2018-2019_Consti_1_Review_by_Montejo.pdf - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 REVIEW From the lectures of Atty Vincent Paul Le Montejo 4 Manresa(2018-2019 | Ateneo de

2018-2019_Consti_1_Review_by_Montejo.pdf - CONSTITUTIONAL...

This preview shows page 1 out of 87 pages.

Unformatted text preview: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 REVIEW From the lectures of Atty. Vincent Paul Le. Montejo 4- Manresa (2018-2019) | Ateneo de Davao University July 17, 2018 – Yasmine Ibay STRUCTURE AND POWERS OF GOVERNMENT I. A. IN GENERAL Political Law Defined MACARIOLA vs. ASUNCION 114 SCRA 77 (1982) DOCTRINE OF CONSTITUTIONAL SUPREMACY If a law or contract violates any norm of the constitution, that law or contract, whether promulgated by the legislative or by the executive branch or entered into by private persons for private purposes, is null and void and without any force and effect. Since the Constitution is the fundamental, paramount and supreme law of the nation, it is deemed written in every statute and contract (Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS). Parts of a Constitution Political Law has been defined as that branch of public law which deals with the organization and operation of the governmental organs of the State and define the relations of the state with the inhabitants of its territory (People vs. Perfecto [1922]). It may be recalled that political law embraces constitutional law, law of public corporations, administrative law including the law on public officers and elections. 1. Constitution of government Article VI (Legislative), Article VII (Executive), Article VIII (Judicial), Article IX (Constitutional Commissions) 2. Constitution of liberties Article 3 (Bill of Rights) B. 3. Constitution of sovereignty Articles on Amendment and Revision Constitutional Law Defined 1. 2. C. That branch of the public law of a state which treats of the organization and frame of government, the organs and powers of sovereignty, the distribution of political and governmental authorities and functions, the fundamental principles which are to regulate the relations of government and subject, and which prescribes generally the plan and method according to which the public affairs of the state are to be administered (Black’s Law Dictionary). Characteristics of the 1987 Constitution 1. That department of the science of law which treats of constitutions, their establishment, construction, and interpretation, and of the validity of legal enactments as tested by the criterion of conformity to the fundamental law (Black’s Law Dictionary). II. Constitution Defined The Constitution is not a document that provides in express terms the listing of what government powers are. The powers of the government are inherent. If there are specific provisions in the Constitution respecting a particular type or kind of power, it is a limitation rather than a grant. *Additional Note: It is a system of fundamental laws for the governance and administration of a nation. It is supreme, imperious, absolute and unalterable except by the authority from which it emanates. It is the fundamental and paramount law of the nation. It prescribes the permanent framework of a system of government, assigns to the different departments their respective powers and duties, and establishes certain fixed principles on which government is founded. It is a supreme law to which all other laws must conform and in accordance with which all private rights must be determined and all public authority administered (Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS). It is written. 2. It is enacted and not evolved. - In common law countries where constitutional principles evolved through their political history. In the Philippines, it is made effective at a definite point in time. 3. It is rigid. - It can only be amended or revised based on the strict terms of the provisions of the Constitution on amendment or revision. BACKGROUND OF THE PRESENT CONSTITUTION A. The February 1986 Revolution and the Proclamation of the Provisional Constitution B. Adoption and Effectivity of the Present Constitution The 1987 Constitution was made effective on plebiscite day. This was based on Proclamation No. 3 which was the Provisional Constitution. Proclamation No. 1 of Corazon Aquino was the establishment of the Revolutionary Government. Proclamation No. 3 was the so-called Freedom Constitution where most of the provisions in the 1973 Constitution were repealed. One of the provisions in the Freedom Constitution required the passage of a new drafting and eventual passage of the new constitution. It says “which shall become effective on the day of the plebiscite.” Previous constitutions starting with 1935 Constitution will tell us that it had become effective upon the issuance of the Presidential Proclamation declaring the votes cast in the plebiscite which were more for “yes” than for “no”. In the political exercise of a plebiscite, there has to be some delay brought about by the counting, canvassing, and final Page 1 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 REVIEW From the lectures of Atty. Vincent Paul Le. Montejo 4- Manresa (2018-2019) | Ateneo de Davao University results tabulation and so the proclamation will be on some other future date. The same was true with the 1973 Constitution as well as the 1976 and 1981 amendments thereto. But in the 1987 because the Freedom Constitution says it would be effective on plebiscite day, then it would be effective on that day. It is February 2, 1987. So there was a change in the rationalization of the SC from plebiscite day. This time Justice Teehankee said that the counting and the canvassing of the votes cast during plebiscite is a mere mathematical computation of the wish of the sovereign. It was made effective on the plebiscite day when votes were cast for its affirmation. Compared with Effectivity of Statutes RULE: There shall be publication. But in the Constitution there is no need of such publication. III. A. Initiative and Referendum Article VI, Section 32. The Congress shall, as early as possible, provide for a system of initiative and referendum, and the exceptions therefrom, whereby the people can directly propose and enact laws or approve or reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the Congress or local legislative body after the registration of a petition therefor signed by at least ten per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters thereof. The Congress shall enact a law for the people to exercise the right of initiative and referendum. That is an express provision requiring a legislative enactment therefore it is not self-executing. GENERAL RULE: The presumption is that there is no need for an enabling law for rights in the constitution to be claimable. (From 2017 TSN) JUDICIAL ELABORATION OF THE CONSTITUTION EXCEPTION: The only exception is when, by intent or by express requirement of the provision, an enabling law must have to be passed by congress. Construction RULE 1: The provisions in the Constitution are deemed to be SELFEXECUTING. MANILA PRINCE HOTEL vs. GSIS 267 SCRA 408 (1997) Section 10, Article 12 of the Constitution was allegedly violated in the sale of the sale of GSIS shares to non-filipinos. The private respondents argue that the Constitution is not applicable. RULING: Hence, unless it is expressly provided that a legislative act is necessary to enforce a constitutional mandate, the presumption now is that all provisions of the constitution are self-executing. If the constitutional provisions are treated as requiring legislation instead of self-executing, the legislature would have the power to ignore and practically nullify the mandate of the fundamental law. RULE 2: VERBA LEGIS RULE (Plain Language Rule) GENERAL RULE: The intent of the framers is its plain language or normal meaning. The Constitution is not a document reserved for lawyers, law students, or those knowledgeable in law. It is for everybody to understand. EXCEPTION: The intent is to use the technical meaning. Residence - Residence as qualification for public office under the 1987 Constitution means that you have to be a domiciliary of that place. DOMINO vs. COMELEC 310 SCRA 546 (1999) ATTY. MONTEJO: The reason was because the Constitution is a direct source of rights. There is no need for a congressional act, legislative act, or enabling law to make the rights under the constitution claimable. It is doctrinally settled that the term residence, as used in the law prescribing the qualifications for suffrage and for elective office, means the same thing as domicile. A provision which lays down a general principle, such as those found in Art. II of the 1987 Constitution, is usually not self-executing. But a provision which is complete in itself and becomes operative without the aid of supplementary or enabling legislation, or that which supplies sufficient rule by means of which the right it grants may be enjoyed or protected, is self-executing. Thus a constitutional provision is selfexecuting if the nature and extent of the right conferred and the liability imposed are fixed by the constitution itself, so that they can be determined by an examination and construction of its terms, and there is no language indicating that the subject is referred to the legislature for action. DAVID v. SET 803 SCRA 435 (2016) Other examples of non self-executing provisions The Constitution should, therefore, be appreciated and read as a singular, whole unit ut magis valeat quam pereat. Each provision must be understood and effected in a way that gives life to all that the Constitution contains, from its foundational principles to its finest fixings. The intent of the framers must be taken into consideration. It is a well-established rule in constitutional construction that no one provision of the Constitution is to be separated from all the others, to be considered alone, but that all the provisions bearing upon a particular subject are to be brought into view and to be so interpreted as to effectuate the great purposes of the instrument. Sections bearing Page 2 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 REVIEW From the lectures of Atty. Vincent Paul Le. Montejo 4- Manresa (2018-2019) | Ateneo de Davao University on a particular subject should be considered and interpreted together as to effectuate the whole purpose of the Constitution and one section is not to be allowed to defeat another, if by any reasonable construction, the two can be made to stand together. Atty. Montejo on the Sereno Quo Warranto Case: In one of the reasons for granting the QW, the SC has applied the statutory construction rule of the mandatory word “shall” and the permissive word “may”. Yes, the constitutional provision on impeachment uses the word “may”, but the thing is that what is the intent of the entire Constitution with respect to these impeachable officers? Yes, the SC cited it says “may” because the President and Vice-President can be removed through an election contest or QW before the PET. But is there any other provision referring to the OTHER impeachable officers who could be removed other than a QW petition? Yes, that’s the rule on statutory construction but is that applicable also when you view the Constitution? Just like in ordinary statutes, words and phrases are normally in their technical meaning. That is why most statutes have the definition of terms. They are not to be understood in their ordinary plain language because they are technically defined. But the Constitution is supposed to be understood in their ordinary meaning. But since the SC said that that is the reason then so will we. is not in its technical meaning. It is supposed to be understood in its loose meaning, to include life imprisonment. If the person is charged with a crime punishable by life imprisonment or higher, then bail becomes a matter of discretion. 
 RULE 3: It shall be construed PROSPECTIVELY. GENERAL RULE: The Constitution is not a penal statute. It has is no retroactive application. Miranda Rule The Miranda Rule first came into our judicial system under the 1973 Constitution. The case of Miranda vs Arizona, a late 1960s decision that have been incorporated on the 1935(?). any extra-judicial confession which do not comply with the Miranda Warnings and Miranda Rule taken before the efficacy of the said rule provided, that they were coerced, compelled, or tortured are admissible despite non-compliance with the Miranda Rule. It does not apply retroactively. EXCEPTION: Retroactive Application Natural-born Citizenship *Other Rules in DAVID vs. SET (2016) In the 1973 Constitution, the definition of natural-born is: In relation with intent, it is deemed written in the Constitution. While the decisions of the SC are not forever, they can be changed as of the moment under the DOCTRINE OF RELATIVE CONSTITUTIONALITY. Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines: Also, international agreements or those duly accepted principles in international law should be deemed forming part of interpretations of the Constitution and so will be on the Local Statutes on the matter. David, written by Leonen, has stretched it that far because of the issue of natural-born. How should we view natural-born citizenship? And because of the earlier ruling in Poe vs. Comelec, Justice Perez wrote that the intent, citing our local law on Rules on Adoption, you can only adopt a Filipino Citizen. If Grace Poe was adopted, then the presumption is that she is a Filipino. Also based on international law/declarations regarding the rights of children, it would require the State to give permanent residence/citizenship to foundlings or children born in their respective States. Construing the word “natural-born citizens” is found in Article 4 of the Constitution. It also considers international treaties concerning generally accepted principles in international law whether or not we are signatories or not under the DOCTRINE OF INCORPORATION or TRANSFORMATION. They will form part of our judicial system and therefore they should be consulted or read into when interpreting Constitutional Provisions. Reclusion Perpetua - In the Bill of Rights, the threshold when right to bail is a matter of right or discretion is the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The word reclusion perpetua (1) (2) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution. Those whose fathers and mothers are citizens of the Philippines. (3) Those who elect Philippine citizenship pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution of nineteen hundred and thirty-five. (4) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law. Section 4. A natural-born citizen is one who is a citizen of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect his Philippine citizenship. This applies to those who were born of a Filipino mother and a foreigner father, legitimately, under the 1935 Constitution. There was seemingly a doubtful situation involving these children (children which have elected Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority under the 1973 Constitution). The argument being, when they elect, they were performing an act to perfect or acquire citizenship. It was doubtful because there was no definition of naturalborn in the 1935 Constitution. In order to avoid any confusion, the 1987 Constitution expanded the meaning of a natural-born, to wit: Section 1. The following are citizens of the Philippines: Page 3 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1 REVIEW From the lectures of Atty. Vincent Paul Le. Montejo 4- Manresa (2018-2019) | Ateneo de Davao University (1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution; when the same question was raised 16 years after, the Supreme Court ruling changed, saying that it violates the free exercise clause. (2) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines; (3) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine Citizenship upon reaching the age of majority; and (4) Those who are naturalized in the accordance with law. What has changed? Petitioners are the same. Religion is the same. The claim is the same. The government is still the same. The circumstances have altered. The evil sought to be avoided in the earlier decision has not come to pass or it could not instill the sense of patriotism to children simply by compelling them to salute the flag. There could be other ways of instilling patriotism on children. The fear that there would be a generation of children lacking in that sense [of patriotism did not come to pass. And so the constitution should be capable of being interpreted not only to meet the questions of the present Section 2. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens. Nature of the Constitution It is not a document containing in express or explicit terms the powers of the government. It admits of residual powers. Powers of the government are executive, judicial, or legislative. Those provisions are applied RETROACTIVELY for those children in order to avoid the confusion of WON their act of electing citizenship upon reaching the age of majority still makes them a natural-born. The provisions relating to each of the powers refer to the limitation rather than the grant. RULE 4: Rule on Dynamism ABAS KIDA vs. SENATE The Constitution must be construed to be DYNAMIC. It must be capable of being interpreted not only to meet what is being asked of in the present but also the uncertainties and vagaries of the future. The ARMM elections were not held. The President appointed OICs for the elective positions affected instead ISSUE: Whether the President can do that. This could be shown by the interpretation of the SC over the SAME provision. The interpretation in one time may be different in some other time. RULING: Yes. The President has the power to ensure that laws are implemented. Part of implementation is to ensure that there is continuity in the governance of the ARMM. It is said that one of the measures of a good constitution is that it is capable of being interpreted not only to accommodate the demands of the present but also those to be demandable in the future. (From 2017 TSN) B. In relation to this is your understanding of the: THE DOCTRINE OF RELATIVE CONSTITUTIONALITY. What does that mean? This is based on the concept of separation of powers. Before the 1987 Constitution, judicial review has always been a theory. The first case on judicial review was Angara vs. Electoral Commission which was decided under the 1935 Constitution. When the Supreme Court interprets a law, statute, or an act in relation to a constitutional provision to be not valid under the constitution at present, it does not mean that the ruling will remain forever. Conversely, if the Supreme Court says that it is valid in the constitution as of the moment that does not mean that it will remain to be valid forever. As they say there is no forever. When the circumstances have been altered or there are new developments say in human society or in human behavior, that ruling may change depending on the demands of that particular time. If you remember the flag salute cases, what was the first thing that you could remember in these cases where Jehovah‘s witnesses were not required to salute the flag? The previous ruling was that it does not violate their right under the freedom to exercise religion clause. But Theory of Judicial Review Separation of Powers ANGARA vs. ELECTORAL COMMISSION 63 PHIL 139 (1936) ISSUE: Who has the power to fix the date for filing of election protest? Is it the Congress or the Electoral Commission? In this case, the Supreme Court discussed what separation of powers is and its role to ensure that such separation is maintained. From Full Text: The separation of powers is a fundamental principle in our system of government. It obtains not through express provision but by actual division in our Constitution. Each department of the government has exclu...
View Full Document

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture