XAVIER UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW Cagayan de Oro City CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I First Semester, AY 2014-2015 Dr. Antonio G. M. La Viña I. COURSE INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW A. Course Objectives: a. To help you become lawyers (Pass the bar) b. To help you become good lawyers (for your future clients) c. To teach law in a grand manner and to help you become great lawyers (for the poor, for the country, and for the world) B. Course Requirements: a. 50% = 4-6 Hour Final Examinations at the end of the semester b. 50% to be derived equally from: i. Quizzes on the provisions of the 1987 Constitution ii. Collective recitation grade (daily recitation and group projects) iii. Mid-Term Exams (To be determined by class consensus; without consensus, no midterms and the 50% will be divided equally between the oral exams and the collective recitation grade)C. *Recommended References: Joaquin Bernas S.J., The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary. Rex Bookstore (2003) Facebook Link: TLV Constitutional Law C. Course Overview, including introductions and preliminary exercises II. WHAT IS LAW? WHAT IS CONSTITIONAL LAW? WHAT IS PHILIPPINE CONSTITUIONAL LAW? A. Preliminary Reflections *The Oresteia by Aeschylus (can be downloaded at gutenberg.net.au/ebooks07/0700021.txt) *An Enemy of the People by Henrik Ibsen (can be downloaded at gutenberg.org/files/2446/2446-h/2446-h.htm) * Valino vs Adriano (GR 182894, 22 April 2014, read dissent of Justice Leonen) *Estrada v. Escritor [A.M. No. P-02-1651. August 4, 2003] B. Lecture on History of Philippine Constitutional Law The Biak-na-Bato Constitution (1897) The Malolos Constitution (1899) McKinley’s Instructions (1900) Philippine Bill of 1902 Jones Act of 1916 The 1935 Constituion (Original and as Amended) The 1973 Constitution (As Amended) The 1986 Freedom Constitution The 1987 Constitution The Constitutional Transition Cases • Gonzales v. COMELEC 21 SCRA 774, 797 (1967) • Tolentino v. COMELEC 41 SCRA 702 (1971) • Planas v. COMELEC, 49 SRA 105 (1973) • Javellana v. Executive Secretary 50 SRA (1973) • Sanidad v. COMELEC, 73 SCRA 333 (1976) • Lawyers’ League for a Better Phil. v. Pres. Aquino et. al., GR 73748 (1986) • Saturnino v. Bermudez, GR No. 146738 (March 2, 2001) • Estrada v. Desierto (G.R. Nos. 146710-15. April 3, 2001] III. WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL? WHO INTERPRETS THE CONSTITUTION (POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW) • A. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS Article VIII, Sections 1, 4(2), 5(2), 5(5) Read all the RH Law opinions - See interaksyon/article/84526/supreme-court-decision-on-rh-law The PDAF and DAP (if available) Decisions – citations to be provided. • B. CASE LIST: • 1. Origin of Judicial Review • � Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch (5 US) 137, 2 l. ed. 60 (1803) • � Angara v. Electoral Tribunal, 63 Phil. 139 (1936) • 2. Requisites of Judicial Review • � PACU v. Secretary of Education, 97 Phil. 806 (1955); • � Tan v. Macapagal, 43 SCRA 678 (1972). • � People v. Vera, Phil. 58, 89 (1937). • 3. Actual Controversy • � Mariano v. COMELEC, 242 SCRA 211 (1995) • � Province of North Cotabato v. GRP, Esperon et. al., G.R. No. 183591, October 14, 2008 • 4. Mootness Doctrine • � Alunan III v. Mirasol, 276 SCRA 501, 511 (1997) • � AKBAYAN v. Thomas G. Aquino, G.R. No. 170516, July 16, 2008 • 5. Legal Standing • � Macasiano v. NHA, 224 SCRA 236 (1993) • � Kilosbayan v. Guingona, 232 SCRA 110 (1994) • � Senate of the Philippines v. Ermita, 488 SCRA 1, at 39 (2006) • 6. Taxpayer’s suit • � Tatad v. Garcia, Jr, 243 SCRA 436 (1995) • � Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works & Communications, 110 Phil. 331 (1960) • � Del Mar vs. PAGCOR, 346 SCRA 485 (2000) • 7. Political Question • � Tanada v. Cuenco, 13 SCRA 375 (1965) • � Daza v. Singson, 180 SCRA 496 (1989) IV. HOW CAN WE CHANGE, AMEND, OR REVISE THE CONSTITUTION? • A. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS Article XVII, Sections 1-4 • B. CASE LIST 1. � Javellana vs. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. L-36142. March 31, 1973 2. � Sanidad v. COMELEC, 73 SCRA 333 (1976) 3. � Ratification Cases, 50 SCRA 30, 373, note 3 (1973) 4. � Gonzales v. COMELEC, 21 SCRA 774, 797 (1967) 5. � Planas v. COMELEC, 49 SCRA 105 (1973) 6. � Tolentino v. COMELEC, 41 SCRA 702 (1971) 7. � Santiago v. COMELEC, 270 SCRA 106 (1997) 8. � Lambino v. COMELEC, 505 SCRA 160 (2006) • C. LAWS: • � REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6132: CALLING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, ETC. August 24, 1970. • � R.A. 6735: AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A SYSTEM OF INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM. August 4, 1989. D. REFERENCE – Joaquin Bernas S.J., The JV Ongpin Lecture on Constitutional Change (2006) V. WHAT IS THE PHILIPPINES? (TERRITORY, PEOPLE, and GOVERNMENT) 1. TERRITORY A. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS Article I (Compare to 1935 and 1973 versions) B. TREATIES AND LAWS • � TREATY OF PARIS, Article III • � R. A. No. 3046 as amended b RA No. 5446 - AN ACT TO DEFINE THE BASELINES OF THE TERRITORIAL SEA OF THE PHILIPPINES • � R. A. No. 9522 – “AN ACT TO AMEND CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF R. A. NO. 3046, AS AMENDED BY R. A. NO. 5446, TO DEFINE THE ARCHIPELAGIC BASELINES OF THE PHILIPPINES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES” • � UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA, December 10, 1982; see Articles 46-54 • � PD No. 1599: ESTABLISHING AN EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES June 11, 1978. C. REFERENCE – Peter Payoyo, “On the Philippines and the Archipelagic Doctrine” 2. PEOPLE A. A. CITIZENSHIP Article IV, Sections 1-5 CASE LIST • � Aznar v. COMELEC, 185 SCRA 703 (1990) • � Fornier vs. Commission on Elections and Ronald Allan Kelley Poe, also known as Fernando Poe Jr.424 SCRA 277 ( 2004) • � Co v. Electoral Tribunal of the House of Representatives. 199 SCRA 692 (1991) • � Willie Yu v. Defensor-Santiago, 169 SCRA 364 (1989) • � Labo v. COMELEC, 176 SCRA 1 (1989) • � Frivaldo v. COMELEC,174 SCRA 245 • � Frivaldo vs. COMELEC, 257 SCRA 727 (1996) • � Angat v. Republic, 314 SCRA 438 (1999.) • � Bengzon v. Cruz, 357 SCRA 545 (2001) • � Valles v. COMELEC, 337 SCRA 543 (2000.) • � Mercado vs. Manzano and COMELEC, 307 SCRA 630 (1999) LAWS THE DUAL CITIZENSHIP LAW (2004) B. SUFFRAGE Article 5, Sections 1-2 CASE LIST • � Gallego v. Verra, 73 Phil. 453, 455-456 (1941) • � Romualdez v. RTC, 226 SCRA 408, 415 (1993) • � Akbayan v. COMELEC, 355 SCRA 318 (2001) • � Ceniza v. COMELEC, 95 SCRA 703 (1980) • � Macalintal v. COMELEC, 405 SCRA 614 (2003) LAWS RA 9189 (THE OVERSEAS ABSENTEE VOTING ACT) 3. GOVERNMENT See Bernas, S.J., pp. 35-46 CASE LIST • � Government of the Philippines, Defined U.S. v. Dorr, 2 Phil. 332, at 339 (1903) • � Constituent and Ministrant and Functions of the Government Bacani vs. Nacoco, November 29, 1956. • � Traditional Classification of Government Functions Obliterated ACCFA v. CUGCO, 30 SCRA 256 (1989) • � De Facto and De Jure Government Co Kim Cham v. Valdez, 75 Phil. 113 (1946) • � Revolutionary Government Republic v. Sandiganbayan, 406 SCRA 190 (2003) • � Parens Patriae Government v. Monte de Piedad, 35 Phil. 728 (1916) • � Immunity from Suit Republic v. Feliciano, 148 SCRA 424 (1987) Meritt v. Government of the Phil. Island, 34 Phil. 311 (1916) Phil. Agila Satellite v. Lichauco, G.R. No. 134887, July 27, 2006 • � Money Claims Ministerio v. CFI, 40 SCRA 464 (1971) • � Inherent Powers of the State Rubi v. Provincial Board, 39 Phil. 660 (1919) Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA 195 (1979) VI. WHO MAKES OUR LAWS? (THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT) • A. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS 1. 1. MEMBERSHIP IN THE LEGISLATURE Article VI, Sections 2-14 1. 2. ORGANIZATION OF THE LEGISLATURE Article VI, Sections 15-21, 1. 3. POWERS OF CONGRESS Article VI, Sections 1, 5, 18, 21, 25-28 Article III 1. 4. LEGISLATIVE PROCESS Article VI, Sections 24-29 1. 5. INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM Article VI, Section 32 • B. CASE LIST 1. 1. MEMBERSHIP IN THE LEGISLATURE Article VI, Sections 2-14 • a. Residence Qualification (Section 6) • � Romualdez-Marcos v. COMELEC, 248 SCRA 300 (1995) • � Domino v. COMELEC, 310 SCRA 546 (1999) • b. Term and Tenure (Section 7) • � Dimaporo v. Mitra, 202 SCRA 779 (1991) • � Fariñas, et al. v. Executive Secretary, 417 SCRA 503 (2003) • c. Election (Section 8) • � Codilla v. De Venecia, 393 SCRA 639 (2002) • d. Special Election (Section 9) • � Tolentino v. COMELEC, 420 SCRA 438 (2004) • e. Party List System (Section 5) • � Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC, 342 SCRA 224 (2000) • � Ang Bagong Bayani v. COMELEC, 359 SCRA 698 (2001) • � Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor party v. COMELEC, June 2, 2003 • � Barangay Association for National Advancement and Transparency (BANAT) v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 179271, April 21, 2009 • f. Privilege from Arrest (Section 11) • � People v. Jalosjos, 324 SCRA 689 (2000) • g. Privilege of Speech (Section 11) • � Jimenez v. Cabangbang, G.R. No. L-15905,, August 3, 1966 • � Antonino v. Valencia, G.R. No. L-26526, May 27, 1974 • h. Prohibitions (Section 14) • � Puyat v. De Guzman, 113 SCRA 31 (1982) • � Liban v. Gordon, G.R. No. 175352, July 15, 2009 1. 2. ORGANIZATION OF THE LEGISLATURE Article VI, Sections 15-21, 1. a. Officers (Section 16) • � Avelino v. Cuenco, March 4, 1949 • � Santiago v. Guingona, supra • � Arroyo, et al. v. De Venecia, 277 SCRA 268 (1997) 1. b. Internal Discipline (Section 16) • � Osmeña v. Pendatun, 109 Phil. 863 (1960) • � Paredes, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 118364, August 8, 1995 1. c. Journals (Section 16) • � US v. Pons, 34 Phil. 729 (1916) • � Casco v. Phil. Chemical Co. v. Gimenez, 7 SCRA 347 (1963) • � Astorga v. Villegas, 56 SCRA 714 (1974) 1. d. Electoral Tribunals (Section 17) • � Angara v. Electoral Commission, 63 Phil. 139 (1936) • � Abbas, et al. v. Senate, 166 SCRA 651 (1988) • � Lazatin v. COMELEC, 157 SCRA 337 (1988) • � Lazatin v. COMELEC, 168 SCRA 391 (1988) 1. 3. POWERS OF CONGRESS Article VI, Sections 1, 5, 18, 21, 25-28 Article III 1. a. Non-delegability of legislative power (Section 1) • � Eastern Shipping Lines v. POEA, 166 SCRA 533 (1988) • � Tablarin v. Gutierrez, 152 SCRA 730 (1987) • � Tatad v. Secretary of Energy, 282 SCRA 337 (1997) • � People v. Dacuycuy, 173 SCRA 90 (1989) • � Chiongbian v. Orbos, 245 SCRA 253 (1995) • � Sema v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 177597, July 16 2008 [In relation to Art. VI, Sec. 5] 1. b. Commission on Appointments (Section 18) • � Daza v. Singson, 180 SCRA 496 (1989) • � Coseteng v. Mitra, Jr., 187 SCRA 377 (1990) • � Guingona, Jr. v. Gonzales, 214 SCRA 789 (1992) 1. c. Legislative Investigations (Section 21) • � Arnault v. Nazareno, 87 Phil. 29, 45 (1950) • � Bengzon v. Senate Blue Ribbon Comm., 203 SCRA 767 (1991) • � Sabio, v. Gordon, et al. - G.R. No. 174340, October 17, 2006 • � Romulo L. Neri v. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations, Senate Committee on Trade and Commerce, and Senate Committee on National Defense and Security, G.R. No. 180643 (2008) 1. 4. LEGISLATIVE PROCESS Article VI, Sections 24-29 1. a. Appropriations (Section 25) • � Garcia v. Mata, 65 SCRA 517 (1975) 1. b. Transfer of Funds (Section 25) • � Demetria v. Alba, 148 SCRA 208 (1987) 1. c. Subject and Title of Bills (Section 26) • � Central Capiz v. Ramirez, 40 Phil. 883, 891 (1920) • � Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, 235 SCRA 630 (1994) 1. d. Item Veto (Section 27) • � Commission of Internal Revenue v. CTA, 185 SCRA 329 (1990) • � Gonzales v. Macaraig, 191 SCRA 452 (1990) • � Philconsa v. Enriquez, 235 SCRA 508 (1994) 1. e. Tax Laws (Section 28) • � Commissioner of BIR v. CA, 298 SCRA 83 (1998) • � CIR v. Santos, 277 SCRA 617 (1997) 1. f. Expenditure of Funds (Section 29) • � Guingona, Jr. v. Carague, 196 SCRA 221 (1991) • � Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works, 110 Phil. 331-346 (1960) • � Osmeña v. Orbos, 220 SCRA 703 (1993) 1. 5. INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM Article VI, Section 32 1. a. Initiative and Referendum (Section 32) • � Garcia v. COMELEC, 237 SCRA 279 (1994) • C. LAWS: • � RA No. 7941: AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE ELECTION OF PARTY-LIST REPRESENTATIVES THROUGH THE PARTY-LIST SYSTEM, March 3, 1995. • � RA No. 6735: AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A SYSTEM OF INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, August 4, 1989 D. REFERENCE – Policy Papers on Bicameralism and on the Parliamentary-Presidential Debate (2007) VII. WHO IMPLEMENTS THE LAW AND RUNS THE GOVERNMENT? (EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT) A. A. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS 1. 1. PRESIDENT AND VICE-PRESIDENT Article VII, Sections. 2-13 1. 2. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE PRESIDENT Article VII, Sections 1, 13-23 Article X, Sections 4 and 16 Article VI, Sections 9, 23, 27, 28 Article III, Section 13 Article VI, Section 23 (2) Article XII, Section 21 A. B. CASE LIST 1. 1. PRESIDENT AND VICE-PRESIDENT Article VII, Sections. 2-13 1. a. Election and Canvass (Section 4) • � Macalintal v. COMELEC. 405 SCRA 614 (2003) • � Congressman Lopez v. Senate and House, G.R. No. 163556, June 4, 2004 • � Pimentel v. Joint Canvassing Committee, June 22, 2004 1. b. Vacancy situations during the term (Section 8) • � Estrada v. Desierto, supra 1. c. Temporary Disability (Section 8) • � Estrada v. Desierto, supra 1. d. Prohibitions (Section 13) • � Doromal v. Sandiganbayan, 177 SCRA 354 (1989) • � Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, 194 SCRA 317 (1991) • � Bitonio Jr. v. COA, G.R. No. 147392, March 12, 2004 • � Estrada v. Desierto, supra • � Soliven v. Makasiar, 167 SCRA 393 (1988) 1. 2. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE PRESIDENT Article VII, Sections 1, 13-23 1. a. Executive Power (Section 1) • � Marcos v. Manglapus, 177 SCRA 668 (1989) • � Sema v. COMELEC, supra 1. b. Prohibited Appointments (Section 16) • � Government v. Springer, 50 Phil. 259 (1927) • � Bermudez v. Executive Secretary, 213 SCRA 733 (1999) • � Matibag v. Benipayo, 380 SCRA 49 (2002) • � De Castro v. JBC; GR No. 191002, March 17,2010 • � Funa v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 184740, February 11, 2010 1. c. Power of Control and Supervision (Section 17) • � Lacson-Magallanes v Paño, 21 SCRA 895 • � Blaquera, et al. v. Alcala, 295 SCRA 366 (1998) • � DENR v. DENR Employees, 409 SCRA 359 (2003) • � Senate v. Ermita, 488 SCRA 1 (2006) • � Rufino v. Endriga, G.R. No. 139554, July 21, 2006 1. d. Emergency Powers (Section 18) • � Gudani v. Senga, SCRA 498 SCRA 671 (2006) • � IBP vs. Zamora, et al. G.R. No. 141284. August 15, 2000. • � Sanlakas v. Reyes, February 3, 2004. • � Gonzales v. Abaya, 498 SCRA 445 (2006) • � David v. Macapagal-Arroyo (PP1017), GR 171396, May 3, 2006 1. e. Pardon (Section 19) • � Monsanto v. Factoran, 170 SCRA 190 (1989) • � Llamas v. Orbos, 202 SCRA 844 (1991) • � Drilon v. CA, 202 SCRA 378 (1991) 1. f. International Agreement (Section 21) • � Bayan v. Executive Secretary, 342 SCRA 449 (2000) • � Secretary of Justice v. Judge Lantion, 343 SCRA 377 (2000) • � Akbayan v. Aquino, supra A. C. REFERENCE – Policy Papers on Emergency Powers of the President (2007) VIII. WHO INTERPRETS THE LAW AND RESOLVES DISPUTES? (JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT) 1. A. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS Article VIII, Sections 1-16 1. B. CASE LIST 1. a. Judicial Power, Defined • � Lopez v. Roxas, 17 Phil 766 (1966) 1. b. Effect of Section 1 (2) on Judicial Inquiry (Section 1) • � Marcos v. Manglapus, 177 SCRA 688 (1989) • � Echegaray v. The Secretary of Justice, 19 January 1999 • � In Re: Wenceslao Laureta, 148 SCRA 382 (1987) 1. c. SC Division and En Banc (Section 4) • � People v. Dy, 395 SCRA 256 (2003) • � Fortich v. Corona, 312 SCRA 751 (1999) • � Firestone Ceramics v. CA, 334 SCRA 465 (2000) 1. d. Powers of the Judiciary (Section 5) • � In re Cunanan, 94 Phil. 534 (1954) • � Fabian v. Desierto, 295 SCRA 470, 492 (1998) • � In re Integration of the Bar of the Philippines, 49 SCRA 25-27 (1973) • � Tan v. IBP Commission on Bar Discipline, 501 SCRA 156 (2006) 1. e. Salaries fixed by law (Section 10) • � Nitafan v. Commission of Internal Revenue, 152 SCRA 284 1. f. Legal basis of decisions (Section 14) • � Francisco vs.Permskul, G.R. No. 81006. May 12, 1989. • � Velarde v. Social Justice Society, 428 SCRA 283 (2004) 1. C. REFERENCE – Policy Papers on the Judiciary (2007) IX. WHAT ARE THE INDEPENDENT CONSTITUTIONAL COMISSIONS? (CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISIONS) 1. A. COMMON CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS Article IX(A), Sections 1-7 1. B. CASE LIST • � Galido v. COMELEC, 193 SCRA 78 (1991) • � Mateo v. CA, 247 SCRA 284 (1995) • � Garces v. CA, 259 SCRA 99 (1996) • � CHREA v. CHR, G.R. 155336, July 21, 2006 1. 1. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Article IX(B), Sections 1-8 CASE LIST • � Mathay, Jr. Civil Service Commission, 312 SCRA 91 (1999) • � CSC v. Salas, 274 SCRA 414 (1997) • � Binamira v. Garrucho, Jr., 188 SCRA 154 (1990) • � Canonizado v. Aguirre, 323 SCRA 312 (2000) • � Luego v. CSC, 143 SCRA 327 (1986) • � Flores v. Drilon and Gordon, 223 SCRA 508 (1993) 1. 2. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS Article IX (C), Sections 1-11 CASE LIST • � Brillantes v. Yorac, 192 SCRA 358 (1990) • � Buac and Bautista v. COMELEC, 421 SCRA 92 (2004) • � LDP v. COMELEC, 423 SCRA 665 (2004) • � Kilosbayan v. COMELEC, 280 SCRA 892 (1997) • � Salazar v. COMELEC, 184 SCRA 433 (1990) • � Sanidad v. COMELEC, 181 SCRA 529 (1990) 1. 3. THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT Article IX (C), Sections 1-11 CASE LIST • � DBP v. COA, 373 SCRA 356 (2002) • � Dingcong v. Guingona Jr., 162 SCRA 782 (1988) • � Danville Maritime, Inc. v. COA, 175 SCRA 701 (1989) • � Ramos v. Aquino, 39 SCRA 256 (1971) 1. 4. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL BODIES a. Central Monetary Authority Article XII, Sections 20-21 b. Economic and Planning Agencies Article XII, Sections 9-10 c. National Commissions • o Commission on Human Rights (Article XIII) • o National Language Commission ( Article XIV, Section 9) • o National Police Commission (Article XVI, Section 6) X. WHAT IS THE ROLE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS? a. A. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS Article X, Sections 1-21 a. B. CASE LIST • � Basco v. Pagcor, 197 SCRA 52 (1991) • � Limbona v. Mangelin, 170 SCRA 786) • � Ganzon v. CA, 200 SCRA 271 (1991) • � Sucaldito v. Montejo, 193 SCRA 556(1991) • � Latasa v. Comelec, 417 SCRA 601 (2003) • � Pelaez v. Auditor General, 15 SCRA 569 (1965) • � Paredes v. The Executive Secretary, 128 SCRA 6 (1984) • � Lopez v. Comelec, 136 SCRA 633 (1985) • � City of Manila v. IAC, 179 SCRA 428 (1989) • � Rural Bank of Makati v. Makati, 433 SCRA 362 (2004) • � Acebedo Optical Company v. CA, 329 SCRA 314 (2000) • � Binay v. Domingo, 201 SCRA 508, 514 (1991) • � Carpio v. Executive Secretary, 206 SCRA 290 (1992) • � Dadole v. COA, 393 SCRA 262 (2002) 1. � Drilon v. Lim, 235 SCRA 135 (1994) • � Province of Rizal v. Executive Secretary, 477 SCRA 436 (2005) • � Sema v. COMELEC, supra • � League of Cities of the Philippines vs. Commission on Elections, G.R. Nos. 176951, 177499, 178056, December 21, 2009 • � Navarro v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 180050, February 10, 2010 • � Quinto v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 189698, December 1, 2009 • � Province of North Cotabato v. GRP, Esperon, et. al. G.R. No. 183591, October 14, 200 a. C. LAWS 1. � The Local Government Code of 1991 2. � R. A. No. 9054 - The Organic Act of Muslim Mindanao a. D. REFERENCE - Policy Papers on Federalism and Local Autonomy (2006) XI. HOW DO WE HOLD PUBLIC OFFICERS ACCOUNTABLE? a. A. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS Article XI, Sections 1-18 a. B. CASE LIST • � Nuñez v. Sandiganbayan, 111 SCRA 433, (1982) • � Office of the Ombudsman vs. Atty. Valera, 471 SCRA 715 (2005.) • � Ledesma vs. CA, 465 SCRA 437 (2005) • � In Re Gonzales, 160 SCRA 771 (1988) • � Francisco, et al. v. House Speaker , et al., 415 SCRA 44 (2003) • � Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan, 160 SCRA 843 (1988) • � Laurel v. Desierto, 381 SCRA 48 (2002) • � Azarcon v. Sandiganbayan, 268 SCRA 747 (1997) • � Honasan II v. Panel of Investigating Prosecutors of the Department of Justice, 427 SCRA 46 (2004) • � Garcia v. Miro, 397 SCRA 41 (2003) • � Caasi v. CA, 191 SCRA 229 (1990) • � Engaño v. Court of Appeals, 493 SCRA 323 (2006) • � Ombudsman v. Madriaga, G.R. No. 164316, September 27, 2006 C. LAWS: R.A. No. 6713 - Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. February 20, 1989 (See also The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) D. REFERENCE - Transparency and Accountability Network Corruption Report (2007) XII. WHAT IS OUR VISION OF SOCIETY? A. STATE PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES Article II, Sections 1-28 CASE LIST • � People v. Gozo, 53 SCRA 476 (1973) • � Co Kim Cham v. Valdez Tan Keh, 75 Phil. 113 (1945) • � In Re Letter of Associate Justice Puno, 210 SCRA 589 (1992) • � Republic v. Sandiganbayan, 407 SCRA 10 (2003) • � Oposa v. Factoran, 224 SCRA 792 (1993) • � Laguna Lake Development Authority v. CA, (1994) • � Garcia v. Board of Investments, 224 SCRA 792 (1990) • � Pamatong v. COMELEC, 427 SCRA 96 (2004) • � Tañada vs. Angara, 272 SCRA 18 (1997) • � MMDA v. Concerned Citizens of Manila Bay, G.R. Nos. 171947-48, December 18, 2008 • � AKBAYAN v. Thomas G. Aquino, G.R. No. 170516, July 16, 2008 REFERENCE - A. La Viña, The Right to a Sound and Balanced Ecology: The Odyssey of a Constitutional Policy, Philippine Law Journal, Manila 1994. B. NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY Article XII, Sections 1-22 CASE LIST • � San Miguel Corporation v. CA, 185 SCRA 722 (1990) • � La Bugal B’laan Tribal v. DENR, 421 SCRA 148 (2004) • � Chavez v. PEA and AMARI, 384 SCRA 152 (2002) • � JG Summit Holdings, Inc. v. CA, 412 SCRA 10 (2003) • � Krivenko v. Register of Deeds, 79 Phil. 461, 481 (1947) • � Director of Lands v. Judge Aquino, 192 SCRA 296 (1990) • � Director of Lands v. Intermediate Court of Appeals, 146 SCRA 509 (1986) • � Cruz v. Sec. of DENR, et al., 347 SCRA 128 (2000) • � Republic v. CA, 235 SCRA 567 (1994) • � Halili v. CA, 287 SCRA 465 (1998) • � Manila Prince v. GSIS, 267 SCRA 408 (1997) • � Albano v. Reyes, 175 SCRA 264 (1989) • � Associated Communications v. NTC, 397 SCRA 574 (2003) • � Agan v. PIATCO, 420 SCRA 575 (2004) • � Republic v. PLDT, 26 SCRA 620 (1969) • � Republic v. Jacob, 495 SCRA 529 (2006) • � Muller v. Muller, 500 SCRA 65 (2006) LAWS: R.A No. 8371: The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997. REFERENCE – A. La Viña et. al., Policy papers on Free, Prior and Informed Consent of Indigenous Peoples and on Revenue Distribution of the Profits from Natural Gas Extraction (2007) C. SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS Article XIII, Sections 1-19 CASE LIST • � Bautista vs. Salonga, 172 SCRA 160 (1989) • � Simon, Jr. vs. Commission on Human Rights, 229 SCRA 117 (1994) • � BPI Credit Corporation vs. NLRC, 234 SCRA 441 (1994) • � Federation of Free Farmers v. CA, 107 SCRA 352 (1981) • � Employers Confederation v. NWPC, 201 SCRA 759 (1991) • � Vinzons-Magana v. Estrella, 201 SCRA 536 (1991) • � Luz Farms v. Secretary of Agrarian Reforms,192 SCRA 51 (1990) • � Association of Small Landowners v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, 175 SCRA 343 (1989)) • � Del Rosario v. Bengzon, 180 SCRA 521 (1989) • � Cariño v. CHR, 204 SCRA 483 (1991) • � Cuba v. Cuenco, 502 v. 324, (2006) D. OTHER ASPIRATIONS All provisions of Articles XIV, XV & XVI CASE LIST • � DECS v. v. San Diego, 180 SCRA 533 (1989) • � Peña v. NLRC, 258 SCRA 65, 67 (1996) • � Ateneo de Manila University v. CA, 145 SCRA 100 (1986) • � Licup v. University of San Carlos, 178 SCRA 637 (1989) • � Capitol Medical Center v. CA, 178 SCRA 493 (1989) • � Abra Valley College, Inc. v. Aquino, 162 SCRA 106 (1988) • � Morales v. Board of Regents, 446 SCRA 227 (2004) • � Miriam College Foundation v. CA, 348 SCRA 265 ( 2000) • � University of San Carlos v. CA, 166 SCRA 570 (1988) • � U.P. v. Judge Ayson, 283 SCRA 571 (1989) • � Office of the President v. Buenaobra, 501 SCRA 302 (2006) XIII. CONCLUSION AND SYNTHESIS Plato, The Republic William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince Jose W. Diokno, A Nation for Our Children (1987) Horacio De La Costa SJ, Philippine Problems in Historical Perspective (1971)
Posted on: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 16:05:06 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015