Module 1: Constitutional Law

Basic Principles and Policies

SECTION 1. Guiding Principles and Policies in Government.—Government power shall be exercised in

(1) The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all
government authority emanates from them.
(2) The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights.
(3) Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military.
(4) The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments.
(5) The territorial and political subdivisions of the Republic of the Philippines are the provinces, cities,
municipalities, and barangays. There shall be autonomous regions, in accordance with the Constitution,
in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras as may be provided by law.
(6) The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.
(7) The right of the people and their organizations to effective and reasonable participation at all levels
of social, political, and economic decision-making shall not be abridged. The State shall, by law, facilitate
the establishment of adequate consultation mechanisms.
(8) The powers expressly vested in any branch of the Government shall not be exercised by, nor
delegated to, any other branch of the Government, except to the extent authorized by the Constitution.

POLITICAL LAW PART I

DEFINITIONS & CONCEPTS

1. Define: a. Political Law—is that branch of public law which deals with the organization and
operations of the governmental organs of the State and defines the relations of the State with the
inhabitants of its territory. (PEOPLE VS. PERFECTO, 43 Phil. 887)

b. Constitutional Law

c. Constitution

d. Administrative Law

e. Law of Public Officers

f. Law on Public Corporations

g. Election Law

h. Distinction between Political Law and Constitutional Law

2. Read: MACARIOLA VS. JUDGE ASUNCION, 114 SCRA 77

The provision in the Code of Commerce which prohibits judges, justices, etc., (public officers) from
engaging in business within the territorial jurisdiction of their courts is political in nature and therefore,
said provision was deemed abrogated when there was a change of sovereignty from Spain to the United
States at the turn of the century. Political laws are deemed abrogated if there is a change of sovereignty
and unless re-enacted under the new sovereign, the same is without force and effect.
Module 1: Constitutional Law

3. The Supremacy of the Constitution

By definition, the Philippine Constitution is the basic or fundamental law of the land. It defines the
territory, system of government, process of how to select leader, citizenship, and other rules that define
what makes the Philippines a sovereign state. The Constitution has been ratified by the majority of the
people of the Philippines via a plebiscite and cannot be repealed or amended unless it follows the
process described within the Constitution.

All other laws of the country must be based on the articles and provisions of the Constitution. Laws that
are inconsistent with it are struck down by the Supreme Court. It is the duty of every elected and
appointed government official to obey and enforce the Constitution. Just as local laws (provincial and
municipal ordinances) must be subordinate to national laws, all national laws and treaties entered into
by the Philippine Government must be subordinate to the Constitution.

Read: 1. MUTUC VS. COMELEC, 36 SCRA 228

2. MANILA PRINCE HOTEL VS. GSIS, 267 SCRA 408

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. It has
been defined as the fundamental and paramount law of the nation. It prescribes the permanent
framework of a system of government, assigns to the different departments their respective powers and
duties, and establishes certain fixed principles on which government is founded. The 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.

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 the 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.
Module 1: Constitutional Law

4. Kinds of Constitution

a) written or unwritten

b) rigid and flexible

c) cumulative or conventional

5. AMENDMENT OR REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION (Art. XVII)

Section 1. Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be proposed by:

[1] The Congress upon a vote of ¾ of all its Members; or

[2] A constitutional Convention.

Section 2. Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be directly proposed by the people through
initiative upon a petition of at least 12% of the total number of registered voters, of which every
legislative district must be represented by at least 3% of the registered voter therein. No amendment
under this Section shall be authorized within five (5) years following the ratification of this Constitution
nor oftener than once every five years thereafter.

The Congress shall provide for the implementation of the exercise of this right.

Section 3. The Congress, by a vote of 2/3 of all its members, cal a constitutional convention, or by a
majority vote of all its Members, submit to the electorate the question of calling such a convention.

Section 4. Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution under Section 1 hereof shall be valid
when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days
nor later than ninety days after the approval of such amendment or revision.

Any amendment under Section 2 hereof shall be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a
plebiscite which shall be held not later than ninety days after the certification by the COMELEC of the
sufficiency of the petition.

NOTE: Amendments to, or revision of the Constitution is VALID only when approved by a majority of the
votes cast during the plebiscite, not by the votes of the Members of Congress.

2. Read: R.A. 6735

Requisites for a valid people’s initiative to amend the Constitution; distinctions between amendment
and revision.
Module 1: Constitutional Law

RAUL L. LAMBINO and ERICO B. AUMENTADO , together with 6,327,952 registered voters vs. THE
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, G.R. No. 174153, October 25, 2006, 505 SCRA 160

Carpio, J.

Facts:

Petitioners filed a Petition for Initiative and Referendum with the COMELEC to amend the 1987
Philippine Constitution, particularly Articles VI and VII to replace the present Presidential-Bicameral
system of government to Parliamentary-Unicameral system using Section 2, Art. XVII of the Constitution.
Petitioners claim that their petition was signed by 6,327,952 million voters all over the country and the
same constitutes over 12% of all the registered voters in the entire country and that more than 3% of
the registered voters in every legislative district signed the same in accordance with Section 2, Art. XVII
of the Constitution. The petition to change the Constitution involves sections 1-7 of Article VI; Sections
1-4 of Article VII and an Article XVII entitled “Transitory Provisions”. The petitioners prayed with the
COMELEC that after due publication of their Petition, the COMELEC should submit the following
proposition in a plebiscite for the voters’ ratification:

DO YOU APPROVE THE AMENDMENT OF ARTICLES VI AND VII OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION, CHANGING
THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT FROM THE PRESIDENTIAL BICAMERAL TO A UNICAMERAL-
PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM, AND PROVIDING ARTICLE XVIII AS TRANSITORY PROVISIONS FOR THE
ORDERLY SHIFT FROM ONE SYSTEM TO THE OTHER?

The COMELEC dismissed the petition citing SANTIAGO VS. COMELEC, 270 SCRA 106 where it was held
that:

RA 6735 intended to include the System of Initiative on Amendments to the Constitution, but is,
unfortunately, Inadequate to cover that system under Section 2, Art. XVII of the Constitution. x x x .

The foregoing brings us to the conclusion that RA 6735 is incomplete, inadequate or wanting in essential
terms and conditions insofar as initiative on amendments to the Constitution is concerned. Its lacunae
on this substantive matter are fatal and cannot be cured by “empowering” the COMELEC to promulgate
such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry the purposes of this act.
Module 1: Constitutional Law

Considering the said dismissal, petitioners elevated the matter to the Supreme Court on Certiorari and
Mandamus alleging rave abuse of discretion and to set aside the COMELEC’ Decision and to compel the
latter to give due course to their initiative petition.

The Issues:

1. WHETHER THE LAMBINO GROUP’S PETITION COMPLIES WITH SECTION 2, ARTICLE XVII OF THE
CONSTITUTION ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION THROUGH PEOPLE’S INITIATIVE;

2. WHETHER THE COURT SHOULD REVISIT ITS RULING IN DEFENSOR-SANTIAGO VS. COMELEC,
DECLARING THAT RA NO. 6735 “INCOMPLETE, INADEQUATE OR WANTING IN ESSENTIAL TERMS AND
CONDITIONS” TO IMPLEMENT THE INITIATIVE CLAUSE ON PROPOSALS TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION;
and

3. WHETHER THE COMELEC COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION IN DENYING DUE COURSE
TO THE LAMBINO GROUP’S PETITION.

H E L D:

There is no merit to the petition.

The Lambino group miserably failed to comply with the basic requirements of the Constitution for
conducting a people’s initiative. Thus, there is even no need to revisit Santiago, as the present petition
warrants dismissal based alone on the Lambino Group’s glaring failure to comply with the basic
requirements of the Constitution. As such, there is likewise no grave abuse of discretion on the part of
the COMELEC.

Section 2, Article XVII of the Constitution is the governing constitutional provision that allows a people’s
initiative to propose amendments to the Constitution. This Section provides:

“Section 2. Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be DIRECTLY PROPOSED BY THE PEOPLE
through initiative upon a petition of at least twelve per centum (12%) of the total number of registered
voters of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum (3%) of the
registered voters therein.”
Module 1: Constitutional Law

The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention vividly explain the meaning of the amendment
“directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition”. Thus:

MR. RODRIGO: Let us look at the mechanics. Let us say some voters want to propose a constitutional
amendment. IS THE DRAFT OF THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT READY TO BE SHOWN
TO THE PEOPLE WHEN THEY ARE ASKED TO SIGN?

MR. SUAREZ. That can be reasonably assumed, Madam President.

MR. RODRIGO: What does the sponsor mean? The draft is ready and shown to them before they sign?
Now, who prepares the draft?

MR. SUAREZ: The people themselves, Madam President…As it is envisioned, any Filipino can prepare
that proposal and pass it around for signature.

Clearly, the framers of the Constitution intended that the “draft of the proposed constitutional
amendment” should be “ready and shown” to the people “before they sign such proposal”. The framers
plainly stated that “before they sign there is already a draft shown to them.” The framers also
“envisioned” that the people should sign on the proposal itself because the proponents must “prepare
the proposal and pass it around for signature.”

The essence of amendments “directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition” IS
THAT THE ENTIRE PROPOSAL ON ITS FACE IS A PETITION BY THE PEOPLE. This means two (2) essential
elements must be present:

1. The people must author and must sign the entire proposal. No agent or representative can sign
for and on their behalf;

2. As an initiative upon a petition, THE PROPOSAL MUST BE EMBODIED IN A PETITION.

These essential elements are present only if the full text of the proposed amendments is first shown to
the people who will express their assent by signing such complete proposal in a petition. Thus, an
Module 1: Constitutional Law

amendment is “DIRECTLY PROPOSED BY THE PEOPLE THROUGH INITIATIVE UPON A PETIITON “ ONLY IF
THE PEOPLE SIGN ON A PETITION THAT OCNTAINS THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.

The petitioners bear the burden of proving that they complied with the constitutional requirements in
gathering the signatures—that the petition contained, or incorporated by attachment, the full text of
the proposed amendments.

The Lambino Group did not attach to their present petition a copy of the document containing the
proposed amendments and as such, the people signed initiative petition without knowing the actual
amendments proposed in the said initiative. Instead , the alleged 6.3 million people who signed the
petition had to rely the representations of Atty. Lambino. Clearly, Atty. Lambino and his group deceived
the 6.3 million signatories, and even the entire nation.

2. A people’s initiative to change the Constitution applies only to an amendment of the Constitution
and not to its revision. In contrast, Congress and a Constitutional Convention can propose both
amendments and revisions to the Constitution. This is clear under Section 1 of Art. XVII of the
Constitution.

Where the intent and language of the Constitution under Section 2 of Art. XVIII clearly withhold from the
people the power to propose revisions to the Constitution, the people cannot propose revisions even as
they are empowered to propose amendments. The two are distinguished as follows:

“Revision” is the alterations of the different portions of the entire document [Constitution]. It may
result in the rewriting whether the whole constitution, or the greater portion of it, or perhaps some of
its important provisions. But whatever results the revision may produce, the factor that characterizes it
as an act of revision is the original intention and plan authorized to be carried out. That intention and
plan must contemplate a consideration of all the provisions of the Constitution to determine which one
should be altered or suppressed or whether the whole document should be replaced with an entirely
new one.

“Amendment” of the Constitution, on the other hand, envisages a change or only a few specific
provisions. The intention of an act to amend is not to consider the advisability of changing the entire
constitution or of considering that possibility. The intention rather is to improve specific parts of the
existing constitution or to add to it provisions deemed essential on account of changed conditions or to
suppress portions of it that seem obsolete, or dangerous, or misleading in their effect.

MIRIAM DEFENSOR-SANTIAGO, et al. Vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 127325, March 19, 1997 & June 10, 1997
Module 1: Constitutional Law

RA 6735 intended to include the System of Initiative on Amendments to the Constitution, but is,
unfortunately, Inadequate to cover that system. Section 2 Art. XVII is not self-executory and unless
Congress provides for its implementation , it would remain in the cold niche of the Constitution. RA 6735
in all its 23 sections mentions the word “Constitution” only in section 2 and Section 3 as compared to
the initiative on “statutes” and local legislation. The foregoing brings us to the conclusion that RA 6735 is
incomplete, inadequate or wanting in essential terms and conditions insofar as initiative on
amendments to the Constitution is concerned. Its lacunae on this substantive matter are fatal and
cannot be cured by “empowering” the COMELEC to promulgate such rules and regulations as may be
necessary to carry the purposes of this act.

Enumerate the steps to be followed and the requisites to be met in order that the people may proposed
the amendments, repeal, amend or enact a law or provision of the Cnstitution.

3. What are the different modes of amending the constitution? Distinguish “Revision” from
“amendment” of the Constitution.

“Revision” is the alterations of the different portions of the entire document [Constitution]. It may
result in the rewriting whether the whole constitution, or the greater portion of it, or perhaps some of
its important provisions. But whatever results the revision may produce, the factor that characterizes it
as an act of revision is the original intention and plan authorized to be carried out. That intention and
plan must contemplate a consideration of all the provisions of the Constitution to determine which one
should be altered or suppressed or whether the whole document should be replaced with an entirely
new one.

“Amendment” of the Constitution, on the other hand, envisages a change or only a few specific
provisions. The intention of an act to amend is not to consider the advisability of changing the entire
constitution or of considering that possibility. The intention rather is to improve specific parts of the
existing constitution or to add to it provisions deemed essential on account of changed conditions or to
suppress portions of it that seem obsolete, or dangerous, or misleading in their effect. (SINCO, Vicente,
PHILIPPINE POLITICAL LAW)

4. Read: a) MABANAG vs. LOPEZ VITO, 78 Phil. 1

b) GONZALES vs. COMELEC, 21 SCRA 774

There is no prohibition for Congress to propose amendments to the Constitution and at the
same time call for the convening of a Constitutional Convention to amend the Constitution. The word
“or” in the provision “…Congress, upon a vote of ¾ of all its members; OR [2] A constitutional
Convention” under Section 1, Art. XVII also means “AND”.

c) TOLENTINO vs. COMELEC, 41 SCRA 702

“Doctrine of Proper Submission” means all the proposed amendments to the Constitution shall be
presented to the people for the ratification or rejection at the same time, not piecemeal.

d) SANIDAD vs. COMELEC, 73 SCRA 333

e) ALMARIO vs. ALBA, 127 SCRA 69

If the question regarding the proposed amendment to the Constitution deals with its “necessity,
expediency or wisdom”, the same is political in nature and beyond the power of the courts to decide.

f) MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO VS. COMELEC, 270 ACRA 106

Concept of Philippine Constitution

Meaning of Constitution In broad sense, the term constitution refers to “that body of rules and
principles in accordance with which the powers of sovereignty are regularly exercised.” As thus defined,
it covers both written and unwritten constitution.

Nature and Purpose or Function of Constitution

a. Serves as the supreme or fundamental law – A constitution is the charter creating the government. It
has the status of a supreme or fundamental law as it speaks for the entire people from whom it derives
its claim to obedience.

b. Establishes basic framework and underlying principles of government – The constitution is also
referred to as the organic or basic law being or relating to the law by virtue of which the government
exists as such.

Meaning of Constitutional Law Constitutional law may be defined as that branch of public law which
treats of constitutions, their nature, formation, amendment, and interpretation.
Module 1: Constitutional Law

Kinds of Constitution Constitution may classify as follows:

1. As to their origin and history

a. Conventional or enacted- One which is enacted by a constituent assembly or granted by a monarch to

b. Cumulative or evolved- Like the English Constitution, one which is a product of growth or a long
period of development originating in customs, traditions, judicial decisions, etc., rather than from a
deliberate and formal enactment.

2. As to their form

a. Written- One which has been given definite written form at a particular time, usually by a specially
constituted authority called a “constitutional convention”; and

b. Unwritten- One which is entirely the product of political revolution, consisting largely of a mass of
customs, usages and judicial decisions together with a smaller body of statutory enactments of a
fundamental character, usually bearing different dates.

3. As to manner of amending them

a. Rigid or inelastic- One regarded as a document of special sanctity which cannot be amended or
altered except by some special machinery more cumbrous than the ordinary legislative process; and

b. Flexible or elastic- One which possesses no higher legal authority than ordinary laws and which may
be altered in the same way as other laws.

The Philippine Constitution may be classified as conventional or enacted, written, rigid or inelastic. It
was drafted by an appointive body called “Constitutional Commission.”

Advantages and Disadvantages of a Written Constitution

1. It has the advantage of clearness and definiteness over an unwritten one. This is because it is
prepared with great care and deliberation. Such a constitution cannot be easily bent or twisted by the
legislature or by the courts, to meet the temporary fancies of the moment. Hence, the protection it
affords and the rights it guarantees are apt to be more secure. Moreover, it is more stable and free from
all dangers of temporary popular passion.

2. Its disadvantage lies in the difficulty of its amendment. This prevents the immediate introduction of
needed changes and may thereby retard the healthy growth and progress of the state.

Requisites of a Good Written Constitution

1. As to form, a good written constitution should be:

a. Brief. Because if the constitution is too detailed, it would lose the advantage of a fundamental law
which in a few provisions outlines the structure of the government of the whole state and the rights of
the citizens. It would probably never be understood by the public. Furthermore, it would then be
necessary to amend it every once in a while to cover many future contingencies;
Module 1: Constitutional Law

b. Broad. Because a statement of the powers and functions of government , and of the relations
between the governing body and the governed, requires that it be as comprehensive as possible; and

c. Definite. Because otherwise the application of its provisions to concrete situations may prove unduly
difficult if not impossible. Any vagueness which may lead to opposing interpretations of essential
features may cause incalculable harm. Civil war and the disruption of the state may conceivably follow
from the ambiguous expressions in a constitution.

2. As to contents, it should contain at least three sets of provisions:

a. That dealing with the framework of government and its powers and defining the electorate. This
group of provisions has been called the constitution of government;

b. That setting forth the fundamental rights of the people and imposing certain limitations on the
powers of government as a means of securing the enjoyment of these rights. This group has been
referred to as the constitution of liberty; and

c. That pointing out the mode or procedure for amending or revising the constitution. This group has
been called the constitution of sovereignty.

Constitution Distinguished from Statute

1. A constitution is a legislation direct from the people, while a statute is a legislation from the people’s
representatives;

2. A constitution merely states the general framework of the law and the government, while a statute
provides the details of the subject of which it treats;

3. A constitution is intended not merely to meet existing conditions but to govern the future, while a
statute is intended primarily to meet existing conditions only; and

4. A constitution is the supreme or fundamental law of the State to which the statutes and all other laws
must conform.

Effectivity of the Constitution

February 11, 1987

The 1987 Constitution finally came into full force and effect on February 11, 1987 with the President,
other civilian officials, and members of the Armed Forces swearing allegiance to the new charter.

Rules on Interpreting Doubtful Provision of the Constitution

Civil Code Article 10

Art. 10. In case of doubt in the interpretation or application of laws, it is

Where there is ambiguity, ratio legis est anima. The words of the Constitution should be interpreted in
accordance with the intent of its framers. And so did the Court apply this principle in Civil Liberties
Union v. Executive Secretary in this wise:

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.