to participate in government principally
G.R. No. 135080
the time of the commission of the offense in order through the right to vote, the right to hold public office,
November 28, 2007
to convict the defendant. and the right to petition the government for redress of
(5.) That which assumes to regulate civil rights and grievance." Citizenship also entails obligations to the
remedies only but in effect imposes a penalty or political community of which one is part. Citizenship,
deprivation of a right which when done was lawful; therefore, is intimately tied with the notion that loyalty is
or owed to the state, considering the benefits and
(6.) That which deprives a person accused of a crime of protection provided by it. This is particularly so if these
some lawful protection to which he has become benefits and protection have been enjoyed from the
entitled, such as the protection of a former moment of the citizen's birth.
conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of
amnesty. The Constitution sustains a presumption that all
Citizenship foundlings found in the Philippines are born to at least
Poe-Llamanzares vs. Although the Philippines may not be a signatory to two either a Filipino father or a Filipino mother and are thus
COMELEC international treaties, it does not mean that it cannot natural-born, unless there is substantial proof otherwise.
G.R. No. 221697 effectively take into account the generally accepted
March 8, 2016 principles of international law. Concluding that foundlings are not natural-born Filipino
When the names of the parents of a foundling cannot be citizens is tantamount to permanently discriminating
David vs. Senate against our foundling citizens. They can then never be of
discovered despite a diligent search, but sufficient
Electoral Tribunal service to the country in the highest possible capacities.
evidence is presented to sustain a reasonable inference
G.R. No. 221538 It is also tantamount to excluding them from certain
that satisfies the quantum of proof required to conclude
September 30, 2016 means such as professions and state scholarships, which
that at least one or both of his or her parents is Filipino,
will enable the actualization of their aspirations. These

16

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

consequences cannot be tolerated by the Constitution, immigrant of another country during his tenure
not least of all through the present politically charged shall be dealt with by law." It is also in view of this
proceedings, the direct objective of which is merely to that Section 5 (5) similarly bars those who seek or
exclude a singular politician from office. Concluding that occupy public office elsewhere and/or who are
foundlings are not natural-born citizens creates an serving in the armed forces of other countries from
inferior class of citizens who are made to suffer that being appointed or elected to public office in the
inferiority through no fault of their own. Philippines.
Natural-born Filipinos, who have been naturalized Where jurisprudence regarded an illegitimate child as
elsewhere and wish to run for elective public office, must taking after the citizenship of its mother, it did so for the
comply with all of the following requirements: benefit the child. It was to ensure a Filipino nationality
Tecson vs. COMELEC
(1.) First, taking the oath of allegiance to the Republic. for the illegitimate child of an alien father in line with the
G.R. No. 161434
This effects the retention or reacquisition of one's assumption that the mother had custody, would exercise
March 3, 2004
status as a natural-born Filipino. This also enables parental authority and had the duty to support her
the enjoyment of full civil and political rights, illegitimate child. It was to help the child, not to
subject to all attendant liabilities and prejudice or discriminate against him.
responsibilities under existing laws, provided the Co vs. House of Formal election of citizenship applies only to those who
solemnities recited in Section 5 of Republic Act No. Representatives have yet to acquire Philippine citizenship and not to
9225 are satisfied. G.R. Nos. 92191-92 those who are already Filipinos when the time to elect
(2.) Second, compliance with Article V, Section 1 of the July 30, 1991 comes.
1987 Constitution, Republic Act No. 9189, otherwise By being an illegitimate, child of a Filipino mother,
known as the Overseas Absentee Voting Act of respondent automatically became a Filipino upon birth.
2003, and other existing laws. This is to facilitate the Stated differently, she is a Filipino since birth without
exercise of the right of suffrage; that is, to allow for Republic vs. Lim having to elect Filipino citizenship when she reached the
voting in elections. G.R. No. 153883 age of majority.
(3.) Third, making a personal and sworn renunciation of January 13, 2004
any and all foreign citizenship before any public The exercise of the right of suffrage and the participation
officer authorized to administer an oath. This, along in election exercises constitute a positive act of election
with satisfying the other qualification requirements of Philippine citizenship.
under relevant laws, makes one eligible for elective Philippine citizenship can never be treated like a
public office. Third, making a personal and sworn commodity that can be claimed when needed and
renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship In Re: Vicente Ching
suppressed when convenient. One who is privileged to
before any public officer authorized to administer B.M. No. 914
elect Philippine citizenship has only an inchoate right to
an oath. This, along with satisfying the other October 1, 1999
such citizenship. As such, he should avail of the right with
qualification requirements under relevant laws, fervor, enthusiasm and promptitude.
makes one eligible for elective public office. This What we now say is that where, as in petitioners' case,
required sworn renunciation is intended to the election of citizenship has in fact been done and
complement Article XI, Section 18 of the Cabiling vs. Fernandez documented within the constitutional and statutory
Constitution in that "public officers and employees G.R. No. 183133 timeframe, the registration of the documents of election
owe the State and this Constitution allegiance at all July 26, 2010 beyond the frame should be allowed if in the meanwhile
times and any public officer or employee who seeks positive acts of citizenship have publicly, consistently,
to change his citizenship or acquire the status of an and continuously been done. The actual exercise of

17

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

Philippine citizenship, for over half a century by the Qualifications for public office are continuing
herein petitioners, is actual notice to the Philippine requirements and must be possessed not only at the
public which is equivalent to formal registration of the time of appointment or election or assumption of office
election of Philippine citizenship. Frivaldo vs. COMELEC but during the officer's entire tenure. Once any of the
Express renunciation was held to mean a renunciation G.R. No. 87193 required qualifications is lost, his title may be seasonably
Yu vs. Defensor-
that is made known distinctly and explicitly and not left June 23, 1989 challenged. The will of the people as expressed through
Santiago
to inference or implication. Philippine citizenship, it must the ballot cannot cure the vice of ineligibility, especially if
G.R. No. 83882
be stressed, is not a commodity or were to be displayed they mistakenly believed, as in this case, that the
January 24, 1989
when required and suppressed when convenient. candidate was qualified.
The renunciation of foreign citizenship is not a hollow Republic vs. Dela Rosa
The requirements under the naturalization law are
oath that can simply be professed at any time, only to be G.R. No. 104654
jurisdictional in nature
violated the next day. It requires an absolute and June 6, 1994
perpetual renunciation of the foreign citizenship and a Labo vs. COMELEC
Forfeiture of foreign citizenship does not restore
full divestment of all civil and political rights granted by G.R. No. 86564
Philippine citizenship formerly lost.
the foreign country which granted the citizenship. August 1, 1989
The renunciation needed to lose Philippine citizenship
Aznar vs. COMELEC
While the act of using a foreign passport is not one of must be "express", it stands to reason that there can be
G.R. No. 83820
the acts enumerated in Commonwealth Act No. 63 no such loss of Philippine citizenship when there is no
May 25, 1990
constituting renunciation and loss of Philippine renunciation, either "express" or "implied ".
citizenship, it is nevertheless an act which repudiates the In including §5 in Article IV on citizenship, the concern of
very oath of renunciation required for a former Filipino the Constitutional Commission was not with dual citizens
citizen who is also a citizen of another country to be per se but with naturalized citizens who maintain their
qualified to run for a local elective position. allegiance to their countries of origin even after their
Maquiling vs. naturalization. Hence, the phrase "dual citizenship" in
COMELEC Qualifications for public office are continuing R.A. No. 7160, §40(d) and in R.A. No. 7854, §20 must be
G.R. No. 195649 requirements and must be possessed not only at the understood as referring to "dual allegiance."
April 16, 2013 time of appointment or election or assumption of office
but during the officer's entire tenure. Once any of the Consequently, persons with mere dual citizenship do not
required qualifications is lost, his title may be seasonably fall under this disqualification. Unlike those with dual
Mercado vs. Manzano
challenged. The citizenship requirement for elective allegiance, who must, therefore, be subject to strict
G.R. No. 135083
public office is a continuing one. It must be possessed process with respect to the termination of their status,
May 26, 1999
not just at the time of the renunciation of the foreign for candidates with dual citizenship, it should suffice if,
citizenship but continuously. Any act which violates the upon the filing of their certificates of candidacy, they
oath of renunciation opens the citizenship issue to elect Philippine citizenship to terminate their status as
attack. persons with dual citizenship considering that their
condition is the unavoidable consequence of conflicting
Citizenship is not a matter of convenience. It is a badge laws of different states.
of identity that comes with attendant civil and political
rights accorded by the state to its citizens. It likewise As Joaquin G. Bernas, one of the most perceptive
demands the concomitant duty to maintain allegiance to members of the Constitutional Commission, pointed out:
one's flag and country. "Dual citizenship is just a reality imposed on us because

18

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

we have no control of the laws on citizenship of other October 4, 1971 married an alien who is subsequently naturalized here
countries. We recognize a child of a Filipino mother. But follows the Philippine citizenship of her husband the
whether or not she is considered a citizen of another moment he takes his oath as Filipino citizens, provided
country is something completely beyond our control." that she does not suffer from any of the disqualifications
under said Section 4.
By electing Philippine citizenship, such candidates at the
same time forswear allegiance to the other country of The Constitution itself recognizes as Philippine citizens
which they are also citizens and thereby terminate their "Those who are naturalized in accordance with law".
status as dual citizens. It may be that, from the point of Citizens by naturalization, under this provision, include
view of the foreign state and of its laws, such an not only those who are naturalized in accordance with
individual has not effectively renounced his foreign legal proceedings for the acquisition of citizenship, but
citizenship. also those who acquire citizenship by "derivative
Repatriation, on the other hand, may be had under naturalization" or by operation of law, as, for example,
various statutes by those who lost their citizenship due the "naturalization" of an alien wife through the
to: naturalization of her husband, or by marriage of an alien
(1.) Desertion of the armed forces; woman to a citizen.
(2.) Service in the armed forces of the allied forces in
World War II; The legislature could not have intended that an alien wife
(3.) Service in the Armed Forces of the United States at should not be deemed a Philippine citizen unless and
any other time; until she proves that she might herself be lawfully
(4.) Marriage of a Filipino woman to an alien; and naturalized. Far from it, the law states in plain terms that
(5.) Political and economic necessity. she shall be deemed a citizen of the Philippines if she is
one "who might herself be lawfully naturalized." The
Bengzon III vs. HRET As distinguished from the lengthy process of proviso that she must be one "who might herself be
G.R. No. 142840 naturalization, repatriation simply consists of the taking lawfully naturalized" is not a condition precedent to the
May 7, 2001 of an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the vesting or acquisition of citizenship; it is only a condition
Philippines and registering said oath in the Local Civil or a state of fact necessary to establish her citizenship as
Registry of the place where the person concerned resides a factum probandum. The word "might," as used in that
or last resided. phrase, precisely implies that at the time of her marriage
to Philippine citizen, the alien woman "had the power" to
Moreover, repatriation results in the recovery of the become such a citizen herself under the laws then in
original nationality. This means that a naturalized Filipino force.
who lost his citizenship will be restored to his prior status
as a naturalized Filipino citizen. On the other hand, if he Everytime the citizenship of a person is material or
was originally a natural-born citizen before he lost his indispensable in a judicial or administrative case,
Philippine citizenship, he will be restored to his former whatever the corresponding court or administrative
status as a natural-born Filipino. authority decides therein as to such citizenship is
Mo Ya Lim Yao vs. An alien woman marrying a Filipino, native-born or generally not considered as res judicata, hence it has to
Commission of naturalized, becomes ipso facto a Filipina provided she is be threshed out again and again as the occasion may
Immigration not disqualified to be a citizen of the Philippines under demand.
G.R. No. L-21289 Section 4 of the same law. Likewise, an alien woman

19

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

Regarding the steps that should be taken by an alien promote the laudable purposes for which they exist, but
woman married to a Filipino citizen in order to acquire only when such assistance may be reasonably incidental
Philippine citizenship, the procedure followed in the to the fulfillment of their judicial duties.
Bureau of Immigration is as follows: The alien woman (1.) The separation of powers is a fundamental principle
must file a petition for the cancellation of her alien in our system of government. It obtains not through
certificate of registration alleging, among other things, express provision but by actual division in
that she is married to a Filipino citizen and that she is not our Constitution. Each department of the
disqualified from acquiring her husband's citizenship government has exclusive cognizance of matters
pursuant to Section 4 of Commonwealth Act No. 473, as within its jurisdiction, and is supreme within its own
amended. Upon the filing of the said petition, which sphere.
should be accompanied or supported by the joint (2.) It does not follow from the fact that the three powers
affidavit of the petitioner and her Filipino husband to the are to be kept separate and distinct that the
effect that the petitioner does not belong to any of the Constitution intended them to be absolutely
groups disqualified by the cited Section from becoming unrestrained and independent of each other.
naturalized Filipino citizen, the Bureau of Immigration The Constitution has provided for an elaborate
conducts an investigation and thereafter promulgates its system of checks and balances to secure
order or decision granting or denying the petition. coordination in the workings of various departments
In addition to taking the Oath of Allegiance to the of government.
Altajeros vs. COMELEC Republic of the Philippines, the registration of the (3.) The Constitution has blocked out with deft strokes
G.R. No. 163256 Certificate of Repatriation in the proper civil registry and and in bold lines, allotment of power to the
November 10, 2004 the Bureau of Immigration is a prerequisite in effecting Angara vs. Electoral executive, the legislative and the judicial
the repatriation of a citizen. Commission departments of the government. The overlapping
Separation of Powers G.R. No. 45081 and interlacing of functions and duties between the
Under the Constitution, the members of the Supreme July 15, 1936 several departments, however, sometimes makes it
Court and other courts established by law shall not be hard to say just where the one leaves off and the
designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or other begins. In times of social disquietude or
administrative functions (Section 12, Art. VIII, political excitement, the great landmarks of
Constitution). Considering that membership of Judge the Constitution are apt to be forgotten or marred, if
Manzano in the Ilocos Norte Provincial Committee on not entirely obliterated. In cases of conflict, the
Justice, which discharges administrative functions, will be judicial department is the only constitutional organ
in violation of the Constitution, the Court is constrained which can be called upon to determine the proper
In Re: Manzano
to deny his request. This declaration does not mean that allocation of powers between the several
A.M. No. 88-7-1861-
RTC Judges should adopt an attitude of monastic departments and among the integral or constituent
RTC. October 5, 1988
insensibility or unbecoming indifference to Province/City units thereof.
Committee on Justice. As incumbent RTC Judges, they (4.) The Constitution is a definition of the powers of
form part of the structure of government. Their integrity government. Who is to determine the nature, scope
and performance in the adjudication of cases contribute and extent of such powers? The Constitution itself
to the solidity of such structure. As public officials, they has provided for the instrumentality of the judiciary
are trustees of an orderly society. Even as non-members as the rational way. And when the judiciary mediates
of Provincial/City Committees on Justice, RTC judges to allocate constitutional boundaries, it does not
should render assistance to said Committees to help assert any superiority over the other departments; it

20

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

does not in reality nullify or invalidate an act of the province of the judicial department to pass upon the
Legislature, but only asserts the solemn and sacred validity of the proceedings in connection therewith.
obligation assigned to it by the Constitution to Sanidad vs. COMELEC Under the 1973 Constitution, which was the Constitution
determine conflicting claims of authority under the G.R. No. L-44640 at the time, the presidential exercise of legislative powers
Constitution and to establish for the parties in an October 12, 1976 in times of martial law is now a conceded valid act.
actual controversy the rights which that instrument The term “political question” refers "to those questions
secures and guarantees to them. This is in truth all which, under the Constitution, are to be decided by the
that is involved in what is termed "judicial Daza vs. Singson people in their sovereign capacity, or in regard to which
supremacy" which properly is the power of judicial G.R. No. 86344 full discretionary authority has been delegated to the
review under the Constitution. December 21, 1989 Legislature or executive branch of the Government." It is
(5.) This power of judicial review is limited to actual cases concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not
and controversies to be exercised after full legality, of a particular measure.
opportunity of argument by the parties, and limited There are two (2) fundamental tests to ensure that the
further to the constitutional question raised or the legislative guidelines for delegated rule-making are
very lis mota presented. Any attempt at abstraction indeed adequate.
could only lead to dialectics and barren legal
questions and to sterile conclusions unrelated to The first test is called the "completeness test." Case law
actualities. Narrowed as its function is in this manner, states that a law is complete when it sets forth therein
the judiciary does not pass upon questions of the policy to be executed, carried out, or implemented by
wisdom, justice or expediency of legislation. Belgica vs. Ochoa
the delegate. On the other hand, the second test is called
G.R. No. 208566
"Political question" – Connotes question of policy. It the "sufficient standard test." Jurisprudence holds that a
November 19, 2013
refers to those questions which under the Constitution, law lays down a sufficient standard when it provides
are to be decided by the people in their sovereign adequate guidelines or limitations in the law to map out
capacity; or in regard to which full discretionary authority the boundaries of the delegate's authority and prevent
has been delegated to the legislative or executive branch the delegation from running riot. To be sufficient, the
of the government. It is concerned with issues dependent standard must specify the limits of the delegate's
upon the wisdom, not legality, of a particular measure. authority, announce the legislative policy, and identify
Casibang vs. Aquino The term has been made applicable to controversies the conditions under which it is to be implemented.
G.R. No. L-38025 clearly non-judicial and therefore beyond its jurisdiction COMELEC’s Jurisdiction: covers the matter of petitioner's
August 20, 1979 or to an issue involved in a case appropriately subject to certificate of candidacy, and its due course or its
its cognizance, as to which there has been a prior cancellation, which are the pivotal conclusions that
legislative or executive determination to which deference determines who can be legally proclaimed. The matter
must be paid. Or in other words, a question decided by Ongsiako-Reyes vs. can go to the Supreme Court but not as a continuation
the people in their sovereign capacity or in regard to COMELEC of the proceedings in the COMELEC, which has in fact
which full discretionary authority is vested either in the G.R. No. 207264 ended, but on an original action before the Court
President or Congress. It is thus beyond the competence October 22, 2013 grounded on more than mere error of judgment but on
of the judiciary to pass upon. error of jurisdiction for grave abuse of discretion. At and
The Senate is not clothed with "full discretionary after the COMELEC En Banc decision, there is no longer
Tanada vs. Cuenco
authority". The exercise of its power thereon is subject to any certificate cancellation matter than can go to the
G.R. No. L10520
constitutional limitations which are claimed to be HRET.
February 28, 1957
mandatory in nature. It is clearly within the legitimate

21

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

HRET’s Jurisdiction: In that sense, the HRET's (4.) Delegation to local governments; and
constitutional authority opens, over the qualification of (5.) Delegation to administrative bodies.
its MEMBER, who becomes so only upon a duly and
legally based proclamation, the first and unavoidable What are the tests in determining whether delegation of
step towards such membership. The HRET jurisdiction powers is valid or not?
over the qualification of the Member of the House of (1.) The completeness test – The law must be complete
Representatives is original and exclusive, and as such, in all its terms and conditions when it leaves the
proceeds de novo unhampered by the proceedings in legislature such that when it reaches the delegate the
the COMELEC which, as just stated has been terminated. only thing, he will have to do is enforce it
Delegation of Powers (2.) The sufficient standard test – There must be
There is explicit constitutional permission to Congress to adequate guidelines or stations in the law to map out
authorize the President "subject to such limitations and the boundaries of the delegate's authority and
restrictions as Congress may impose" to fix "within prevent the delegation from running riot.
Garcia vs. Executive specific limits" "tariff rates and other duties or imposts".
Secretary Section 401 of the Tariff and Customs Code establishes The legislature may delegate to executive officers or
G.R. No. 101273 general standards with which the exercise of the bodies the power to determine certain facts or
July 3, 1992 authority delegated by that provision to the President conditions, or the happening of contingencies, on which
must be consistent: that authority must be exercised in the operation of a statute is, by its terms, made to
"the interest of national economy, general welfare and/or depend, but the legislature must prescribe sufficient
national security." standards, policies or limitations on their authority. While
The powers which Congress is prohibited from delegating the power to tax cannot be delegated to executive
are those which are strictly, or inherently and exclusively, agencies, details as to the enforcement and
legislative. Purely legislative power, which can never be administration of an exercise of such power may be left
delegated, has been described as the authority to make a to them, including the power to determine the existence
complete law — complete as to the time when it shall take of facts on which its operation depends.
effect and as to whom it shall be applicable — and to Araneta vs. Dinglasan The delegation of emergency powers to the president
determine the expediency of its enactment. Thus, the rule G.R. No. L-2044 must only be temporary. If it is not, it cannot be said to
is that in order that a court may be justified in holding a August 26, 1949 be an emergency.
statute unconstitutional as a delegation of legislative The emergency expressly is one "in time of war," as
ABAKADA Guro vs.
power, it must appear that the power involved is purely distinguished from "other national emergency" that may
Ermita
legislative in nature — that is, one appertaining exclusively arise as an after-effect of war or from natural causes such
G.R. No. 168056
to the legislative department. It is the nature of the power, as widespread earthquakes, typhoons, floods, and the
September 1, 2006
and not the liability of its use or the manner of its exercise, like. The Congress is available for necessary special
which determines the validity of its delegation. Rodriguez vs. Gella sessions, and it cannot let the people down without
G.R. No. L-6266 somehow being answerable thereover. Shelter may not
However, there are recognized limitations or exceptions: February 2, 1953 be sought in the proposition that the President should
(1.) Delegation of tariff powers to the President under be allowed to exercise emergency powers for the sake of
Section 28 (2) of Article VI of the Constitution; speed and expediency in the interest and for the welfare
(2.) Delegation of emergency powers to the President of the people, because we have the Constitution,
under Section 23 (2) of Article VI of the Constitution; designed to establish a government under a regime of
(3.) Delegation to the people at large; justice, liberty and democracy.

22

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

As a rule, an act of the legislature is incomplete and The maxim of delegatus non potest delegare or delegati
hence invalid if it does not lay down any rule or definite potestas non potest delegare has been made to adapt
standard by which the administrative officer or board itself to the complexities of modern government, giving
may be guided in the exercise of the discretionary rise to the adoption, within certain limits, of the principle
powers delegated to it. In the case at bar, we do not find of “subordinate legislation”. Accordingly, with the
any and none has been pointed to us by the growing complexity of modern life, the multiplication of
respondents. The probation Act does not fix and impose the subjects of governmental regulation, and the
upon the provincial boards any standard or guide in the increased difficulty of administering the laws, there is a
exercise of their discretionary power. What is granted, if constantly growing tendency toward the delegation of
People vs. Vera
we may use the language of Justice Cardozo in the Tablarin vs. Guttierez greater power by the legislature, and toward the
G.R. No. 45685.
recent case of Schecter, supra, is a "roving commission" G.R. No. 78164 approval of the practice by the courts."
November 16, 1937
which enables the provincial boards to exercise arbitrary July 31, 1987
discretion. In other words, the provincial boards of the The standards set for subordinate legislation in the
various provinces are to determine for themselves, exercise of rulemaking authority by an administrative
whether the Probation Law shall apply to their provinces agency like the Board of Medical Education are
or not at all. If a provincial board does not wish to have necessarily broad and highly abstract — "The standard
the Act applied in its province, all that it has to do is to may be either expressed or implied. If the former, the
decline to appropriate the needed amount for the salary non-delegation objection is easily met. The standard
of a probation officer. This, to our minds, is a virtual though does not have to be spelled out specifically. It
surrender of legislative power to the provincial boards. could be implied from the policy and purpose of the act
With the proliferation of specialized activities and their considered as a whole."
attendant peculiar problems, the national legislature has The creation of municipalities, is not an administrative
Pelaez vs. Auditor
found it more and more necessary to entrust to function, but one which is essentially and eminently
General
administrative agencies the authority to issue rules to legislative in character. The question whether or not
G.R. No. L-23825
carry out the general provisions of the statute. This is "public interest" demands the exercise of such power is
December 24, 1965
Eastern Shipping Lines called the "power of subordinate legislation." With this not one of fact. It is "purely a legislative question".
vs. POEA power, administrative bodies may implement the broad The Legislative Department
G.R. No. L-76633 policies laid down in a statute by "filling in" the details Section 3
October 18, 1988 which the Congress may not have the opportunity or The Congress cannot validly amend or otherwise modify
competence to provide. This is effected by their the qualification standards set by the Constitution, as it
promulgation of what are known as supplementary Pimentel Jr vs. cannot disregard, evade, or weaken the force of a
regulations, such as the implementing rules issued by the COMELEC constitutional mandate, alter, or enlarge the Constitution.
Department of Labor on the new Labor Code. These G.R. No. 161658 Thus, legislative power remains limited in the sense that
regulations have the force and effect of law. November 3, 2008 it is subject to substantive and constitutional limitations
United States vs. Ang which circumscribe both the exercise of the power itself
The Legislature cannot delegate legislative power to
Tang Ho and the allowable subjects of legislation.
enact any law.
43 Phil. 1 (1922) Section 5
There is an invalid delegation of legislative powers where Reapportionment of legislative districts may be made
Ynot vs. IAC Tobias vs. Abalos
such power was granted with unlimited discretion to the through a special law, such as in the charter of a new city.
G.R. No. 78164 G.R. No. 114783
authorities to distribute the property confiscated to The Constitution clearly provides that the House of
July 31, 1987 December 8, 1994
whom it may see fit. Representatives shall be composed of not more than 250

23

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

members, "unless otherwise provided by law." The October 6, 2000
inescapable import of the latter clause is that the present BANAT vs. COMELEC
Basahin niyo yung #33 ng Ka-poli notes. Kasi buong held
composition of Congress may be increased, if Congress G.R. No. 179271
yung doctrine.
itself so mandates through a legislative enactment. April 21, 2009
The Constitution did not preclude Congress from Ang Bagong Bayani vs. Political Parties may Participate, but must comply with
increasing its membership by passing a law, other than a COMELEC the declared statutory policy of enabling "Filipino citizens
general reapportionment law. To hold that G.R. No. 147589 belonging to marginalized and underrepresented sectors
reapportionment can only be made through a general June 26, 2001 to be elected to the House of Representatives."
apportionment law, with a review of all the legislative Thus, the party-list system is composed of three different
districts allotted to each local government unit groups:
Mariano Jr. vs. nationwide, would create an inequitable situation where (1) national parties or organizations;
COMELEC a new city or province created by Congress will be (2) regional parties or organizations; and
G.R. No. 118577 denied legislative representation for an indeterminate (3) sectoral parties or organizations.
March 7, 1995 period of time. That intolerable situation will deprive the
people of a new city or province a particle of their New Guidelines in the Party-List System:
sovereignty. 1. Three different groups may participate in the party-
list system: (1) national parties or organizations, (2)
Sovereignty cannot admit of any kind of subtraction. It is regional parties or organizations, and (3) sectoral
indivisible. It must be forever whole or it is not parties or organizations.
sovereignty. 2. National parties or organizations and regional
Montejo vs. COMELEC Reapportionment of legislative districts lies within the parties or organizations do not need to organize
G.R. No. 118702 jurisdiction of the Congress and thus, COMELEC has no along sectoral lines and do not need to represent
March 16, 1995 jurisdiction to transfer one legislative district to another. any "marginalized and underrepresented" sector.
Atong Paglaum vs.
250,000 minimum population that must compose a 3. Political parties can participate in party-list elections
COMELEC
legislative district. provided they register under the party-list system
G.R. No. 203766
and do not field candidates in legislative district
April 2, 2013
The second sentence of Section 5 (3), Article VI of the elections. A political party, whether major or not,
Constitution, succinctly provides: "Each city with a that fields candidates in legislative district elections
population of at least two hundred fifty thousand, or can participate in party-list elections only through
Aquino vs. COMELEC each province, shall have at least one representative." its sectoral wing that can separately register under
G.R> No. 189793 the party-list system. The sectoral wing is by itself
April 7, 2010 The provision draws a plain and clear distinction between an independent sectoral party, and is linked to a
the entitlement of a city to a district on one hand, and political party through a coalition.
the entitlement of a province to a district on the other. 4. Sectoral parties or organizations may either be
For while a province is entitled to at least a "marginalized and underrepresented" or lacking in
representative, with nothing mentioned about "well-defined political constituencies." It is enough
population, a city must first meet a population minimum that their principal advocacy pertains to the special
of 250,000 in order to be similarly entitled. interest and concerns of their sector. The sectors
Veterans Federation that are "marginalized and underrepresented"
The 20% allocation in the House for Party-List Lawmakers
Party vs. COMELEC include labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor,
is a mere ceiling and is not mandatory.
G.R. No. 136781 indigenous cultural communities, handicapped,

24

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

veterans, and overseas workers. The sectors that (2.) Those who shall be elected through the party-
lack "well-defined political constituencies" include list system of registered national, regional, and
professionals, the elderly, women, and the youth. sectoral parties or organizations.
5. A majority of the members of sectoral parties or
organizations that represent the "marginalized and This means that, from the Constitution's point of view, it
underrepresented" must belong to the is the party-list representatives who are "elected" into
"marginalized and underrepresented" sector they office, not their parties or organizations.
represent. Similarly, a majority of the members of (1.) Section 6 (8) of RA 7941 provides for two
sectoral parties or organizations that lack "well- separate grounds for delisting; these grounds
defined political constituencies" must belong to the cannot be mixed or combined to support
sector they represent. The nominees of sectoral delisting; and
parties or organizations that represent the (2.) The disqualification for failure to garner 2%
"marginalized and underrepresented," or that party-list votes in two preceding elections
Phil. Guardians vs.
represent those who lack "well-defined political should now be understood, in light of the
COMELEC
constituencies," either must belong to their Banat ruling, to mean failure to qualify for a
G.R. No. 190529
respective sectors, or must have a track record of party-list seat in two preceding elections for
April 29, 2010
advocacy for their respective sectors. The nominees the constituency in which it has registered.
of national and regional parties or organizations
must be bona-fide members of such parties or This, we declare, is how Section 6 (8) of RA 7941 should
organizations. be understood and applied. We do so under our
6. National, regional, and sectoral parties or authority to state what the law is, and as an exception to
organizations shall not be disqualified if some of the application of the principle of stare decisis.
their nominees are disqualified, provided that they The COMELEC cannot withhold the list of nominees.
have at least one nominee who remains qualified.
The COMELEC cannot disregard an application for Party The last sentence of Section 7 of R.A. 7941 reading: "The
List on the mere ground of personal moral and religious names of the party-list nominees shall not be shown on
belief. Laws of general application should apply with the certified list" is certainly not a justifying card for
equal force to LGBTs, and they deserve to participate in COMELEC to deny the requested disclosure. The
Ang Ladlad vs. the party-list system on the same basis as other prohibition imposed by COMELEC limited in scope and
COMELEC marginalized and under-represented sectors. duration extends only to the certified list which the same
Bantay Republic Act
G.R. No. 190582 Discrimination based on sexual orientation is not provision requires to be posted in the polling places on
vs. COMELEC
April 8, 2010 tolerated—not by our own laws nor by any international election day. To stretch the coverage of the prohibition
G.R. No. 177271
laws to which we adhere. moral disapproval, without to the absolute is to read into the law something that is
May 4, 2007
more, is not a sufficient governmental interest to justify not intended.
exclusion of homosexuals from participation in the party-
list system. COMELEC obviously misread the limited non-disclosure
The members of the House of Representatives are of two aspect of the provision as an absolute bar to public
Palparan vs. HRET
kinds: disclosure before the May 2007 elections. The
G.R. No. 189506
(1.) Members who shall be elected from legislative interpretation thus given by the Comelec virtually tacks
February 11, 2010
districts; and an unconstitutional dimension on the last sentence of
Section 7 of R.A. No. 7941.

25

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

Section 6 Marriage is not a cause for loss of domicile.
The concept of domicile to mean an individual's While property ownership is not and should never be an
"permanent home," "a place to which, whenever absent indicia of the right to vote or to be voted upon, the
for business or for pleasure, one intends to return, and absence of clear and positive proof showing a successful
depends on facts and circumstances in the sense that they Aquino vs. COMELEC abandonment of domicile under the conditions stated
disclose intent." Based on the foregoing, domicile includes G.R. No. 120265 above, the lack of identification — sentimental, actual or
the twin elements of "the fact of residing or physical September 18, 1995 otherwise — with the area, and the suspicious
presence in a fixed place" and animus manendi, or the circumstances under which the lease agreement belie the
intention of returning there permanently. claim of residency for the period required by the
Constitution.
Residence, in its ordinary conception, implies the factual Entering a profession open only to Filipinos, serving in
relationship of an individual to a certain place. It is the Co vs. HRET public office where citizenship is a qualification, voting
physical presence of a person in a given area, community G.R. Nos. 92191-92 during election time, running for public office, and other
or country. July 30, 1991 categorical acts of similar nature are themselves formal
manifestations of choice for these persons.
The essential distinction between residence and domicile Lack of the citizenship requirement is not a continuing
in law is that residence involves the intent to leave when disability or disqualification to run for and hold public
the purpose for which the resident has taken up his abode office. The citizenship requirement is to be possessed by
ends. One may seek a place for purposes such as pleasure, an elective official at the latest as of the time he is
Romualdez-Marcos vs. business, or health. If a person's intent be to remain, it proclaimed and at the start of the term of office to which
COMELEC becomes his domicile; if his intent is to leave as soon as he has been elected. An official begins to govern or to
G.R. No. 119976 his purpose is established it is residence. It is thus, quite discharge his functions only upon his proclamation and on
September 18, 1995 perfectly normal for an individual to have different the day the law mandates his term of office to begin. The
residences in various places. However, a person can only law intended CITIZENSHIP to be a qualification distinct
have a single domicile, unless, for various reasons, he from being a VOTER, even if being a voter presumes being
successfully abandons his domicile in favor of another a citizen first. It also stands to reason that the voter
domicile of choice. Frivaldo vs. COMELEC requirement was included as another qualification (aside
G.R. No. 120295 from “citizenship”), not to reiterate the need for nationality
Residence for election purposes is used synonymously June 28, 1996 but to require that the official be registered as a voter IN
with domicile. THE AREA OR TERRITORY he seeks to govern.

A minor follows the domicile of his parents. As domicile, It should be emphasized that the Local Government Code
once acquired is retained until a new one is gained. requires an elective official to be a registered voter. It does
not require him to vote actually. Hence, registration — not
Domicile of origin is not easily lost. To successfully effect the actual voting — is the core of this “qualification”.
a change of domicile, one must demonstrate:
(1.) An actual removal or an actual change of domicile; In other words, the law’s purpose in this second
(2.) A bona fide intention of abandoning the former requirement is to ensure that the prospective official is
place of residence and establishing a new one; and actually registered in the area he seeks to govern — and
(3.) Acts which correspond with the purpose. not anywhere else.

26

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

The rule, therefore, is: the ineligibility of a candidate While parliamentary immunity guarantees the legislator
receiving majority votes does not entitle the eligible complete freedom of expression without fear of being
candidate receiving the next highest number of votes to made responsible in criminal or civil actions before the
be declared elected. A minority or defeated candidate courts or any other forum outside of the Congressional
cannot be deemed elected to the office.” Hall.
Section 7 Osmena vs. Pendatun
The term of office prescribed by the Constitution may not G.R. No. L-17144 However, it does not protect him from responsibility
be extended or shortened by the legislature, but the October 28, 1960 before the legislative body itself whenever his words and
Dimaporo vs. Mitra period during which an officer actually holds the office conduct are considered by the latter disorderly or
G.R. No. 96859 (tenure), may be affected by circumstances within or unbecoming a member thereof. For unparliamentary
October 15, 1991 beyond the power of said officer. Tenure may be shorter conduct, members of Congress can be censured,
than the term or it may not exist at all. These situations committed to prison, suspended, even expelled by the
will not change the duration of the term of office. votes of their colleagues.
Section 11 This legislative privilege is founded upon long experience
"Speech or debate therein" refers to utterances made by and arises as a means of perpetuating inviolate the
Congressmen in the performance of their official functioning process of the legislative department. Without
functions, such as speeches delivered, statements made, parliamentary immunity, parliament, or its equivalent,
or votes cast in the halls of Congress, while the same is in would degenerate into a polite and ineffective debating
session as well as bills introduced in Congress, whether Pobre vs. Defensor- forum.
the same is in session or not, and other acts performed by Santiago
Congressmen, either in Congress or outside the premises A.C. No. 7399 Legislators are immune from deterrents to the uninhibited
housing its offices, in the official discharge of their duties August 25, 2009 discharge of their legislative duties, not for their private
as members of Congress and of Congressional indulgence, but for the public good. The privilege would
Committees duly authorized to perform its functions as be of little value if they could be subjected to the cost and
such at the time of the performance of the acts in inconvenience and distractions of a trial upon a conclusion
question. of the pleader, or to the hazard of a judgment against
Jimenez vs.
them based upon a judge's speculation as to the motives.
Cabangbang
The publication involved in this case does not belong to Section 13
G.R. No. 15905
this category. According to the complaint herein, it was an When a public official voluntarily accepts an appointment
August 3, 1966
open letter to the President of the Philippines, dated to an office newly created or reorganized by law, which
November 14, 1958, when Congress presumably was not new office is incompatible with the one formerly occupied
in session, and defendant caused said letter to be by him, qualifies for the discharge of the functions thereof
published in several newspapers of general circulation in by taking the necessary oath, and enters into the
Zandueta vs. Dela
the Philippines, on or about said date. performance of his duties by executing acts inherent in
Costa
said newly created or reorganized office and receiving the
G.R. No. 46267
It is obvious that, in thus causing the communication to corresponding salary, he will be considered to have
November 28, 1938
be so published, he was not performing his official duty, abandoned the office he was occupying by virtue of his
either as a member of Congress or as officer of any former appointment, and he cannot question the
Committee thereof. Hence, contrary to the finding made constitutionality of the law by virtue of which he was last
by His Honor, the trial Judge, said communication is not appointed. He is excepted from said rule only when his
absolutely privileged. non-acceptance of the new appointment may affect public

27

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

interest or when he is compelled to accept it by reason of action (taken by a deliberative body) when the requisite
legal exigencies. number of members have agreed to a particular measure.
Section 14
All an Assemblyman need do, if he wants to influence an The court has no more power to look into the internal
administrative body is to acquire a minimal participation proceedings of a House than members of that House have
Puyat vs. De Guzman in the "interest" of the client and then "intervene" in the to look over our shoulders, as long as no violation of
G.R. No. 51122 proceedings. That which the Constitution directly constitutional provisions is shown. The courts cannot
March 25, 1982 prohibits may not be done by indirection or by a general declare an act of the legislature void on account merely of
legislative act which is intended to accomplish the objects noncompliance with rules of procedure made by itself, it
specifically or impliedly prohibited. follows that such a case does not present a situation in
Section 16 which a branch of the government has "gone beyond the
In effect, while the Constitution mandates that the constitutional limits of its jurisdiction" so as to call for the
President of the Senate must be elected by a number exercise of our Art. VIII, §1 power.
constituting more than one half of all the members Osmena vs. Pendatun
Congress has the inherent legislative prerogative of
thereof (majority), it does not provide that the members G.R. No. L-17144
suspension which the Constitution did not impair.
who will not vote for him shall ipso facto constitute the October 28, 1960
"minority", who could thereby elect the minority leader. The order of suspension prescribed by Republic Act No.
3019 is distinct from the power of Congress to discipline
While the Constitution is explicit on the manner of its own ranks under the Constitution which provides that
Santiago vs. Guingona
electing a Senate President and a House Speaker, it is, each house may determine the rules of its proceedings,
Jr.
however, dead silent on the manner of selecting the other punish its Members for disorderly behavior, and, with the
G.R. No. 134577
officers in both chambers of Congress. concurrence of two-thirds of all its Members, suspend or
November 18, 1998
expel a Member.
All that the Charter says is that "[e]ach House shall choose
such other officers as it may deem necessary." To our The suspension contemplated in the above constitutional
mind, the method of choosing who will be such other provision is a punitive measure that is imposed upon
officers is merely a derivative of the exercise of the determination by the Senate or the House of
Santiago vs.
prerogative conferred by the aforequoted constitutional Representatives, as the case may be, upon an erring
Sandiganbayan
provision. Therefore, such method must be prescribed by member.
G.R. No. 128055
the Senate itself, not by this Court.
April 18, 2001
When the Constitution declares that a majority of "each The Sandiganbayan merely adhered to the clear and
House" shall constitute a quorum, "the House" does not unequivocal mandate of the law, as well as the
Avelino vs. Cuenco mean "all" the members. Even a majority of all the jurisprudence in which the Court has, more than once,
G.R. No. L-2821 members constitute "the House". There is a difference upheld Sandiganbayan's authority to decree the
March 4, 1997 between a majority of "all the members of the House" and suspension of public officials and employees indicted
a majority of "the House", the latter requiring less number before it.
than the first.
Parliamentary rules are merely procedural, and with their The use of the word "office" would indicate that it applies
Arroyo vs. De Venecia to any office which the officer charged may be holding,
observance, the courts have no concern. They may be
G.R. No. 127255 and not only the particular office under which he stands
waived or disregarded by the legislative body. Mere failure
August 14, 1997 accused. Therefore, Republic Act No. 3019 does not
to conform to parliamentary usage will not invalidate the

28

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

exclude from its coverage the members of Congress and independent department of the Government, and to
that, therefore, the Sandiganbayan did not err in thus interfere with the legitimate powers and functions of the
decreeing the assailed preventive suspension order. Legislature.
Petitioner’s invocation of Section 16(3), Article VI of the If there has been any mistake in the printing of the bill
Casco vs. Gimenez
Constitution which deals with the power of each House before it was certified by the officers of Congress and
G.R. No. L-17931
of Congress inter alias to ‘punish its members of approved by the Executive, the remedy is by amendment
February 28, 1963
Congress for disorderly behavior’ and suspend or expel a or curative legislation, not by judicial decree.
Paredes Jr. vs.
member by a vote of two-thirds of the members subject The Judiciary is separate and distinct from the Legislative
Sandiganbayan
to the qualification that the penalty of the suspension Philja vs. Prado department. Although they may be co-existing, the
G.R. No. 118354
spoken of in Sec. 13 of RA 3019 which is not penalty by a G.R. No. 105371 principle of separation of powers still reiterates courtesy;
August 8, 1995
preliminary preventive measure presenting from the fact November 11, 1993 thus, the Judiciary may not look into the veracity of the
that the latter is not being imposed on the petitioner for journals of the Legislature.
misbehavior as a Member of the House of Section 17
Representative. Where the court has jurisdiction over the subject matter,
The doctrine of separation of powers does not exclude the its orders upon all questions pertaining to the cause are
members of Congress from the mandate of RA 3019. orders within its jurisdiction, and however erroneous they
may be, they cannot be corrected by certiorari.
The order of suspension prescribed by Republic Act 3019
is distinct from the power of Congress to discipline its own However, the judicial review of decisions or final
ranks under the Constitution. The suspension resolutions of the House Electoral Tribunal is possible only
contemplated in the above constitutional provision is a Robles vs. HRET in the exercise of this Court's so-called extraordinary
punitive measure that is imposed upon a determination G.R. No. 86647 jurisdiction, upon a determination that the tribunal's
De Venecia vs. by the Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case February 5, 1990 decision or resolution was rendered without or in excess
Sandiganbayan may be, upon an erring member. Its purpose is to prevent of its jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion or,
G.R. No. 130240 the accused public officer from frustrating his prosecution upon a clear showing of such arbitrary and improvident
February 5, 2002 by influencing witnesses or tampering with documentary use by the Tribunal of its power as constitutes a denial of
evidence and from committing further acts of malfeasance due process of law, or upon a demonstration of a very
while in office. clear unmitigated error, manifestly constituting such a
grave abuse of discretion that there has to be a remedy
While, the suspension or expulsion contemplated in the for such abuse.
Constitution is a House-imposed sanction against its The Electoral Commission is an independent
members. It is, therefore, a penalty for disorderly behavior constitutional creation with specific powers and functions
to enforce discipline, maintain order in its proceedings, or to execute and perform, closer for purposes of
vindicate its honor and integrity. classification to the legislative than to any of the other
Angara vs. Electoral
From their very nature and object, the records of the two departments of the government. It is the sole judge
Commission
Legislature are as important as those of the Judiciary. To of all contests relating to the election, returns and
G.R. No. 45081
U.S. vs. Pons inquire into the veracity of the journals of the Philippine qualifications of members of the National Assembly. The
July 15, 1936
G.R. No. 11530 Legislature, when they are, as we have said, clear and present Constitution has transferred all the powers
August 12, 1916 explicit, would be to violate both the letter and the spirit previously exercised by the legislature with respect to
of the organic laws by which the Philippine Government contests relating to the election, returns and
was brought into existence, to invade a coordinate and qualifications of its members, to the Electoral

29

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

Commission. Such transfer of power from the legislature Pre-proclamation cases are not allowed in elections for
to the Electoral Commission was full, clear and complete, President, Vice-President, Senator and Member of the
and carried with-it ex necesitate rei the implied power House of Representatives.'' What is allowed is the
inter alia to prescribe the rules and regulations as to the correction of "manifest errors in the certificate of canvass
time and manner of filing protests. The avowed purpose or election returns."
in creating the Electoral Commission was to have an
independent constitutional organ pass upon all contests To be manifest, the errors must appear on the face of the
Chavez vs. COMELEC
relating to the election, returns and qualifications of certificates of canvass or election returns sought to be
211 SCRAR 315
members of the National Assembly, devoid of partisan corrected and/or objections thereto must have been made
1992
influence or consideration, which object would be before the board of canvassers and specifically noted in
frustrated if the National Assembly were to retain the the minutes of their respective proceedings.
power to prescribe rules and regulations regarding the
manner of conducting said contests. It is the Senate Electoral Tribunal which has exclusive
The 1987 Constitution intended to restore fully to jurisdiction to act on the complaint of petitioner involving,
the Electoral Tribunals exclusive jurisdiction over all as it does, contest relating to the election of a member of
contests relating to the election, returns and the Senate.
qualifications of its Members, consonant with the return The Constitution expressly grants to the HoR the
to the separation of powers of the three prerogative, within constitutionally defined limits, to
Lazatin vs. HRET branches of government under the presidential system, is choose from among its district and party-list
8 SCRA 391 too evident to escape attention. representatives those who may occupy the seats allotted
1988 to the House in the HRET and the CA.
The new Constitution has substantially retained the
COMELEC's purely administrative powers, namely, the Thus, even assuming that party-list representatives
exclusive authority to enforce and administer all laws and comprise a sufficient number and have agreed to
regulations relative to the conduct of an election, designate common nominees to the HRET and the CA,
plebiscite, initiative, referendum, and recall. their primary recourse clearly rests with the House of
The Tribunal to be staffed by both Justices of the Supreme Representatives and not with this Court.
Court and Members of the Senate, the Constitution Pimentel vs. HRET
Abbas vs. SET
intended that both those "judicial" and "legislative" G.R. No. 141489 Under Sections 17 and 18, Article VI of the Constitution,
G.R. No. L-83767
components commonly share the duty and authority of November 29, 2002 party-list representatives must first show to the House that
October 27, 1988
deciding all contests relating to the election, returns and they possess the required numerical strength to be
qualifications of Senators. entitled to seats in the HRET and the CA. Only if the House
The independence of the House Electoral Tribunal so fails to comply with the directive of the Constitution on
zealously guarded by the framers of our Constitution, proportional representation of political parties in the HRET
would, however, by a myth and its proceedings a farce if and the CA can the party-list representatives seek recourse
Bondoc vs. Pineda
the House of Representatives, or the majority party to this Court under its power of judicial review.
G.R. No. 97710
therein, may shuffle and manipulate the political (as
September 27, 1991
distinguished from the judicial) component of the Under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, prior recourse
electoral tribunal, to serve the interests of the party in to the House is necessary before petitioners may bring the
power. instant case to the court. Consequently, petitioners' direct
recourse to this Court is premature.

30

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)

 lOMoARcPSD|47033074

POLITICAL LAW REVIEW DOCTRINES

The HRET has jurisdiction over party-list representatives as jurisdiction over elections relating to the election, returns,
well, by analogy to the provision of Section 17, Article VI and qualifications ends, and the HRET’s own jurisdiction
of the 1987 Constitution, that once the party or begins.
Palparan vs. HRET organization of the party-list nominee has been
G.R. No. 189506 proclaimed and the nominee has taken his oath and The judgments of the HRET and SET are beyond judicial
February 11, 2010 assumed office as member of the House of interference save only “in the exercise of this Court’s so-
Representatives, the COMELEC's jurisdiction over election called extraordinary jurisdiction” upon a determination
contests relating to his qualifications ends and the HRET's that the tribunal’s decision or resolution was rendered
own jurisdiction begins. without or in excess of its jurisdiction, or with grave abuse
The HRET is a collegial body with members from two of discretion.
separate departments. The intention of the framers was to
make the tribunal an independent, constitutional body
STAY THE COURSE; BLOCK OUT THE NOISE. ~ KOBE BRYANT.
subject to constitutional restrictions. The origin of the
tribunal can be traced back from the electoral
commissions under the 1935 Constitution whose
functions were quasi-judicial in nature. The presence of 3
Justices was intended as an additional guarantee to
ensure impartiality in the judgment of cases before it.

The main objectives is to ensure the exercise of judicial

impartiality in the disposition of election contests
affecting members of the lawmaking body. To achieve
this:
Ongsiako-Reyes vs. (1.) The party having the largest number of votes, and the
COMELEC party having the second largest number of votes, in
G.R. No. 207264 the National Assembly or in each House of Congress,
June 25, 2013 were given the same number of representatives in
the Electoral Commission or Tribunal, so that they
may realize that partisan considerations could not
control the adjudication of said cases, and thus be
induced to act with greater impartiality; and
(2.) The Supreme Court was given the same number of
representatives as each one of said political parties,
so that the influence of the former may be decisive
to endow said Commission or Tribunal with judicial
temper.

The HRET’s power or jurisdiction begins only after a

candidate has become a member of the HoR. Thus, once
a winning candidate has been proclaimed, taken his oath,
and assumed office as a member of the HoR, COMELEC’s

31

POLITICAL LAW DOCTRINES - FINALS

KA-POLI NOTES 2020-2021
Dione Maghirang / Lara Murallos / Tin Narne-Pedralvez / Fergie Villanueva

Downloaded by LUV ZAR (coconut@svteen.site)