Recentjuris Poli Final

(1)

Recent Jurisprudence (April 1, 2014

–

March 31, 2015)

Prepared by: Dean Sedfrey M. Candelaria and the students

of Ateneo de Manila University

PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF LAW SCHOOLS

BAR OPS PILIPINAS

2016

POLITICAL

LAW

(2)

Titles you can't find anywhere else

Try Scribd FREE for 30 days to access over 125 million titles without ads or interruptions!

Start Free Trial

Cancel Anytime.

(3)

Cancel Anytime.

INHERENT POWERS OF THE STATE

Police Power

The Court finds that there is no substantial difference between the activities that would fall The Court finds that there is no substantial difference between the activities that would fall under the purview of

under the purview of “sales“sales promotion”promotion” in RA 7394 in RA 7394 (“Consumer(“Consumer Act of the Act of the Philippines”),Philippines”), as as well as those under

well as those under “promotion”“promotion” in RA 9211 in RA 9211 (“Tobacco(“Tobacco Regulation Act of Regulation Act of 2003”),2003”), as would as would warrant a delineation in the authority to regulate its conduct. In line with this, if the warrant a delineation in the authority to regulate its conduct. In line with this, if the IAC-Tobacco was created and expressly given the exclusive authority to implement the Tobacco was created and expressly given the exclusive authority to implement the provisions of RA 9211, it signifies that it shall also take charge of the regulation of the use, provisions of RA 9211, it signifies that it shall also take charge of the regulation of the use, sale, distribution, and advertisements of tobacco products, as well as all forms of sale, distribution, and advertisements of tobacco products, as well as all forms of “promotion”

“promotion” which essentially includes which essentially includes “sales“sales promotion.”promotion.” Hence, the Court finds that RA Hence, the Court finds that RA 9211 impliedly repealed the relevant provisions of RA 7394 with respect to the authority of 9211 impliedly repealed the relevant provisions of RA 7394 with respect to the authority of the DOH to regulate tobacco sales promotions. Therefore, with this regulatory power the DOH to regulate tobacco sales promotions. Therefore, with this regulatory power conferred upon the IAC-Tobacco by RA 9211, the DOH and the BFAD have been effectively conferred upon the IAC-Tobacco by RA 9211, the DOH and the BFAD have been effectively and impliedly divested of any authority to act upon applications for tobacco sales and impliedly divested of any authority to act upon applications for tobacco sales promotional permit, including

promotional permit, including PMPMI’s.PMPMI’s.

THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, REPRESENTED

BY SECRETARY ENRIQUE T. ONA, AND THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION

(FORMERLY THE BUREAU OF FOOD AND DRUGS), REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT

SECRETARY OF HEALTH NICOLAS B. LUTERO III, OFFICER-IN-CHARGE

SECRETARY OF HEALTH NICOLAS B. LUTERO III, OFFICER-IN-CHARGE vs. PHILIP

vs. PHILIP

MORRIS PHILIPPINES MANUFACTURING, INC., G.R. No. 202943, March 25, 2015, J.

Perlas-Bernabe

STATE IMMUNITY FROM SUIT

An unincorporated government agency without any separate juridical personality of its An unincorporated government agency without any separate juridical personality of its own enjoys immunity from suit because it is invested with an inherent power of own enjoys immunity from suit because it is invested with an inherent power of sovereignty. Accordingly, a claim for damages against the agency cannot prosper; sovereignty. Accordingly, a claim for damages against the agency cannot prosper; otherwise, the doctrine of sovereign immunity is violated. The immunity has been upheld otherwise, the doctrine of sovereign immunity is violated. The immunity has been upheld in favor of the former because its function is governmental or incidental to such function; it in favor of the former because its function is governmental or incidental to such function; it has not been upheld in favor of the latter whose function was not in pursuit of a necessary has not been upheld in favor of the latter whose function was not in pursuit of a necessary function of government but was essentially a business.

function of government but was essentially a business.

The TRB, Dumlao and the DPWH correctly invoked the doctrine of sovereign immunity in The TRB, Dumlao and the DPWH correctly invoked the doctrine of sovereign immunity in their favor. The TRB and the DPWH performed purely or essentially government or public their favor. The TRB and the DPWH performed purely or essentially government or public functions. As such, they were invested with the inherent power of sovereignty. Being functions. As such, they were invested with the inherent power of sovereignty. Being unincorporated agencies or entities of the National Government, they could not be sued as unincorporated agencies or entities of the National Government, they could not be sued as such. On his part, Dumlao was acting as the agent of the TRB in respect of the matter such. On his part, Dumlao was acting as the agent of the TRB in respect of the matter concerned.

concerned.

Nonetheless, the Hermano Oil properly argued that the PNCC, being a private business Nonetheless, the Hermano Oil properly argued that the PNCC, being a private business entity, was not immune from suit. The PNCC was incorporated in 1966 under its original entity, was not immune from suit. The PNCC was incorporated in 1966 under its original name of Construction Development Corporation of the Philippines (CDCP) for a term of name of Construction Development Corporation of the Philippines (CDCP) for a term of fifty years pursuant to the Corporation Code. Hence, the Government owned 90.3% of the fifty years pursuant to the Corporation Code. Hence, the Government owned 90.3% of the equity of the PNCC, and only 9.70% of the

equity of the PNCC, and only 9.70% of the PNCC’sPNCC’s voting equity remained under private voting equity remained under private ownership. Although the majority or controlling shares of the PNCC belonged to the ownership. Although the majority or controlling shares of the PNCC belonged to the

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

(4)

Cancel Anytime.

(5)

Cancel Anytime.

Commission. Consequently, the doctrine of sovereign immunity had no application to the Commission. Consequently, the doctrine of sovereign immunity had no application to the PNCC.

PNCC.

HERMANO

HERMANO OIL

OIL MANUFACTURING

MANUFACTURING &

& SUGAR

SUGAR CORPORATION

CORPORATION vs.

vs. TOLL

TOLL

REGULATORY BOARD, ENGR. JAIME S. DUMLAO, JR., PHILIPPINE NATIONAL

CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION (PNCC) AND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND

HIGHWAYS (DPWH), G.R. No. 167290, November 26, 2014, J. Bersamin

SEPARATION OF POWERS

If the Legislature may declare what a law means, or what a specific portion of the If the Legislature may declare what a law means, or what a specific portion of the Constitution means, especially after the courts have in actual case ascertain its meaning by Constitution means, especially after the courts have in actual case ascertain its meaning by interpretation and applied it in a

interpretation and applied it in a decision, this would surely cause confusion and instabilitydecision, this would surely cause confusion and instability in judicial processes and court decisions. Herein, the Executive has violated the GAA when in judicial processes and court decisions. Herein, the Executive has violated the GAA when it stated that savings as a concept is an ordinary species of interpretation that calls for it stated that savings as a concept is an ordinary species of interpretation that calls for legislative, instead of judicial determination.

legislative, instead of judicial determination.

MARIA CAROLINA P. ARAULLO,

CHAIRPERSON, BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN, et al. vs.

CHAIRPERSON, BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN, et al. vs. BENIGNO SIMEON C.

BENIGNO SIMEON C.

AQUINO

AQUINO III,

III, PRESIDENT

PRESIDENT OF

OF THE

THE REPUBLIC

REPUBLIC OF

OF THE

THE PHILIPPINES,

PHILIPPINES, et

et al.

al. G.R.

G.R. No.

No.

209287, February 3, 2015, J. Bersamin

CHECKS AND BALANCES

“Under

“Under this carefully laid-out this carefully laid-out constitutional system, the DAP violates the principles of constitutional system, the DAP violates the principles of sepa- sepa-ration of powers and checks and balances on two (2) counts: first, by pooling funds that ration of powers and checks and balances on two (2) counts: first, by pooling funds that cannot at all be classified as savings; and second, by using these funds to finance projects cannot at all be classified as savings; and second, by using these funds to finance projects outside the

outside the ExecutivExecutive or e or for projects with for projects with no appropriation coverno appropriation cover.. “These

“These violations violations –– in direct violation of the in direct violation of the “no“no transfer”transfer” proviso of [Sec. 25(5)] of Article proviso of [Sec. 25(5)] of Article VI of the Constitution

VI of the Constitution –– had the effect of allowing the Executive to encroach on the domain had the effect of allowing the Executive to encroach on the domain of Congress in the budgetary process. By facilitating the use of funds not classified as of Congress in the budgetary process. By facilitating the use of funds not classified as savings to finance items other than for which they have been appropriated, the DAP in savings to finance items other than for which they have been appropriated, the DAP in effect allowed the President to

effect allowed the President to circumvecircumvent the constitutional budgetary process and nt the constitutional budgetary process and to vetoto veto items of the GAA without subjecting them to the 2/3 overriding veto that Congress is items of the GAA without subjecting them to the 2/3 overriding veto that Congress is empowered to

empowered to exercise.”exercise.”

MARIA CAROLINA P. ARAULLO, CHAIRPERSON, BAGONG

AL

ALY

YANSANG

ANSANG MAKABA

MAKABAY

YAN,

AN, et

et al.

al. vs.

vs. BENIGNO

BENIGNO SIMEON

SIMEON C.

C. AQUINO

AQUINO III,

III, PRESIDENT

PRESIDENT OF

OF

THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, et al.,G.R. No. 209287 (Consolidated), July 01,

2014, Separate Opinion, J. Brion

LIMITATIONS ON LEGISLATIVE POWER

Limitations on Appropriations Measures

Section 25(5), Article VI of the Constitution states: 5) No law shall be passed authorizing Section 25(5), Article VI of the Constitution states: 5) No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the President of the Senate, the any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized

heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in theto augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.

respective appropriations.

LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

(6)

Cancel Anytime.

(7)

Cancel Anytime.

may, with the approval of the President, be used to cover a deficit in any other item of the may, with the approval of the President, be used to cover a deficit in any other item of the regular appropriations: Provided, that the creation of new positions or increase of salaries regular appropriations: Provided, that the creation of new positions or increase of salaries shall not be allowed to be funded from budgetary savings except when specifically shall not be allowed to be funded from budgetary savings except when specifically authorized by law: Provided, further, that whenever authorized positions are transferred authorized by law: Provided, further, that whenever authorized positions are transferred from one program or project to another within the same department, office or agency, the from one program or project to another within the same department, office or agency, the corresponding amounts appropriated for personal services are also deemed transferred, corresponding amounts appropriated for personal services are also deemed transferred, without, however increasing the total outlay for personal services of the department, office without, however increasing the total outlay for personal services of the department, office or agency concerned.

or agency concerned.

On the other hand, Section 39 is evidently in conflict with the plain text of Section 25(5), On the other hand, Section 39 is evidently in conflict with the plain text of Section 25(5), Article VI of the Constitution because it allows the President to approve the use of any Article VI of the Constitution because it allows the President to approve the use of any savings in the regular appropriations authorized in the GAA for programs and projects of savings in the regular appropriations authorized in the GAA for programs and projects of any department, office or agency to cover a deficit in any other item of the regular any department, office or agency to cover a deficit in any other item of the regular appropriations. As such, Section 39 violates the mandate of Section 25(5) because the latter appropriations. As such, Section 39 violates the mandate of Section 25(5) because the latter expressly limits the authority of the President to augment an item in the GAA to only those expressly limits the authority of the President to augment an item in the GAA to only those in his own Department out of the savings in other items of his own

in his own Department out of the savings in other items of his own Department’sDepartment’s appropriations. Accordingly, Section 39 cannot serve as a valid authority to justify appropriations. Accordingly, Section 39 cannot serve as a valid authority to justify cross-border transfers under the DAP. Augmentations under the DAP which are made by the border transfers under the DAP. Augmentations under the DAP which are made by the Executive within its department shall, however, remain valid so long as the requisites Executive within its department shall, however, remain valid so long as the requisites under Section 25(5) are complied with.

under Section 25(5) are complied with.

MARIA CAROLINA P. ARAULLO, CHAIRPERSON,

BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN et al., vs.

BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN et al., vs. BENIGNO SIMEON C. AQUINO III,

BENIGNO SIMEON C. AQUINO III,

PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES et al., G.R. No. 209287, February

3, 2015, J. Bersamin

POWERS

The Executive cannot circumvent the prohibition by Congress of an expenditure for a The Executive cannot circumvent the prohibition by Congress of an expenditure for a Program, Activity or Project (PAP) by resorting to either public or private funds. Nor could Program, Activity or Project (PAP) by resorting to either public or private funds. Nor could the Executive transfer appropriated funds resulting in an increase in the budget for one the Executive transfer appropriated funds resulting in an increase in the budget for one PAP, for by so doing the appropriation for another PAP is necessarily decreased. The terms PAP, for by so doing the appropriation for another PAP is necessarily decreased. The terms of both appropriations will thereby be violated.

of both appropriations will thereby be violated.

MARIA CAROLINA P. ARAULLO,

CHAIRPERSON, BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN, et al. vs. BENIGNO SIMEON C.

AQUINO

AQUINO III,

III, PRESIDENT

PRESIDENT OF

OF THE

THE REPUBLIC

REPUBLIC OF

OF THE

THE PHILIPPINES,

PHILIPPINES, et

et al.,

al., G.R.

G.R. No.

No.

209287 (Consolidated), July 01, 2014, J. Bersamin

It is true that the General Appropriations Act provides for impoundment. Philconsa v. It is true that the General Appropriations Act provides for impoundment. Philconsa v. Enriquez declined to rule on its constitutional validity. Until a ripe and actual case, its Enriquez declined to rule on its constitutional validity. Until a ripe and actual case, its constitutional contours have yet to be determined. Certainly, there has been no specific constitutional contours have yet to be determined. Certainly, there has been no specific expenditure under the umbrella of the DAP alleged in the petition and properly traversed expenditure under the umbrella of the DAP alleged in the petition and properly traversed by respondents that would allow us the proper factual framework to delve into this issue. by respondents that would allow us the proper factual framework to delve into this issue. Any definitive pronouncement on impoundment as constitutional doctrine will be Any definitive pronouncement on impoundment as constitutional doctrine will be premature, advisory, and, therefore, beyond the province of review in these cases. premature, advisory, and, therefore, beyond the province of review in these cases.

J.

J. Leonen, Separate Concurring Opinion

Leonen, Separate Concurring Opinion

“When

“When the President approves the wholesale withdrawal of unobligated allotments by the President approves the wholesale withdrawal of unobligated allotments by invoking the blanket authority of [Sec. 38 vis-à-vis] the general policy impetus to ramp up invoking the blanket authority of [Sec. 38 vis-à-vis] the general policy impetus to ramp up government spending, without any discernible explanation behind a particular PAP government spending, without any discernible explanation behind a particular PAP

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT

(8)

Cancel Anytime.

(9)

Cancel Anytime.

mind, it is respectfully submitted]

mind, it is respectfully submitted] “that “that the with-drawal of unobligated allotments not the with-drawal of unobligated allotments not considered as savings, the augmentation, or, despite the funds being considered as savings, considered as savings, the augmentation, or, despite the funds being considered as savings, the augmentation of items cross-border or the funding of PAPs without an existing the augmentation of items cross-border or the funding of PAPs without an existing appropriation cover are unconstitutional acts and/practices taken under the

appropriation cover are unconstitutional acts and/practices taken under the DAP.”DAP.”

J.

J. Perlas-Bernabe, Separate Concurring Opinion

Perlas-Bernabe, Separate Concurring Opinion

Pardoning Power

When the pardon extended to former President Estrada shows that both the principal When the pardon extended to former President Estrada shows that both the principal penalty of reclusion perpetua and its accessory penalties are included in the pardon. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and its accessory penalties are included in the pardon. The first sentence refers to the executive clemency extended to former President Estrada who first sentence refers to the executive clemency extended to former President Estrada who was convicted by the Sandiganbayan of plunder and imposed a penalty of reclusion was convicted by the Sandiganbayan of plunder and imposed a penalty of reclusion perpetua. The latter

perpetua. The latter is the principal penalty pardoned which relieved is the principal penalty pardoned which relieved him of imprisonment.him of imprisonment. The sentence that followed, which states that "(h)e is hereby restored to his civil and The sentence that followed, which states that "(h)e is hereby restored to his civil and political rights," expressly remitted the accessory penalties that attached to the principal political rights," expressly remitted the accessory penalties that attached to the principal penalty of reclusion perpetua. Hence, from the text of the pardon that the accessory penalty of reclusion perpetua. Hence, from the text of the pardon that the accessory penalties of civil interdiction and perpetual absolute disqualification were expressly penalties of civil interdiction and perpetual absolute disqualification were expressly remitted together with the principal penalty of reclusion

remitted together with the principal penalty of reclusion perpetua.perpetua. Furthermore, the third preambular clause of the pardon, i.e.,

Furthermore, the third preambular clause of the pardon, i.e., “[w]hereas, Joseph Ejercito“[w]hereas, Joseph Ejercito Estrada has publicly committed to no longer seek any elective position or

Estrada has publicly committed to no longer seek any elective position or office,”office,” neither neither makes the pardon conditional, nor militate against the conclusion that former President makes the pardon conditional, nor militate against the conclusion that former President Estrada’s

Estrada’s rights to suffrage and to seek public elective office have been restored. A rights to suffrage and to seek public elective office have been restored. A preamble is really not an integral part of a law. It is merely an introduction to show its preamble is really not an integral part of a law. It is merely an introduction to show its intent or purposes. It cannot be the origin of rights and obligations. Where the meaning of a intent or purposes. It cannot be the origin of rights and obligations. Where the meaning of a statute is clear and unambiguous, the preamble can neither expand nor restrict its statute is clear and unambiguous, the preamble can neither expand nor restrict its operation much less prevail over its text. Hence if the pardon was intended be conditional, operation much less prevail over its text. Hence if the pardon was intended be conditional, it should have explicitly stated the same in the text of the pardon itself. Since it did not it should have explicitly stated the same in the text of the pardon itself. Since it did not make an integral part of the decree of pardon, the 3rd preambular clause cannot be make an integral part of the decree of pardon, the 3rd preambular clause cannot be interpreted as a condition to the pardon extended.

interpreted as a condition to the pardon extended.

ATTY. ALICIA

ATTY.

ALICIA RISOS-VIDAL

RISOS-VIDAL and

and

ALFREDO

ALFREDO S.

S. LIM

LIM vs.

vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA,

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA,

G.R. No. 206666, January 21, 2015, J. Leonardo-De Castro

Powers Relative to Appropriation Measures

The DAP was a government policy or strategy designed to stimulate the economy through The DAP was a government policy or strategy designed to stimulate the economy through accelerated spending. In the context of the

accelerated spending. In the context of the DAP’sDAP’s adoption and implementation being a adoption and implementation being a function pertaining to the Executive as the main actor during the Budget Execution Stage function pertaining to the Executive as the main actor during the Budget Execution Stage under its constitutional mandate to faithfully execute the laws, including the GAAs, under its constitutional mandate to faithfully execute the laws, including the GAAs, Congress did not need to legislate to adopt or to implement the DAP. Congress could Congress did not need to legislate to adopt or to implement the DAP. Congress could appropriate but would have nothing more to do during the Budge Execution Stage. Indeed, appropriate but would have nothing more to do during the Budge Execution Stage. Indeed, appropriation was the act by which Congress

appropriation was the act by which Congress “designates“designates a particular fund, or sets apart a a particular fund, or sets apart a specified portion of the public revenue or of the money in the public treasury, to be applied specified portion of the public revenue or of the money in the public treasury, to be applied to some general object of governmental expenditure, or to some individual purchase or to some general object of governmental expenditure, or to some individual purchase or expense. As pointed out in Gonzales vs. Raquiza,

expense. As pointed out in Gonzales vs. Raquiza, “[i]n“[i]n a strict sense, appropriation has been a strict sense, appropriation has been defined

defined ‘as nothing more than the legislative authorization prescribed by the Constitution‘as nothing more than the legislative authorization prescribed by the Constitution that money may be paid out o

that money may be paid out of thef the Treasury,’Treasury,’ while appropriation made by law refers to while appropriation made by law refers to ‘the‘the act of the legislature setting apart or assigning to a particular use a certain sum to be used act of the legislature setting apart or assigning to a particular use a certain sum to be used in the payment of debt or d

(10)

Cancel Anytime.

(11)

Cancel Anytime.

funded under th

funded under the DAPe DAP. The poo. The pooling of savings pursuant ling of savings pursuant to the to the DAPDAP, and the , and the identification ofidentification of the PAPs to be funded under the DAP did not involve appropriation in the strict sense the PAPs to be funded under the DAP did not involve appropriation in the strict sense because the money had been already set apart from the public treasury by Congress because the money had been already set apart from the public treasury by Congress through the GAAs. In such actions, the Executive did not usurp the power vested in the through the GAAs. In such actions, the Executive did not usurp the power vested in the Congress under Sec. 29(1), Article VI of the Constitution.

Congress under Sec. 29(1), Article VI of the Constitution.

MARIA CAROLINA P. ARAULLO,

CHAIRPERSON, BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN, et al., vs. BENIGNO SIMEON C.

AQUINO

AQUINO III,

III, PRESIDENT

PRESIDENT OF

OF THE

THE REPUBLIC

REPUBLIC OF

OF THE

THE PHILIPPINES,

PHILIPPINES, et

et al.,

al., G.R.

G.R. No.

No.

209287 (Consolidated), July 01, 2014, J. Bersamin

JUDICIAL REVIEW

The Court does not have the unbridled authority to rule on just any and every claim of The Court does not have the unbridled authority to rule on just any and every claim of constitutional violation. Jurisprudence is replete with the rule that the power of judicial constitutional violation. Jurisprudence is replete with the rule that the power of judicial review is limited by four exacting requisites, viz : (a) there must be an actual case or review is limited by four exacting requisites, viz : (a) there must be an actual case or controversy; (b) the petitioners must possess locus standi; (c) the question of controversy; (b) the petitioners must possess locus standi; (c) the question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest opportunity; and (d) the issue of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest opportunity; and (d) the issue of constitutionality must be the lis mota of the case. Hence, there is deemed an actual case of constitutionality must be the lis mota of the case. Hence, there is deemed an actual case of controversy when petitioners have shown that the case is so because medical practitioners controversy when petitioners have shown that the case is so because medical practitioners or medical providers are in danger of being criminally prosecuted under the RH Law for or medical providers are in danger of being criminally prosecuted under the RH Law for vague violations thereof, particularly public health officers who are threatened to be vague violations thereof, particularly public health officers who are threatened to be dismissed from the service with

dismissed from the service with forfeiturforfeiture of retirement and other e of retirement and other benefits. Fbenefits. For this reason,or this reason, Court can exercise its power of judicial review over the controversy.

Court can exercise its power of judicial review over the controversy.

JAMES M. IMBONG, et

al., vs. HON. PA

al., vs. HON. PAQUITO N. OCHO

QUITO N. OCHOA, JR. et

A, JR. et al., G.R. No.

al., G.R. No. 204819 ,

204819 , April 8, 2014,

April 8, 2014, J. Mendoza

J. Mendoza

Except for PHILCONSA, a petitioner in G.R. No. 209164, the petitioners have invoked their Except for PHILCONSA, a petitioner in G.R. No. 209164, the petitioners have invoked their capacities as taxpayers who, by averring that the issuance and implementation of the DAP capacities as taxpayers who, by averring that the issuance and implementation of the DAP and its relevant issuances involved the illegal disbursements of public funds, have an and its relevant issuances involved the illegal disbursements of public funds, have an interest in preventing the further dissipation of public funds. The petitioners in G.R. No. interest in preventing the further dissipation of public funds. The petitioners in G.R. No. 209287 (Araullo) and G.R. No. 29442 (Belgica) also assert their right as citizens to sue for 209287 (Araullo) and G.R. No. 29442 (Belgica) also assert their right as citizens to sue for the enforcement and observance of the constitutional limitations on the political branches the enforcement and observance of the constitutional limitations on the political branches of the

of the Government.Government.

On its part, PHILCONSA simply reminds that the Court has long recognized its legal On its part, PHILCONSA simply reminds that the Court has long recognized its legal standing to bring cases upon constitutional issues. Luna, the petitioner in G.R. No. 209136, standing to bring cases upon constitutional issues. Luna, the petitioner in G.R. No. 209136, cites his additional as a lawyer. The IBP, the petitioner in G.R. No. 209260, stands by cites his additional as a lawyer. The IBP, the petitioner in G.R. No. 209260, stands by “its“its avowed duty to work for the rule of law and of paramount importance of the question in avowed duty to work for the rule of law and of paramount importance of the question in this action, not to mention its civic duty as the official association of all lawyers in this this action, not to mention its civic duty as the official association of all lawyers in this country.”

country.”

Under their respective circumstances, each of the petitioners has established sufficient Under their respective circumstances, each of the petitioners has established sufficient interest in the outcome of th

interest in the outcome of the controverse controversy as to confer locus standi oy as to confer locus standi on each of them.n each of them.

MARIA

CAROLINA P. ARAULLO, CHAIRPERSON, BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN, et al. vs.

BENIGNO SIMEON C. AQUINO III, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,

et al., G.R. No. 209287 (Consolidated), July 01, 2014, J. Bersamin

It is a rule firmly entrenched in our jurisprudence that the courts will not determine the It is a rule firmly entrenched in our jurisprudence that the courts will not determine the constitutionality of a law unless the

constitutionality of a law unless the following requisites are present: (1) the existence of following requisites are present: (1) the existence of anan

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

(12)

Cancel Anytime.

(13)

Cancel Anytime.

necessary to the

necessary to the decision of the casdecision of the case. e. The Supreme Court has caThe Supreme Court has carefully read the petitionsrefully read the petitions and we conclude that they fail to compellingly show the necessity of examining the and we conclude that they fail to compellingly show the necessity of examining the constitutionality of Section 28(a) and (b) of RA 7279 in the light of Sections 1 and 6, Article constitutionality of Section 28(a) and (b) of RA 7279 in the light of Sections 1 and 6, Article 3 of the 1987 Constitution.

3 of the 1987 Constitution.

KALIPUNAN NG DAMAYANG MAHIHIRAP, INC., et al., vs.

JESSIE ROBREDO, in his capacity as Secretary, Department of Interior and Local

Government, et al., G.R. No. 200903, July 22, 2014, J. Brion

The existence of an actual

The existence of an actual controvcontroversy in the instant case cannot ersy in the instant case cannot be overbe overemphasized. At theemphasized. At the time of filing of the instant petition, Robredo had already implemented the assailed MCs. In time of filing of the instant petition, Robredo had already implemented the assailed MCs. In fact, Villafuerte received Audit Observation Memorandum (AOM) No. 2011-009 dated May fact, Villafuerte received Audit Observation Memorandum (AOM) No. 2011-009 dated May 10, 2011 from the Office of the Provincial Auditor of Camarines Sur, requiring him to 10, 2011 from the Office of the Provincial Auditor of Camarines Sur, requiring him to comment on the observation of the audit team,

comment on the observation of the audit team,

The issuance of AOM No. 2011-009 to Villafuerte is a clear indication that the assailed The issuance of AOM No. 2011-009 to Villafuerte is a clear indication that the assailed issuances of Robredo are already in the full

issuances of Robredo are already in the full course of implementation. The AOM specificallycourse of implementation. The AOM specifically mentioned of

mentioned of Villafuerte’sVillafuerte’s alleged non-compliance alleged non-compliance …… and [t]he fact that Villafuerte is being and [t]he fact that Villafuerte is being required to comment on the contents of thereof signifies that the process of investigation required to comment on the contents of thereof signifies that the process of investigation for his alleged violation has already begun. Ultimately, the investigation is expected to end for his alleged violation has already begun. Ultimately, the investigation is expected to end in a resolution on whether a violation has indeed been committed, together with the in a resolution on whether a violation has indeed been committed, together with the appropriate sanctions that

appropriate sanctions that come with itcome with it. Clearly. Clearly,, Villafuerte’sVillafuerte’s apprehension is real and well- apprehension is real and well-founded as he stands to be sanctioned for non-compliance with the issuances.

founded as he stands to be sanctioned for non-compliance with the issuances.

GOV. LUIS

RAYMUND F. VILLAFUERTE, JR. AND THE PROVINCE OF CAMARINES SUR vs. HON.

JESSE M. ROBREDO IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF

INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, G.R. No. 1

, G.R. No. 195390, De

95390, December 10, 2014,

cember 10, 2014, J. Reyes

J. Reyes

There can be no justiciable controversy involving the constitutionality of a proposed bill. There can be no justiciable controversy involving the constitutionality of a proposed bill. The Court can exercise its power of judicial review only after a law is enacted, not before. The Court can exercise its power of judicial review only after a law is enacted, not before. Mijares wants the court to strike down the proposed bills abolishing the Judiciary Mijares wants the court to strike down the proposed bills abolishing the Judiciary Development Fund. The court, however, must act only within its powers granted under the Development Fund. The court, however, must act only within its powers granted under the Constitution. The court is not empowered to review proposed bills because a bill is not a Constitution. The court is not empowered to review proposed bills because a bill is not a law.

law.

IN THE MATTER OF: SAVE THE SUPREME COURT JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE AND

FISCAL AUTONOMY MOVEMEN vs. ABOLITION OF JUDICIARY DEVELOPMENT FUND

(JDF) AND REDUCTION OF FISCAL AUTONOMY., UDK-15143, January 21, 2015, J.

Leonen

Operative Fact Doctrine

The doctrine of operative fact recognizes the existence of the law or executive act prior to The doctrine of operative fact recognizes the existence of the law or executive act prior to the determination of its unconstitutionality as an operative fact that produced the determination of its unconstitutionality as an operative fact that produced consequences that cannot always be erased, ignored or disregarded. In short, it

consequences that cannot always be erased, ignored or disregarded. In short, it nullifies thenullifies the void law or executiv

(14)

Cancel Anytime.

(15)

Cancel Anytime.

Moot & Academic

A case or issue is considered moot and academic when it ceases to present a justiciable A case or issue is considered moot and academic when it ceases to present a justiciable controversy by virtue of supervening events, so that an adjudication of the case or a controversy by virtue of supervening events, so that an adjudication of the case or a declaration on the issue would be of no practical value or use. In such instance, there is no declaration on the issue would be of no practical value or use. In such instance, there is no actual substantial relief which a petitioner would be entitled to, and which would be actual substantial relief which a petitioner would be entitled to, and which would be negated by the dismissal of the petition.

negated by the dismissal of the petition. Courts generally decline jurisdiction over such caseCourts generally decline jurisdiction over such case or dismiss it on the ground of mootness, as a judgment in a case which presents a moot or dismiss it on the ground of mootness, as a judgment in a case which presents a moot question can no longer be enforced. RTC's rendition of the Decision by virtue of which the question can no longer be enforced. RTC's rendition of the Decision by virtue of which the assets subject of the said cases were all forfeited in favor of the government, are assets subject of the said cases were all forfeited in favor of the government, are supervening events which have rendered the essential issue in this case moot and supervening events which have rendered the essential issue in this case moot and academic, that is, whether or not respondents should have been allowed by the RTC to academic, that is, whether or not respondents should have been allowed by the RTC to intervene on the ground that they have a legal interest in the forfeited assets.

intervene on the ground that they have a legal interest in the forfeited assets.

REPUBLIC OF

THE PHILIPPINES, represented by the ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING COUNCIL, vs.

RAFAEL A. MANALO, GRACE M. OLIVA, and FREIDA Z. RIVERA-YAP, G.R. No. 192302,

June 4, 2014, J. Perlas-Bernabe

Political Question Doctrine

When petitioners, a Diocese and its Bishop posted tarpaulins in front of the cathedral When petitioners, a Diocese and its Bishop posted tarpaulins in front of the cathedral which aimed to dissuade voters from electing candidates who supported the RH Law, and which aimed to dissuade voters from electing candidates who supported the RH Law, and the COMELEC twice ordered the latter to dismantle the tarpaulin for violation of its the COMELEC twice ordered the latter to dismantle the tarpaulin for violation of its regulation which imposed a size limit on campaign materials, the case is about

regulation which imposed a size limit on campaign materials, the case is about COMELEC’sCOMELEC’s breach of the

breach of the petitioners’petitioners’ fundamental right of expression of matters relating to election. fundamental right of expression of matters relating to election. The concept of a political question never precludes judicial review when the act of a The concept of a political question never precludes judicial review when the act of a constitutional organ infringes upon a fundamental individual or collective right.

constitutional organ infringes upon a fundamental individual or collective right.

THE

DIOCESE OF BACOLOD, REPRESENTED BY THE MOST REV. BISHOP VICENTE M.

NAVARRA and THE BISHOP HIMSELF IN HIS PERSONAL CAPACITY vs. COMMISSION

OF ELECTIONS AND THE ELECTION OFFICER OF BACOLOD CITY, ATTY. MAVIL V.

MAJARUCON, G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015, J. Leonen

JUDICIAL RESTRAINT

Not every error in the proceedings, or every erroneous conclusion of law or fact, Not every error in the proceedings, or every erroneous conclusion of law or fact, constitutes grave abuse of discretion. While the prosecutor, or in this case, the investigating constitutes grave abuse of discretion. While the prosecutor, or in this case, the investigating officers of the Office of the Ombudsman, may err or even abuse the discretion lodged in officers of the Office of the Ombudsman, may err or even abuse the discretion lodged in them by law, such error or abuse alone does not render their act amenable to correction them by law, such error or abuse alone does not render their act amenable to correction and annulment by the extraordinary remedy of certiorari. The requirement for judicial and annulment by the extraordinary remedy of certiorari. The requirement for judicial intrusion is still for the petitioner Agdeppa to demonstrate clearly that the Office of the intrusion is still for the petitioner Agdeppa to demonstrate clearly that the Office of the Ombudsman committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of Ombudsman committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of

(16)

Cancel Anytime.

(17)

Cancel Anytime.

Powers

Since the Extraordinary and Miscellaneous Expenses (EME) of Government-Owned and Since the Extraordinary and Miscellaneous Expenses (EME) of Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations (GOCCs), Government Financial Institutions (GFIs) and their Controlled Corporations (GOCCs), Government Financial Institutions (GFIs) and their subsidiaries, are, pursuant to law, allocated by their own internal governing boards, as subsidiaries, are, pursuant to law, allocated by their own internal governing boards, as opposed to the EME of National Government Agencies (NGAs) which are appropriated in opposed to the EME of National Government Agencies (NGAs) which are appropriated in the annual General Appropriations Act (GAA) duly enacted by Congress, there is a the annual General Appropriations Act (GAA) duly enacted by Congress, there is a perceivable rational impetus for the Commission on Audit (CoA) to impose nuanced control perceivable rational impetus for the Commission on Audit (CoA) to impose nuanced control measures to check if the EME disbursements of GOCCs, GFIs and their subsidiaries measures to check if the EME disbursements of GOCCs, GFIs and their subsidiaries constitute irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable government constitute irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable government expenditures.

expenditures.

ARNALDO

ARNALDO M.

M. ESPINAS, L

ESPINAS, LILLIAN N.

ILLIAN N. ASPRER, and

ASPRER, and ELEANORA R.

ELEANORA R. DE

DE JESUS,

JESUS,

vs. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, G.R. No. 198271, April 1, 2014, J. Perlas-Bernabe

T

To fill o fill the gap created by the the gap created by the amendment of COA Circular No. 8amendment of COA Circular No. 86-255, respondents correctly6-255, respondents correctly held that the officials of CDC who violated the provisions of Circular No. 98-002 and held that the officials of CDC who violated the provisions of Circular No. 98-002 and Circular No. 9 should be personally liable to pay the legal fees of Laguesma, as previously Circular No. 9 should be personally liable to pay the legal fees of Laguesma, as previously provided for in Circular No. 86-255.

provided for in Circular No. 86-255.

This finds support in Sec. 103 of the Government Auditing Code of the Philippines, which This finds support in Sec. 103 of the Government Auditing Code of the Philippines, which states that

states that“expenditures“expenditures of government funds or uses of government property in violation of government funds or uses of government property in violation of law or regulations shall be a personal liability of the official or employee found to be of law or regulations shall be a personal liability of the official or employee found to be directly responsible

directly responsible therefore”.therefore”.

This court has also previously held in Gumaru vs. Quirino State College that

This court has also previously held in Gumaru vs. Quirino State College that “the“the fee of the fee of the lawyer who rendered legal service to the government in lieu of the OSG or the OGCC is the lawyer who rendered legal service to the government in lieu of the OSG or the OGCC is the personal liability of the government official who hired his services without the prior personal liability of the government official who hired his services without the prior written conformity of the OSG or the OGCC, as the case may

written conformity of the OSG or the OGCC, as the case may be.”be.”

THE LAW FIRM OF

LAGUESMA MAGSALIN CONSULTA AND GASTARDO vs. THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT

AND/OR REYNALDO

AND/OR REYNALDO A.

A. VILLAR AND

VILLAR AND JUANI

JUANITO G.

TO G. ESPINO, J

ESPINO, JR. IN

R. IN THEIR C

THEIR CAP

APACITIES AS

ACITIES AS

CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER, RESPECTIVEL

CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER, RESPECTIVELY

Y, G.R. No.

, G.R. No. 185544, January

185544, January 13, 2015,

13, 2015, J.

J. Leonen

Leonen

Jurisdiction

The case tackles the decision of COA for denying allegation of BCDA that COA gravely The case tackles the decision of COA for denying allegation of BCDA that COA gravely abused its discretion when it when it declared that disbursement made covering the abused its discretion when it when it declared that disbursement made covering the remuneration pursuant to the extension of CMS is without legal basis. The court ruled in remuneration pursuant to the extension of CMS is without legal basis. The court ruled in favor of COA.It is the general policy of the Court to sustain the decisions of administrative favor of COA.It is the general policy of the Court to sustain the decisions of administrative authorities, especially one which is constitutionally-created not only on the basis of the authorities, especially one which is constitutionally-created not only on the basis of the doctrine of separation of powers but also for their presumed expertise in the laws they are doctrine of separation of powers but also for their presumed expertise in the laws they are entrusted to enforce. Findings of administrative agencies are accorded not only respect but entrusted to enforce. Findings of administrative agencies are accorded not only respect but

(18)

Cancel Anytime.

(19)

Cancel Anytime.

cheat, deceive or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or cheat, deceive or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity; lack of honesty, probity or integrity in principle; lack of fairness and straight forwardness. Both gross misconduct and integrity in principle; lack of fairness and straight forwardness. Both gross misconduct and dishonesty are grave offenses that are punishable by dismissal even for the first dishonesty are grave offenses that are punishable by dismissal even for the first offense. Conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service is also classified as a grave offense. Conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service is also classified as a grave offense under Section 22(t) of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of Executive Order No. offense under Section 22(t) of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of Executive Order No. 292

292 and and other other pertinent pertinent Civil Civil Service Service laws, laws, with with the the penalty penalty for for the the first first offense offense beingbeing suspension for six (6) months and one (1) day to

suspension for six (6) months and one (1) day to one (1) year, and for the second offense beingone (1) year, and for the second offense being dismissal.

dismissal. The The Civil Service laws Civil Service laws and rules and rules contain no contain no description of description of what specific what specific actsacts constitute the grave offense of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of

constitute the grave offense of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. However,the service. However, jurisprudence

jurisprudence has has been been instructive, instructive, with with the the Court Court having having considered considered the the following following acts acts oror omissions as constitutive of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, namely: (a) omissions as constitutive of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, namely: (a) misappropriation of public funds; (b) abandonment of office; (c) failure to report back to misappropriation of public funds; (b) abandonment of office; (c) failure to report back to work without prior notice; (d) failure to keep public records and property safe; (e) making work without prior notice; (d) failure to keep public records and property safe; (e) making false

false entries entries in in public public documentsdocuments; ; and and (f) (f) falsification falsification of of court court orders. orders. For For making making falsefalse statements

statements, committing perjur, committing perjury and stealing the copy papery and stealing the copy paper, , Austria and Glor are guiltAustria and Glor are guilty ofy of grave misconduct, gr

grave misconduct, gross dishonesty, and conduct prejudoss dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.icial to the best interest of the service. Their dismissal from the service is the proper penalty, with forfeiture of retirement benefits, Their dismissal from the service is the proper penalty, with forfeiture of retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, and perpetual disqualification from reemployment in the except accrued leave credits, and perpetual disqualification from reemployment in the Government. In addition, the records of the case should be referred to the Department of Government. In addition, the records of the case should be referred to the Department of Justice

Justice for for investigation investigation with with a a view view to to the the filing, filing, if if warrantedwarranted, , of of the the appropriate appropriate criminalcriminal proceedings.

proceedings.

ALLEGED

ALLEGED LOSS

LOSS OF

OF VARIOUS

VARIOUS BOXES

BOXES OF

OF COPY

COPY PAPER

PAPER DURING

DURING THEIR

THEIR

TRANSFER FROM THE PROPERTY DIVISION, OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

(OAS), TO THE VARIOUS ROOMS OF THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY, A.M. No.

2008-23-SC, November 10, 2014, J. Bersamin

Jurisdiction

Funa filed the instant petition questioning the designation of Duque as a member of the Funa filed the instant petition questioning the designation of Duque as a member of the Board of Directors or Trustees of the GSIS, PHIC, ECC and HDMF for being violative of Board of Directors or Trustees of the GSIS, PHIC, ECC and HDMF for being violative of Sections 1 and 2 of Article IX-A of the 1987 Constitution which prohibits the Chairmen and Sections 1 and 2 of Article IX-A of the 1987 Constitution which prohibits the Chairmen and Members of the Constitutional Commissions from holding any other office or employment Members of the Constitutional Commissions from holding any other office or employment during their tenure. Ruling in favor of Funa the SC ruled that Section 14, Chapter 3, Title during their tenure. Ruling in favor of Funa the SC ruled that Section 14, Chapter 3, Title I-A, Book V of EO 292 is clear that the CSC

A, Book V of EO 292 is clear that the CSC Chairman’sChairman’s membership in a governing body is membership in a governing body is dependent on the condition that the functions of the government entity where he will sit as dependent on the condition that the functions of the government entity where he will sit as its Board member must affect the career development, employment status, rights, its Board member must affect the career development, employment status, rights, privileges, and welfare of government officials and emplo

privileges, and welfare of government officials and employees.yees.

The concerned GOCCs are vested by their respective charters with various powers and The concerned GOCCs are vested by their respective charters with various powers and functions to carry out the purposes for which they were created. While powers and functions to carry out the purposes for which they were created. While powers and functions associated with appointments, compensation and benefits affect the career functions associated with appointments, compensation and benefits affect the career development, employment status, rights, privileges, and welfare of government officials development, employment status, rights, privileges, and welfare of government officials