Feb 28, 2025
Exercise of Government Power
Basic Framework
Separation of Powers
Delegation of Powers
Basic Framework
Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from
them.
The real people is with the people as a collective.
Sovereign will is often expressed by electing representatives (who are
supposed to represent our interest).
3 branches of People as a Sovereign Power
1. Executive
2. Legislative
3. Judicial
Legislative Power
Legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines, which
shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent
reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum (Article VI,
section 1)
Upper House and Lower House
Executive Power
shall be vested int the President of the Philippines (Article VII, Section I)
Judicial Power
shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be
established by law. (Article VIII, Section 1)
3 branches of the Government should be/have:
Co-equal and independent.
Feb 28, 2025 1
Separation and Independence. - always emphasize.
The three departments of government, the executive, legislative, and
judicial, are not only coordinate, they are coequal and co-important. While
interdependent, in the sense that each is unable to perform its functions
fully and adeq uately without the other, they are, nevertheless, in the most
important sense independent of each other; that is to say, one department
may not control or even interfere with another in the exercise of its
special functions. The quality of government consists in their remaining
thus independent - Justice Moreland
Reasons:
1. They are supposed to be independent
2. They are supposed to be checks and balances.
a. One branch should not have control over the other, they should
check each other out or balance each other out.
Whenever there is an act that violates with independence that is
unconstitutional.
Mamiscal v Abdullah
Administrative case against a clerk in shari’a court because of a divorce of a
muslim court.
Under Muslim Law - the clerk of court of the shari’a court is also the civil
registrar.
In this case, the acts complained of were performed while he was acting as a
civil registar.
SC said that although the SC have administrative jurisdiction over all court
personnel, it cannot entertain this particular complain because the acts
complained of refers to acts as a civil registrar - under of the control of the
executive department. - acts complained of are part of his functions as part
of the executive department.
SC refused to interfere because of separation of powers.
💡 "the Clerk of Court of the Shari'a Circuit Court enjoys the privilege of
wearing two hats: first, as Clerk of Court of the Shari'a Circuit Court, and
second, as Circuit Registrar within his territorial jurisdiction. Although the
Constitution vests the Court with the power of administrative supervision
over all courts and its personnel, this power must be taken with due
regard to other prevailing laws."
Feb 28, 2025 2
In re Laureta and Maravilla
💡 to look for another forum to review the Supreme court's decision is to
violate the principle of separation of powers. When it comes to
adjudication of cases, the Supreme Court is supreme and no other
branch of government may review its decisions
Mantruste System v CA
💡 While the judicial power may appear to be pervasive, the truth is that
under the system of separation of powers set up in the Constitution, the
power of the courts over the other branches and instrumentalities of the
Government is limited only to the determination of "whether or not there
has been a grave abuse of discretion (by them) amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction" X x x Courts may not substitute their judgment for
that of the APT, nor block, by an injunction, the discharge of its functions
and the implementation of its decisions in connection with the
acquisition, sale or disposition of assets transferred to it.
expanded judicial power - determine whether or not there is a grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of juridisction.
even if it is supposed to be a political question but involves grave abuse of
discretion the court can still review it.
while it appears that judiciary is the most powerful branch because it can
nullify an executive or legislative action, but it is not because it has:
no self-citing capacity;
their power to nullify the executive or legislative action is only limited to the
Philippine Constitution.
INS v Chadha
there is a law where US congress delegated to the executive brank to the INS,
the power delegated is to determine who can and cannot be deported
(aliens).
Chadha was supposed to be deported because he overstayed but the law
grants the power to immigration officials to determine whether or not an
exception can be carved out and the deportation can be suspended, but the
grant of power was accompanied by a limitation, and the limitation is that
exercise of the power to suspend deportation is subject to the veto power of
congress and that power is delegated to one house.
Feb 28, 2025 3
Chadha challenge this on the ground of separation of powers and the SC
agreed with Chadha.
💡 A provision in the law allowing a one-house veto of an executive act is
unconstitutional as it violates the very principle of separation of powers.
How does it violate the very principle of separation of powers?
Legislative power ends after the law is enacted. What comes after the law is
enacted is the execution of the law.
In this case, the congress didn’t end the law once they have enacted it,
instead they have subjected it for review. The legislature retained their power
to supervise the implementation of the law which cannot be done because
ineffect, if they allow that, the legislature will now supervise the executive
officials. In which, the legislature cannot do because they are co-equal and
this will disrupt the separation of powers.
Immigration officials, attorney-generals are under the executive
department.
Post-legislation of congress
after it passes the law, it can monitor how the executive is implementing the
law, review or conduct legislative investigation but it cannot interfere with the
executive.
Purpose of reviewing: so that they will know if they have to amend it, so they
can only review, monitor, check or oversee for the purpose of future legislation
but they cannot interfere because that is now part of the functions of the
executive department.
Arnault v Balagtas
Arnault filed a habeas corpus against the Senate for refusing to release him
even if he already purged himself from the content.
RTC granted the habeas corpus in which the SC stated otherwise.
💡 Court have no right to review the findings of legislative bodies in the
exercise of the prerogative of legislation, or interfere with their
proceedings or their discretion in what is known as the legislative
process.
Feb 28, 2025 4
Court cannot interfere with the senate investigation. Unless there is grave
abuse of discretion.
Arnault v Nazareno
earlier case before Arnault v Balagtas
Arnault accused senate for grave abuse of discretion for irrelevant questions
so ineffect went to the Court to rule the immateriality of the question. In which
the Court denied.
💡 So we are of the opinion that where the alleged immateriality of the
information sought by the legislative body from a witness is relied upon
to contest its jurisdiction, the court is in duty bound to pass upon the
contention. The fact that the legislative body has jurisdiction or the
power to make the inquiry would not preclude judicial intervention to
correct a clear abuse of discretion in the exercise of that power.
Belgica v Ochoa
Pork-barrel case
The power of the purse belongs to the legislature.
meaning, the one who controls the funds are the legislature. According to
the Constitution, no money will go out of the treasury unless there is a law
appropriating it.
Rules on appropriation law require that they specify where the
money/funds will go.
Pork-barrel concept: the officials will make an appropriation (describe their
projects that the fund will be used for) ending, the senators or congressmen
decide what kind of project, where it will be implemented and how it will be
implemented.
Ultimate approval falls on the approval of a single congressman or a senator.
Belgica v Ochoa is the 4th case to be brought in the SC where the concept of
pork-barrel funds questioning it as unconstitutional. The 3 prior cases that
was brought, SC ruled that there is nothing wrong with the pork-barrel, but
because of the Napoles case, the SC was pressured to review the concept
more.
Feb 28, 2025 5
💡 Upon approval and passage of the GAA, Congress' law -making role
necessarily comes to an end and from there the Executive's role of
implementing the national budget begins. So as not to blur the
constitutional boundaries between them, Congress must "not concern it
self with details for implementation by the Executive.
Once the law is passed particularly when it comes to budget, that is what we
call the budget legislation, what will necessarily follow is budget execution.
Congress passes the general appropriation’s act, this is the law that
distributes the money and determines how much will be spent well.
Budget Execution
Congress no longer has the power to interfere in budget execution.
💡 "the phase of budget execution "covers the various operational aspects
of budgeting" and accordingly includes "the evaluation of work and
financial plans for individual activities," the "regulation and release of
funds" as well as all "other related activities" that comprise the budget
execution cycle."
Mendoza v People
💡 Under Article 5 of the Revised Penal Code, the courts are bound to apply
the law as it is and impose the proper penalty, no matter how harsh it
might be. The same provision, however, gives the Court the discretion to
recommend to the President actions it deems appropriate but are
beyond its power when it considers the penalty imposed as excessive.
Power, except in deciding cases, they only exercise discretion given by the
law itself.
violation of SSS law. - if you are an employer and you have failed to pay your
employees’ SSS, that is a crime.
In this case, an employer was found guilty of failing to pay the proper sss
benefits of his employees - convicted.
The power to forgive is not with the judiciary, that is with the power of the
President, and the power to determine penalty is the legislative, all the
Supreme Court can do is impose the penalty according to the law.
Feb 28, 2025 6
NPC Drivers and Mechanics v Napocor
💡 Thus, the department secretaries cannot delegate their duties as
members of the NPB, much less their power to vote and approve board
resolutions, because it is their personal judgment that must be
exercised in the fulfillment of
such responsibility.
Once the law gives the power to department secretaries, they cannot delegate
that to their assistants, therefore, their assistants cannot approve board
resolutions, because when the law gives the power to a department secretary,
that means that law depends on the personal judgement of the secretary, and
because it is personal, it cannot be delegated to an assistant. Therefore, the
board resolution that was approved not by the secretary but their
alternates/assistants was held to be unconstitutional.
La Bugal Blaan v Ramos
mining case during the 1990s.
issue about financial and technical assistants of foreign companies.
Nationalists believe that we should not allow foreigners to interfere with the
exploitation of mineral resources. In the Constitution, it limits the participation
of foreign companies in exploitation of mineral resources to financial and
technical assistants.
💡 The choice or prioritizing mining over other economic activity is a
political question which the court cannot pass upon.
policy questions should be brought to the Congress.
The only thing you can brought to the SC are justiciable questions.
Pobre v Defensor Santiago
Feb 28, 2025 7
💡 Courts do not interfere with the legislature or its members in the manner
they perform their functions in the legislative floor or in committee
rooms. Any claim of an unworthy purpose or of the falsity and mala fides
of the statement uttered by the member of the Congress does not
destroy the privilege. The disciplinary authority of the assembly and the
voters, not the courts, can properly discourage or correct such abuses
committed in the name of
parliamentary immunity.
The Courts cannot interfere with how a senator performs his or her job.
Makalintal v Comelec
local version of INS v Chadha.
involves a law, overseas voting. Where congress passed a law granting
COMELEC the power to decide on the rules but still subject for approval of the
Congress.
💡 By vesting itself with the powers to approve, review, amend, and revise
the IRR for The Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003, Congress went
beyond the scope of its constitutional authority. Congress trampled upon
the constitutional mandate of independence of the COMELEC. Under
such a situation, the Court is left with no option but to withdraw from its
usual reticence in declaring a provision of law unconstitutional.
Congress cannot subject the approval of IRR in implementing rules and
regulations to its approval. Because after they delegated the power of the law,
then legislative power ends there. They cannot retain approving power
because legislative ends after the law has passed.
Abakada v Purisima
💡 Congress, in the guise of assuming the role of an overseer, may not pass
upon their legality by subjecting them to its stamp of approval without
disturbing the calculated balance of powers established by the
Constitution. In exercising discretion to approve or disapprove the IRR
based on a determination of whether or not they conformed with the
provisions of RA 9335, Congress arrogated judicial power unto itself, a
power exclusively vested in this Court by the Constitution.
Feb 28, 2025 8
Just like in Chadha and Makalintal case, the Congress cannot retain veto
power, supervisory power over how it will be implemented, and once they
delegate rule making power it can no longer be subject to their approval.
Delegation of Powers
The 3 great branches, as a general rule, they are not allowed to delegate their
power. Usually the one who delegates power is the legislature, and this
concept is called undue delegation of legislative power.
What does this mean?
that an illegal delegation of legislative power, the general rule is that,
“the delegate cannot delegate, delegated power.”
Public officials are but agents or representatives of the people, so
the power they exercise are already delegated power and they are
nothing but delegates.
The problem is that, most of the time, the Court uses the term
“valid delegation of legislative power,” which confuses people.
What is delegated is not legislative power but is the rule-
making power.
The Court has adopted 2 tests: Completeness and Sufficient standard test
Completeness test
the law must be complete in all its terms and conditions when it leaves
the legislature such that when it reaches the delegate, the only thing
he will have to do is to enforce it.
In other words, the law is complete in itself, the policies are stated,
what it seeks to achieve is stated, the penalties, etc. The delegates
is just supposed to fill in the details.
Sufficient standard test
Adequate guidelines or limitations in the law to determine the
boundaries of the delegate's authority and prevent the delegation from
running riot. To be sufficient, the standard must specify the limits of
the delegate's authority, announce the legislative policy and identify
the conditions under which it is to be implemented.
the law itself must provide for the guidelines that will limit the
power of the delegate so that the delegate’s authority is clear.
There are sufficient standards that will tell the delegate what their
specific authority under the law.
Garcia v Exec Sec
Feb 28, 2025 9
💡 There is thus explicit constitutional permission 1 to Congress to authorize
the President "subject to such limitations and restrictions is [Congress]
may impose" to fix "within specific limits" "tariff rates... and other duties
or imposts..."
Why does the Constitution allow this?
Part of executive power is the foreign relations power.
US v Tang Ho
💡 A law that allows the Governor General unlimited discretion to determine
when the price of rice should be fixed, at what price should it be fixed,
and to make a violation of the price so fixed a crime provides no
standard and hence is an invalid delegation of legislative power.
Cotescup v Sec of Educ
case where K-12 law was question.
Among others, they said that there was an invalid delegation of legislative
power because it gave CHED rule-making power.
💡 The K to 12 Law adequately provides the legislative policy that it seeks to
implement.
Moreover, scattered throughout the K to 12 Law are the standards to
guide the DepEd, CHED and TESDA in carrying out the provisions of the
law, from the development of the K to 12 BEC, to the hiring and training
of teaching personnel and to the formulation of appropriate strategies in
order to address the changes during the transition period.
Conference v POEA
The law granted POEA the power to make implementing rules that will govern
OFWs. There was a standard contract that was imposed by that rules so the
employer questioned the power of the POEA to come up with the rules. IT said
that POEA should not be the one coming up with those rules, it should be
Congress itself, but the law granted POEA to make those rules.
Feb 28, 2025 10
💡 The formulation of the rules and regulations of the POEA is authorized by
a valid delegation of legislative power.
Disini v Sec. of Justice
💡 The authority that Section 12 gives law enforcement agencies is too
sweeping and lacks restraint. While it says that traffic data collection
should not disclose identities or content data, such restraint is but an
illusion. Admittedly, nothing can prevent law enforcement agencies
holding these data in their hands from looking into the identity of their
sender or receiver and what the data contains. This will unnecessarily
expose the citizenry to leaked information or, worse, to extortion from
certain bad elements in these agencies.
the law was not complete in itself and there is no sufficient standard.
People v Judge Dacuycuy
what was involved here was a law where it says that it is punishable by a fine
or an imprisonment at the discretion of the Court. (no minimum or maximum)
💡 A law that leaves the penalty of imprisonment to the discretion of the
court is void.
Congress is the one that determines the law.
It must be the legislature that determines the penalty and policy.
Pelaez v Auditor General
💡 The creation/incorporation of municipalities is a legislative function and
the delegation thereof to the executive should not be allowed.
“municipalities is a legislative function” — Constitution gives that power to the
legislature, it cannot delegate that power to the President.
Sema v Comelec
Feb 28, 2025 11
💡 The power to reapportion legislative districts necessarily includes the
power to create legislative districts out of existing ones. Congress
exercises these powers through a law that Congress itself enacts, and
not through a law that regional or local legislative bodies enact. The
allowable membership of the House of Representatives can be
increased, and new legislative districts of Congress can be created, only
through a national law passed by Congress.
a law that allows local or regional legislative bodies to create a district is not
allowable.
issue: can a Muslim Mindanao create a legislative district?
The law cannot say that you can have the power to create a legislative district
because the Constitution grants that power only to the legislature. Therefore,
that power cannot be delegated to an autonomous region.
Why do we resort to delegation?
Because agencies or departments, the Congress recognize their expertise.
So that they can translate policies ton enforceable rules.
Feb 28, 2025 12