100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 19 - 21 out of 107 pages.
members of the Philippine Bar and former delegates to the1971 Constitutional Convention that framed the presentConstitution, are suing as taxpayers assailed against thevalidity of three Batasang Pambansa Resolutions (ResolutionNo. 1 proposing an amendment allowing a natural-borncitizen of the Philippines naturalized in a foreign country toown a limited area of land for residential purposes wasapproved by the vote of 122 to 5; Resolution No. 2 dealingwith the Presidency, the Prime Minister and the Cabinet, andthe National Assembly by a vote of 147 to 5 with 1abstention; and Resolution No. 3 on the amendment to theArticle on the Commission on Elections by a vote of 148 to 2with 1 abstention) 1proposing constitutional amendments.The petitioners asserted in rather unorthodox aspect thatthe 1973 Constitution is not the fundamental law, theJavellana 2ruling to the contrary notwithstanding.ISSUES:1.Whether or not the 1973 Constitution is thefundamental law.2.Whether or not the resolutions issued by the InterimBatasang Pambansa is unconstitional or notunconstitutional.3.Whether or not the proposed amendments are soextensive in character that goes far beyond the limitsof the authority conferred on the Interim BatasangPambansa.HELD1.No. The proposed amendments do not go beyond thelimits of the authority conferred on the Interim BatasangPambansa.In Del Rosario v. Commission on Elections,Justice Makasiar, dispose this contention: thus, "Andwhether the Constitutional Convention will only proposeamendments to the Constitution or entirely overhaul thepresent Constitution and propose an entirely newConstitution based on an Ideology foreign to thedemocratic system, is of no moment; because the samewill be submitted to the people for ratification. Onceratified by the sovereign people, there can be no debateabout the validity of the new Constitution. The fact thatthe present Constitution may be revised and replacedwith a new one ... is no argument against the validity ofthe law because 'amendment' includes the 'revision' ortotal overhaul of the entire Constitution. At any rate,whether the Constitution is merely amended in part orrevised or totally changed would become immaterial themoment the same is ratified by the sovereign people." Therefore, the Interim Batasang Pambansa, sitting as aconstituent body, can propose amendments, whetherextensive in character, is inconsequential once ratified.WHEREFORE, it is the ruling of the court that the petitionsbe dismissed for lack of merit.Lambino, supraConstitutional Law 1 based on the syllabus of Atty. Remoroza2018-201919
Merzy’s Notes Prelim Exam i. Congress ii. Constitutional Convention Three Theories on the position of a ConstitutionalConvention vis-à-vis the regular the departments ofgovernment:1. Theory of Conventional Sovereignty2. Convention is inferior to the other department3. Independent of and co-equal to the other departmentsiii. People only for Amendments Republic Act No. 6735 - An Act Providing for a System of