CHAPTER 1. THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CHAPTER 1. THE CONSTITUTION OF THE
PHILIPPINES PHILIPPINES What is Political Law?
What is Political Law?
That branch of public law, which deals That branch of public law, which deals with
with the the organization organization and and operations operations of of thethe governmental organs of the State and defines the governmental organs of the State and defines the relations of the State with inhabitants of its relations of the State with inhabitants of its territory (
territory (People v. Perfecto) People v. Perfecto) Scope /Divisions of Political Law Scope /Divisions of Political Law
1.
1. Constitutional Law. –Constitutional Law. – The study of the The study of the maintenance of the proper balance maintenance of the proper balance between
between authority authority as as represented represented by by thethe three inherent powers of the State and three inherent powers of the State and liberty as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights liberty as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights (Cruz, Constitutional Law, 1993 ed., p 1) (Cruz, Constitutional Law, 1993 ed., p 1) 2.
2. Administrative Law. That branch ofAdministrative Law. That branch of public law which fixes the organization of public law which fixes the organization of government, determines the competence government, determines the competence of the administrative authorities who of the administrative authorities who execute the law, and indicates to the execute the law, and indicates to the individual remedies for the violation of individual remedies for the violation of his rights.
his rights. 3.
3. Law on Municipal CorporationsLaw on Municipal Corporations 4.
4. Law of Public OfficersLaw of Public Officers 5.
5. Election LawsElection Laws
FROM ALBANO: FROM ALBANO:
Are there any distinctions between a Are there any distinctions between a Constitution and a statute?
Constitution and a statute? Yes.
Yes. A Constitution A Constitution is a is a legislation direct from legislation direct from thethe people; a statute is a l
people; a statute is a legislation from the people’segislation from the people’s representatives. A Constitution states general representatives. A Constitution states general principles; a statute provides the details of the principles; a statute provides the details of the subject of which it treats. A Constitution is subject of which it treats. A Constitution is intended not merely to meet existing conditions; a intended not merely to meet existing conditions; a statute is intended primarily to meet existing statute is intended primarily to meet existing conditions only. A Constitution is the conditions only. A Constitution is the fundamental law of the State to which all other fundamental law of the State to which all other
laws and statutes must conform. (Neptali Gonzales, laws and statutes must conform. (Neptali Gonzales, Political Law, citing Malcolm)
Political Law, citing Malcolm)
Is the constitution a conferment of powers or a Is the constitution a conferment of powers or a limitation of the same?
limitation of the same?
It is both a conferment of powers and a limitation It is both a conferment of powers and a limitation of the same. The constitution allocates to the three of the same. The constitution allocates to the three (3) departments of the government. It also (3) departments of the government. It also provides for limitations on the exercise of such provides for limitations on the exercise of such powers, like the provisions of the Bill of Rights. powers, like the provisions of the Bill of Rights. What
What isis meant by the statement, “themeant by the statement, “the Constitution is a social contract?”
Constitution is a social contract?”
The Constitution as a social contract means that it The Constitution as a social contract means that it where
where the the people people have have surrendered surrendered theirtheir sovereign powers to the State for the common sovereign powers to the State for the common good. Hence, as held in
good. Hence, as held in Marcos vs. Manglapus Marcos vs. Manglapus lest the officers of the government exercising the lest the officers of the government exercising the powers delegated by the people forget and the powers delegated by the people forget and the servants of the people become rulers, the servants of the people become rulers, the Constitution reminds everyone that “sovereignty Constitution reminds everyone that “sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them” (Sec.
emanates from them” (Sec. 1, Art. II, 1987 1, Art. II, 1987 Constitution).
Constitution).
History of Constitution- Comm. Sarmiento History of Constitution- Comm. Sarmiento 1.
1.Malolos CongressMalolos Congress It is known as the
It is known as the La Constitución política deLa Constitución política de Malolos
Malolos and was written in and was written in Spanish Spanish
Following the declaration of independence from Following the declaration of independence from Spain by the Revolutionary Government, a Spain by the Revolutionary Government, a congress was held in
congress was held in Malolos, Malolos, Bulacan in 1899 to Bulacan in 1899 to draw up a constitution.
draw up a constitution.
It was the first republican constitution in Asia. It was the first republican constitution in Asia. The document declares that the people have The document declares that the people have exclusive sovereignty. It states basic civil rights, exclusive sovereignty. It states basic civil rights, the separation of church and state, and calls for the separation of church and state, and calls for the creation of an Assembly of Representatives the creation of an Assembly of Representatives which would act as the legislative body.
which would act as the legislative body. It also It also thethe president elected for a term of four years by a president elected for a term of four years by a majority of theAssembly. The Malolos majority of theAssembly. The Malolos
Constitution established
Constitution established SpanishSpanish as the officialas the official language of the Philippines.
language of the Philippines. The Preamble reads:
The Preamble reads:
"Nosotros los Representantes del Pueblo Filipino, "Nosotros los Representantes del Pueblo Filipino, convocados legítimamente paraestablecer la convocados legítimamente paraestablecer la justicia, proveer a
justicia, proveer a la defensa la defensa común, promover elcomún, promover el bien general y
bien general y asegurar los beneficios asegurar los beneficios de lade la libertad, implorando el auxilió del Soberano libertad, implorando el auxilió del Soberano Legislador
Legislador del Universo del Universo para alcanzar para alcanzar estosestos fines,
fines, hemos hemos votado, votado, decretado decretado y y sancionado sancionado lala siguiente
siguiente ""
(We, the Representatives of the Filipino people, (We, the Representatives of the Filipino people, lawfully convened, in order to establish justice, lawfully convened, in order to establish justice, provide for common defense, promote the general provide for common defense, promote the general welfare,
welfare, and insure and insure the the benefits benefits of of liberty,liberty, imploring the aid of the Sovereign Legislator of imploring the aid of the Sovereign Legislator of the Universe for the attainment of these ends, the Universe for the attainment of these ends, have voted, decreed, and sanctioned the following) have voted, decreed, and sanctioned the following) 2.
2. Commonwealth and Commonwealth and Third Republic Third Republic (1935)(1935) The
The 1935 Constitution of the Philippines1935 Constitution of the Philippines was was written
written inin 1934,1934, approved and adopted by the approved and adopted by the Commonwealth of the Philippines (1935-1946) Commonwealth of the Philippines (1935-1946) and later used by the Third Republic of the and later used by the Third Republic of the Philippines (1946-1972). It was written with an Philippines (1946-1972). It was written with an eye to meeting the approval of the
eye to meeting the approval of the United StatesUnited States Government
Government as well, so as to ensure that the U.S.as well, so as to ensure that the U.S. would
would live live up up to to its its promise promise to to grant grant thethe Philippines independence and not have a premise Philippines independence and not have a premise to hold on to its "possession" on the grounds that to hold on to its "possession" on the grounds that it was too politically immature and hence unready it was too politically immature and hence unready for full, real independence.
for full, real independence.
The Preamble reads: The Preamble reads:
““ "The Filipino people, imploring"The Filipino people, imploring the aid of Divine Providence, in the aid of Divine Providence, in order to establish a government order to establish a government that shall embody their ideals, that shall embody their ideals, conserve and develop the conserve and develop the patrimony of the nation, promote
patrimony of the nation, promote ””
the general welfare, and secure to the general welfare, and secure to themselves and their posterity the themselves and their posterity the blessings of independence under blessings of independence under a regime of justice, liberty, and a regime of justice, liberty, and democracy, do ordain and democracy, do ordain and promulgate this constitution." promulgate this constitution."
The original 1935 Constitution provides, inter The original 1935 Constitution provides, inter alia, for a unicameral Legislature and a single alia, for a unicameral Legislature and a single six- year
year term term for for the the President. President. It It waswas amendedamended inin 1940 to have a bicameral Congress composed of 1940 to have a bicameral Congress composed of a Senate and House of Representatives, as well the a Senate and House of Representatives, as well the creation of an independent
creation of an independent Commission onCommission on Elections.
Elections. The Constitution limited the President The Constitution limited the President to a four-year term with a maximum of two to a four-year term with a maximum of two consecutive terms in office.
consecutive terms in office. A
A Constitutional Convention Constitutional Convention was was held held in in 1971 1971 toto rewrite the 1935 Constitution. The convention rewrite the 1935 Constitution. The convention was stained
was stained with manifest with manifest bribery and bribery and corruption.corruption. Possibly the most controversial issue was Possibly the most controversial issue was removing the presidential term limit so that removing the presidential term limit so that Ferdinand E. Marcos
Ferdinand E. Marcos could seek election for acould seek election for a third term, which many felt was the true reason third term, which many felt was the true reason for which the convention was called. In any case, for which the convention was called. In any case, the 1935 Constitution was suspended in 1972 the 1935 Constitution was suspended in 1972 with
with Marcos' Marcos' proclamation proclamation ofof martial law,martial law, the the rampant corruption of the constitutional process rampant corruption of the constitutional process providing him with one of his major premises for providing him with one of his major premises for doing so.
doing so.
3. Second Republic (1943) 3. Second Republic (1943) The
The 1943 Constitution of the Republic of the1943 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines
Philippines was was drafted drafted by by a a committeecommittee appointed by the
appointed by the Philippine Philippine ExecutiveExecutive Commission,
Commission, the body established by the Japanese the body established by the Japanese to administer the Philippines in lieu of the to administer the Philippines in lieu of the Commonwealth of the Philippines
Commonwealth of the Philippines which which hadhad established a
established a government-in-exile.government-in-exile. In mid-1942, In mid-1942, Japanese
Japanese PremierPremier Hideki TojoHideki Tojo had promised thehad promised the Filipinos "the honor of independence" which Filipinos "the honor of independence" which meant that the commission would be supplanted meant that the commission would be supplanted by a formal republic.
by a formal republic. The
The Philippine Independence CommitteePhilippine Independence Committee taskedtasked with drafting a new
with drafting a new constitution was composed, constitution was composed, inin large part, of members of the pre-war National large part, of members of the pre-war National
Constitution established
Constitution established SpanishSpanish as the officialas the official language of the Philippines.
language of the Philippines. The Preamble reads:
The Preamble reads:
"Nosotros los Representantes del Pueblo Filipino, "Nosotros los Representantes del Pueblo Filipino, convocados legítimamente paraestablecer la convocados legítimamente paraestablecer la justicia, proveer a
justicia, proveer a la defensa la defensa común, promover elcomún, promover el bien general y
bien general y asegurar los beneficios asegurar los beneficios de lade la libertad, implorando el auxilió del Soberano libertad, implorando el auxilió del Soberano Legislador
Legislador del Universo del Universo para alcanzar para alcanzar estosestos fines,
fines, hemos hemos votado, votado, decretado decretado y y sancionado sancionado lala siguiente
siguiente ""
(We, the Representatives of the Filipino people, (We, the Representatives of the Filipino people, lawfully convened, in order to establish justice, lawfully convened, in order to establish justice, provide for common defense, promote the general provide for common defense, promote the general welfare,
welfare, and insure and insure the the benefits benefits of of liberty,liberty, imploring the aid of the Sovereign Legislator of imploring the aid of the Sovereign Legislator of the Universe for the attainment of these ends, the Universe for the attainment of these ends, have voted, decreed, and sanctioned the following) have voted, decreed, and sanctioned the following) 2.
2. Commonwealth and Commonwealth and Third Republic Third Republic (1935)(1935) The
The 1935 Constitution of the Philippines1935 Constitution of the Philippines was was written
written inin 1934,1934, approved and adopted by the approved and adopted by the Commonwealth of the Philippines (1935-1946) Commonwealth of the Philippines (1935-1946) and later used by the Third Republic of the and later used by the Third Republic of the Philippines (1946-1972). It was written with an Philippines (1946-1972). It was written with an eye to meeting the approval of the
eye to meeting the approval of the United StatesUnited States Government
Government as well, so as to ensure that the U.S.as well, so as to ensure that the U.S. would
would live live up up to to its its promise promise to to grant grant thethe Philippines independence and not have a premise Philippines independence and not have a premise to hold on to its "possession" on the grounds that to hold on to its "possession" on the grounds that it was too politically immature and hence unready it was too politically immature and hence unready for full, real independence.
for full, real independence.
The Preamble reads: The Preamble reads:
““ "The Filipino people, imploring"The Filipino people, imploring the aid of Divine Providence, in the aid of Divine Providence, in order to establish a government order to establish a government that shall embody their ideals, that shall embody their ideals, conserve and develop the conserve and develop the patrimony of the nation, promote
patrimony of the nation, promote ””
the general welfare, and secure to the general welfare, and secure to themselves and their posterity the themselves and their posterity the blessings of independence under blessings of independence under a regime of justice, liberty, and a regime of justice, liberty, and democracy, do ordain and democracy, do ordain and promulgate this constitution." promulgate this constitution."
The original 1935 Constitution provides, inter The original 1935 Constitution provides, inter alia, for a unicameral Legislature and a single alia, for a unicameral Legislature and a single six- year
year term term for for the the President. President. It It waswas amendedamended inin 1940 to have a bicameral Congress composed of 1940 to have a bicameral Congress composed of a Senate and House of Representatives, as well the a Senate and House of Representatives, as well the creation of an independent
creation of an independent Commission onCommission on Elections.
Elections. The Constitution limited the President The Constitution limited the President to a four-year term with a maximum of two to a four-year term with a maximum of two consecutive terms in office.
consecutive terms in office. A
A Constitutional Convention Constitutional Convention was was held held in in 1971 1971 toto rewrite the 1935 Constitution. The convention rewrite the 1935 Constitution. The convention was stained
was stained with manifest with manifest bribery and bribery and corruption.corruption. Possibly the most controversial issue was Possibly the most controversial issue was removing the presidential term limit so that removing the presidential term limit so that Ferdinand E. Marcos
Ferdinand E. Marcos could seek election for acould seek election for a third term, which many felt was the true reason third term, which many felt was the true reason for which the convention was called. In any case, for which the convention was called. In any case, the 1935 Constitution was suspended in 1972 the 1935 Constitution was suspended in 1972 with
with Marcos' Marcos' proclamation proclamation ofof martial law,martial law, the the rampant corruption of the constitutional process rampant corruption of the constitutional process providing him with one of his major premises for providing him with one of his major premises for doing so.
doing so.
3. Second Republic (1943) 3. Second Republic (1943) The
The 1943 Constitution of the Republic of the1943 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines
Philippines was was drafted drafted by by a a committeecommittee appointed by the
appointed by the Philippine Philippine ExecutiveExecutive Commission,
Commission, the body established by the Japanese the body established by the Japanese to administer the Philippines in lieu of the to administer the Philippines in lieu of the Commonwealth of the Philippines
Commonwealth of the Philippines which which hadhad established a
established a government-in-exile.government-in-exile. In mid-1942, In mid-1942, Japanese
Japanese PremierPremier Hideki TojoHideki Tojo had promised thehad promised the Filipinos "the honor of independence" which Filipinos "the honor of independence" which meant that the commission would be supplanted meant that the commission would be supplanted by a formal republic.
by a formal republic. The
The Philippine Independence CommitteePhilippine Independence Committee taskedtasked with drafting a new
with drafting a new constitution was composed, constitution was composed, inin large part, of members of the pre-war National large part, of members of the pre-war National
Assembly
Assembly and and of of individuals individuals with with experience experience asas delegates to the convention that had drafted the delegates to the convention that had drafted the 1935 Constitution. Their draft for the republic to 1935 Constitution. Their draft for the republic to be
be established established under under the the Japanese Japanese Occupation,Occupation, however, would be limited in duration, provide for however, would be limited in duration, provide for indirect, instead of direct, legislative elections, and indirect, instead of direct, legislative elections, and an even stronger executive branch.
an even stronger executive branch.
Upon approval of the draft by the Committee, the Upon approval of the draft by the Committee, the new charter was ratified in 1943 by an assembly new charter was ratified in 1943 by an assembly of appointed, provincial representatives of the of appointed, provincial representatives of the KALIBAPI,
KALIBAPI, the organization established by the the organization established by the Japanese to
Japanese to supplant all previous supplant all previous political parties.political parties. Upon ratification by the KALIBAPI assembly, the Upon ratification by the KALIBAPI assembly, the Second Republic was formally proclaimed Second Republic was formally proclaimed (1943-1945).
1945). José P. Laurel José P. Laurel was was appointed appointed as as PresidentPresident by
by thethe National AssemblyNational Assembly and inaugurated intoand inaugurated into office in October of 1943. Laurel was highly office in October of 1943. Laurel was highly regarded by the Japanese for having openly regarded by the Japanese for having openly criticized the U.S. for the way they ran the criticized the U.S. for the way they ran the Philippines and because he had a degree from Philippines and because he had a degree from Tokyo International University.
Tokyo International University.
The 1943 Constitution remained in force in The 1943 Constitution remained in force in Japanese-controlled
Japanese-controlled areas areas of of the the Philippines, Philippines, butbut was
was never never recognized recognized as as legitimate legitimate or or binding binding byby the governments of the
the governments of the United StatesUnited States or of theor of the Commonwealth of the Philippines
Commonwealth of the Philippines and guerrillaand guerrilla organizations loyal to them. In late 1944, organizations loyal to them. In late 1944, President Laurel declared that a state of war President Laurel declared that a state of war existed with the United States and the British existed with the United States and the British Empire and proclaimed martial law, essentially Empire and proclaimed martial law, essentially ruling by decree. His government in turn went into ruling by decree. His government in turn went into exile in December, 1944, first to
exile in December, 1944, first to Taiwan Taiwan and thenand then Japan.
Japan. After the announcement of Japan's After the announcement of Japan's surrender, Laurel formally proclaimed the Second surrender, Laurel formally proclaimed the Second Republic as dissolved.
Republic as dissolved.
Until the 1960s, the Second Republic, and its Until the 1960s, the Second Republic, and its officers, were not viewed as legitimate or as officers, were not viewed as legitimate or as having any standing, with the exception of the having any standing, with the exception of the Supreme Court
Supreme Court whose whose decisions, decisions, limited limited toto reviews of criminal and commercial cases as part reviews of criminal and commercial cases as part of a policy of discretion by
of a policy of discretion by Chief JusticeJose Yulo Chief JusticeJose Yulo continued to be part of the official records (this continued to be part of the official records (this was
was made made easier easier by by the the Commonwealth Commonwealth nevernever constituting a Supreme Court, and the formal constituting a Supreme Court, and the formal vacancy
vacancy in in the the chief chief justice justice position position for for thethe
Commonwealth with the execution of
Commonwealth with the execution of Jose Jose AbadAbad Santos
Santos by by the the Japanese). Japanese). It It was was only only during during thethe Macapagal administration that a partial, political Macapagal administration that a partial, political rehabilitation of the Japanese-era republic took rehabilitation of the Japanese-era republic took place, with the recognition of Laurel as a former place, with the recognition of Laurel as a former president and the addition of his cabinet and president and the addition of his cabinet and other officials to the roster of past government other officials to the roster of past government officials. However, the 1943 charter was not officials. However, the 1943 charter was not taught in schools and the laws of the 1943-44 taught in schools and the laws of the 1943-44 National Assembly never recognized as valid or National Assembly never recognized as valid or relevant.
relevant.
The Preamble reads: The Preamble reads:
““ "The Filipino people, imploring the"The Filipino people, imploring the aid of Divine Providence and aid of Divine Providence and desiring to lead a free national desiring to lead a free national existence, do hereby proclaim existence, do hereby proclaim their independence, and in order their independence, and in order to establish a government that to establish a government that shall promote the general welfare, shall promote the general welfare, conserve and develop the conserve and develop the patrimony of the Nation, and patrimony of the Nation, and contribute to the creation of a contribute to the creation of a world order based on peace, world order based on peace, liberty, and moral justice, do liberty, and moral justice, do ordain this Constitution."
ordain this Constitution." ”” The 1943 Constitution provided strong executive The 1943 Constitution provided strong executive powers. The Legislature consisted of a
powers. The Legislature consisted of a unicameral unicameral National Assembly and only those considered as National Assembly and only those considered as anti-US could stand for election, although in anti-US could stand for election, although in practice most legislators were appointed rather practice most legislators were appointed rather than elected.
than elected.
4. Fourth Republic (1973) 4. Fourth Republic (1973) The
The 1973 Constitution of the Republic of the1973 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines,
Philippines, promulgated promulgated after after Marcos'Marcos' declaration of martial law, provides for a declaration of martial law, provides for a parliamentary form of government. Legislative parliamentary form of government. Legislative power was vested in a National Assembly whose power was vested in a National Assembly whose members were elected for six-year terms. The members were elected for six-year terms. The President was elected as the symbolic head of President was elected as the symbolic head of state from the Members of the National Assembly state from the Members of the National Assembly for a six-year term and could be re-elected to an for a six-year term and could be re-elected to an unlimited number of terms. Upon election, the unlimited number of terms. Upon election, the
President ceased to be a member of the National President ceased to be a member of the National Assembly.
Assembly. During During his his term, term, the the President President was was notnot allowed to be a member of a political party or hold allowed to be a member of a political party or hold any other office. Executive power was exercised any other office. Executive power was exercised by
by the the Prime Prime Minister Minister who who was was also also elected elected fromfrom the Members of the National Assembly. The
the Members of the National Assembly. The Prime Prime Minister
Minister was was the the head head of of government government andand Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. This Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. This constitution was subsequently amended three constitution was subsequently amended three times.
times.
On 22 September 1976, President Marcos issued On 22 September 1976, President Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 1033 proposing Presidential Decree No. 1033 proposing amendments to the Constitution, which was later amendments to the Constitution, which was later on ratified and included in the 1973 Constitution. on ratified and included in the 1973 Constitution. The amendments provide, among other things, for The amendments provide, among other things, for the replacement of the National Assembly by the the replacement of the National Assembly by the Batasang Pambansa
Batasang Pambansa .. It also states that the It also states that the incumbent President of the Philippines shall be incumbent President of the Philippines shall be the Prime Minister, and shall continue to exercise the Prime Minister, and shall continue to exercise legislative powers until Martial Law has been legislative powers until Martial Law has been lifted. Amendments were done again in 1981 lifted. Amendments were done again in 1981 which
which re-established re-established a a parliamentary parliamentary form form ofof government with a president elected by direct vote government with a president elected by direct vote of the people. In reality, these amendments had of the people. In reality, these amendments had little effect at the time due to the ongoing Marcos little effect at the time due to the ongoing Marcos dictatorship; however, Marcos did, at least in dictatorship; however, Marcos did, at least in name, dissolve martial law at about this time and name, dissolve martial law at about this time and conduct (highly questionable) elections, which he conduct (highly questionable) elections, which he unsurprisingly "won". Presidential Proclamation unsurprisingly "won". Presidential Proclamation No. 3, popularly known as the 1986
No. 3, popularly known as the 1986 Provisional Provisional Freedom Constitution,
Freedom Constitution, was was the the most most far far reachingreaching set of amendments to the 1973 constitution that it set of amendments to the 1973 constitution that it was
was almost almost a a constitution constitution in in its its own own right.right. However, it is really a large set of amendments However, it is really a large set of amendments which
which superseded superseded and and abolished abolished certaincertain provisions from the constitution. It granted the provisions from the constitution. It granted the President certain powers to remove officials from President certain powers to remove officials from office, reorganize the government and hold a new office, reorganize the government and hold a new constitutional convention to draft a new constitutional convention to draft a new constitution.
constitution.
Following the EDSA People Power Revolution that Following the EDSA People Power Revolution that removed President
removed President Ferdinand E. MarcosFerdinand E. Marcos fromfrom office, the new President,
office, the new President, Corazon C. AquinoCorazon C. Aquino issued Proclamation No. 3 and the adoption of a issued Proclamation No. 3 and the adoption of a provisional constitution that would prepare for provisional constitution that would prepare for
the next constitution which became the 1987 the next constitution which became the 1987 constitution.
constitution. 5. The
5. The Constitution of the Republic of theConstitution of the Republic of the Philippines
Philippines (In (In Filipino:Filipino: Ang Ang Konstitusyon Konstitusyon ngng Republika ng Pilipinas
Republika ng Pilipinas ), ratified on February 2,), ratified on February 2, 1987, is the fourth fundamental law to govern the 1987, is the fourth fundamental law to govern the Philippines
Philippines since it became independent on July 4,since it became independent on July 4, 1946. First, the 1935 Constitution, which became 1946. First, the 1935 Constitution, which became fully operational after the
fully operational after the Inauguration of theInauguration of the Third Philippine Republic.
Third Philippine Republic. Second, the 1973 Second, the 1973 Constitution, which was promulgated during Constitution, which was promulgated during Martial Law
Martial Law and became fully operational onlyand became fully operational only after the lifting of Martial Law in 1981. Third, the after the lifting of Martial Law in 1981. Third, the 1986 Provisional "Freedom" Constitution,
1986 Provisional "Freedom" Constitution, which which was
was promulgated promulgated on on March March 25 25 by by PresidentPresident Corazon C. Aquino
Corazon C. Aquino after the successful Peopleafter the successful People Power Revolution in 1986.
Power Revolution in 1986.
History of Constitution- Atty. Gabriel History of Constitution- Atty. Gabriel 7 constitutions in the Philippines after 7 constitutions in the Philippines after
Spanish colonization Spanish colonization a.
a. Biak-na-batoBiak-na-bato –– firstfirst revolutionary constitution in revolutionary constitution in Asia (unicameral)
Asia (unicameral) b.
b. MalolosMalolos –– first first democraticdemocratic constitution in Asia (uni/parl) constitution in Asia (uni/parl) c.
c. 19351935 –– Unicameral, Presidental - Unicameral, Presidental --- May 14, 1935 changed to -- May 14, 1935 changed to bicameral
bicameral d.
d. 19431943 –– Japanese constitution Japanese constitution during belligerent occupation during belligerent occupation (uni/pres)
(uni/pres) e.
e. 19731973 –– uni/parl uni/parl f.
f. FreedomFreedom –– bicam bicam g.
g. 19871987 –– bicam, revision of 1935 bicam, revision of 1935
TheThe 1897 Constitution of Biak-na-Bato1897 Constitution of Biak-na-Bato,, oror Constituciong Halal sa Biak-na-Bato Constituciong Halal sa Biak-na-Bato ,,
promulgated by the Philippine Revolutionary Government on November 1, 1897, is the provisionary Constitution of the Philippine Republic during the Revolution against Spain. It provides that the Supreme Council, vested with the supreme power of government, shall conduct foreign relations, war, the interior, and the treasury.
The 1899 Political Constitution of the Republic, known as the Malolos Constitution , was approved by President Emilio Aguinaldo on January 21, 1899 and served as the Constitution of the First Philippine Republic. It provides for a parliamentary form of government, but the President, and not a Prime Minister, acts as the head of government. Legislative power is exercised by the Assembly of Representatives of the Nation, and judicial power is lodge in a Supreme Court.
The 1935 Constitution of the Philippines, ratified on May 17, 1935, establishes the Commonwealth of the Philippines, defining its powers, composition and organization as it function as the Government of the Philippine Islands. It is based on the principle of separation of powers among the three branches of government. Executive power is vested in the President and shall serve for a single-six year term. Legislative power is vested in a unicameral National Assembly, and judicial power is exercised by the Supreme Court. It also provides that upon proclamation of Philippine Independence, the Commonwealth of the Philippines shall be known as the Republic of the Philippines.
The 1939 Amendment — The amendments liberalized all laws and made few changes on the economic provisions of the Tydings-Mcduffie Law.
The 1940 Amendments — The amendments, by virtue of Resolution No. 73, provide for the
establishment of a bicameral Congress, composed of a Senate and a House of Representatives, and limits the term of office of the President to four years, but may continue to serve for a maximum of eight years. The amendment also provides for the
creation of a Commission on Elections.
The 1947 Amendment — known as the Parity Amendment, gave Americans equal rights with Filipinos in the exploitation of Philippine Natural resources.
The 1943 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, or the Constitution of the Second Philippine Republic, was ratified by the general assembly of the KALIBAPI. It is based on the system of separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and the judiciary. It served as a temporary constitution, for it stipulated that one year after the end of the World War II, it shall be replaced by a new constitution.
The 1973 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, or Ang Saligang Batas ng Pilipinas , ratified by the Citizens Assemblies on January 17, 1973, provides for a shift from a presidential form of government to a parliamentary system. The President serves as a symbolic head of State, executive power is exercised by the Prime Minister with the assistance of the Cabinet, and legislative power is vested in a unicameral National Assembly. In 1976, the National Assembly was replaced by the Batasang Pambansa , by virtue of PD 1033 issued by President
Ferdinand Marcos.
The 1973 Constitution as amended (amended in 1981 and 1984) provides for a semi-parliamentary form of government, where the President, no longer acts as a symbolic head, but acts as the head of state and the chief executive. The Office of the President has been restored to its original
status under the 1935 Constitution. Legislative power is vested in a unicameral Batasang Pambansa . The Prime Minister, who is subordinated to the President, acts as the Head of the Cabinet.
The 1986 Provisional Constitution, popularly known as the Freedom Constitution, promulgated by President Corazon C. Aquino on March 25, 1986, was a provisional constitution after a successful People Power Revolution. Under the Freedom Constitution, executive and legislative powers are exercised by the President, and shall continue to exercise legislative powers until a legislature is elected and convened under a new Constitution. Furthermore, the President is mandated to convene a Constitutional Commission tasked to draft a new charter. What is a Constitution? – Atty. Gabriel, *you
may also answer the definition in Manila Prince Hotel Case
Cooley- That body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the powers of sovereignty are habitually exercised.
Definition of Constitution in Philippine Context?
Malcolm – That written instrument enacted by direct action of the people by which the fundamental powers of the government are established, limited and defined, and by which those powers are distributed among the several departments for their safe and useful exercise for the benefit of the body politic.
*memorize the two definition by heart he will ask these
GABBY PRE-WEEK: *useful during exams and recits
It is not the beginning of a community. It is not the origin of private rights. It is not the fountain of law nor the incipient state of government. It is not the cause, but the consequence of personal and political freedom; it confers no rights to the people; it is the creature of their power, the instrument of their convenience. (Cooley)
Can the constitution be wrong?
No, the constitution can never be
wrong because it is the direct act of the people according to Justice Malcolm. *also cite the doctrine in case of Marcos vs. Manglapus below.
The Constitution is the work or will of the People themselves, in their original, sovereign, and unlimited capacity. Law is the work of the Creator, and the other of the Creature. The Constitution fixes limits to the exercise of legislative authority, and prescribes the orbit within which it must move. In short, gentlemen, the Constitution is the sun of the political system, around which all Legislative, Executive and Judicial bodies must revolve. Whatever may be the case in other countries, yet is this there can be no doubt that every act of the Legislature, repugnant to the Constitution, as absolutely void. (Justice Malcolm)
Constitution will always prevail! Why so special?
enacted by the people
surrendered sovereign powers in favor
of governmental organs
sovereignty = direct act of the people
The Constitution is the source of all rights. T or F?
False. There are rights which do not
Oposa case: right to balanced and
healthful ecology – emanates from being a human being.
NOT origin of private rights.
Which comes first, Constitution or Government? (by analogy to chicken and eggs)
Constitution because it provides
for organization of the government.
But without a government, who will enact a constitution?
There must be a government first
for it precedes the promulgation of the constitution.
But can we not argue that it’s the constitution that lays down the powers of the government?
The Constitution of a State is stable
and permanent, not to be worked upon by the temper of the times, nor to rise and fall with the tide of events: notwithstanding the competition of opposing interests, and the violence of contending parties, it remains firm and immovable, as a mountain amidst the strife of storms, or a rock in the ocean amidst the raging of the waves (Vanhorne vs. Dorrance)
A constitution 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 ( Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS )
Is the Constitution a social contract?
Yes, in Marcos vs. Manglapus …
In Marcos vs. Manglapus , the Supreme Court held that “it must be borne in mind that the Constitution, aside from being an allocation of
power is also a social contract whereby the people have surrendered their sovereign powers to State for the common good.”
What is the Doctrine of Constitutional Supremacy?
That fundamental conception in other words is that 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. Under the 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. Thus, 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)
Constitution is immutable, it will
always prevail. Why? Direct act of the people.
It reflects the people’s sovereignty (the
power to do anything without any accountability).
What are the rights independent of the Constitution?
The right to life, liberty and security
are examples of the rights independent of the Constitution. These are rights are inherent from the time immemorial when man exists. (Suggested answer lang
paki rephrase or paki correct n lng)
Purpose of the Constitution- Atty. Gabriel and Comm. Sarmiento
1. To prescribe the permanent framework of a system of government;
2. To assign to the several departments their respective powers and duties and;
3. To establish certain first principles on which the government is founded (Manila Prince
Hotel vs. GSIS)
CLASSIFICATION- Atty. Gabriel (memorize by heart)
1. WRITTEN OR UNWRITTEN
a. Written — one whose precepts are embodied in one document or set of documents;
b. Unwritten — consist of rules which have not been integrated into a single, concrete form but are scattered in various sources, such as statutes of a fundamental character, judicial decisions, commentaries of publicists, customs and tradition, and certain common law principles.
Is it correct to say that the classification of a constitution as written/ unwritten depends on form?
No, both are in writing. Distinction is recognized as to sources in unwritten constitution have scattered sources unlike written constitution.
2. ENACTED (CONVENTIONAL) OR EVOLVED (CUMULATIVE)
Enacted (Conventional) — a conventional constitution is enacted, formally struck off at a definite time and place following a conscious or deliberate effort taken by a constituent body or ruler;
Evolved (Cumulative) — it is the result of political evolution, not inaugurated at any specific time but changing by accretion rather
than by any systematic method. 3. RIGID OR FLEXIBLE
a. Rigid- is one that can be amended only by a formal and usually difficult process;
b. Flexible- one that can be changed by ordinary legislation.
So what then is the Philippine Constitution?
The Philippine Constitution is a written,
enacted and rigid type of constitution. HOW? It is embodied in a single document, enacted by the Congress acting as Constitutional Convention or Constitutional Assembly ratified by the Filipino people in a plebiscite called for such purpose.
QUALITIES OF A GOOD WRITTEN CONSTITUTION:
a. BROAD- Not just because it provides for the organization of the entire government and covers all persons and things within the territory of the State but because it must be comprehensive enough to provide for every contingency.
b. BRIEF- It must confine itself to basic principles to be implemented with legislative details more adjustable to change and easier to amend.
c. DEFINITE- To prevent ambiguity in its provisions which could result in confusion and divisiveness among the people.
ESSENTIAL PARTS OF A GOOD WRITTEN CONSTITUTION:
a. Constitution of Liberty – The series of prescriptions setting forth the fundamental civil and political rights of the citizens and imposing limitations on the powers of government as a means of securing the enjoyment of those rights. E.g. Art. III
b. Constitution of Government – The series of provisions outlining the organization of the government, enumerating its powers, laying down certain rules relative to its administration, and defining the electorate, E.g. Arts. VI, VII, VIII and IX c. Constitution of Sovereignty – The provisions pointing out the mode or procedure in accordance with which formal changes in the fundamental law may be brought, E.g., Art. XVII -By analogy to essential parts of a human body: absence of one will not negate its supremacy, only that it is lacking an essential part.
-A constitution can include parts not essential, e.g. Article I – The National Territory.
Preamble is not part of Constitution -to walk before, to introduce
-prefatory statement
INTERPRETATION/CONSTRUCTION OF THE CONSTITUTION
Rules of Construction of the Constitution: *do not mention directly the tools of construction cited in Francisco v. House of
Representatives go first to the case of Manila Prince Hotel
1. Determine Executing vs. Non Self-Executing Provisions (Manila Prince Hotel Case Doctrine)
Admittedly, some constitutions are merely declarations of policies and principles. Their provisions command the legislature to enact laws and carry out the purposes of the framers who merely establish an outline of government providing for the different departments of the governmental machinery and securing certain fundamental and inalienable rights of citizens. 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 self-executing if the nature and extent of the right conferred and 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.
2. In Case of Doubt, Constitutional Provisions are Self- Executing (Manila Prince Hotel Case Doctrine)
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.
Why?
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. This can be cataclysmic. That is why the prevailing view is, as it has always been, that-X x x x in case of doubt, the Constitution should be considered self-executing rather than non self-executing x x x x Unless the contrary is clearly intended, the provisions of the Constitution should be considered self-executing, as a contrary rule would give the legislature discretion to determine when, or whether, they shall be effective. These provisions would be subordinated to the will of the lawmaking body, which could make them entirely meaningless by simply refusing to pass the needed implementing statute.
Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, G.R. No. 122156, February 3, 1997 D E C I S I O N
(En Banc)
BELLOSILLO, J.:
FACTS:Pursuant to the privatization program of the Philippine Government, the GSIS sold in public auction its stake in Manila Hotel Corporation (MHC). Only 2 bidders participated: petitioner Manila Prince Hotel Corporation, a Filipino corporation, which offered to buy 51% of the MHC or 15,300,000 shares at P41.58 per share, and Renong Berhad, a Malaysian firm, with ITT-Sheraton as its hotel operator, which bid for the same number of shares at P44.00 per share, or P2.42 more than the bid of petitioner.
Petitioner filed a petition before the Supreme Court to compel the GSIS to allow it to match the bid of Renong Berhad. It invoked the Filipino First
Policy enshrined in §10, paragraph 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution, which provides that “in the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions
covering the national economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos.”
ISSUE/S:
1. Whether §10, paragraph 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution is a self-executing provision and does not need implementing legislation to carry it into effect;
2. Assuming §10, paragraph 2, Article XII is self-executing, whether the controlling shares of the Manila Hotel Corporation form part of our patrimony as a nation;
3. Whether GSIS is included in the term “State,” hence, mandated to implement §10, paragraph 2, Article XII of the Constitution; and
4. Assuming GSIS is part of the State, whether it should give preference to the petitioner, a Filipino corporation, over Renong Berhad, a foreign corporation, in the sale of the controlling shares of the Manila Hotel Corporation.
RULING:
[The Court, voting 11-4, DISMISSED the petition.] 1. YES, §10, paragraph 2, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution is a self-executing provision and does not need implementing legislation to carry it into effect.
Sec. 10, second par., of Art XII is couched in such a way as not to make it appear that it is non-self-executing but simply for purposes of style. But, certainly, the legislature is not precluded from enacting further laws to enforce the constitutional provision so long as the contemplated statute squares with the Constitution. Minor details may be left to the legislature without impairing the self-executing nature of constitutional provisions.
xxx xxx xxx
Respondents . . . argue that the non-self-executing nature of Sec. 10, second par., of Art. XII is
implied from the tenor of the first and third paragraphs of the same section which undoubtedly are not self-executing. The argument is flawed. If the first and third paragraphs are not self-executing because Congress is still to enact measures to encourage the formation and operation of enterprises fully owned by Filipinos, as in the first paragraph, and the State still needs legislation to regulate and exercise authority over foreign investments within its national jurisdiction, as in the third paragraph, then a fortiori , by the same logic, the second paragraph can only be self-executing as it does not by its language require any legislation in order to give preference to qualified Filipinos in the grant of rights, privileges and concessions covering the national economy and patrimony. A constitutional provision may be self-executing in one part and non-self-executing in another.
xxx. Sec. 10, second par., Art. XII of the 1987 Constitution is a mandatory, positive command which is complete in itself and which needs no further guidelines or implementing laws or rules for its enforcement. From its very words the provision does not require any legislation to put it in operation. It is per se judicially enforceable. When our Constitution mandates that [i]n the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering national economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos, it means just that - qualified Filipinos shall be preferred. And when our Constitution declares that a right exists in certain specified circumstances an action may be maintained to enforce such right notwithstanding the absence of any legislation on the subject; consequently, if there is no statute especially enacted to enforce such constitutional right, such right enforces itself by its own inherent potency and puissance, and from which all legislations must take their bearings. Where there is a right there is a remedy. Ubi jus ibi remedium.
2. YES, the controlling shares of the Manila
Hotel Corporation form part of our patrimony as a nation.
In its plain and ordinary meaning, the term patrimony pertains to heritage. When the Constitution speaks of national patrimony, it refers not only to the natural resources of the Philippines, as the Constitution could have very well used the term natural resources , but also to
the cultural heritage of the Filipinos.
xxx xxx xxx
For more than eight (8) decades Manila Hotel has bore mute witness to the triumphs and failures, loves and frustrations of the Filipinos; its existence is impressed with public interest; its own historicity associated with our struggle for sovereignty, independence and nationhood. Verily, Manila Hotel has become part of our national economy and patrimony. For sure, 51% of the equity of the MHC comes within the purview of the constitutional shelter for it comprises the majority and controlling stock, so that anyone who acquires or owns the 51% will have actual control and management of the hotel. In this instance, 51% of the MHC cannot be disassociated from the hotel and the land on which the hotel edifice stands. Consequently, we cannot sustain respondents’ claim that the Filipino First Policy provision is not applicable since what is being sold is only 51% of the outstanding shares of the corporation, not the Hotel building nor the land upon which the building stands.
3. YES, GSIS is included in the term “State,” hence, it is mandated to implement §10, paragraph 2, Article XII of the Constitution. It is undisputed that the sale of 51% of the MHC could only be carried out with the prior approval of the State acting through respondent Committee on Privatization. [T]his fact alone makes the sale of the assets of respondents GSIS and MHC a “state action.” In constitutional jurisprudence, the
acts of persons distinct from the government are considered “state action ” covered by the Constitution (1) when the activity it engages in is a “public function; ” (2) when the government is so significantly involved with the private actor as to make the government responsible for his action; and, (3) when the government has approved or authorized the action. It is evident that the act of respondent GSIS in selling 51% of its share in respondent MHC comes under the second and third categories of “state action.” Without doubt therefore the transaction, although entered into by respondent GSIS, is in fact a transaction of the State and therefore subject to the constitutional command.
When the Constitution addresses the State it refers not only to the people but also to the government as elements of the State. After all, government is composed of three (3) divisions of power - legislative, executive and judicial. Accordingly, a constitutional mandate directed to the State is correspondingly directed to the three (3) branches of government. It is undeniable that in this case the subject constitutional injunction is addressed among others to the Executive Department and respondent GSIS, a government instrumentality deriving its authority from the State.
4. YES, GSIS should give preference to the petitioner in the sale of the controlling shares of the Manila Hotel Corporation.
It should be stressed that while the Malaysian firm offered the higher bid it is not yet the winning bidder. The bidding rules expressly provide that the highest bidder shall only be declared the winning bidder after it has negotiated and
executed the necessary contracts, and secured the requisite approvals. Since the Filipino First Policy provision of the Constitution bestows preference on qualified Filipinos the mere tending of the highest bid is not an assurance that the highest bidder will be declared the winning
bidder. Resultantly, respondents are not bound to make the award yet, nor are they under obligation to enter into one with the highest bidder. For in choosing the awardee respondents are mandated to abide by the dictates of the 1987 Constitution the provisions of which are presumed to be known to all the bidders and other interested parties.
xxx xxx xxx
Paragraph V. J. 1 of the bidding rules provides that [i]f for any reason the Highest Bidder cannot be awarded the Block of Shares, GSIS may offer this to other Qualified Bidders that have validly submitted bids provided that these Qualified Bidders are willing to match the highest bid in terms of price per share. Certainly, the constitutional mandate itself is reason enough not to award the block of shares immediately to the foreign bidder notwithstanding its submission of a higher, or even the highest, bid. In fact, we cannot conceive of a stronger reason than the constitutional injunction itself.
In the instant case, where a foreign firm submits the highest bid in a public bidding concerning the grant of rights, privileges and concessions covering the national economy and patrimony, thereby exceeding the bid of a Filipino, there is no question that the Filipino will have to be allowed to match the bid of the foreign entity. And if the Filipino matches the bid of a foreign firm the award should go to the Filipino. It must be so if we are to give life and meaning to the Filipino First Policy provision of the 1987 Constitution. For, while this may neither be expressly stated nor contemplated in the bidding rules, the constitutional fiat is omnipresent to be simply disregarded. To ignore it would be to sanction a perilous skirting of the basic law.
3. Specific Tools of Constitutional Construction (Francisco vs. House of Representatives Case Doctrines)
*use of the tools must be one after the other in short the three must be used successively
To determine the merits of the issues raised in the instant petitions, this Court must necessarily turn to the Constitution itself which employs the well-settled principles of constitutional construction. First, verba legis that is, wherever possible, the words used in the Constitution must be given their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed. It is to be assumed that the words in which constitutional provisions are couched expressed the objective sought to be attained. They are to be given their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed in which case the significance thus attached to them prevails. As the Constitution is not primarily a lawyer’s document, it being essential for the rule of law to be obtain that it should ever be present in the people’s consciousness, its language as much as possible should be understood in the sense they have in common use.
WHY is that verbal legis is used as a tool for construction?-not a lawyer’s document- people must understand since it is created by and for the people Second, where there is ambiguity, ratio legis est anima. The words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent of its framers. A foolproof yardstick in constitutional construction is the intention underlying the provision under consideration. Thus, it has been held that the Court in construing a Constitution should bear in mind the object sought to be accomplished by its adoption, and the
evils, if any, sought to be prevented or remedied. A doubtful provision will be examined in the light of the history of the times, and the condition and circumstances under which the Constitution was framed. The object is to ascertain the reason which induced the framers of the Constitution to enact the particular provision and the purpose sought to be accomplished thereby, in order to construe the whole as to make the words consonant to that reason and calculated to effect that purpose.
Ratio legis est anima
-may courts of justice use extraneous mats?? NO- only if all 3 tools failed ‘yong history, what’s going on in society at that time lang?
When ratified, they did not have deliberations of consti commission
-must inform themselves in 4 corners of Consti lang
Finally, ut magis valeat quam pereat. The words of the Constitution should be interpreted as a whole. The members of the Constitutional Convention could not have dedicated a provision of our Constitution merely for the benefit of one person without considering that it could also affect others. When they adopted [provisions of the Constitution], they permitted, if not willed, that said provision should function to the full extent of its substance and its terms, not by itself alone, but in conjunction with all other provisions of that great document. (Francisco vs. House of Representatives, GR No. 160261, Nov. 10, 2003)
4. Extraneous Materials Can ONLY be used if the Above-Mentioned Rules Fail
Likewise, still in Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, this Court affirmed that:
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 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.
In other words, the court must harmonize them, if practicable, and must lean in favor of a construction which will render every word operative, rather than one which may make the words idle and nugatory. (Emphasis supplied)
If, however, the plain meaning of the word is not found to be clear, resort to other aids is available. In still the same case of Civil Liberties Union v. Executive Secretary, this Court expounded:
While it is permissible in this jurisdiction to consult the debates and proceedings of the constitutional convention in order to arrive at the reason and purpose of the resulting Constitution, resort thereto may be had only when other guides fail as said proceedings are powerless to vary the terms of the Constitution when the meaning is clear. Debates in the constitutional conve ntion “are of values
as showing the views of the individual members, and as indicating the reasons for their votes, but they give us no light as to the views of the large majority who did not talk, much less of the mass of our fellow citizens whose votes at the polls
gave that instrument the force of fundamental law. We think it safer to construe the constitution from what appears upon its face.” The proper interpretation therefore depends more on how it was understood by the people adopting it than in the framers’ understanding
Francisco vs. House of Representatives (GR 160261, 10 November 2003)
En Banc, Carpio Morales (J): 1 concurs, 3 wrote separate concurring opinions to which 4 concur, 2 wrote concurring and dissenting separate opinions to which 2 concur.
FACTS: On 28 November 2001, the 12th Congress of the House of Representatives adopted and approved the Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings, superseding the previous House Impeachment Rules approved by the 11th Congress. On 22 July 2002, the House of Representatives adopted a Resolution, which directed the Committee on Justice "to conduct an investigation, in aid of legislation, on the manner of disbursements and expenditures by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF). On 2 June 2003, former President Joseph E. Estrada filed an impeachment complaint (first impeachment complaint) against Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr. and seven Associate Justices of the Supreme Court for "culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of the public trust and other high crimes." The complaint was endorsed by House Representatives, and was referred to the House Committee on Justice on 5 August 2003 in accordance with Section 3(2) of Article XI of the Constitution. The House Committee on Justice ruled on 13 October 2003 that the first
