As forwarded:
• P. 12 Territory- It would be on the 2nd sentence on Sec. 1, on what is known in Public International Law as the archipelagic doctrine of national territory.
• P.13 The Archipelagic Doctrine Of National Territory. it should be treated as a single island for purposes of defense.
• P.14 Sec 2., par 1 of the Administrative Code of 1987
• P.18 Suit Against Government Agencies But, the corporation code contains precisely a provision to the effect that these corporations among others can sue and be sued, that provision is consent on the part of the State for all of these corporations which are organized or incorporated pursuant to the Corporation Code to be sued.
• P.18 Consent to be sued. Local Government Units, Municipalities, Cities, Provinces , Barangays. If you will look at Sec.22 of the Local Govt Code, in the enumeration of corporate powers of local government units, you will find that one of the corporate powers of the local government unit is the power to sue and be sued.
• P.18 But, the more difficult question perhaps is this, suppose the agency performs both propriety and governmental functions, how do you resolve this? In such a case, you look at the principal function of the agency and that is what is supposed to prevail.
• P.19 Before we look at these classification of consent, I would like to recall Republic vs Feliciano, This is not basically Political law, this is more in Remedial law, but in Republic vs Feliciano, the SC said, when suit is filed against the state, either in the form of an original complaint or by way of counterclaim, when suit is filed against the state, the complaint or counterclaim must allege that consent has been obtained and where this consent is found. The SC went on to say, absent this allegation, the court may sua esponte, dismiss the action because any suit against the state is in derogation of sovereignty and must be construed in a strictissimi juris.
• P.20 Express Consent. There is in the Civil code… an imputation of a vicarious liability on the part of the state when the State acts through a special agent… Is this provision, express consent on the part of the State to be sued? This is one of the questions I would have given in the bar exams if I were the examiner.
• P.20 Implied Consent. But the better question perhaps has to do with implied consent. Implied consent is deemed implied when the State commences litigation… But I would like to believe, even as the courts have always been very strict in interpreting exceptions to immunity from suit, I would like to believe that a permissive counterclaim may be allowed in so far as the consent given by the State when it commences litigation
• P.20. same. Perhaps the better question still would be, when the State intervenes in a pending action, is the intervention by the State commencement of litigation and therefore, implied consent to be sued? A files suit against B, the Republic of the Philippines intervenes. Is the intervention by the Republic of the Philippines commencement of litigation? The answer to that is, it depends on the nature of the intervention.
• P.22. The Supreme Court said, these service contracts entered into by the Republic of Indonesia are in the nature of contracts in jure impreii because they have to do with the maintenance of the embassy and of the diplomatic personnel of the Republic of Indonesia.
• P.22. In the case of incorporated agencies whose charters provide that they can sue and be sued, the Supreme Court said, this charter provision that grants consent to be sued is also consent to execution.
• P.23. But the Supreme Court, in the case of Municipality of San Miguel Bulacan vs Fernandez, said, funds of local government unite, whether they are deposited in a bank, whether they are in the nature of a special or general deposits are public funds. As public funds, they cannot be garnished unless there is an appropriate, there is a corresponding appropriation ordinance duly tasked by the Sanggunian of the local government unit concerned, appropriating that money in order to satisfy the money judgment.
• P.23. If it is a local government unit, there has to be an appropriation ordinance. If it is a national government unit that is sued and is made liable under a judgment, then the consent has to be found in an appropriation law, a law appropriating the amount in order to satisfy the money judgment, that is your consent.
• P.24 Here, Municipality of Makati vs CA, a writ of mandamus will lie not only to compel the Sanggunian to act but to pass, to pass an appropriation ordinance. It is a writ of mandamus that will compel not only the exercise of the discretionary power but even the discretion itself.
• p.25. A police power legislation, legislation passed in the exercise of police power may be given retroactive effect.
• P.26 there has to be some kind of rational basis for choosing the subject of police legislation.
• P.27. This means that because you restrict this, you therefore, accomplish this. So, the SC, there being no causal connection between the means employed and the objective sought o be accomplished, the law is therefore, an invalid exercise of the police power.
• P.41. What are the conditions for the grant of Emergency powers? There must be was or other natural emergency. Second, the exercise of the power shall be for a limited period. It shall be for a limited period as limited by Congress in the law granting the power to the President but in no case shall the grant of the power exceed the emergency itself. Third, the exercise of the emergency powers by the President shall be subject to the conditions, terms, restrictions imposed by Congress found in the law delegating the emergency powers. And of course, when the President exercises delegated emergency powers, the President is bound again by the Constitution to exercise this, or to exercise only such powers as are necessary and proper in order to carry out a declared national policy.
• Same. Because of that, our constitution provides that now Congress can withdraw the grant of emergency powers only by a resolution, a resolution does not require approval of the President.
• P.43. The potential question is of course, if there should be a conflict between a Public International Law principle and Municipal Law or law of the Philippines, which will prevail? This is from the point of view of Philippine Law and Philippine Constitutional Law, so, if a Public International law principle should be in conflict with the Philippine Constitution, it is the Philippine Constitution that will prevail.
• P.46Equality of Men and Women. Sec 14, on the rule of women and the fundamental equality of men and women before the law.
• P.49. Local Autonomy. Local autonomy is simply decentralization. It does not mean that local governments will become an imperium in imperio.
• P. 51. Requisites of Substantive Due Process. First, the interest of the public in general as distinguished form those of particular class required the passage of the law or the issuance of the administrative rule or regulation. Second, the means employed… must be reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose and not duly oppressive on the individuals.
• P. 54. Appeal and Due Process. While appeal is accepted not to be a part of due process because the right to appeal is granted by statue, nonetheless, where there is a law that grants the right to appeal, denial of the right o appeal without any valid basis would constitute a denial of due process.
• P.55.Probable Cause. The exception to the rule of probable cause is in the matter of violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act considering that the offenses punished under the law are so inter-related.
• P.58 Particularity of Description. A John Doe warrant is a valid warrant, provided that the warrant of arrest contains a description of the person to be arrested who is, because his name is not known, who is now denominated as John Doe. The description persona, the description of the person to be arrested.
• P.58 same. The Supreme Court said the warrant is in the natire of a general warrant and therefore, it is an invalid warrant
• P.59 Search Warrants. But when the searching party goes to the house and they find nothing listed in the search warrant. As they are about to go, they notice that there is a car parked along the street in front of the house. Can they search the car in front o the house? There is no garage. They can’t search the car because it is not an extension of the house.
• P.59 General Warrants. The SC said the search warrant is severable. And so, while it may be invalid with respect to shabu and paraphernalia for shabu, it is valid for the guns.
• P.61 Warrantless Arrest. When an offense has just been committed and there is probable cause to believe based in personal knowledge of facts or other circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed the offense.
• P.61. Warrantles Searches; Valid Waiver. Just like any right, the waiver must be made voluntarily, willingly, and intelligently. That is, there must be a right. The person who waives mut know that such a right exists and that he has such a right, and he willingly and volutariyly waives that right.
• P.62 same. The ruling in Anyag vs Comelec is this, consent under coercive circumstances is not valid consent at all.
• P 62.same. in People vs Damaso, consent of waiver must be made by the person whose right is being violated.
• P.63. In Varoy vs Layage, even when consent is already given, the scope of the consent may be limited
• P.64. Search as an Incident to a Lawful Arrest. Jurisprudence on the matter tell us that when as search is made as an incident to a lawful arrest, the search must be made contemporaneous with the arrest which means at or about the time the arrest was made. And the search is made only within a permissible area of search, which refers to the place within the control of the person.
• P.66. Plain View Doctrine. The peace officer or government agent, must have a valid reason to be in the place where he is. Second, without actually conducting a search, he chances upon or stumbles upon a prohibited item. Number 3, the prohibited item is in plain view, it is open to the eye and hand. And number 4, the plain view doctrine justifies the seizure.
• P.70 O’brien test. First, the act must be within the constitutional power of govt. second, the act must be intended to further a substantial governmental interest. Third, the govt interest sought to be promoted must not be related or suppression of freedom of expression. And fourth, the incidental restriction or restraint on freedom of expression must be limited to what is only essential or what is necessary to promote govt interest.
• P.70 Challenge of Government Act. A person may not go to court to question the constitutionality of the governmental act even if he himself may not be injured by the governmental act, but that others nay be so injured. Even as to himself, the act is not unconstitutional with respect to others because on its face, it is unconstitutional, then he may validly challenge the same.
• P.72 Freedom from subsequent punishment. The SC said the determination of what is obscene or what is pornographic is a judicial function. And so it is not valid to say that magazines said to be pornographic can be confiscated at will.
• P. 74. Clear and present danger rule. Under the clear and present danger rule, the expression must be of such a nature that it will pose a clear and present danger of an evil, which the state has the right to prevent. The degree of imminence must be great.
• P. 74. Clear and present danger rule. Speaker attacking the govt. Under the dangerous tendency rule, definitely, the speaker can be convicted. Under the clear and present danger rule, you have to look at the circumstance surrounding the speech. 10,000 in the audience. All of them children, 6 years old and below.
• P.74. Right to Peacable Assembly. Under the Public Assembly Act, there are rules relative to the acquisition of a permit for the use of a public place in order to conduct an assembly and the law provides that when the assembly is to be held in a private place or if it is to be held in a freedom park or in the campus of a government owned educational institution, then there is no need for a permit from the Mayor, otherwise a permit is required.
• P.75. Right to Peacable Assembly. Economic rights must be subordinate to the right to peaceably assemble and petition the government for redress and grievances.
• P.75. Right to Peacable Assembly. The Supreme Court they were not being penalized by exercising their right, they were being penalized for being absent from their classes without any justifiable reason.
• P.75. Right to Peacable Assembly. Today the rule is, when a student enrolls in college, he is supposed to enroll for the entire course subject of course to the payment of the school fees for the entire course. That means he cannot be denied re-admission except on 2 grounds. First, academic deficiency, the rules in academic deficiency, however must be published in other words.
• P.76. Right to Peacable Assembly. The second, for denying re-admission to the students is if the students commit a violation of reasonable rules of conduct prescribed by the school.
• P.76. Right to Peacable Assembly. What are these requisites? First, he must be notified of the nature and cause of his alleged violation. Second, he is entitled to answer with the assistance of counsel if required. Third, he must be given access to the evidence against him, access to the documents or to the affidavits that are supposed yo be evidence against him. Fourth, he must be given an opportunity to present evidence in his behalf. And fifth, the investigator, panel, committee should consider the evidence presented. These then are the requisites for the validity.
• P.78. Non-establishment Clause. An ecclesiastical affair is that which pertains to creed, doctrine, worship, such as excommunication of members, ordination of ministers, administration of sacraments.
• P.80.Liberty of Abode and Travel. Alright the right to travel.. the constitution speaks of national security, public safety and public health as limitations as may be prescribed by law or as may be prvided by law as limitations on the right to travel.
• P.81.Liberty of Abode and Travel. Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a person should not at all be prevented from returning to his own native country, even the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights also guarantees a person’s right to return to his own... home-country.
• P.81.Right to Information on Matters of Public Concern. First, information relative to privileged communication rooted in the doctrine of separation and powers. Second, information relating to military or diplomatic secrets. Third, information affecting the national security. And fourth, information relative to investigations conducted by the government into offenses commiited prior to the filing of the corresponding criminal information in Court.
• p.83. Miranda Doctrine. Custodial Investigation takes place when there is a questioning made by the government investigators after the investigation has shifted from a general inquiry into an unsolved crime and has begun to focus on one person or per… or the persons who are now prime suspects as perpetrators of the offense.
• p.83. Miranda Doctrine. Preliminary investigation conducted by the prosecutor is not custodial investigation andso we refer to custodian investigation really as that inquiry, that interrogation that takes place after a prime suspect or prime suspects has or have already been identified and that the investigation now focuses on him or them as the case may be.
• P.84. Right to Bail. When charged with an offense punishable by reclusion perpetuator higher and evidence of guilty is strong.
• P.86. Presumption of Innocence. The Supreme Court said the presumption standing alone cannot prevail over the presumption of innocence.
• P.87. Right of the Accused to be Heard by Himself and Counsel. Right to Counsel during the trial from arraignment through trial and even upon promulgation of judgment cannot be waived
• P.88. Right to be Informed of the Nature and Cause of Accusation. If I, if I were, if I had been a bar examiner, one of the questions I would have asked in the bar exams would have been very simple. One, one sentence in question. May the accused be convicted of an offense other than that which is charged? Explain your answer fully.
• P.89. Right to be Informed of the Nature and Cause of Accusation. The answer, should be first, as a rule no. Because if he is convicted of an offense other than that which is charged, he would be denied the right, the constitutional right to be informed of the nature and the cause of the accusation against him. However, he may be convicted.
• P.89. Right to be Informed of the Nature and Cause of Accusation. Of an offense other than that which is charged if he is convicted of an offense that is necessarily included in the offense charged.
• P.89. Right to be Informed of the Nature and Cause of Accusation. He may also be convicted of an offense other than that, he may also be convicted of an offense other than that or in addition even to that which may be charged, if he does not at all object to the introduction of any evidence to support the additional charge found in the information.
• P.90. Trial in Absentia. On the other hand, after arraignment, if he jumps bail or escapes from confinement, then the Supreme Court said he loses his standing in court. He cannot even invoke the right to appeal unless he comes back and submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court.
• P.92. Right against Self-incrimination. However class, if the accused in a criminal case or the respondent in any of these administrative cases where a penal sanction may be imposed upon him testifies voluntarily, if he testifies then he can no longer refuse to answer questions on cross-examination. In either he can no longer invoke the right against self-incrimination during cross-examination. Except to questions which the answer, the answer to which will incriminate him of an offense other than that for which he is charged.
• P.93. Prohibited Punishments. It does not refer merely to the harshness or the severity of the penalty imposed but to the disproportion between the act punished and the penalty imposed such as to shock the moral sense of the community.
• P.93. Prohibited Punishments. If I were the ah ah examiner, the only question I would really ask here is the constitutionality of the death penalty and it would be in the nature of a composition…
• P.94. Non-imprisonment for Non-payment of Debt or Poll tax. Lozano vs. Martinez in the matter of the constitutionality of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22. People vs. Judge Nitafan on the constitutionality of the Trust Receipts Law, this has been asked in the bar exams twice and of course the law is constitutional according to the Supreme Court because what is punished is not non-payment of an obligation or a debt but is punished is the loss or is the abuse of confidence or the deceit incident of the violation of the Trust Receipts Law.
• P.95. Double Jeopardy. Memorized the requisites for double jeopardy under the first sentence. First there must be a valid complaint or information, second the valid complaint or information must be filed before the competent court, third the accused must have pleaded to the valid complaint or information and fourth the accused must have been convicted or acquitted or the case dismissed or otherwise terminated without the expressed consent of the accused.
• P.95. Double Jeopardy. The third situation contemplated is, where the case is terminated, is dismissed or otherwise terminated without the expressed consent of the accused, it is important that the dismissal be a final or a permanent dismissal because as you very well know, there may be a provisional dismissal by the Court.
• P.97. Double Jeopardy. A was charged for killing B because they were last seen together and B simply disappeared and could no longer be found, circumstantial evidence pointed to the guild of A, ok so he was sentenced to 20 years of prison, after serving 20 years he now goes out of prison and the first person he sees is B and he tell himself, “20 years akong naghirap sa bilangguan sa pagpatay sayo, buhay ka pa pala, papatayin na kita” pinatay nya ngayon. Pinatay nya ngayon, charged with killing B can he invoke double jeopardy, considering the fact that he was charged under a valid complaint or information for before a court of competent jurisdiction to which he pleaded and he was convicted of the offense of homicide, he is now charged again of homicide for killing the very same person for which he had already served sentence.
• P.101. Dual Allegiance. Dual citizenship in section 40 of the Local Government Code should be understood to mean dual allegiance, and dual allegiance would mean that a person owes allegiance to independent sovereign states and dual allegiance pre-supposes voluntariness, allegiance given voluntarily by the individual not cases where by virtue of circumstances beyond the control of the individual, the individual possesses 2 or more nationalities.
• P.102. Dual Allegiance. Any administrative finding of citizenship will not acquire res judicata or preclusive effect that is what Zita Ngo Burca all about, will not acquire res judicata effect unless 3 conditions are satisfied: first, the issue of citizenship is raised as a material issue in an administrative or a judicial proceeding and subjected to a full hearing; second, the Solicitor General or his representatives participated in the proceedings; and third, the finding whether by administrative agency or judicial body is affirmed by the Court. IT is in that sense then class that an administrative determination of Filipino citizenship never becomes final and never acquires res judicata effect.
• P.103. Citizens of the Philippines. And then finally class, there is a class of citizens under the ’35 Constitution that is not found in any of the other Philippine Constitutions, the class of citizens who became citizens of the Philippines by virtue of what is called the Caram provision in the 1935 Constitution.
• P.104. Citizens of the Philippines. Doctrine of implied election
• P.104. Citizens of the Philippines. The answer is yes of course, yes, yes because the determining factor is the citizenship of the mother at the time of her marriage and not at the time of the conception or birth of the child as long as the mother was a Filipino at the time of her marriage then, the child can avail of the privilege of electing Filipino citizenship.
• P.104. Citizens of the Philippines. But legitimation is not a mode of acquiring Filipino citizenship, neither is marriage, although marriage may give rise to the naturalization of a the foreign woman as we will discuss in a little while under Moy Ya Lim Yao vs. Commissioner of Immigration, ‘yon.
• P.105. Naturalization. “If she herself may be lawfully naturalized” means that she does not have to go through the naturalization proceedings, she does not have to go through the naturalization proceedings, wala, all she has to do is file a petition with the Bureau of Immigration and deportation a petition for cancellation of her alien certificate registration.
• P.105. Naturalization. Note than under our law on administrative naturalization, it is not the Court anymore that grants naturalized Filipino citizenship status it is the special committee on naturalization, with the SOLGEN as chairman and the Secretary of the Department of Foeign Affairs and the National Security Adviser as member.
• P.108. Loss and Reacquisition of Filipino Citizenship. In Frivaldo, the Supreme Court said that the effect of repatriation retroacts to the date of filing of the application for repatriation, that’s one.
• P.108. Loss and Reacquisition of Filipino Citizenship. When a person is repatriated he is restored to his original status as a Filipino citizen.
• P.108. Legislative Department. Consider also class, the definition of an indirect initiative where the people petition for the adoption of a law course through Congress, it is indirect in that instead of seeking the direct adoption of the law through an election for the purpose, the people instead go through Congress and would like Congress to adopt that law through the legislative, the normal legislative process provided in Article VI.
• P.109. Senate. And then of course able to read and write that is the mere literacy qualification, able to read and write what… oo. If a person is blind but he knows how to read and write in Braille… Braille, will be qualified for the Senate explain you answer, 1% noh.
• P.110. House of Representatives. Alright the constitution provides that congress shall pass a re-apportionment law within 3 years from return of every census, the census referred to in the constitution is the census on population which is normally undertaken by the government once every 10 years, census on population so.
• P.110. House of Representatives. The principle that the commission on elections cannot exercise the power of apportionment.
• P.112. Commission on Appointments. The Supreme Court said membership in the Commission on Appointments is never permanent. It is never permanent in the sense that it is always subject to the Constitutional provision that membership therein shall be based on proportional representation of the political parties registered in the partylist system represented in the house.
• P.113. Powers of Congress. Plenary legislative power. The plenary legislative power is the power to propose and act, amend and repeal laws.
• P.114. Legislative Process. All of those things, dun pa lang sa persons and family relations pa lang, and so class when you speak of only one subject, that subject refers to a general subject matter and not to a specific/particular subject matter.
• P.115. Legislative Process. So, kailangan the 3 reading must be on separate days.
• P.116. Legislative Process. The Supreme Court has said that when there is a presidential certification to your bill, then you do not have to have 3 readings on separate days. All the 3 readings can be done on the same day. There is no need for the printed copy of the bill in its final form distributed at least 3 days prior to the 3rd and final reading. You can distribute final copies on the same day that you approved the bill on 2nd reading and on the same day you cannot approve the bill on 3rd reading.
• P.117. Legislative Process. 1. President approves the bill. 2. By merely lapse of time. 3. Then of course class, if the President does not want or does not like the bill, then the President vetoes the bill, President shall veto. However, even if the President objections to the bill and then sends the bill back to house of origin along with the veto message. Despite the Presidential veto however, the bill may still become a law if Congress overrides the veto. Overriding the veto will entail a vote of 2/3 of all of the members of the house where the bill originated and then a similar vote in the other house – 2/3 to override the veto. 4. Without the approval of the President, without any presidential action.
• P.117. Legislative Process. This bill shall be deemed certified by the President, it shall be deemed certified by the President and after approval on third reading by both Houses, shall automatically become law.
• P.118. Appropriation Law. What is an appropriation law? It is a law, the primary and specific purpose of which is to authorize the release of funds from the public treasury.
• P.118. Appropriation Law. The General Appropriation Law is that which is based that law passed by Congress based on the budget submitted by the President of the Philippines and it is intended for the financial operation of government for an entire fiscal year.
• P.119. Appropriation Law. 2 constitutional limitations on special appropriation law. First, the measure itself. The law itself must provide the specific purpose for which the appropriation is to be spent. Second, the law must be accompanied by a certification of the national treasurer that there are funds available for the purpose.
• P.119. Appropriation Law – Limitations; Guidelines. First, the constitution provides that the Congress cannot increase the appropriation recommended by the President for the operations of the government for the fiscal year.
• P.119. Appropriation Law – Rider. A rider in a general appropriation law is a provision in the GAA that is, does not refer to any specific appropriation item.
• P.120. Principle of Automatic Reappropriation. Impoundment is the term given to the refusal of the President to obligate or to spend money appropriated already for whatever reason.
• P.120. Principle of Automatic Reappropriation. And then of course the matter of budgetary reserves under the Administrative Code of 1987, there is a provision that authorizes the President through the budget secretary not to release in full the amounts appropriated for purposes of, to be called budgetary the amounts reserved are called budgetary reserves.
• P.120. Principle of Automatic Reappropriation. Class the veto must be normally a veto is a veto of the entire law.
• P.120. Item Veto vs. Line Veto. A legislative veto is a means by which Congress may block or modify administrative action or executive action taken in the implementation of the measure.
• P.121. Item Veto vs. Line Veto. However, the Supreme Court did not declare this unconstitutional. Ang sinabi lang ng Supreme Court “however, such a provision should be contained in a separate substantive law not in the GAA itself. Should be contained in a separate substantive law. Therefore the veto made by President Ramos was held valid because this is an inappropriate provision in the General Appropriations Act, considering that such a provision should be contained in a separate substantive law.”
• P.121. Power of Taxation. What are the requisites however for the validity of such legislative inquiry or legislative investigation? One, the investigation must be in aid of legislation. Two, the investigation must be conducted in accordance with duly published rules of procedures. And three, the rights of the person affected by such investigation must be respected.
• P.121. Legislative Investigation. Yes, of course. But he can invoke the same only when the question calling for an incriminating answer is asked because such a person is called in an investigation as a witness and not as a respondent for example.
• P.122. The President. So the President of the Philippines. The Executive power of the government is vested in the President of the Philippines. What are the qualifications for President? Natural-born Filipino citizen, on the day of the election at least 40 years of age, able to read or write, a registered voter, a resident of the Philippines for at least 10 whole years immediately preceding the election. Remember these are the same qualification for your Vice-President. Why? Because your Vice-President could at any time be your President.
• P.123. Privileges. This immunity cannot be invoked by 1 whose term has expired or who is no longer President even if he is called to account for acts committed by him while he was President of the Philippines.
• P.123. Privileges. The Secretary of Education cannot claim the immunity that is granted to the President because as we earlier said, the immunity granted is personal to the President of the Philippines and it is not enjoyed by alter egos of the President of the Philippines.
• P.123. Temporary Vacancy; Rules of Succession. So itong temporary vacancy, class the rules on temporary vacancy found in the constitution are rules copied from the United States.
• P.123. Temporary Vacancy; Rules of Succession. If the majority of the members of the cabinet
• P.124. Powers of the President. Distinguish this from the Office of the President at large, on the whole which includes all of the departments of the government. While indeed the President has indeed plenary authority to abolish, merge, consolidate offices, agencies and positions in the office of the President proper, there are limits to the power of the President to reorganize all of these departments, agencies, etc. but in that case also, the Supreme Court said that the President may delegate this power to reorganize.
• P.124. Powers of the President. Where the President of the Philippines refuses to implement, to enforce or to execute a law, will this mean culpable violation of the constitution which will be then be a basis of complaint for impeachment? That is possible.
• P.124. Power of Appointment. Appointment as you very well know is the selection by the authority having the power of an individual who is to perform the functions of a given office.
• P.126. Power of Removal. However class, note first in the members of cabinet, members of the cabinet while the President can replace them at any time, what happens if a cabinet member is replaced is not removal but expiration of term.
• P.127. Constitutional Limitations on the Power of the President to Appoint. But the Supreme Court said that this prohibition found in the constitution does not apply to local executives. So mayors and governors may issue valid appointments even during the 2, no even during, just before the term ends. Of course, the appointments made 2 months before the elections, the normal prohibition is 45 days before the election in the case of other government offices. In the case of the President is 2 months before the elections and all the way up to the end of the term.
• P.127. Other Powers. Conduct unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman charged before a court martial duly created under the authority of the president of the Philippines. The 50 members of the military establishment are exonerated by the court martials. May the President reverse the decision of exoneration and declare them guilty and impose a penalty of 10 years of hard labor?
• P.127. Other powers. And so he declared, aba hindi pa tapos yan, hindi pa tapos yan ah the decision of the court martials is subject to review of the President of the Philippines. Because the court martial is precisely an agency of executive character and is subject to the exercise of the power of control which the president wields over the entire Armed Forces of the Philippines, as it were.
• P.128. Other powers. Invasion when public safety requires it and rebellion when public safety requires it.
• P.128. Other powers. The inquiry that the Supreme Court can do with respect to the proclamation is limited to the sufficiency of the factual basis.
• P.129. Other powers. For our purposes, the important things to remember from the standpoint of constitutional law are first the discretion vested in the president of the Philippines. Nobody can compel the president to issue a pardon.
• P.130. Other powers. First, the president cannot pardon a person declared or found guilty in an impeachment case.
• P.130. Other powers. Second no pardon shall be issued in favor a person convicted of violation of election laws unless there is a favorable recommendation made by the Commission on Elections. Third, note that a pardon may be issued only after a final conviction.
• P.130. Other powers. Fourth, a pardon shall not relieve a person for any of liability for legislative contempt.
• P.130. Other powers. Number 5, a pardon shall not relieve a convict of civil liability.
• P.130. Other powers. Finally a pardon shall not restore public offices forfeited.
• P.130. Other powers. That plenary pardon made you eligible to be appointed again. But you are not eligible to be automatically reinstated.
• P.131. Other powers. The SC said no, there is no need for your to be convicted. When you accept the conditional [pardon you a re entering a contract with the President of the Philippines. By entering that contact, you give to the President of the Philippines the authority to determine whether or not you have really committed a violation of the conditions attached to the pardon.
• P. 133, The Judicial Power. The of course, yung decision nila dyan, that the penalty to be imposed on the erring judge is dismissal from his service that the Supreme Court must decide the case en banc. Majority of the members who participate in the deliberation and who vote thereon but it is to be decided en banc where the penalty to be imposed is dismissal from the service or separation from service.
• P 134. July 15 –16. Because under the administrative code, a superior officer shall be held liable for the unlawful, negligent or malicious acts of his subordinates only if he is authorized in writing then doing of such an act. There is no such thing as command responsibility except perhaps in the military.
• P. 135. Private Lands. The citizenship of the corporation sole is not the citizenship of the bishop or a high priest.
• P. 139. Education, Science and Technology, Arts Culture and Sports. 1.) the student is entitled to know, has the right tot know the nature and cause of the accusations against him; 2.) he has the right to answer with the assistance of counsel if desired; 3.) he has the right of access to the evidence against him; 4.) he has right to preset evidence in his behalf; and 5.) the body, committee panel, investigator must consider the evidence presented.
• P. 139. General Provisions. Congress passes a law changing the name of the Republic of the Philippines to Bayan Ng Maharlika, is the law valid? Explain.
• P. 140. Powers of Administrative Bodies. Determinative Powers and Incidental Powers.
• P. 141. Same. The enabling powers, the directing powers, the dispensing powers, the examining powers and the summary powers.
• Same. The Issuance of license is part of the mayor’s power.
• Same. Example of directing powers is making Assessments or the bureau of customs.
• Same. But perhaps even now, we should consider the case of Guevara v. COMELEC, the Supreme Court said that the power to punish contempt is essentially a judicial power; however, an administrative agency may by law be granted the power to punish contempt. However, even when the law grants an administrative agency the power to punish contempt, that power can be exercised only by the agency when the agency is engaged in the performance of quasi-judicial functions.
• Same. Accordingly, in the case of COMELEC for example, the Commission on Elections has quasi – judicial powers. It is, the COMELEC, supposed to be given original exclusive jurisdiction over all prep proclamation contests. The COMELEC. The COMELEC has exclusive jurisdiction over all cases relating to election returns, qualification of regional, provincial and city elective officials.
• Same. Then the summary powers refer to powers of certain administrative agency to apply compulsion or force upon persons or things without the necessity of judicial warrant.
• P. 142. Kinds of Administrative Rules and Regulations. Detailed legislation, interpretative legislation, and contingent legislation.
• P. 143. July 17, 2004. Preclusive effect.
• Same. There can no res judicata where the amount of benefits given to the employee are less than those provided by law.
• P. 144. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies. The doctrine says that when a party agreed by an administrative decision, has still other available administrative remedies, he may not seek judicial recourse until he shall have exhausted all such administrative remedies.
• Same. The doctrine of finality of prior resort and the doctrine of finality of administrative action.
• P. 145. Same. The doctrine of qualified political agency.
• Same. Two exceptions, were the law itself provide it inasmuch as the President himself who issued the Presidential proclamation, appeal to the President would be complete exhaustion of administrative remedies.
• Same. The administrative agency invoking the doctrine of estoppel.
• Same. Where the issue is a pure question of law.
• Same. Administrative action will result in the nullification of the claim.
• Same. There is violation of due process of law.
• P. 146. Same. Where the administrative action is patently illegal.
• Same. The basis even as class in the old, in American jurisprudence, Congress can deny resort to the court. In other words, Congress can provide that he decision of the administrative agency shall be final, executory and unappealable, that is no longer possible today under the Constitution where there is involved the exercise of quasi – judicial powers because the exercise of quasi – judicial powers entails the exercise of discretion by the agency vested with the quasi – judicial powers and under Section 1, second paragraph of Article 8, the definition of judicial powers includes the power to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess in jurisdiction on the part of any agency of instrumentality of the government.
• Same. Board of Commission CID v. Judge Dela Rosa; Commendador v. De Villa
• Same. However, questions of fact may be raised if the law itself provides the questions of fact may be validly raised. Second, when there is fraud, imposition or mistake, other than error of judgment in the evaluating the evidence, or were there is a mistake or error committed in the appreciation of the pleadings, or in the interpretation of documentary evidence.
• Same. The brandized doctrine of assimilation of facts, were what purports to be a question of a finding on the question of fact is so intimately related with, or dependent upon a question of all as to be in substance and effect a decision on the latter, then the court may go over the records and the evidence and therefore, rule even on the question of facts.
• P. 147. Tenure. Tenure is supposed to be the period of time by which the public officer actually holds office. While term is the period of time by which the public officer is entitled to hold office.
• Same. Right to Salary. The salaries of public officers before they are paid to the public officer himself are free from garnishment.
• P. 148. Salaries or Compensation of de facto Officers. Also goes into the matter of qualifying for the office so that even if an accountable officer has already taken the oath of office, if he has not yet posted his bond, that requirement may go into the title that he has over the office. He may not be a de jure public officer; he may only be a de facto public officer until after he has fully qualified by posting the bond, alright.
• Same. Qualifications. In the case of Constitutional offices.
• Same. In the case of statutory public office. One that the prescribed qualifications must be germane to the duties attached to the office and second, that the prescribed qualifications must not be specific as to fit an identifiable individual because were such a provision in the law is included, it is in effect Congress that is appointing or exercising the power of appointment to the given office.
• P. 149. Same. That the prescribed qualification must not be unconstitutional, it must not violate the Constitution.
• P. 150. Disqualification. Elected official cannot be appointed to any other office during their tenure.
• Same. In their case, they may not hold any other office in the government, unless otherwise provided by law, unless allowed by the law in fact or by the primary functions of their office, alright.
• Same. First, allowed by law and second, allowed by the primary functions of the office unless otherwise allowed by the Constitution.
• P. 151. Specific Disqualifications. So, President, Vice President, members of the cabinet, undersecretaries, and their assistants are prohibited from holding any other office in government during their tenure of course.
• Same. Incompatible office.
• Same. For members of the Judiciary, Justices of the Supreme Court and Judges of lower courts, the prohibition is against being designated to any position in government performing quasi- judicial of administrative functions.
• Same. Constitutional Commission members, the Ombudsman and the deputies are prohibited from holding other office during their tenure, of course. Then, the ombudsman and deputies may not be candidates for public office in the election immediately succeeding their cessation from office. Members of the Constitutional Commissions should not have been candidates in the election immediately preceding their appointments.
• P. 152. Requisites. 1.) There must be a validly existing office; 2.) The officer must have the physical position of the office; 3.) What makes him only de facto because instead of having full, legal, valid title to the office, he has only color of title, he does not have a valid title to the office.
• Same. Situations that give rise to color of title: 1.) by reputation and acquiescence; 2.) under a known and valid appointment or election but he does not conform with a duty mandated by law, such as, precisely qualification; 3.) under a known election or appointment, void election, void because either the appointee or the party elected is ineligible of ineligibility, or there is want of authority on the part o electing or appointing authority, or there was an irregularity in the appointment or in the election provided that such ineligibility , such want of authority, or such irregularity is not know n to the public; 4.) under a known appointment or election, void, because the election or the appointment is made pursuant a an unconstitutional law before the law is declared unconstitutional.
• Same. Entitlement to Salaries. When the de facto officers co – exist with the de jure officer, such as the de facto officer physically ousted the de jure officer from the office and the de facto officer assumed office, stated functions, etc, then the de facto public officer is not entitled to the emoluments attached to the office. He is under the obligation to give the salaries and other emoluments to the de jure officer.
• When there is no de jure public officer, the de facto officer is entitled to the salaries and emoluments of the office because he has been or is performing the functions of the office.
• If the fellow being made to pay is a de facto public officer then he cannot be made to pay, he is entitled. But if he is merely a usurper then he may be made to pay, or to refund, or to reimburse or to deliver to the winning candidate whatever that it was he received by way of compensation, salaries or other emoluments incident to the office.
• P. 154. Commencement of the Official Relations. Appointment is the selection by the authority having the power of an individual who is to perform the functions of a given public office. It is distinguished from designation, in that officially, is merely the grant of additional duties to one who is already in public office.
• Same. Appointment. When designation is used to convey an appointment instead of merely giving additional duties to one who is already in public service, when designation is the term used to the issuance of the appointment, then, it has always been held to mean temporary appointment, not a permanent appointment.
• P. 155. July 20, 2004. Notice the distinction between permanent and temporary in the matter of security of tenure were one is appointed to a permanent, permanently appointed to a position in the government, in the Civil Service, one enjoys security of tenure and that means he cannot be suspended or dismissed except for the cause, anyone of the causes prescribed in the Civil Service Law or repeated in the Administrative Code and only in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the Civil Service Code. But only if you are a temporary appointee, then you can be terminated at anytime, except, yung ating sinabi na may specific period for the temporary appointment.
• P. 156. Same. a petition quo warranto filed in court to protest the validity of an appointment in the Civil Service by a person who claims to be, to have a better title to the position, will not lie. The Court cannot entertain that petition for quo warranto.
• Same. Automatic reversion rule under the Civil Service Law. The automatic reversion rule, maraming appointments, simultaneous promotion on appointments.
• P. 157. Classes of Civil Service. Career and non – career service.
• P. 158. Same. In both cases, the Supreme Court said the requirements for acquiring security of tenure in career executive service are: 1.) acquisition of the appropriate, of the corresponding career executive service eligibility; 2.) appointment by the President to the career executive service rank.
• P. 159. Same. Elective officials and their confidential staff, heads of departments, cabinet ranks and their confidential staff, chairman, commissioners with, those with appointed for specific term and their confidential staff, and then contractual personnel, except, that there, the law comes in and says, that contractual personnel appointed and falling within this non-career service are those who possess certain skills or knowledge not available in the agency.
• P. 160. Same. This is merely an exclusive determination, executive or legislative determination which is not binding on the courts because the SC said, the primary factor in determining whether a position is primarily confidential is still the nature of the functions of the position, nature.
• P. 160. Promotion. Promotion is the movement within the same agency, movement from one position to another that entails additional duties, additional responsibilities and as a rule also is accompanied by increases in salary and compensation.
• Same. This is also known as the next in rank rule which provides that generally the officer holding the position next in rank shall be given preference in the matter of promotion whenever the position next higher in rank shall be vacated.
• P. 162. Retirement Benefits. For those in government service, terminal leave benefits, terminal leave benefits are benefits from accumulated leave credits. The rule is the payment of your terminal leave benefit credits shall be based on the highest salaries you have received.
• P.165.Impeachment. Deemed Ipso facto resigned, it does not matter apparently if later he withdraws his certificate of candidacy because it is supposed to be the filing of the certificate of candidacy that will toll the termination of the official relationship.
• P.165.Impeachment. The hold over principle states that a public officer may continue to hold office even after the expiration of a term of office until his successor shall had been duly elected or appointed and shall have qualified.
• P.166.Impeachment. We have the case of Licaros vs. Sandiganbayan. However, where the Supreme Court justified the hold over of a Sangguniang Kabataan Chairman because of the failure on the part of the successor to take his oath and to qualify for the position, justifying the hold over. Because according to the Supreme Court, there was no express or implied prohibition against hold over.
• P.167. Resignation. So, two basic requisites for a valid resignation. Number one, voluntariness. Second, acceptance by competent authority.
• P.170. Preventive Suspension. And consider that while transfer as a rule, transfer of a public officer or employee constitutes a violation of security of tenure, nonetheless, transfer may also be a penalty imposed on the erring public officer or employee.
• P.171. Preventive Suspension. Accomplishment of the purpose for which the public office created.
• P.171. Preventive Suspension. And if one is absent without leave for a period of 30 days under the Civil Service rules, his name may be stricken off the roll of employees of public officers.
• P.171. Preventive Suspension. Acceptance of an incompatible office.
• P.171. Preventive Suspension. Abolition of office. Who has the power to abolish government offices? Congress.
• P.171. Preventive Suspension. The common standards of simplicity, economy and efficiency in government service to justify the abolitionof a number of offices or positions in certain government offices.
• P.174. Election Laws. Provided, however, that all election cases including pre-proclamation cases shall first be taken cognizance of and resolved by the Commission on Elections in division. Provided, however, that the motion for reconsideration shall be resolved by the Commission En Banc.
• P.174. July 21, 2004.All cases appealed from the municipal of the Municipal Trial Court, all of these cases including pre-proclamation cases must be decided by the Commission in division before it can be decided by the Commission En Banc. However, the Supreme Court has sustained the contention of Commission En Banc that in the matter of correction of a manifest error, the matter can be taken cognizance of directly by the Commission En Banc, even if the correction of the manifest error may involve what may be an issue in a pre-proclamation contest.
• P.175. July 21, 2004. When in election cases, it entails the use of quasi-judicial powers of the COMELEC because kung purely administrative matter, hindi kailangan na it must first be heard, decided, in division before it is decided by the Commission En Banc, pag purely administrative, hindi quasi-judicial.
• P.175. July 21, 2004. Because if the COMELEC En Banc simply acted within its own purely administrative, acted in the exercise of purely administrative powers then you do not go to the Supreme Court on a petition for certiorari. You go to the appropriate court of general jurisdiction or a tribunal that has primary administrative jurisdiction.
• P176. Commission on Elections. The 2nd constitutional powers and functions of the COMELEC is precisely the authority the commission has over election cases and the constitution provides that the COMELEC shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over all cases involving the election returns and qualifications of regional, provincial and city elective officials. Exclusive original and exclusive appellate jurisdiction over cases involving ER and qualifications over municipal as well as barangay elective officials.
