student answers to the preliminary examination in constitutional law 1

Albertine Din

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1754

Writing time: 156 minutes

Email: albertine.din@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

Part I.

• The three essential parts of the Constitution are the following. (1) The Constitution of Liberty enumerates the civil and political rights of the citizens provides for the limitations on the powers of the government. This part is mainly found in Article III of the 1987 Constitution, which is on the Bill of Rights. (2) The Constitution of government provides for the organization of the government, definings its powers and the scope of the electorate. This can be found in Article VI-XI of the 1987 Constitution, which provides for the definition and powers of the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government, and also for the Constitutional Commissions and local government units. Lastly, (3) the Constitution of sovereignty which describes how the Constitution can be amended or revised. This can be found in Article XVII of the 1987 Constitution.
• The doctrine of condonation provides that the reelection of an official bars administrative charges against his actions in the previous term, as the reelection serves as a condonement of such actions. 
• Red Cross and Gordon
• Santos III v NOA
• The two principles in determining the citizenship of a person are jus sanguinis and jus soli. Jus sanguinis provides that citizenship is determined by blood relationship. That is, a person is a Philippine citizen if either or both of her parents are Filipinos. Jus soli bases the citizenship of a person based on territory. That is, a person has Philippine citizenship if she is born in the Philippines. These two principles and how they were applied in the Philippine history were extensively discussed in Tecson v COMELEC where the petitioners questioned the nationality of Ferndando Poe Jr. Accordingly, before the 1935 Constitution was promulgated, we generally followed jus soli. In the 1898 Treaty of Paris, where the Spain ceded the Philippine territory to the United States, up to the 1902 Philippine Bill, Philippine citizens were used to describe people who were born within the Philippine territory. This changed when the 1935 Constitution followed the principle of jus sanguinis. When the 1935 Constitution was promulgated it provided that those who were born of Filipino fathers assume Filipino citizenship. This was expanded in the 1973 Constitution and up to the 1987 Constitution, where both constitutions contain provisions which provide that those who have Filipino mothers or fathers would have Filipino citizenship. 
• A foundling is a baby who is found abandoned by her parents. In customary international law, a foundling is presumed to be a citizen of the country where she was found. This is in line with the international law principle that each person has the right to a citizenship. As the Philippines adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land, foundlings found in the Philippines also assume Philippine citizenship.
•  The doctrine of operative fact provides that when a statute or law is declared as unconstitutional, there are certain "realistic" changes which should not be ignored. As such, when a law is declared unconstitutional, all the rights and duties which were present when the law was still considered valid are also valid, as a matter of equity and fair play.
• There are four requisites before a court would resolve a question on the constitutionality of a law. Firstly, there should be an actual case or controversy. This means that the court would not deal into the constitutionality of a law based on questions which are hypothetical, abstract, or academic in nature. Secondly, the case must be raised by the proper party, who is the one affected by the actual case. Thirdly, the question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity, being raised by the proper party during the pleadings. Lastly, the determination of the constitutionality question must be necessary for the court to arrive at the decision for the actual case.
• The equal protection clause of the constitution allows for valid classification. This is based on the principle that people who are differently situated should be treated differently. The valid classification would only stand if it is based on substantial and reasonably distinctions, which would be relevant with the purpose of the law, and would apply the law to all members of the class.

Part II.

• I would deny the petition of Miss X. The pardon granted by the President would remove all the penal consequences of the criminal indictment. However, the pardon does not remove the fact that Miss X was convicted of malversation, and the appointing officer (the head of the  department) has the right to consider the background of the applicants of a vacant position, including the conviction. 
• The appointment of the new Chief Justice is valid, while the appointment of the head of the Probation office would be invalid. As a general rule, the Constitution prohibits the sitting President to have "midnight appointees", or appointees to government positions 2 months before an election. The reason for this is that the leaving President would still remain in power indirectly by appointing his own people into government offices, prejudicial to the President's successor. While the Constitution of the Philippines prohibits the sitting President to appoint officers within two months before an election, the Court in Castro v JBC ruled that this does not include appointments in the Judiciary. This is so because the Constitution also imposes a duty upon the President to fill in vacancies in the Supreme Court within 90 days from its vacancy. If this duty is disregarded, the President will be disobeying the Constitution. 
• (a) He is not correct in claiming that only the Supreme Court en banc has jurisdiction over him. Criminal law is territorial in the Philippines and applies to all the people residing in the Philippines. (b) The Consul works in the embassy of the country they represent, and they perform tasks related to pushing for economic and commercial affairs between their country and the country in which they are assigned. (c) Only the ambassadors, who represent their head of state in the country in which they are assigned to, enjoy immunity form suit in the Philippine jurisdiction. They are the only ones exempted in the territoriality rule of the application of criminal laws in the Philippines.
• The officials invited by the Senate who are part of and closely work with the President or are part of the President's cabinet could invoke executive privilege to not appear in the sessions. However, those who are in independent bodies such as the Chairman of the Commission on Human Rights can be compelled by the Senate to appear  under pain of legislative contempt. While investigations in aid of legislation are crucial for the Congress to draft relevant laws, under the principle of separation of powers, the members of the Cabinet of the President may invoke executive privilege, in order to ensure that matters which are confidential and crucial in the excercise of the President's power are not compromised. As such, officers who correctly invoke executive privilege must not be threatened with detainment.
• (A) Mr. Sy is not under custodial investigation, thus he may not give a defense where he was not given his Miranda rights. A custodial investigation occurs when law enforcers detain a suspect and force a confession or admission through threat, intimidation and force. As all of these elements are missing, Mr. Sy is not under custodial investigation. (B) His right against self-incrimination is also not violated. Self-incrimination occurs when law enforcers ask leading questions, the answers to which would be incriminating against the respondent. The right against self-incrimination is the right to choose to not answer a self-incriminating question. Mr. Sy voluntarily admitted to the crime without any question from any law enforcer. As such, his right against self-incrimination was not violated.
• (a) the search of his bag in the port is not a violation of his constitutional rights. As a general rule, each person has the right against warantless searches and seizures. However, port search is one of the exceptions to this costitutionally protected right. As ports are public areas of transit, the security of the people and the travelers take primary importance, as such, people in transit have an lower expectation of privacy. As such, port authorities have the right to inspect bags in the entrances of ports in order to ensure public security. (b) After the firearms were found in his bag, law enforcers must ensure that Dela Cruz is informed of his Miranda rights before making an arrest. It is a constitutional right that before any arrest is made, the person being arrested must be informed of the constitutional rights of the accused in order to ensure thate no unlawful arrest and investigation occurs.
• (a) The act of the judge in dismissing the case is not valid. The judge dismissed the case upon reading the findings of the Secretary of Justice. However, she must indipendently arrive at a decision as to whether the case has merit. (b) No. If the judge changes her decision and reinstate the case, she would be violating the constitutional provision on double jeopardy. This case contains all the elements of a double jeopardy. This is because (c) double jeopardy is the filing of the same case when a decision has already previously been achieved. The elements are (1) a first jeopardy attached with the second, (2) the first jeopardy must have been validly terminated, and (3) that the second jeopardy is for the same offense. There is first jeopardy when there was a valid indictment before a court and after arraignment a valid plea has been entered, and in which the accused is either found guilty or is acquitted. In this case, when the judge dismissed the case, Ong was acquitted of this offense. Therefore, a reinstatement of the case based on the same offense, after the case was initially dismissed, would constitute double jeopardy.
• (A) A quo warranto proceeding is 
• Yes, the accused is correct in saying that he would be placed in double jeopardy if the judge recalls the earlier decision on the basis of another similar case filed against the accused with a different victim. Firstly, this case would have all the elements of double jeopardy. Secondly, decisions in criminal cases take effective effect. This means that once the accused was acquitted, his acquittal took immediate effect.
•  His petition will push through and will be decided in his favor because the provision in RA 9165 which prohibits plea bargaining violates the Constitutional mandate of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules regarding its proceedings, including plea bargaining.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Audey Principe

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1117

Writing time: 140 minutes

Email: audeygprincipe@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

Part I. Basic Questions

1. Basic parts of the Constitution are: constitution of liberty, the consitution of government and the constitution of sovereignity. The first can be found in Articles III, II, IV, V and XII of our Constitution. The second can be found in Articles VI to XI. The third can be found in Article XVII.

2. Doctrine of condonation is a limited empowerment of the electorate over the accountabilities of their elective local official. The Supreme Court abandoned the ruling, noting that it lacks basis in the 1987 Constitution and law.

3. According to the Supreme Court, the Philippine National Red Cross is not a Government-owned but privately owned. Thus, Gordon did not violate the Article VI section 13 of the Constitution.

4. Rebus Sic Stantibus is a clause ininternational conventions (international agreements and treaties) that provides for the unenforceability of a treaty due to fundamentally changed circumstances. In english it translates to "things thus standing."

5. The two principles are: method of acquisition of citizenship by jus sanguinis or virtue of blood relationship, and second, jus soli or virtue of the place of birth. This two principles was used in Tecson versus COMELEC case wherein the petitioner questioned the citizenship of then Presidential candidate Fernando Poe Jr. (FPJ). The Supreme Court denied the petition, thus assailing that FPJ was indeed a Filipino.

6. A foundling is an infant that has been abandoned by its parents and is discovered and cared for by others. 

7. Doctrine of operative fact recognizes the existence of the law or executive act prior to the determination of its unconstitutionality as an operative fact theat produce consequences that cannot always be erased, ignored or disregarded. In short, it nullifies the void law or executive act but sustaines its effects.

8. The requisites of judicial inquiry are: (1) an actual case or controversy involves a conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible of judicial resolution; (2) a proper party is one who has sustained or is in immediate danger of sustaining an inquiry as a result of the act complained of; (3) the rule is that the constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity, such that if it is not raised in pleadings it cannot be considered in trial, and, if not considered in trial, it cannot be considered on appeal; (4) there must be a necessity in deciding constitutional question.

9. The rules of constitutional construction are: (1) permanence of the constitution in which it must be firm and immovable, like a mountain amidst the strife of storms of a rock in the ocean amidst the raging of the waves. (2) Interpretation of the constitution should be read in accordance with the usual rules on interpretation and construction. (3) Amendments or revisions of the constitution are made if such provision were ambigious that it affect the interpretation of the court of justice.

10. The equal protection clause is directed principally against undue favor and individual or class previledge. It does not intended to prohibit legislation which is limited to the object to which it is directed or by the territory in which it is to operate. It does not require absolute equality, but merely that all persons be treated alike under like conditions both as to previledges conferred and liabities imposed.

Part II. Problem Solving

1. Denied. According to the case of Dimayacyac vs. CA that pardon will erase your conviction and penalty thereof, it shall made the pardonee as inocent prior to conviction, but among others miss X is prohibited in reinstituted in her previous position.

2. The appointment of the new chief justice is invalid. Indeed the appointment of the new head of the probation officer is valid. Accodring to Article VII section 15 of the Constitution, the President shall not make appointments 2 months prior to presidential elections except temporary appointments to executive positions like head of probation office.

3. Yes the consul is correct. The consul is a foreign service public officer who is commissioned by a state to reside in a foreign country for the purpose of fostering the commercial affairs of its citizen in that foreign country and performing such routine functions as issuing visas and renewing passports. Yes the consul is immune according to consular immunity previledges prescribed in the veinna convention on consular relations of 1963.

4. No, they are not compelled if they will request for the postponement of hhi/her appearance in accordance with Rules of procedures governing inquiries , Section 9. Their threat of detention in case of non appearance shall not be tolerate because it is unconstitutional in nature, it prohibits liberty of the threatened official.

5. Yes, Mr. Jose Sy should be in first place read his miranda rights. Yes, there is a violation of self-incrimination in accordance with Article III, section 17 of the constitution wherein his promisory note was used as an evidence to incriminate againsts himself.

6. No, searching of his bag in the seaport without his permission is not a violation of his constitutional rights. Port searches are exemptions of warantless searches and seizures according to the jursidiction of jerry sapla case. He must be entitled of his Miranda rights as a part of prerequisites of the due process of law.

7. No, such act of the judge can be determine by his prima ficae and affidavit if such motion to dismiss is valid, he must not rely on the judgment of the Sec. of Justice. No, he cannot reinstate because it will violate double jeopardy. Double jeopardy is a prosecution of a person twice for the same offense. Elements are; valid complaint or definition, a court of competent jurisdiction, the defendant had pleaded to the charge and defendant was acquitted or convicted, or the case against him was dismissed.  

8. Qou warranto proceeding is a special form of legal action used to resolve a dispute over wether a specific person has a legal right to hold a public office that he/she occupies. Impeachable official are: President, VP, Members of Cons. Comm., Members of Supreme Court and Ombudsman. Sereno violated canons 11 and 13 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct. No, Sereno was appointed on 2012 but was ousted on 2018, leaving 6 years gap.

9. Yes, he is placed in double jeopardy because initially he was acquitted even there is a visible error in the RTC judge. What should AAA do is to appeal the case in to the Court of Appeals.

10. Yes, the petition will push through because under the Estipona case that prohibition of plea bargaining is unconstitutional for being contrary to the rule-making authority of the court.

Cesar Tinga

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1006

Writing time: 142 minutes

Email: sartings@yahoo.com.ph

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

* The 3 essential parts of the Constitution are;

  1. Liberty. Particulary found in Arts. III, IV, II, XII

  2. Government. it is found in Arts. XI

  3. Soveriegnty. It is constituted in Art. XVII

 

* The Doctrine of Condonation states that one should not be punished of the crime he has done after the end of his term in office and consequently is now elected to the position in the government. it is presumed that the people who elected him in another position has a great respect of his person. Condonation is exemplfied in the case of Templonueva v Sandiganbayan, wherein, Templonuevo was charged with a crime done when Templonuevo was still a Board member, Now Templonueva is elected  Vice mayor. The charged aginst Templonueva as a Board member is condonated by electing him as Vice Mayor.

 

*Supreme Court in ruling the case at bar justified by stating that this is sui generis case. it is not true to all circumstances.

 

* The Doctrine of Rebus Sic Standibus implies to a certain jurisprudence which has become the basis of  the ruling of some other cases by the court.

* The 2 principles in determining the citizenship of a person are

  1.   by jus suli which entails the land of your birth. One's birth determines his citizenship.  2. by blood relationship. I am a Filipino by blood.

* A foundling is one whose parents cannot be dtermined.  Our domestic law on foundling provides that a foundling may use the surname of the adopting parents.

* Operative Fact.

* The requisites of the Judicial inquiry are as follows, namely;

  1. there is existing controversy which affect the society already.

  2. The sustainability of the person who complained

  3. That the controversy must be raised as early as possible.

  4. That there is nothing more in the complain other than the existing controversy.

* in the case of Davide impeachment the rules of impechment are as follows;

  1. 2/3 of the votes of the members of Representative shall be complied. After which a

  a record of transmittal to the House of the Senate for the adoption of the impeachment 

  complaint.

  2. That only one impeachment each year to be filed for one and the same person.

* The Equal Protection clause simply states that all things or persons on the same situation must be treated equally.  If not all people are treated equally we would be unjust to some members of the society.

 

Part II.

* Under the ruling of the court, which as a Judge, I have to follow, I have to grant her petition for the reason of the Presidential Pardon. under the existing law, if the pardon is obtained before the judgment, she must be reinstated; if the pardon is rendered after conviction, there will be restoration of her rights.

* The appointment of the Chief Justice is justified, because under the law, the President is mandated to appoint the Chief Justice so as not to disrapt the judiciary in the diepensation of justice to the people. Whereas, the appointment of the head of the Probation office violates the Constitution for the reason the appointment to such office can is adminstrative by nature.

 

*a) No, he is not correct. Under the Principle of Territoriality, accredited honorary consul enjoys the privilege of not being subject to suit.

b. A Consul is a representative of the President of a nation whose function is to oversee the welfare of the nation where is at the moment and his own nation.

c. Yes, he enjoys immunity from our jurisdiction on the basis of the Principle of Territoriality which has given exemptions from suit to honorary persons accredited as such. 

 

* In the light of the Doctrine of the Executive Privilege granted by law as against contemtp of the law, the compulsion of being arrested and detained cannot be a hindrance. Executive Privilege when validated as such of its requisites has a good and noble end.

 

* a. No. Mr. Jose Sy is not  under custodial investigation. for he was only signing a promisory note.

  b. No. His right to self incrimination is not violated as there was investigation being conducted when he signed the promisory.

 

* a. No. the search of Dela Cruz bag is not a violation of his constitutional right for his submission to the xray machine was an ordinary search conducted in the port. He is entitled to the Miranda rights.

* a. The act of judge in dismissing the case is valid on the ground of no probable cause.

b. No. The Judge can no longer change his decision with out violating the provision on the Double Jeopardy.

c. Under the law, one can not be tried by Double Jeopardy.  Double jeopardy is when one is punished twice for a single offense done. The second jeopardy is when one is tried for one single act.

 

* A. A quo warrantto proceeding implies that from the beginning of holding of such an office there was a defect in the submission of the requirements that disqualifies a person from holding such office. 

  B. The impeachable officials of our government are:  The President, the Vice President, the Chief Justice and the Justices of the Supreme Court.

  C. A Chief Justice can be removed by a quo warranto on the basic principle that as a Chief dispenser of justice, she must be above all, a defender of such by fulfilling what the law requires of being a Chief Justice.

D. It is a principle, and this principle had neen duly observed in the case of Sereno.

 

* a. No. The accused is not correct in saying that he is already placed in a double jeopardy for the reason that the above complainant AAA has already testified in the above quoted cases, Crim Case No. Br. -20-6096 & 6097.

 

* His petition will not prosper and will not be decided in his favor for the reason very that the RA 9165 prohibits plea bargaining and is also non bailable offense. 

 

 

 

 

Cherrie May Baes Pancho

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1499

Writing time: 170 minutes

Email: cmb102792@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law

Teacher: Ric Bastasa

1. The three essential parts of the constitution  is the constitution of liberty, the constitution of the government, and the constitution of sovereignty .
First, constitution of liberty consists a series of prescriptions setting forth and fundamental civil and political rights of citizens and imposing limitations on the powers  of government as a means of securing the enjoyment of those rights. 
Second, constitution of government consists a series of provisions outlining the organization of the government, enumerating its powers, laying down certain rules relatives to its administration and defining electorate.
Lastly, constitution of sovereignty consists of the provisions pointing out the mode or procedure in accordance with which formal changes in the fundamental law may be brought about. 
2.
3. 
4.  In the case of Santos III Vs NOA, The principles of Rebus Sic Stantibus means in Latin "Things standing Thus" where the fundamental change of the circumstances, a party may withdraw from or terminate the treaty question. The exception does not apply if the treaty establishes a boundary or if the fundamental change is the result of a breach by the party invoking it of an obligation under the treaty or of any other international obligation owed to any other party to be treaty. 
5.There are two principles or rule that govern citizenship by birth namely: First, Jus Sanguini, for example: under the Filipino Father is a citizenship of the Philippines regardless of his place of Birth. Lastly, Jus Soli if a Filipino child born in American citizenship  and it is observed in that country. Under the old constitution, the jus sanguinis is still the basis for the acquisition of Philippine Citizenship. In 1971, the Constitutional Convention adapt the jus soli as an additional criterion but the proposal voted down.
6.In the case of Grace Poe, a foundling should not be disqualified from running for public office. Disqualifying a foundling from elective from elective officer due to the discrimination. Foundling is a second class citizen of Grace Poe's country.  A foundling cannot have the natural status of the natural born citizenship from one's birth. A foundling is one who is abandoned at infancy and biological family are unknown.  The Philippines Law holds the adoption does not valid upon the adopted the citizenshop of the adapting parents.  The international law and Philippine Law are not applicable of the case of Grace Poe. In 1987 Constitution states, that the natural born citizenship on the basis of one's birth means a pure filipino by blood. 
7. In the case of Richard Gordon, the Doctrine of Operative Facts recognizes the existence of the law or executive act prior to the determination of its unconstitutionality that produces consequences that cannot always be erased, ignored or disregarded.
8.The Requisites of a Judicial Inquiriy:
First, there must be an actual case or controversy.

Second, The question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party.
Third, the constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity;

Lastly, the decision of the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself. 
9. 
10. According to Article 3 Section 1 of Bill of Rights states, No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of laws, meaning there is a scope and requisites to be followed of this constitution.

 

Part II Problem solving:

1. Yes, If I was a judge I would grant her petition for mandamus. I believe Ms. X wants to change and start the new beginning of her life. The petition of mandamus states has always been regarded as an extraordinary legal remedy granted by courts of appellate jurisdiction directed to some corporation, officer, or inferior court, requiring the performance of particular duty therein specified, which duty results from the official station  of the party to whom the writ is directed or from operation of some law. Miss X will do the satisfaction of the court, and she will have the legal rights to the performance of legal duty as distinct from the authority. 

2. Yes, the appointment of Chief Justice is valid, according to Constitution that the new Chief of Justice must be a natural born citizen of the Philippines. He or she atleast forty years of age. He or she have been for fifteen years or more judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines. According to the presidential decree no. 968 in Section 3 (c) states that the probation officer the one who investigates of the court a referral for probation or supervises a probationer or both. The president must fill up a vacancy within the 90 days and the application for chief justice are appointed by the President of the Philippines. He or she must chosen by the Judicial Bar Council.The application for probation office shall be filed with the court, with notice to the appellate court if an appeal has been taken from the sentence of conviction. 
3. (a) Yes, a work of consul is a public officer who is commissioned  by a state  to reside a foreign country for the purpose of fostering the commercial affairs of its citizens in that foreign country and performing such routine functions as issuing visas and renewing passport. (b) No, a consul does not enjoy the status of a diplomat and cannot enter on his official duties until permission has been granted to him by the Philippine Authority which his nomination has been communicated. It may be revoked at anytime at the discretion of the Philippine government where he resides.
4. Yes, according to 1987 Constitution Article VI Section 31 states "No law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted means that the Secretary of Justice, The head of Philippine Military Academy, Philippine Finance Corporation, Commission of Human Rights does not allow to have nobility of the Legislative Department. 
5. Yes, he is under the custodial investigation of miranda rights and he violated a self incrimination. According to Miranda Rights, the legal rights of an arrested person like Mr Sy and he must have an attorney and he will never refuse to answer question. The decision of the Mr Sy case will be on a Supreme Court. In Mr Sy case, there are the practical problems associated with confession in right against self incrimination. First, untrustworthy confessions. Second, involuntary confession, and lastly confessions provoked through unacceptable force is the reason that why he is violated. 
6. (a)Yes, the airport authority must have a right to ask a permission to open the Dela Cruz's Bag. If the airport authority found that Dela Cruz's bag has a illegal firearms, they will have to conduct a investigation for Dela Cruz. After that, he will have a right to explain his side. According to 1987 constitution of Article III Bill of Rights in Section 1 states, "No person shall be deprived with life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall be denied of the equal protection of laws."
(b) Yes, he is entitled for Miranda Rights and Dela Cruz must present a legal adviser or attorney regarding the issue of he did. 
7. (a). Yes, the case is valid.

(b), Yes, it could be a double jeopardy case of Marina Ong. 
(c) Double Jeopardy means the prosecution of a person twice for the same offense. It is risk or disadvantage incurred from two sources simultaneously. There are four elements of double jeopardy: First, a valid complaint or information. Second, a court of competent jurisdiction, Third, the dependent has pleaded to the charge and Lastly, the dependant was acquitted or convicted, or the case against his or her was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent.
8.(a) quo warranto proceeding means is a special form of legal action used to resolve a dispute over whether a specific person has the legal rights to hold the public office that he or she occupies.
(b) The Impeachable Officials of the Philippine Constitution are:

The President of the Philippines
Vice Presidents of the Philippines

Justices of the Supreme Court of the Philippines
Members of the Constitutional Commission.
(c) For Examples the impeachable case of Maria Lourdes Sereno which removed her as a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines that finds her lawfully held the office due to lack of integrity for failing to file certain required financial document. 
(d) The case of Chief Justice Sereno finds her lawfully held the office due to lack of integrity for failing to file a certain required financial documents. 
9. (a) Yes, the case is already terminated and it would be a double jeopardy. 
(b).  According to Section 23 of R.A 9165 states  which prohibits any drug offender to avail of such arrangement regardless of the penalty. Under this rule a person can only plead to the lesser offense of Section 11 paragraph 3 which is punishable 12 years to 20 years. 

DC Kimberly Cuenca

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1539

Writing time: 206 minutes

Email: kimberlycuenca@gmail.com

Class: JD-1 (Constitutional Law 1)

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

Part I. BASIC QUESTIONS.

• Three essential parts of the constitution are the bill of rights, governmental organization and functions, and method of ammendment. The bill of rights can be found on Article III, the governmental organization and functions can be found on Article IX, and the method of ammendment can be found on Articles VI to VIII of the 1987 Constitution.
• The doctrine of condonation is a principle that many other elected officials had invoked during their cases. Under the doctrine, the administrative offenses of an elected official are already deemed forgiven when the public decides to re-elect him or her for another term. The basis of abandoning it, is it lacks basis on the 1987 Philippine Constitution and law.
• The Supreme Court declared the office of the Chairman of the Philippine National Red Cross as not a government office or an office in a government-owned or controlled corporation for purposes of the prohibition in Section 13, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.
• The parties stipulate in the light of certain prevailing conditions, and once these conditions cease to exist, the contract also ceases to exist.
• The two principles are by virtue of blood relationship, and by virtue of the place of birth. We used the first principle, jus sanguinis, under the 1935 Constitution. The 1935 Constitution enumerated that only children born to Filipino fathers were granted natural-born citizenship. Under the 1987 Constitution, the child is considered a natural-born Filipino citizen provided either of his parents is a Filipino citizen.
• A foundling is a deserted or abandoned infant or child whose parents, guardians or relatives are unknown; a child with unknown facts of birth and parentage. The citizenship of a foundling is determined by presuming that all foundlings found in the country are born to at least either a citizen father or a citizen mother.
• Doctrine of operative facts is all about the acts done pursuant to a law which was subsequently declared unconstitutional remain valid, but not when the acts are done after the declaration of unconstitutionality.
• (1) There must be an actual case or controversy. An actual case or controversy involves a conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible of judicial resolution. There must be a contrariety of legal righst can be interpreted and enforced on the basis of existing law and jurisprudence. (2) The question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party. A proper party is one who has sustained or is in immediate danger of sustaining an injury as a result of the act complained of. (3) The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possibel opportunity. If the constitutional question is not raised in the pleadings, it cannot be considered at the trial, and if not considered at the trial, it cannot be considered on appeal. In criminal cases, the constitutional question can be raised at any time in the discretion of the court. In criminal cases, it can be raised at any stage if it is necessary to the determination of the case itself. In every cases, except if there is estoppel, the constitutional question may be raised at any stage if it involves the jurisdiction of the court. (4) The decision of the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself. The courts indulge the presumption of constitutionality and go by the maxim that "to doubt is to sustain." The courts will not resolve the constitutionality of a law, if the controversy can be settled on other grounds.
• -
• The guarantee does not require that persons or things different in fact be treated in law as though they were the same. Inequality will result if the law will treat them alike as when different in acts, individual or class privilege. The law is only required to provide for equality among all persons if they are similarly situated. Thus, for example, there should be a just due process of law between two defendants regardless of their financial status.

PART II. PROBLEM SOLVING.

• I would not grant her petition. Although the President granted her a pardon, she was still convicted of malversation. There is no assurance that she will not do the same act again. She is no longer legally obligated to complete her duty as an accountant because she was already convicted of malversation. Thus, the dismissal of her petition.
• The appointments of the new chief justice and the new head of the Probation Office are invalid. Their appointments will be valid if it will be stated as temporary appointments that will prejudice public service or endanger public safety if not covered. Appoinments made within two months before the next election is prohibited, to stop the possible misuse by the outgoing President of the power of appointment of enlisting political support, with an exceptions that the appoinments will be temporary in nature, to executive positions, and urgent in the interest of public safety and public service.
• (a)  No, he is wrong in saying that only the Supreme Court en banc has jurisdiction over him. The Constitution provides that the original jurisdiction of the court shall include all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls. (b) A consul fosters the commercial affairs of its citizens in the foreign country and performs routine functions such as issuing visas and renewing passports. (c) He does not enjoy immunity from suit in our jurisdiction. The case does not involve question of diplomatic immunity. It is strongly stated that a consul is not entitled to the privileges and immunities of an ambassador or a minister. Thus, he is subject to the laws and regulations of the country to which he is accredited; he is not exempt form criminal prosecution for violations of the laws of the country he is in.
• No, they cannot be compelled under pain of legislative contempt, especially the manager of Philippine Finance Corporation since he does not have a jurisdiction and expertise or knowledge over the violation of Human Rights in the Philippines. I am against the compulsion and the threat that they will be detained in case of non-apperance before said body. The doctrine of executive privilege withholds information from the public, the courts, and the Congress. Thus, the Senate should not threat the persons since they had no jurisdiction over the said issue.
• (a) He is not under custodial investigation. (b) Yes, his right against self-incrimination is violated. The said evidence violates the Nemo tenetur principle; the evidence is unjust and against justifying the Nemo tenetur principle as a protectuib against either untrustworthy or involuntary confessions.
• (a) No, the search of his bag without his permission does not violate his constitutional right. The port has actually a jurisdiction and a police power to examine and search such items; the port's routinary searches does not violate his constitutional right. (b) Yes. The aftermath of the port's routinary searches can be considered as a custodial investigation. Thus, he is entitled to the Miranda rights.
• (a) Yes, the act of the judge in dismissing the cases valid. The Secretary of Justice has power over him. (b) Yes, he can change his decisions and then reinstate the case if he reports and declares that the case has been mistrial. Mistrial in the grounds that the proceedings have been vitiated by lack of due process, as where he tried and the case acted under pressure. (c) Double jeopardy is the prosecution of a person twice for the same offense. The elements of double jeopardy are (1) a valid complaint or information. A prosecution based on an invalid complaint or information cannot lead to a valid judgment; it should be suffiecient in form and substance to sustain a conviction. (2) filed before a competent court. A court without jurisdiction cannot render a valud judgment; the court should have jurisdiction. (3) to which the defendant had pleaded. A defendant should have been arraigned and pleaded, either guilty or not guilty, to the charge. (4) of which he had been previously acquittes or convicted, or which was dismissed or terminated without his express content.
• (a) A quo warranto proceeding is a legal action to resolve a dispute over whether a specific person has the legal right to hold the public office that she occupies. (b) The President, the Vice President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman are the impeachable officials under our constitution. (c) A chief of justice can be removed by quo warranto if she had failed to comply with disclosure requirements. (d) No, the principle was not applued to the case of Sereno.
• Yes, the accused is correct in saying that he is already placed in double jeopardy and the judgment cannot be changed anymore. A judgment of acquittal is final and is no longer reviewable, although, a motion for reconsideration after an acquittal is possible. The prosecution can file for certiorari, however erroneous the order of the respondent Court is, such error cannot now be righted because of the timely plea of double jeopardy.
• His petition will be dismissed and will serve a life imprisonment if he possessed 10 grams or more of opium, morphine, heroin, cocaine, "shabu", and ectasy among others during the act.

Dexter Kim Patron

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1362

Writing time: 175 minutes

Email: dpatron2005@yahoo.com

Class: Political Law Review

Teacher: Judge Bastasa

Dexter Kim Patron 

 

Part I

 

- Basic Parts of teh Constitution are the Preamble, Articles and the Amendments

                         Preamble at the beginning

                         Articles - National Territory, Declaration of Principls and State Policies,                                         Bill of Rights, Citizenship, Suffrage, Legislative Dept, Executive                                         Dept, Judicial Dept., Constitutional Commission  and others.

                        Amendments - Article XVII

 

-After several decades of following the doctrine that offcial elected for different term is fully absolved of any administrative liabilityarising from offense done during a prior term. 

  The Basis of condoning is that the Ombudsman was able to convince SC that such doctrine has no legal basis and was on relying on the US cases. It further stated that this doctrine has been abused by many politicians.

 

- The Office of the Philippine NAtional Red Cross Chairman is  not a government office nor an office of a government -owned or controlled corporation but is a National Society which acts as auxiliary to teh public authority in teh humanitarian field and provide a range of services including disaster relief and health and social programs. It was further stated that National Society is an organozation that is directly regulated by International Humanitarian Law which also means that it is at one and the same time a private institution and public service organization because teh very nature of its work implies cooperation with authorities, a link with a state.  

 

-Rebus Sic Stantibus is any decisions can be modified in the event of substantial alteration, to the condition and circumstances under which the decision was arrived.

 

 

-Principle of Citizenship are Jus Soli and Jus Sanguinis

During the Spanish Period until teh present time Jus Sanguinis is being followed EXCEPT

during teh American time between April 11, 1899 to July 1, 1902 wherein Jus Soli was followed.

 

  

- A foundling is defined as a child abandoned by his/her parents and was found and cared by others. The Citizenship of a foundling according to the UN Convention on teh Rights of the Child is teh place where he/she is born. It is also stated in the discussion that the generally accepted principle in teh international community that the child is a citizen of teh country where he/she is born and some countries practiced of jus sanguinis that the child is born from their citizens. 

 

- The Doctrine of Operative fact nullifies the effect of an unconstitutional law recognizing that the existence of a statute prior to the determonation of its constitutionality is an operative fact. In the case of Mayor Gordon, his appointment as SBMS Chairman is insconstitutional but all remuneration and lawful acts done in relation to his functions remain valid .

 

-The Judicial Inquiry requisites are:

         1. Existence of the actual controversy

        2. Existence personal and substantial interest on the part of the party raising the  constitutional question

      3. Judicial Review is made at the earliest time

        4. it is the lis mota of the case

 

-NOt all people shall be traeted equally under teh equal protection clause means that the same class of people will be treated equally.

 

 

 

 

PART II

 

                                            1.

Pardon looks at the future. It is not retrospective. It makes no amends for the past and it makes no relief for what has been suffered by the offender. Pardon may relieve from diaability of fines and forfeitures attendant upon conviction but cannot erase the stain of bad character nor blots out the guilt of an individual. Her conviction resulted to her dismissal of work and she cannot demand such by reason that pardon does not erase nor blot out teh guilt of a person. 

 

 

                                        2.

The appointment made by the President to the Chief Justice is valid as the constitution is silent on such prohibition. Jurisprudence tells us that had the framers of teh constitution extend teh prohibition to the members of the Supreme Court They could have explicitly done so.

 

As to the appointment of the Probation Officer, the constitution is clear that the President or acting President cannot make appointments two months immediately before the next presidential election and up to the end of his term.

 

In the case at bar, the President appointed tyhe new Head of teh Probation Office barely a month before the next presidential Election.

 

The appointment is NOT VALID.

 

 

                                    3.

 

a. NO he is not correct.  The constitution provides that the original jurisdiction of consuls is given to teh Supreme Court but it does not mean that it cannot be delegated to the lower courts. 

 b. A consul is tasked to promote trade and commerce of the countrey where he is from.

c. According to the constitution the consul also enjoys teh immunity from suit provided that there is treaty between such country.

 

 

                                    4.

 

a. Sec of Justice and Head of PMA cannot be compelled to appear because of teh executive privilege. The CHR and Manager of PFC can be compelled.

 

b. Executive privilege is allowed on the law because there are information which is vital for public safety and interest which information should be limited only to the President and its Secretaries.

 

                                    5.

The contitution provides that any confession and admission obtained in violation of Art III sec 12 which states that any person has teh right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have a competent and independent legal counsel preferably of his own choice and if he cannot afford he shall be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except oin teh presence of cousel. and it is also provided that No person shall be compelled to be a witnessed against himself.

 

Mr. Sy admitted the misappropriation and signed teh promissory note to pay such.

 

The provision of the constitution is a safeguard of the citizens when investigated by the government authorities and does not apply when conducted by private individuals. Since he is NOT UNDER CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION the admission is acceptable as evidence and his right against self incrimination was not violated.

 

 

                                        6.

 

The provision on the unreasonble search and seizure of whatever nature shall be inviolable without search warrant.

 

In the case at bar, the bag was scanned and there was no physical searching at first, it was only done when there was probable cause to open such physical seach was done.

 

                                        7.

 

a) Yes the act of Judge is valid

b) There would be now double Jeopardy as teh case was dismissed without the express consent of the accused

 

c) Double Jeopardy has three requisites: 1. A first jeopardy must have attached prior to teh second 2)The first joepardy must be validly terminated 3)teh second jeopardy must be fo teh same offense as that of teh first.

 

Double jeopardy is when there is valid indictment before a competent court after arraignment and a valid plea having entered and teh case was dismissed or otherwiasse terminated without the expressed consent of the accused .

 

                                        8.

 

a) A quo warrato proceding is a special legal action use dto resolve an issue whether a specific person has legal right to hold the public office he occupies.

 

b) The impeachable Officials are the President, Vice-President, Members of the Supreme Court, Members of teh Constitutional Commission, Ombudman

 

c) The Chief Justice can be removed by quo warranto if he was not bale to meet the qualifications set.

 

d) It was not applied as the case anchored on that teh deffiency continues even during heer term.

 

                                9.

 

The Accused is not correct. 

 

There is double jeopardy when the first jeopardy must have attached prior to teh second jeopardy and the first jeopardy must have been validly terminated and teh second jeopardy must be ion teh same offense as that of teh first.

 

There promulgation of judgment but was corrected on teh same day and there was no entry of juddgment yet or ther ewas no valid indictment.

 

 

                            10. 

 

The petition will push through since the law enacted by Congress encroached the rule making power of the Supremen Court.

 

It is stated in the constitution that the Supreme Court have powers to promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleadings, practice, and procedure in all courts....

 

Therefore his petition will push through and will favor him.

 

 

Edison Alviar

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 781

Writing time: 138 minutes

Email: edisonalviar755133@gmail.com

Class: Constitution 1

Teacher: Hon. Ric Bastasa

Part 1

a. three essential parts of the constitution are Bill of Right, Government organization and function and methods of its ammendments. these parts can be found in Article III, article (VI, VII, VII) and article XVII of the constitution respectively.

b.  This doctrine means that elected official cannot be removed for administrative misconduct committed during his/her previous term if reelected. the basis of its abandonement refers to aguinaldo doctrine which states the previous term of the respondent already expires.

c. The SC rule that the PNRC chairmanship cannot be considered as government office nor a government owned and controlled corpoation but instead it is a private corporation granted by corporate powers.

d. Rebus sic stantibus it is clause used in international convention for aggreement and treaties that provides for unenforceably of treaty due to circumstances. it all about issues of jurisdiction over the case where cases involved the application of treaty and warsaw convention.

e.  By birth which refer to principle of JUS SANGUINIS by blood relationship and JUS SOLI by soil and by naturalization thru judicial acts.

f. foundling citizenship are consideered natural born citizen. Because there is absence of reference as to  true citizenship of POE.

g. This doctrine of operative facts recognizes the existence of law or executive acts prior to the determination of it unconstitutionality. it also refer to the nullity and void of law or acts but sustains its effect. in the case of Gordon

h. h.1 there must be an actual case or judicial inquiry.

  h.2 that the question of constitutionality must be raised.

  h.3 that the constitutional question must be raised at earliest posible time.

  h.4 the question of constitutionality be necessary fort he determination of the case itself.

I. constitutional construction refers to the primary source from which to ascertain the constitution intent or purpose of the language (Verba Legis). 

  Rules 

  a.

J. though the constitution guaranteed to provide equal protection of law, as such every citizen of the Philippines are entitle to that.  However, the protection and constitutional guarantees end when you started to hit the others constitutional guarantee. Thus if you violated some felony, infraction and other act that would clearly violates other rigth, you are no longer entitle the full cloth of the constitution.

 

Part II

1. No. being a recipient of Presidential pardon it only erase the punishment but the guilt still exist.

2. VALID.

3. No. Because honorary consul are only volunteers of the host country and as such they cannot enjoys immunity as of the carreer consul. Thus, he can be tried within the regular court.

4. No. they cannot be compelled to be detain due to legislative contempt because, they are invited to be resource speaker not as the respondent of an inquiry for the violation of human rights.

5. Yes and yes. because he cannot compel to be a witness against himself and under the law, admission is inadmissible in court and the only way that it can be considered as admissible when ever he was assisted by a counsel.

6. a. NO. because there was a well founded believe that indeed he possess a unlicence firearm through Xray scanning machine. Yes, because doctrine is mandatory when ever the liberty of the person are curtailed due the commision of an offense.

7. a. No. because administrative review only grants to the complainant, whenever the prosecution erred in determining probable cause.

  b. No. because the verified complaint and information were not resolved before hand.

c. double jeopardy, refers that once an accused has been acquitted, convicted and punished, the said person cannot be prosecuted and punished again with the same offense charge against him.

8. a. Quo Warranto or by what authority, is proceeding which requires the person holding public office to or priviledges on what authority that he/she was binded to hold a certain office.

b. Impeachable official are, President, Chief Justice, Vice President and member of the constitutional commission.

c. The CJ can be removed from his/her office through petition of quo warranto if they they fails to meet the requirement for their appointment.

d. Yes. because it is not prescribe.

9. a. NO. he cannot invoke that it is a double jeopardy because, the verdict is not final since the prosecution file a verified motion for reconsideration. Since said motion will depend on the sound mind of the court whether to grant or to deny it. thus, double jeopardy is unexisted.

10.No. because constitutionality issue should be addressed in the earliest possible by proper party. Since, the accused of the crime cannot be considered as the proper party hence his petition will be denied. 

 

 

 

Holly-Ann Cabasag

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1395

Writing time: 189 minutes

Email: cabasaghollyann4@gmail.com

Class: JD-1 Constitutional Law

Teacher: Ric S. Bastasa

Part I.

1.) The three essential parts of the constitution includes the following:

 a. Preamble

 This is an introductory part found in a written constitution which provides the reason or the intent why the statues/laws are enacted.

 b. Articles

  These are statutes which embodies a written constitution and serves as the basis for such law. This is found after the introductory part which is the preamble.

 c. Amendments

 These are statutes that are being amended or being modified to improve a written constitution. These are found after the articles.

2.) 

3.) The Supreme Court justifies this matter of a goverment official occupying two positions in office because Article VI, Section 13 only prohibits Senator or Member of the House of Representatives to hold any office or any employement in the government or any agency or any government-owned corporations. Thus, the position of Gordon doesn't prohibits the said section as being the President of the Red Cross considering that the said organization is a private organization and not part such public office.

4.) The principle of Rebus Sic Stantibus states that there is a fundamental change of circumstances a party may withdraw from or terminate the treaty question.

5.) The two principles in determining the citizenship of a person includes the following:

1. jus soli

 This is with regards to general territoriality. The citizenship of a person is being determined by the place where that person is being born.This principle is being used during the time of the adoption of the 1935 constitution wherein those who are born at this time of adoption are automatically citizens of the Republic of the Philippines.

2. jus sanguinis

 This is with regards to blood relation. The citizenship of your parents determines the citizenship of the children. Ex. If your parents are Filipino, automatically your citizenship would be Filipino as your parents are Filipino. This principle was applied during the Spanish regime wherein those Filipinos who made allegience to the Philippines are automatically Filipino citizens and that those Filipinos who made allegience to Spain are of Spanish nationality.

6.) Foundling is when a certain person found a child because of abandonment of the parents. The citizenship of a foundling is determined by the citizenship of the one who found the foundling.

7.) The doctrine of operative fact provides that invalidity of the law is not necessary to take effect in all aspects and consequences prior to declaration. 

8.) The requisites of a judicial inquiry includes the following:

1. There must be an actual case or controversy. This means that there must be an involvement of conflict of legal rights and claim susceptible judicial resolution.

2. The question of constitutionality must be raised by proper

party which means that there must be one person sustaining injury.

3. The constitutional question must be raised at earliest possible opportunity which means it must be raised at earliest times; and 

4.  The constitutional question must be necessary in the determination of the case itself.

9.) The rule of constitutional construction provides that in Rule no. 5, no impeachment shall be initiated the same year with the same official. In the case of Davide impeachment, he filed twice with the same which is prohibited under Rule No. 5 of impeachment.

10.) There are some exceptions as to the statement that not all people shall be treated equally with regards to the equal protection clause. The equal protection clause provides people to be treated similarly and alike however there are few exceptions with regards to age, gender, physical ability and state of mind. Pregnant women for example should not be treated similarly to men in a way that they are not capacitated to have extraneous labor for example in construction sites. With regards to gender, person of minority are not allowed to have occupation under the Labor Code. Some person with mental disorder are not allowed to be a witness of some criminal offense unless in lucid intervals. 

Part II.

1.) No. The ability of the person to file a writ of mandamus is based on the nature of his/her offense. The conviction of Miss X because of malversation is not applicable to his petition of mandamus. 

2.) Yes. The appointment of the new chief justice is valid. It was provided under another provision of the constitution that the president can appoint a new chief justice within 90 days from its vacancy. Hence, it's valid. On the other hand, the appointment of the  new head of the Probation Office is not valid as there should not be a simultaneous appointed of two offices at the same time.  

3.) a. Yes. He is correct in saying that only the Supreme Court en banc has jurisdiction over him as he is a duly accredited consul. The Supreme Court has only the right to excercised the power of jurisdiction over the State. 

 b. A consul is an officer of an embassy. A consul can be a solemnizing officer which means that a consul can perform several functions just like contracting a marriage or solemnize a wedding.

c. Yes. A consul enjoy immunity from suit in our jurisdiction. As as consul, he is excempted to all criminal offenses. He can be sued criminally right after he resigned in office as a consul. 

4.) 

5.) a.) Yes. He was still under custodial investigation. For this reason, he should be given Miranda rights. Under custodial investigation, he has the right to inform to be remain silent and to have a counsel preferably of his own choice. 

  b.) Yes. His right against self incrimination was violated as he was still under custodial investigation and that during the time he was not assisted by counsel and that he was not informed to remain silent. Art. III, Section 12 (1) provides that any person under custodial investigation has the right to inform remain silent and to have a counsel preferably of his own choice which clearly violates his right under custodial investigation.

6.) a.) No. The search of his bag without his permission is not a violation of his constitutional rights. Arrests in ports are considered as warrantless arrest.

 b.) No. He is not entitled to Miranda rights as his arrest is considered as warrantless arrest. Under warrantless arrest, the person has committed the said offense and that he has the probable cause. With regards to Dela Cruz, he already has the probable cause as he was found out to have illegal firearms inside his bag. 

7.) a.) Yes. The act of the judge in dismissing the case is valid. Considering the fact that there is no probable cause, the case should be dismissed.  

b.) No. he can't change his decision and then reinstate the case because it would be a violation of the constitutional provision on double jeopardy.

c.) Double jeopardy means that you cannot be filed twice with the same case. The elements includes the following:

1. A valid complaint;

2. A court of competent jurisdiction;

3. The defendants had pleaded to the charge;

4. The defendant was aquitted or convicted, or the case against him was dismissed.

8.) A.) quo warranto is a summon given by any person holding an office to show by what the authority he exercises which includes public offices. 

 B.) Under our constitution, impeachable officials include Chief Justices, ombudsman, senators and all officials in the executive branch which includes the President and Vice-President.

C.) A chief justice can be removed by quo warranto since a chief justice is solely to be honest to his/her office.  

D.) No. Chief Justice Sereno was immediately impeached as she was not able to present her SALN (Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Networth). 

9.) Yes. The accused is correct in saying that he is already placed in double jeopady and hence the judgment, despite the visible error of the judge cannot be charged anymore. The accused would be double jeopardize as he is already acquitted. You cannot filed twice with the same case as this was already a double jeopardy. 

10.) No. It will not be in his favor. Republic Act 9165 prohibits plea bargaining wherein he cannot plea for a lessen offense of the crime he committed. 

 

  

Joseph Vallecer

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 731

Writing time: 228 minutes

Email: Jvallecer1980@gmail.com

Class: JD 201

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastas

1 a. Constitution of liberty- Consists of a series of prescription 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.Principally found in Article III of our  Constitution,and also in  Articles II,IV,V,and VII.

 

 b. Constitution of government- Consists of a series of provisions outlining the organization of the government,enumerating its power,laying down certain rules relative to its administration,and difining the electorate.Found in Articles VI to XI of our Constitution.

 

 c. Constitution of sovereignty- Consists of the provisions pointing out the mode or procedure in accordance with which formal changes in the fundamental law may be bought about.Found in Article XVII of our constitution.

 

2 Doctrine of condonation- An elected official cannot be removed for administrative misconduct committed during a previous term if he is re-elected to office by the same electorate.

 

3.  Red Cross is an independent and autonomous  non-government organization,under Article IX-B of the 1987 constitution ,which bans any appointive official from holding any other office or employment in the Government or any subdivision,agency or instrumentality thereof,including government owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries,unless otherwise allowed by or the

primary functions of his position.

 

4.  Rebus sic stantibus-legally it implies that the stipulations of the cintract can be modified in the event of substantial alterations to the conditions and circumtances under which they were first agreed upon.and later one,brocard,meaning agreements must be kept.

 

5.  a. Jus sanguinis' right of blood'- is a principle of nationality law by which citizenship is determined or acquired by the nationality or ethnicity of one or both parents.

  b. Jus soli 'right of soil'-solely based on the place of birth.

 

  6. Foundling- Rrefers to a child who is abandoned and parentage is unknown.

  The adherence of the Philippines to this generally accepted principle of international law.In particular, R.A. NO. 8552,R.A 8042 and the court rule on Adoption, expressly refers to 'Filipino children'.In all of them,foundlings are among the Filipino children who could be adopted,international law pressume foundlings as having been born of nationals of the country in which the foundling is found.

 

 7 Doctrine of operative facts- says the Supreme Court 'recognizes the existence of the law or executive act prior to the determination of its unconstitutionality as an operative fact that produced consequences that cannot always be erased,ignored or disregarded.

 

8. a. There must be an actual case or controversy- involves a conflict of legal rights,an assertion of opposite legal claims susceptible of judicial adjudication.

  b. The question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party- Is one who has sustained or is in immediate danger of sustaining  an injury as a result of the act complained of.

  c. The constitutional question must be raised the earliest oppurtunity-Such that if it is not raised in the pleadings,it cannot be considered at the trial,and,not considererd at the trial,it cannot be considered on appeal.

d.The decision of the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself- The reason why the courts will as much as possible avoid the decision of a constitutional question can be traced to the doctrine of separation of powers,which enjoins upon each department a proper respect for the acts of the other department. 

 

 9.

 

 

 

 

10.

 

 

PART II

 

 1. If I am the judge i will not grant the petition of mandamus of Miss X,even she was granted a pardon by the President she was convicted already of malversation.

 

 2. The new chief of justice is valid  it is separate department and the new head  of the probation is invalid because midnight  appointment , any appointment of any officer within two months before election is unconstitutional.

 

 3 a.

 

 

  b. A consul is an official representative of the government of one state in the territory of another,normally acting to assist and protect the cetizens of the consul's own country,and to facilitate trade and friendship between the people of the two countries.

 

  c. NO, Consul only have functional and not full immunity.

 

 

 4

 

 

 

 

 

5  a. No,because he is only making promisory note, miranda rights only use when there is a trial against the offender.

 

  b. No, because No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself

 

  6. a. No,because ports and seaport are authorized for checking baggage.

 b. Yes,

 

 

 

Kyle Kristian Jay Geromo

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1361

Writing time: 189 minutes

Email: kylekristianjaygeromo@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

PART I.

1. The three essential parts of the constitution are the preamble, articles, and ammendment. The preamble can be found at the very beginning of the constitution; the articles can be found in the body of the constitution, and the ammendment can be found on Article 17 of the constitution.

 

2. The doctrine of condonation allows the elected public official to remain and cannot e removed from administrative misconduct committed during previous term if he is re-elected to the office by the same electorate.

 

3. In the ruling of the Supreme Court, the PNRC is not a government-owned but privately owned. The vast majority of the thousands of PNRC members are private individuals, including students. Under the PNRC charter, those who contribute to the annual fund campaign of the PNRC are entitiled to membership in the PNRC for one year. The office of the PNRC Chairman is not government office or an office in a government-owned or controlled corporation for purposes of the prohibition in the constitution. However, since the PNRC should incorporate under the Corporation Code. 

 

4. The principle of Rebus Sic Stantibus is a form of legal doctrine allowing a change in a treaty by two countries because of a certain change of circumstances. In the case of Santos vs Northwest Orient Airlines does not  operate automatically to render treaty inoperative.

 

5. The two principles in determining the citizenship are Jus soli meaning you acquire citizenship on the basis of place of birth, and Jus sanguinis meaning you acquire citizenship on the basis of blood relationship. The Jus sanguinis is applied if the child was born under the 1973 or 1987 constitution and his parents either the mother of fatger is a Filipino citizen at the time the child was born, he is considered a Filipino citizen no matter where he was born. While the Jus soli is applied when you are born in places that the PPhilippines has jurisdiction and sovereignity.

 

6. A foundling is an infant that has been abandoned by its parents and is discovered and cared by others. In the domestic and international law of the Philippines, foundlings are automatically confered with the natural-born citizenship as to the country where they are being found. In the case of Poe, she was found in a church in Iloilo City that is inside the Philippines. 

 

7. The doctrine of operative facts is an exception to the general rule, such that a juridical declaration of invalidity may not necessarily obliterate all effects and consequences of a void act prior to such declaration. 

 

8. The requisites of judicial inquiry are: First, There must be an actual case or controversy meaning it must involve a conflict of legal rights and claim susceptible judicial resolution. Second, The question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party meaning there must be one person sustaining injury as a result of the act complained of. It must have legal personality to raise its constitutionality. Third, the constitutonal question must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity meaning it must be raised in pleading at the earliest time to be considered in trials. Lastly, the decision of the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself, meaning the constitutional question can be traced to the doctrine of separation of powers. 

 

9. a. Rule V states that, "No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within the peiod of one year."

b. Article 11 Section 3 (4) states that, "In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the members of the house."

 

10. The equal protection clause of the constitution treated citizens of the Philippines equally and is available to all persons natural as well as juridical. The equal protection clause is not required to give equality among all persons if they are not similarly situated, it only requires equality among equals and classifications. 

 

PART II.

1. Yes, I will grant her petition. If there is negligence in the part of DENR wherein they dismissed Miss X of her position without her legal rights to being defined. In this case the petition of mandamus by Miss X was right, the petitioner showed clear legal rights, and the law it relied upon also supplied the basis for the peition in which she was not able to exercise and enjoy her rights to have a decent job that was enshrined in the constitution.

 

2. The assigning of the Chief Justice in the office will be possible if there is vacancy and it is much needed for the administration. 

 

3. a. Yes, the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction over him because his work is under the judiciary branch of the government. 

b. A consul is an official appointed by the government to live in another country that will help protect and promote the citizens of a certain country.

c. The consul can enjoy immunity over the jurisdiction of the country since he can only be subject to be liable when the Supreme Court declares.

 

4. It is must that every official will appear when being summined by the legislative body of the government to answer questions. This concludes that the appearance constitutes a good faith towards their work and loyalty towards the constitution.

 

5. a. Yes, he should be given the Miranda rights. His right to be silent is necssary because anything he will say can be used against him. He has the right to remain silent unless he is adviced by his legal counsil to speak. 

b. No, his rights againts self-incrimination was not violated. Ignorance of the law excuses no one, meaning he has the opportunity to not say and do anything that will be admissible in court and used against him without the presence of the lawyer. He has the right to remain silent until the trial has started.

 

6. a. No, the search did not violate his constitutional rights. There are warrantless searches that are valid and this includes the search in ports, vessels, and aircrafts.

b. Yes, he is entitled. Even though there was a firearm in his bag, that does not neglect his right to remain silent unless he is with a legal counsil. 

 

7. a. Yes, the act of the judge is valid. Through the motion by the prosecutor and the administrative review by the Secretary of Justice finding there was no probable cause to convict Marina Ong of the case. 

b. b. Yes, the judge can change his decision. According to the law, one way to terminate the first jeopardy is through dismissal. In this case, the cyberlibel against Marina Ong was dismissed by the judge after the prosecutor filed for a motion, therefor, giving another prosecution of the offense which includes the same complain or information. 

c. Double jeopardy means that when a person is charged with an offense in the first case cannot again be charged of the same or identical offense. 

 

8. a. A quo warranto proceeding is used to resolve dispute over a person who has a legal right to hold an office. It is to test whether a person's performance is legal to the said position.

b. According to the law, the President and Vice President are the impeachable officials.

c. A chief justice may be removed by quo waaranto for being unable to perform his or her duties an unable to file his or her SALN.

d. Yes it was applied on the year it was discovered that there were no records of the Chief Justice about her SLN.

 

9. No, the accused is wrong. The first jeopardy must be terminated first in a manner of dismissal on the merits. However, the dismissal is not an acquittal or based upon consideration of evidence or the merits of the case. 

 

10. The petition will be pushed through because there is a question on how the law is created. It is deemed that the law created must follow the rights enshrined in the constitution. It shall follow and not restricts individuals of their human rights that incudes cases that will render judgment over a person. 

 

Livina Petralba

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 416

Email: petralbalivina@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

1. The three essential parts of the constitution are (1)Preamble which is in the first paragraph of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, (2) Articles which composes it,

and (3) Amendments which can be found in Article XVII..

 

2. Doctrine of condonation is the re-election of a local official after he/she is being forgiven of an administrative case. 

4.  Rebus Sic Stanlibus 

5. The two types in determining the citizenship of a person  are (1) by birth and by (2) naturalization.  These two principles can be use in the political history of the philippines when a person run for a position of President where in Article VIII it says "No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines...."

 

6. A foundling is an infant who may be abandoned by his parents and is found and cared for by others. That in the case of Grace Poe, a foundling does not guarantee the citizenship of the foundling's parents.

 

8. Requisites of judicial inquiry are:

1) There must be an actual case or controversy. This means that there is really a participation of legal claims susceptible for a review of judicial determination.

2) The question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party. Which means that there must really be a party that is being offended or a victim of abused or injury that make its complain.

3. The constitution must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity.  That a constitutional question should be made and raised at its earliest time for its action has its own timeliness.

4. Constitutional question must be necessary for the determination of the case itself. It is necessary because it is a guide on the issue to focus.

 

 

10. "Not all people shall be treated equally." This statement is unsconstitutional since it is in Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution that (Section 6)  The Liberty to abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court..."

 

PART II.

1.  No, I won't grant her petition since she wasalready convicted for malversation. Granting her pardon and back to office is enough. This is just to avoid for another mistake again for she is knowledgable in the position she demaded to be reinstated.

 

* His petition for plea bargain will be granted when the amount of prohibited drugs confiscated from him is less than 5 grams.

 

Liwayway Elumbaring

2020-11-10

Lovelle Naquila

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1082

Writing time: 200 minutes

Email: lovellenaquila@gmail.com

Class: JD 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

I1. Constitution of Liberty- found in Art. III

  Constitution of Government- found in Arts. VI, VII, VIII and IX

  Constitution of Sovereignty- found in Art. XII

2. Doctrine of condonation is a defence argument sometimes made when an accuser has previously forgiven or chosen to ignore an act about which they nor legally complaining.

3. The Court held that respondednt did not forfeit his seat in the Senate when he accepted the charimanship of the PNRC Board of Governor, as the office of the PNRC  Chairman is not a government office or an office in a government ovned or controlled corporation for purposes of the prohibition in Section 13 Article VI.

4. A principle which would justify non performance of a treaty obligation if the conditions with relation to which the partie s contracted have changed so materially and so unexpectedly as to create a situation in which the exaction of performance would be unreasonable. Key element of this doctrine is the vital change in the condition of the contrancting parties that they could not have foreseen at the time the treaty was concluded.

5. a. Jus soli, whereby citizenship is acquired by birth within the territoy of the state, regardless of parental citizenship

  b.  Jus sanguinis, whereby a person, wherever born is a citizen of the state if, at the time of his or her birth

6.  Foundling is an infant that has been abandoned by its parents and is discovered and cared for by others.

  A foundling is, until the contrary is proved, presumed to have been born on the territory of the State in which it was found

  Foundling is presumed born of citizenz of the country where he is found.

7. Issue of constitutionality of RA No. 95 

8. a. Actual case- an actual case or controversy involves a conflict of legal rights, an assertion of opposite legal claims  susceptible of judicial adjudication.

b. Proper Pary- a proper party is one who has sustained or is in immediate danger of sustaining an injury as a result of the act complained of.

c. Earliest Opportunity- The rule is that the constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity, such that if it is not raised in the pleadings it cannot be considered at the trial and if not considered at the trial, it cannot be considered on appeal.

d. Necessity of Deciding Constitutional Question- The decision of the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination the case itself.

9.a. if there is a finding by the House Committee on Justice that the verified complaint and / or resolution is sufficient in substance

  b. Once the House itself affirms or overturns the finding of the committee on Justice that theverified complaint and  or resolution is not suffiecient in substance

c. by the filing or endorsement befor ethe Secretary General of the HOuse of Representatives of a verified compalint or a reslution of impeachment by at least 1/3 of the members of the House 

10. Equal Protection Clause  provides "nor  shall any State deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". But it only mandates to the individuals in similar situations be treated equally by the law.

 

Part II

1. If I were the judge i wouldnt grant her the petition. We can not force the finance department to let miss x be back in her position for the trust and confidence of the said department for her was lost .

2. Under article VII of the 1987 Constitution a president shall not make appointments but when it comes to chief Justice of the Philippines , he may temporarily  appoint  ChiefJustice.

As to the Head of the Probation office it is not valid. It is stated in the said article that the only known exeptions to this prohibition are temporary appointments in the executive positions when continued vacancies will prejudice public service of endanger public safety .

3.a.No, jurisdiction over consuls was exercisable by our courts or court of his jurisdiction.

b. Consul is an official representative of the government of one state in the territoy of another, normally acting to assist and protect the citizens of the consul`s own country, and to facilitate trade and friendship between the people of the two countries.

c.Consular Officers are not accorded absolute immunity from a host countrys criminal jurisdiction, they may be tried for certain local crimes upon action by a local court, and are immune from local jurisdiction only in cases directly relating to consular functions.

4. Yes they will be compelled under pain of legislative contempt if they refuse to to appear for the invitation is not confidential.  In the light of the doctrine of executive privilage I dont agree with this because what will happen to the public officials being transparent to the public?

5. No, because he voluntarily admit what he did and so he should not be given his Miranda rights.

Yes because the promissory note was signed without his counsel and they use this promissory note as evidence .

6. Yes it is a violation of Article III Sec.2.

 Yes  he is entitled because they immediately seach and charge him with illegal possession of firerms without his counsel.

7.a. yes

 b. Yes, reinstating the case wont violate the constitutional provision on double jeopary for elements of double jeopardy in this case were not present.

c. Double jeopardy simply meands that a person cannot be charge with a sme or identical crime when such person was already previously convicted or acquitted of a similar crime.elements are . a valid information sufficient on form and substance to sustain a conviction of the crime charged, a court of competent jurisdiction, the accused has been arrained and had pleaded, and the accused was convicted or acquitted 

8. a. Quo warranto is a special form of legal action used to resolve a dispute over whether a specific person has the legal right to hold the public office that he or she occupies.

b. The President, the Vice President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and Ombudsman

c.Based on the grounds of culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust.

d. yes

9. No, it is not double jeopardy for the victim is different.

b. Yes Sec. 23 of RA 9165 is unconstitutional for being contrary to the rule making authority of Supreme court under Section 5(5) Article VIII of the 1987 constitution.

 

  

Lovelle Naquila

2020-11-10

Marie Beth Revilla

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 872

Writing time: 186 minutes

Email: mariebeth.revilla1432@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

1. The Three essential parts of the constitution are ;

 

• The preamble - Legislative Branch
• The Articles - Excutive Branch
• The Amendments - Judicial Branch

2. Doctrine of condonation:

Is a limited empowerment of the elctorate over accountabilities of their elective local officials.

 

 

3. PNRC is a private organization that performs public function. The ruling of the supreme court was they allowed Gordon to still be seated in the senate because the Philippine red cross was not a private company.

 

4. Ribus Sic Stantibus:

    Its stipulates that where there has been a fundamental change of circumstances, a party may withdraw from or terminate the treaty in question.

 

5. Born in the philippines and a naturalized Philippine citizen. Under the commonwealth  period.

 

6.Grace Poe:

A foundling is an abandoned child, both domestic and international law a child's citizenship is based upon the parents or the place the child was born, in the situation of grace poe she was found as a baby in the philippines therefore she was automatically deemed as a natural born filipino citizen.

 

7. Doctrine of operative fact:

 The Doctrine is about acts that are done pursuant to a law which was subsequently declared unconstitutional remain valid, but not when the acts are done after the declaration of unconstitutionality.

 

8. Judicial Inquiry requisites

1. There must be an actual case or controversy 
2. The question before the court must be ripe for adjudication
3. Person challenging the act must be a proper party
4. The decision of the constitutional quetion must be necessary to the determination of the case itself.

 

9. Rules of constitutional instruction

 

Rule number 5. No impeachment shall initiate the same official within a year.

 

 

10. The principle vis a vis of the equal protection clause gives way for both sides to speak out their truth and this can also pave a way for a more deeper understanding upon the problem of each situations, it is both fair and just to avoid unfair claims upon falsely blaming or accusing an individual. 

 

PART  II Problem solving

 

1.MISS X

While it will not clear her record just because she had a President's pardon as a judge I will still issue her writ of mandamus because it is her right.

 

2.President of the Philippines

The newly appointed Chief Justice and Head of probation office is still valid but if the new president willfully want's to assign someone else, he can.

 

3. CONSULS

a.)Yes, Consuls are conferred exclusively upon the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

b.) A consul is an official representative of the government in the territory of another country normally to assist of help protect the citizens of that consul's countrymen in that country and to facilitate friendship between the people of both countries.

c.) No, because under the law the supreme court of the country wherein the consul is has jurisdiction over them including the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

 

4.The senate

 

 

5. Cebu Pacific

a.) Yes, everyone has the right to remain silent and to acquire an attorney.

b.)Yes, because he might have admitted his misappropriation as the head of their accounting team admitting that is has his responsibility to avoid things like these from happening but that did not mean that he was the actual culprit who stole the amount from Cebu Pacific.

 

6.) Dela Cruz

a.) No, because the search was neccessary for security rights upon the Cebu pacific, it is always a neccessity to search the contents or check for illegal weapons of things that might put the lives of the passengers in danger.

b.) Yes, The miranda rights is about having the right to remain silent and have the right to an attorney and everyone has the right to this.

 

7.  Cyber Libel

a.)No,because there was probable cause in the first place approved by prosecutor and the Judge beforehand.

b.)Yes

c.) A double Jeopardy is a double prosecution or a person twice for the same offense.

 

8. impeachment

A.) A quo warranto is an action that may be brought to determine whether a public official satisfies a requirement that he or she resides in the district or whether a public official is serving in two compatible offices.

B.)  The impeachable officials under our constitutions are: The President, the vice president, the justices of the supreme court, and the auditor generals.

C.) Lack of integrity for failing to file certain required financial documents.

D.) Yes

 

 

9. Rape

The accused is correct that he will be placed in double jeopardy but that will not excuse him from what he did, he still needs to testify for the 2nd petition against him and be punished by the law.

 

 

 

 

Marie Beth Revilla

2020-11-10

MARIETTA RAEL

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1131

Writing time: 180 minutes

Email: ursomarietta@yahoo.com

Class: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

PART 1.

*The three essential parts of the constitution are the preamble, which can be found onthe on the first page before the Articles,bill of rights on Article 3 of the Philippine Constitution and provisionson checks and balances that can be found on Articles 6,7, and 8 (Executive,Legislative and Judicial Department.

*Doctrine of Condonation also known as The Aguinaldo Doctrine, reelection operates as a condonation by the electorate of the misconduct committed by an elective official during his previous term.It is also believd that a reelection has the effect of voters forging public official's faults or misconduct committed in the previous term.Lawyers of Mayor Makati Junjun Binay have invoked this doctrine in his case. It was abandoned because the doctrine is contrary to the mandate under Article XI of the 1987 philippine Constitution which is the Accountability of Public Officers. 

*The Supreme Court declared that the Office of the Chairman of the Philippine National Red Cross headed by Senator Gordon is not a government office or a government-owned office  or government controlled rather than a private corporation which grants its corporate powers and does not violate provisions under Article VI of the 1987 Philippine Constitution,therefore it is dismissed.

* It is a clause in treaties or international agreements hat provides for the unenforceability of a treaty due to circumstances that are changed.

*Jus Soli looks to the law of the place of one's birth to detrmine one's nationality while Jus Sanguinis is rule of descent or blood.Citizenship is determined or acquired by the nationality of one or both parents.Jus Sanguinis is being followed and articulated in our Constitution

*Foundling is a historic term applied to children or a baby that have been abandoned by parents and discovered and cared for by others which is the case of Grace Poe.Child's nationality shall be determined by the rules applicable in cases where the parentage is known.

* It recognizes the existence of the law prior to the determination of its unconstitutionality as an operative fact that cannot be ignored or disregarded.

*First, there must be an actual case before the court. Second, The question before the court must be ripe for adjudication. The first two requisites are something that had been accomplished  by either branch before a court may come into the picture and petioner must allege the existence of injury as result of the challenge action

The third requisite is the legal standing of the petitioner. He must be able to show not only the law or any government act is invalid but also he must sustained direct injury as a result of its enforcement.The fourth is the judicial review, which the issue of constitutionality should be raised at the earliest opportunity.

* It is the process by which meanings are assigned to words in a constitution, to enable legal decisions that are justified by it. Interpretation as it is based on the meanings in other usages of the terms by those writers and the readers. Construction concludes the meaningfrom a broader set of evidence.

*I dissent. All people should be treated equally regardless of personality, possessions and status. Ensuring everyone is treated fairly and equally,The law must treat an individual in the same manner as other people in similar conditions and circumstances. 

PART II.

* Yes. Though past conviction of Miss x does not hide in any instace of her life, but her pardon from the President allows her to be relieved from some legal consequences and can therefore be reinstated in herposition

*The said appointment of the next Chief Justice of the Philippines prior two months before election is not a contrary to law wherein the said appiontment does not fall to an appontment to political office made during last hours of the term of office of the person in whom the right of making such appointment is vested.

*a.) Yes. Under the law,only the Supreme Court have the powers on excercising jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors,public ministers and connsuls. 

b.) A consul is a public officer who is commissioned by a state to reside in a foreign country for the purpose of fostering the commercial affairs of its citizens living in that foreign country and perform functions as issuing visas and renewing passports.

c.)Yes. it is a general rule under Revised Penal Code that persons who are exempt from arrest  and imprisonment and whose properties are exempt from distraint, seizure and attachment are Public Ministers, Consuls and Ambassadors.

*Under the law, if they refuse to appear they can be compelled under pain of legislative contempt however the Supreme Court ruled that Senate has no power to indefinitely detain them or a person  cited in contempt during an inquiry in aid of legislation.

*a.) It is clear that Mr. Sy was not warned to remain silen,that anything he says can be used against him against the court of law, and he must have a legal counsel to assist him or rpesent to.Miranda righst were not given to the accused therefore such evidence  is inadmissible to the court.

b.)Yes. the situation of using his promisory note to pay as an evidence against him is contrary to the law as it invokes self-incrimination and under the law, no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself therefore his right against self incrimination was being violated.

*a.Yes, as prosecution cannot prove the accused guilty and that there is no probable cause and the case should be dismissed.

b.No

c.Double jeopardy is a procedural defence that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same similar charges foloowing a valid acquital or conviction in the same jurisdiction.The following elements of double jeopardy are as follows; 1.) a valid complaint or information 2.) a court of competent jurisdiction 3. )the defendant was acquitted of the case against him was dismissed.

*a. Quo warranto is a special form of legal action used to resolve a dispute over wether a specific person has the legal right to hold public office that he or she occupies.

b.)The President, Vice President,Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions and the Ombudsman may be remove from office thru impeachment.

c.)Sereno failed to compy with disclosure requirements despite the fact that her qualifications had been already certified bybthe judicial and Bar Council.

d. Yes

* a.)No, accused is not under double jeopardy for the reason that it has separate complaints from different private complainant and therefore it must be relted into different verdict.

b)An accused may plea bargain and can plead to lesser offense as long as the accused and the prosecution work out mutually satisfactory disposition of the case,subject to court approval.

 

MARIETTA RAEL

2020-11-10

Marnelli Pastorfide

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1581

Writing time: 128 minutes

Email: moulan09@gmail.com

Class: Political and International Law Review

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

Student Name:  MARNELLI T. PASTORFIDE Rating:___________

 

Part I

 

I.1  The three essential parts of the constitution are (a) the bill of rights-found in article III, (b)governmental organization and functions- found on Article VI to XI and (c) method of amendment- found on Article XVII. 

 

I.2  The doctrine of condonation is where an elected official is condoned of his accountabilities in view of his re-election.  The reason for abandoning this doctrine is the negative message it conveys to government officials.  In essence, what it points out is that said officials may do whatever they want even if said functions are ultra vires and tainted with corruption.  They just had to make sure they get re-elected for their infractions/crimes  to be condoned or forgiven.  This is based on the premise that the electorate are well aware of their doings and the act of re-electing them is tantamount to condoning their crimes or doing away with their accountabilities.

 

I.3  The Supreme Court ruled that Senator Gordon can hold the position as presdient of Red Cross since said organization is not a government office or a GOCC.  The SC said that PNRC is a private corporation, hence, the prohibition in the constitutiondoes not apply in the instant case.

 

I.4  The literal translation of Rebus Sic Stantibus is "things thus standing."  This pertains to contracts with stipulations that can be subjected to modification or alteration when there are changes in the condition or circumstances upon which they were initially based from.

 

I.5 The principles that are considered in determining the citizenship of a person are Jus Soli or Jus Sanguinis.  The former refers to a person being a citizen on account of where he/she was born while the latter refers to a person being a citizen because of his blood or parentage.  The case of Grace Poe is an infamous case that tested the provisions of our constitution.  The SC said that foundlings are considered natural-born of the country where they were found.  The Jus Soli principle was applied here.  Another case is that of Fernando Poe, Jr.  wherein his citizenship was questioned because his father accordingly is a spaniard.  The court said, having a Filipino mother made him a natural-born citizen, upholding in this instance the Jus Sanguinis principle.  

 

I.6  As decided in Grace Poe's case, the Supreme Court pointed out that where the foundling was found will determine his/her citizenship.  In said case, it was also taken into consideration the physical features of Grace Poe.  Since she was found in Iloilo which was inhabited by 99% Filipino, it is therefore an elementary inference that her biological parents are Filipinos, hence, she was declared to be a natural-born Filipino.

 

I.7  The Doctrine of Operative fact refers to acts done pursuant to a law which subsequently declared uncostitutional remain valid, but not when the acts are done after the declaration of unconstitutionality.  An example to this are contracts entered into during the application of a law.  When said law is thus declared unconstitutional, the contracts which were entered during the time it was still in operation remains valid.  The decisions that were arrived at during the application of said law will be upheld.  

 

I.8  The requisites of a valid judicial inquiry/review are: a) there must be an actual case or a justiciable controversy brought to the court; b) the question must be ripe for adjudication; c) the person challenging must be a proper party and; d)  the issue of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest opportunity and must be the cause of the case.  The first requisite is self-explanatory.  However, the second requisite hinges on the fact that the act that was brought to court has adversely affected the person challenging it.  The third requisite refers to the invidual having the legal standing to bring the matter to the court's attention.  He must show that he suffered injury or was adversely affected by an act or law that makes the act or law invalid or worth declaring as unconstitutional.  The fourth requisite must show that the act/law that was brought to court is not moot and academic.  This primarily means that, no antecedent act or pronouncement was made that will render the review a waste of time.  Or simply put, it ceases to be a controversy due to an earlier decision or action.  

 

I.9  The rule on constitutional construction under the Davide Impeachment Case is that the intent of the law must be interpreted in accordance with how the framers intended it to be and not according to how congress wants to interpret it.  

 

I.10  The Equal Protection Clause under our constitution is anchored on the principles of equity and not entirely on equality.  It provides for the right of the people to due process and equal protection of the laws.  In the face of the law, all people regardless of social strata, sex or religion, are all treated equal.  Albeit, there are special applications for certain classes because it is well within their nature that they enjoy such right.  Say for example the maternity leave enjoyed by female workers.  This does not mean that males are discriminated but because there is a need for females to recover what they lost through child birth.  A special law that specifically addresses this concern is enjoyed by females and not by males. 

 

Part II

 

II.1  The nature of a presidential pardon relieves an offender of all sanctions.  It is as if she has never committed the offense.  She is cleansed of the punishments and thus, should enjoy all rights that she is entitled, including returning to work.  If I were the judge, I will grant her petition for mandamus because the pardon has relieved her of all sanctions and interdictions attached to the offense she committed.

 

II.2  When in exigency of service, the president can appoint. The appointment of the Chief Justice will stand but the appointment of the Head of the Probation Office will still be subject to the confirmation by the Commission on Appointments.

 

II.3  a)  No, his contention is wrong.  RTC has jurisdiction to try his case even with him being a consul.  The crime committed by him is triable by the RTC  b)  A consul's job is to serve as a representative of the country in another country.  Him being tried under Philippine courts is correct since his crime was not done outside of the Philippines. c)  He does not enjoy immunity from suit because his crime is not in line with his function.  

 

II.4  Those officials directly under the president cannot be compelled to attend the senate hearing unless the president himself allows them to.  The secretary of justice cannot be compelled unless expressly allowed by the president.  However, the other 3 officials can be compelled to attend the senate hearing since they cannot invoke the executive privilege as an excuse.

 

II.5  The rights in question are all rights expressed under the bill of rights.  However, the contention of Mr. Jose Sy will not stand against his employer since the rights were intended to be applied against government authorities.  

 

II.6  a)  No, the search was not violative of his rights since it is a standard procedure.  All that passes through said port are all subjected to the same routine.  b)  He cannot contest that his miranda rights were violated because the arrest was not made by police authorities.  Terminals are sometimes run by private companies through a servicing contract.  If the arrest was made by non-uniform personnel, obviously, his miranda rights will not be observed.  

 

II.7  a)  No, the act of the judge of dismissing the case was not valid.  When the prosecutor found probable cause for the filing of the case and he himself affirmed it, the secretary of justice will have no jurisdiction over the case.  b)  No, the judge cannot just reinstate the case because it will violate the right of the accuse.  c)  For double jeopardy to set in, there must be a first jeopardy, the first jeopardy must have been validly terminated and the second jeopardy must be for the same offense.  In the instant case, since there was dismissal by the judge, the principle of double jeopardy will set in as provided in the enumeration above.

 

II.8  a)  Quo warranto is a remedy to oust ineligible public official when the subject act or ommission was committed prior to or at the time of appointment relating to the official's qualification to hold office that will render such appointment invalid.  b)  The President, the vice president, members of the supreme court, members of the constitutional commissions and the ombudsman are officials that can be removed via impeachment.  c)  The availment of quo warranto basically attacks the appointed person's integrity which in turn resonate to public officials holding office with utmost integrity, effeciency and loyalty.  A deviation from said virtues will disqualify an official to continue holding office.

 

II.9  a)  Yes, judgement of acquittal is final and is immediately executory upon promulgation.  

 

II.10  The intent of the law is to punish and deter.  When the law is clear and there is no room for ambiguity, the law shall be enforced as is.  Under R.A. 9165, plea bargaining is not allowed when accused is charged uner Section 5 of said law.  However, plea bargaining is allowed under Section 11 of the same law.  

 

Marnelli Pastorfide

2020-11-10

Mary Choleene Bautista

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1940

Writing time: 212 minutes

Email: leenebautista@gmail.com

Class: Consti 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

  Part I.

1.  The three essential parts of the constitution are: 

a.  The preamble which can be found on the very beginning of the Constitution which serves as the introduction stating such goals of the Constitution.

b.  The Articles which is found right after the preamble which serves as the contents of the Constitution.

c.  The Amendments which can be found after the Articles which are the amendments being made on the Constitution.

 

2.  Doctrine of Condonation is that the public official, who has been re-elected on the same position, cannot be removed from his position for the crime he committed in his previous term.  

 

3. In the Red Cross case, the court found that the Philippine Red Cross was a private organization and not a government one.  The position of Gordon in the Red Cross does not give him the benefit in earning money for Red Cross is a voluntary organization.  He was appointed becase the Chief Executive of the organization has seen that Gordon is capable to be appointed.

 

4.  The principle used in the case of Santos III v. NOA was the Warsaw Convention which regulates the process and requiments of the ticketing of the passengers and also provides the liabilities that the Airlines  whenever accidents or dameges happens.

 

5.  The two principles in determining the citizenship of a person are:

a.  Jus sanguinis, which is when a child acquires their citizenship through their parent's citizenship.

b.  Jus soli, which is when the child acquires their citizenship on the place they were born.

 

6.  A foundling is when a baby is abandoned by his or her parents and the baby has been found by another person.  In the case of Grace Poe, it was determined that a foundling citizenship shall be of the state on where the foundling was found.  It was said there that there is a high probabilility of the foundling's parents citizenship are the one's of the State because of there is a higher rate of the citizens of that State giving birth of a baby that aliens.

 

7.  The doctrine of the operative fact is used whenever a law is being challenged as unconstitutional.  This doctrine will first recognize the existence of such law being challenged before it is being deemed as unconstitutional because the decision of its unconstitutionality cannot be ignored if so it is decided.

 

8.  The requisites of judicial inquiry are:

  a.  There must be an actual case or controversy.  That before just Judicial question is raised there must be a present case to raise it to;

  b.  The one raising the question must be the person affected.  The person who's legal rights are being injured must be the one who has the right to raise the question to the court;

  c. The question must be raised at the earliest opportunity.  If the injured party had realized that his rights are being injured then he should raise the question immediately.  

  d. The decision of such question must be necessery for the determination of the case.  The question must be the one related to the case, that such decision to the question will detemine the conclusion of the case present.

 

9.  The rules of constitutional construction are:

a.  Verba Legis, that is what the Constitution words are shall be use in its ordinary meaning and should not be interpreted in another way;

b.  Ratio legis est anima, it is when there is ambiguity in the words of the Constitution, the intention of the persons who had made such shall be used for its interpretation; and

c.  The constitution must be interpreted as a whole.  In interpreting the Constitution, we must consider the whole Constitution and not just a part of it.

 

10.  If a person had committed a crime, such commission will under go the process of law.  if such person is convicted of such crime that he had committed, he shall be put into prison which will deprive him of his liberty or property.  This shall happen for the protection of the injured party.  

 

Part II.

 

1.  No, if i was the judge, i will not grant her petitioner.  The pardon by the president was, in a way, is about forgiveness of the criminal act that the petitioner had done.  She being forgived by the act she did does not mean to forget the crime.  The pardon does not apply retroactively, only prospectively, so it does not erase the crime that she did but it only forgave her for it.  Therefore, in order for her to get her position back that she had lost due to what she did, she must go through the process of application for the said position.

 

2.  The appointment of the new chief justice is valid.  The law which had provided that the president is mandated to appoint the next chief justice within 90 days from its vacancy will be held as an exception of the provisions which prohibits any appointment of any officer within two months before the election.  Since the law had provided that the president has to appoint the next chief justice within 90 days from its vacancy, then he has to do so as he is mandated to do so.

 

  The Head of the Probation office's appointment is invalid.  The provision only provided that only the next Chief Justice is mandated to be appointed within the 90 days.  Since the head of the propbation office was not a part of it then such appointment is under the first provisions which prohibits an appointment of any office within two months before an election.  Therefore the appointment of the Head of the Probation Office is invalid.

 

3.  a.  No he is not correct, for he is in the jurisdiction of the Philippines, the process of the law must prevail.  Before a case reaches the Supreme Court, is must go through the lower court and it will progress from their.

 

b.  A consul is a representative of another state which helps protect those citizens of their country in another.  He will be the one to assist the citizens of his State whenever it is needed. 

 

c.  No, he is not immune from being suid in our jurisdiction.  Penal Laws shall be binding on the persons who sojourned in the Philippine Territory.  If he so committed the crime of falsification of documents in the Philippine territory, then must be criminally liable for the crime that he had committed.

 

4.  Yes, these persons, if they refuse to appear shall be compelled under pain of legislative contempt.  Legislative contempt is used to discipline individuals who disobey or disrespect to proceedings.  Therefore, if the mentioned persons will refuse to appear when they were being invited for investigation then they will face the legislative contempt.

 

5.  a.  No, Mr. Sy was not in custodial investigation in such a way that he should be givin his Miranda rights.  The investigation that had happened where he admitted the crime was held by the company.  Mr. Sy was not taken into custody, in fact, he had voluntarily admitted the misappropriation.  There was still no trial that happened when the investigation happened.  

 

      b.  No, his right against self-incrimination was not violated.  He has the choice to not answer to the investigation that had happened in the company prior to the filling of the case.  In fact, he voluntarily admitted to the crime that he had committed.  The company or the person investigating him did not use any means that would force him to admit the commission.  Therefore, his right against self-incrimination was not violated.

 

6.  a.  No, the search of his bag without his permission does not violate his constitutional rights.  There was probable cause that there is a gun in Dela Cruz's bag because of the x-ray machine.  The operator of the x-ray does not have the time to go to the courts and have a judge to issue a search warrant.  The operator also did not just blindy search the bag of Dela Cruz, because of the x-ray machine which detected the gun inside the bag, the operator had to do a search to confirm because firearms are not allowed in the port for the purposes of the safety of the people.  Therefore, the search of Dela Cruz's bag does not violate his constitutional right.

 

  b.  Yes, Dela Cruz is entitled to the Miranda rights.  In the arrest of Dela Cruz of the Illegal Possession of Firearm, he must be reminded of his rights that he has the right to remain in silence, the right to have an attorney of his choice, if not of his choice, one will be appointed to him, and that anything he will say may be used against him in the court.  All people that are being arrested has the right to the Miranda rights.

 

7.  a.  No the act of the Judge in dismissing the case is not valid.  The case had not proceeded to the trial yet.  The parties has not had a chance to testify their claims.

 

     b.  No the Judge cannot change his decision and the reinstate the case because he would be violating the constitutional provision on double jeopardy.  The Judge had dismissed the case without the express consent of the accused.  The elements or Double Jeopardy is present in the case present.  The accused will be in double jeopardy if the judge will reinstate the case.  Therefore, the Judge cannot anymore change his decision and reinstate the case without violating the constitutional provision on double jeopardy.

 

     c.  There is double jeopardy when an accused, in a competent court, has been acquitted or convicted, or when his case has been dismissed without his consent, after such happens, another case has been filed against him of the same crime.  Elements of double jeopardy are the following:  (1) that there was a valid information filed against an accused; (2) that such information was filed in a competent court; (3) that the accused had pleaded to the crime; and (4) the accusedwas acquitted or convicted, or the case was dismissed without the consent of the accused.

 

8.  a.  A quo warranto proceeding is a proceeding to determine if the person has the legal right to hold the subject position that he is occupying.

 

 b.  The impeachable officials under our constitution are:  The President; the Vice-President; the Senators; the ombudsman; and the members of the Supreme Court

 

c.  She had failed to file the required SALN thus redering her unlawful to hold the position.

 

d.    

 

9.  No, the accused was not correct in saying that he was already placed in double jeopardy. Elements of double jeopardy are the following:  (1) that there was a valid information filed against an accused; (2) that such information was filed in a competent court; (3) that the accused had pleaded to the crime; and (4) the accused was acquitted or convicted, or the case was dismissed without the consent of the accused.

 

  In this case, the accused had expressly gave his consent in his acquital.  His manifestation stating that he would no longer present any evidence for the defense and "submitted the case for decision" is a means of expressly giving his consent to his acquital.  And because of such consent, the fourth element with constitute double jeopardy is absent.  Therefore, there is no double jeopardy and the accused can be charge again of the same crime.

 

10.  The accused's petition will push through.  An accused has a right to plead guilty to a lesser offense.  It would violate his Constitutional right of liberty to be deprive of choosing a lesser offense to the crime that he had committed.

 

Mary Choleene Bautista

2020-11-10

Mary Rovytte Banas

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1258

Writing time: 235 minutes

Email: maryrovytte.b@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional law

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

 Part I

1.     The three essential parts of the constitution are the following:

 

1. constitution of liberty of which are found under the provisions of Article II, III, IV, V and XII of the constitution;
2. constitution of government of which are found under the provisions of  Aticle VI to XI of our Constitution; and
3. constitution of sovereignty of which are found under the provisions of  Article XVII of our constitution.

2.     Under the case of Carpio vs Binay doctrine of condonation is a peculiar jurisprudential creation that has persisted as a defense of elective officials to escape administrative liability.  As to the abandonment of a doctrine this is entirely within the prerogative of the Court. This doctrine has its own jurisprudential creation therefore this may be revoke notwithstanding the existing events that render the subject of discussion moot. 

 

3.     Under our Constitution this prohibit a senator to hold two position of office. However, in this case the Philippine National Red Cross (PNRC) was not a government -owned but privately owned corporation. The PNRC have be able to convince the court that as to their charter they are privately owned, privately funded and privaely run charitable organization. Thus, allowing Senator Gordon to take the seat as the Chairman of PNRC and as Senator of the Philippines. 

 

4.  The principle of Rebus sic stantibus means that a stipulation of contractcan be modified as to thhe conditions and circumstances of which they have first agreed upon. Thus, the domicile of where the contracting parties entered has the jurisdiction over the contract in result a action for damages can only be file following the domicile meant in their jurisdiction.

 

5.  The two principle in determining the citizenship of a person are the following: 

1.  the principle of Jus Sanguinis of which the citizenship is determined by virtue of blood relationship regardless of his place at birth; and
2. the principle of Jus Soli of which the citizenship is determined by vitue of the place at birth.

6. A foundling is a right to be deemedor be treated as a natural-born citizens. Under the international law foundlings are deemed born of parents of a particular nationality, then bacasuae international law is part of the law of the land, foundlings can be considered born of Filipino parents and hence, are natural-born citizens under our law. 

 

7.     The operative fact doctrine is where the law is recognized as unconstitutional but the effects of the unconstitutional law, prior to its declaration of nullity, may be left undistrubed as a matter of equity and fair play. 

 

8. The requisites of a judiciary inquiry are the following:

1.  there must be an actual case or controversy;
2. the question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party;
3. the constitutionality question must be  raised at the earliest possible opportunity; and 
4. the decision of the constitutional question must be necessaru to the determination of the case itself.

9. The rules of the constitutional construction are the following: 

1. verba legis which means that whenever possible, the words of the Constitution must be given heir ordinary meaning;
2. ratio legis et anima which means that the words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent of the framers; and 
3. ut maais valeat auam pereat which means that the Constitution has to be interpreted as a whole.

10.    In a decided case, it was ruled that the constitution does not require absolute equality among people. Moreover, it was held that it is enough that all persons under  the same circumstances or conditions are given the same privileges required to follow the same obligation. Therefore, a classification based on a valid and reasonable standard is not a violation of the equal protection clause. 

 

Part II

1. No. I will not grant the petition as the said petition is not meritous. In a decided case, it was ruled that:

  It is only during an acquittal, not absolute pardon, as the only ground for  the reinstatement of previous position and entitlement of salary payments of the public officer. 

  Miss X, under the Office of the President, was granted absolute pardon of her malversation case. Therefore, Miss X is not entitled to of reinstatement of her previous position. However, she may regain her former post but she must re-apply and undergo the usual procedure required for a new appointment and in considering her qualification and suitability for the public post.

 

2. No. The appointment of the new chief justice was not valid.

  Under our constitution  the power of the president to appoint renders exclusively within the Executive Department. The President under Section 15, Article 17 of the Constitution does not apply  to appoinment to fill a vacancy in the Supreme Court or to other appointments to the Judiciary. 

 Therefore, the appointment made by the President to the new Chief Justice was not valid. 

 

3.  a. No. Under our Constitution the original jurisdiction possessed and exercised by the Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of the Consitution was not exclusive of, but concurrent with, that of the Court of First Instance. Inasmuch as this is the same original jurisdiction vested in the court by the Constitution and made to include all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, it follows that the jurisdiction of this court over such cases is not exclusive. 

 

  b. No. Under our constitution, the consuls are not entitled to the privileges and immunities of an ambassador or ministry, but is subject to the laws and regulations of the country to which he is accredited. Moreover, the consuls are not immune from suits thus, they can be criminally prosecuted for violations of the laws of our country.  

 

4.No. Under the doctrine of executive privilege is premised on the fact that ceartian information must, as a matter of necessity, be kept confidential in pursuit of the public interest. This privilege provide and exemptiomn from the obligation to disclose information thus, these person may refuse to appear and cannot be compel by the senate. 

 

5.

6. a. NO. The search of his bag was not a violation of his constitutional right as this would fall under a valid consented search and during routine port security procedures meritouos. Thus, the search conducted on petitioner's bag was valid. 

 

b. Yes. Under our Constitution it is the right of the accused to know the cause of why they were seized, of which this is stated under the miranda rights upon seizure. however, if one does not inform of its miranda rights the said accused is not entitled 

7.

8.

9.

10. Yes. The accused was right for claiming the he is already in double jeopardy. Under the rules of court, the following are the elements of a double jeopardy:

1. a valid information sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction of the crime charged;
2. a court of competent jurisdiction;
3.  the accused has been arraigned and had pleaded; and 
4. the accused was convicted or acquitted or the case was dismissed without his express consent. 

  In the case at bar all elements were present thus, the accused claim of double jeopardy was right. However,  the rule on double jeopardy, is not without exceptions, which are: 

1. where there has been deprivation of due process and where there is a finding of a mistrial, or
2. where thre has been a grave abuse of discretion under exceptional circumstances. 

This exceptions does not exist in the case at bar and there was no deprivation of due process or mitrial. therefore, the accused may claim the right against double jeopardy. 

 

Mary Rovytte Banas

2020-11-10

Meg Dianne Paler

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1334

Writing time: 231 minutes

Email: megdianne@yahoo.com

Class: JD201 Consti Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

Part l. Basic Questions 

1. a. constitution of Liberty - found in Art 3, 2, 4, 5 and 12

  b. constitution of government - found in Art. 6 - 11

  c. constitution of sovereignity - found in Art. 17 

 

2. In the case of Carpio v. Binay, doctrine of condonation is the grounds to discipline, suspend or remove an elective local official from office as a result of an administrative case shall be disqualified from running for election. Election should not be used as means to condone and adminsitrative offense. 

 

3. The SC has allowed Gordon to serve as senator and at the same time the president of PRC since the office of the PRC is a private owned company and not a government owned or controlled corpoeration (GOCC) which is prohibited in Art6. 

 

4. Rebus Sic Stanibus is the treaty where one party can withdraw from or terminate his services. In the case of Santos, the airline put the passenger on a waiting list for his connecting flight despite the confirmation of his flight. 

 

5. Jus soli and jus sanguinis 

 

Jus soli is when a persons nationality at birth is determined by the place of birth. 

jus sanguinis is when a person acquire citizenship through their parents / ancestors  

 

We used each principle above on the case of FPJ when running for presidency.  The SC has considered both principles to determine the citizenship of FPJ. 

 

6. Foundling is a baby abandoned by parents, is discovered and taken cared of by others. 

Under the Philippine law, a foundling isconsidered as a natural born citizens. 

 

Same goes to International law, foundlings are pressumed to have the nationality of the country of birth. 

 

7. Gordon, doctrine of operative 

doctrine of operative recognizes the existence of the invalid lawbut sustains its effects. 

 

8.  Requisites of Judicial inquiry 

a. The existence of an actual and appropriate case - there must be an actual case or justiciable controversy before the court 

b. The existence of personal and substantial interest on the part of the party raising the constitutional question - the question before the court must be ripe for judgement

c.  Recourse to judicial review is made at the earliest opportunity - the issue of confidentiality must be raised at the earliest opportunity and must be the very cause or motivation of the case

d. The issue of constitutionality must be the very lis mota of the case  - the person challenging the act must be a proper party 

 

9. Rules of Constitutional construction 

First rule. verba legis -  as much as possible, the words used in the Constitution must be given their ordinary meaningexcept for the technical terms used.  Its language used should be understood in the sense that they have in common use. 

 

Second rule. ratio legis est anima - the words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordnace to the intent of the framers. 

 

Third rule. ut magis valeat quam pereat - the Constitution is to be interpreted as a whole. 

 

10. A classification based on valid and reasonable standards does not violate the equal protection clause. The Constitution does not require absolute equality among residents. it is enough that all persons under the same condition are given the same privileges and required to follow the same responsibilities.

 

Part ll. Problem Solving  

1. Miss X case 

 

If I were the judge, I will deny her petition. The reason being is that, she is already convicted, and although granted pardon by the President, it did not excude her from her criminal liabilities. Still, she is guilty of a crime. 

If she wants to come back to her office and reinstate her position, she must apply for the said position and undergo once again the hiring procedure. 

 

2. Appointment of the President 

 

The Head of the Probation office appointment is not valid because the concurrence of all the elements of a valid appointment should always apply irrespective of when the appointment is made, before or during the appointment ban. 

 

However, the appointment of the new chief justice is valid since under the law, the ban on midnight appointments is not applicable to the appointments in the judiciary. 

 

3. Consol of Uruguay at Manila. 

a. Under the principle of International Law, mandates equality between states forming part of the international community. Subjecting them to the jurisdiction of our courts destroys the equality which each state and its functionaries enjoy in respective counterparts. Hence, the answer is No, the SC has no jurisdiction over him. 

 

b. The work of the consul is to develop  commercial activity in the commisioned foreign country. To perform functions like issuing visas and passports.  

c. Yes, he enjoys immunity from suit in our jurisdiction as it is a limitation we allow on the law-making power of our Congress. 

 

4.  It is just right to detain these officials  if they refuse to appear before the said body because it is our country's welfare who is put at stake. we need to put proper and valid inputs in order to formulate and creat sound and reasonable laws without violating Human Rights. 

 

5. a. He was on a company investigation and not under custodial investigation when he stood up and admitted the misappropriation and  when he signed the promisory note to pay the amount, hence his constituional rights is not yet applicable. 

 

There was still no case filed against him for him to use the Miranda rights like; the right to remain silent, the right for counsel etc. 

 

b. His right against self-incrimination is not violated because he voluntarily admit and confess his mistake and promise to pay the amount in writing without force or intimidation. 

 

6. De la Cruz is not an illegal search 

a. the search of his bag without his permission is not a violation of his constitutional rights since a routinary baggage inspection at seaports , airports are legal and does not need search warrant. 

 

7. Cyber libel 

a. No, the act of the judge is not valid asthe fact that a judge has issued a warrant of arrest, then there is an existing probable cause. 

b. Yes, he can change his decision and reinstate the case without violating the provision of double jeopardy in our Constitution. 

c. Double jeopardy - is when the accused has been convicted or acquitted, or the case against him has been dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent by a court. 

 

Elements of Double Jeopardy: 

1. upon a valid indictment; 

2. before a competent court, 

3. after arraignment 

4. when a valid plea has been entered

5. when the defendant was convicted or acquitted, or the case was dismissed or otherwise terminated without the express consent of the accused 

 

8. a. A quo warranto proceeding as a remedy to oust an ineligible public official may be availed of when the subject act or ommission was committed prior to or at the time of appointment or election relating to an official's qualifications to hold office as to render such appointment or election invalid.  

b. The impeachable officials under our consitution are President, Vice-President, members of the Supreme Court, members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman. 

c. A chief justice can be removed by quo warranto to declare her appointment as null and void, meaning the appointment has been declared illegitmate. 

d. The 1 year limitation is not applicable to the case of Sereno because the petitioner of the case is not a private individual pursuing a private interest, but the governemnt seeking relief for a public wrong and suing for public interest. 

 

9. The accused is not correct that he is placed in double jeopardy because the judge only rectified his wrong judgment on his rape case with AAA victim. 

 

The judge has not yet made a decision of the second rape case filed against the accused by the different complainant, hence, there is no double jeopardy. 

 

10. Plea bargaining 

A person charged in drug cases can only plead to the lesser offense which is still punsihable. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meg Dianne Paler

2020-11-10

Nicefel Villomo

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 887

Writing time: 207 minutes

Email: Nicefelvillomo@gmail.com

Class: JD 1

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

 I.

The three essential parts of the constitution are as follows:

1. The Preamble - Legislative Branch

2. The Articles - Executive Branch

3. The Amendments- Judicial Branch

 

2. 

 

3. The Supreme Court ruled that Gordon is still allowed to be seated in the senate because the Phillipine Red Cross since it is not a public company. PNRC is a private organizations performing public function.

    

4.The concept of  "Rebus Sic Stantibus" stipulates that, where there has been a fundamental change or circumstances, a party may withdraw from or terminate the treaty in question.

 

5. Born in the philippines and a naturalized Philippine Citizen. Under the commonwealth period.

 

6. Grace Poe

  *Doctrine of Operative

  *Judicial Inquiry requisites

  *Rules of constitutional instruction

 

 

7.This petition is about Senator Richard J. Gordon to be forfeited in the Senate. 

  -The invalidity of the law is not necessary to take effect in all aspects and consequences prior to declaration.

 

 

8. The Requisites of the judicial inquiry are as follows:

  1. There must be an actual case or controversy, meaning it must involve a conflict of legal rights and claim susceptible judicial resolution.

  2. The question of constitutionality must be raised bybthe property party, meaning there must be one person sustaining injury as a result of the act complained of. It must have legal personality to raise its constitutionality.

  3. The constitutional questions must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity, meaning it must be raised in pleading at the earliest time to be considered in trials.

  4. The decision of the constitutional question must be necessary to the determination of the case itself, meaning the constitutional question can be traced to the doctrine of separation of powers.

 

9. Rule 5 - No impeachment initiated the same official within a year.

 

10. The principle of vis-a-vis of the equal protection clause is to give way for both sides to speak out their truth and thi can also pave a way for a more deeper understanding upon the problem of each situation, it is both fair and just to avoid unfair claims upon falsely blaming or accusing an individual.

II.

1. Based on the case provided. I would grant her petition for mandamus, since everyone has a personal right and it is her right to be back in her job.

 

2. President appointed the next Chief Justice of the Philippines and the new Head of the probation office barely a month before the next election.

Answer:  -Yes. They are still valid but if the new president willfully want's to assign to someone else, he can do that as well.

 

3. A.Yes. Consul are conferred exclusively upon the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

    B. They are foreign service Officers, they received, review and adjudicating visa applications. They analize the country's public opinion and attitudes, they develop the each countries policies, they evaluate a foreign country's economic of political conditions and

analyzing foreign country's specific forces.

  C. No. Under the law the Supreme Court of the country wherein the consul is has jurisdiction over them including the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

 

4. If there is non appearance the Senate can released writ of mandamus.

 

5. A. Yes. Mr. Jose has the right to remain silent against self incrimination and forced inculpation.

 

    B.  Yes. His right is violated since he was not assisted by the counsel and he was never informed to remain silent during the investigation which violated his rights.

 

6. A. Yes. searching of his bag without permission is against his will it violates his constitutional rights.

 

     B. Yes. He is entitled to miranda rights, since the bag is his personal belongings and there is no permission when they open the bag.

 

7. A. No the act of a Judge is not valid. 

 

      B. Yes. The Judge can reinstate his decision as long as there is enough proof of evidence to present.

 

      C. Double Jeopardy - It prohibits a prosecution of  criminal defendants for the same offense after an acquittal or conviction.

  Elements:

  1. A vaild complaint or information

  2. Acourt of competent jurisdiction

  3.The defendants had pleaded to the charge

  4. The defendant was acquitted or convicted, or the case against him was dismissed.

 

8.  A. Quo Warranto is a special form of legal action used to resolve a dispute over wether a specific person has the legal right to hold the public office that he or she occupies. It is also used to test a persons legal rights to hold an office, not to evaluate the person's performace in the office.

 

  B.The President, Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, Members of the Constitutional Commissions and the Ombudsman.

 

  C. If He/She violating the Code of professional Responsibility and the Code of Judicial Conduct for transgressing the sub judice rule.

 

  D. No. It was not applied to Sereno  case since she violated the Code of Professional Responsiblity and and the Code of  Judicial Conduct, she was found guilty of unlawfully holding and exercising the office of the Chief Justice ousted and excluded.

    

9. Yes. The accused is already in double jeopardy since he commited the same crime which falls in the double jeopardy case.

 

10. Using prohibited drugs is against the law, therefore he is criminally liable for the criminal case and is charged for a life imprisonment.

 

2020-11-10

Raul Ronnel Barbosa

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 725

Writing time: 202 minutes

Email: barbosaraul21@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

 

I. 

1.) Sovreignty - Articles 1 and 2
  Liberty or Rights - Article 3

  Government - Articles 6,7, and 8

2.) The doctrine of condonation, to put it simply, an elected public official cannot be removed due to a misconduct committed on his previous term; his reelectin serves as "forgiveness" for his offenses before.  

3.) The SC held that the Red Cross and Philippine Red Cross are two different bodies; the former being international in nature and the latter domestic. There is reasonable classification between the two bodies, therefore, Gordon was allowed to occupy two positions in office.

4.) A contract or treaty can become terminated due to circumstances.

5.) Jus soli - citizenship is acquired through the place of birth. This principle was applied during the end of Spanish rule.
 Jus sanguinis - citizenship acquired trhough blood relations. This principle was applied during the adoption of thje 1973 Constitution.

6.) In the Grace Poe case, the SC held that : Foundlings are considered to be natural-born Filippino citizens. For international law, foundlings are considered to be natural-born citizens of the state which they are found in.

7.) That the effects of a law, that has been deemed void, may still subsists prior to its declaration of nullity.  

8.) a. There must be an actual case -a controversy that needs to be settled. 

 b. The question presented to the court must ripe for adjudication - when the act has had adverse effect on the person challenging it. 

 c. The person challenging must have legal standing - the person challening must have been directly affected by the act that is being questioned.

9.) 

10.) There should a reasonable classification in order to justify such a principle. In order for the classification to be reasonable it must be (1) must rest on substantial distinctions; (2) must be germane to the purpose of the law; (3) must not be limited to existing conditions only; and (4) must apply to all members of the same class. 

 

II.

 

1.) No. The pardon may have removed her penalties but she has to apply to be appointed. DENR has the right to deny her.

2.) The appointment of the Chief Justice is valid since it has been held before that the prohibition does not apply to Judiciary appointments. Meanwhile, the appointment of the Head of the Pobation office is in valid.

3.) a. No. Consuls are immune to suit. However they are not immune to suit under their own national law.
 b. A consul is the representative of a state in another state's territory. A consul is generally there to protect his citizens in the host state and facilitate diplomatic matter between his parent state and host state.

 c. Yes. Consuls are included in the list of persons who are immune from suit.

4.) 

5.) a. No. He is under investigation of a private company not law enforcement b. He was not compelled to answer, he admitted that he did it in his own will, therefore his right against self incrimination was not violated.

6.) a. No. Under the law, a person can be searched without a warrant when passing through customs or ports. b. Yes. He is being criminally charged, therefore he his entitled to his Miranda Rights.

7.) a. 

b. 

c. Double Jeopardy is being prosecuted twice for the same act. There must be an indictment before a competent court, the accused has been arraigned and pleaded, and finally the accused has been convicted or acquitted. 

8.)  (A.) a Quo warranto proceeding is a legal action that determines whether or not a person has the legal right to hold an office that he occupies. (B.) the President, VP, justices of the supreme court, members of the Constitutional Commission, and the Ombudsman. (C.) Because a chief justice is a member of the Supreme Court. The Constitution provides that members of the Supreme Court can be impeached.

9.)  No, because the act may be the same but the victim is different.

10.) It will push through because the (1) there is an actual case, (2) the accused will be adversely affected by the said law, (3) the accused is directly affected by this law, hence he as legal standing.

 

 

Raymund Morgia

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1295

Writing time: 220 minutes

Email: morgiaraymund@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Ric Bastasa

1.What are these essential parts and where can be each found?

  These essentials are the constitution of liberty, the constitution of government and the constitution of sovereignity.

 

2.What is this doctrine and what is the basis of abandoning it?

         This doctrine known as an implied pardon of an offense by treating the offender as if it had not been committed. The Supreme Court abandoned the condonation doctrine but the abandonment is propective in effect.

 

3.How did the Supreme Court justify this matter of a government official occupying two positions in office?

 

        In the case of Gordon, the supreme court allowed Gordon so serve as the President of the Philippine Red Cross at the same time serve as a Senator. Under the 1987 Constitution no government officer should occupy two government office at same time, in the aforementioned case Gordeon did'nt occupy two positions in the government for the Philippine Red Cross is not a government agency nor a government controled corporation, thus Gordon is allowed to serve as a Senator and as a President of the Philippine Red Cross at the same time.

 

4.What is this principle all about?

      The principle Rebus Sic Stantibus is a latin translation of things standing thus, this principle means that there have been a fundamental change of circumstances uses commonly on treaties, that party may withdraw from or terminate the treaty.

 

5.What are these two principles? In what particular point of our political history did we use each principle? Explain.

  These two principles are Jus Soli and Jus Sanguinis.

 

6.What is a foundling and how is the citizenship of a foundling determined both in our domestic law and international law?

 

        Foundlings are infants that were abandoned by their parents and was found, hence foundling. In the eyes of the Philippine Law and supported by the UN Convention Law that foundlings are natural-born citizens as per the country where they are found.

 

7. What is this doctrine all about?

        

8.What are these requisites? Explain each.

 

9.State each rule and explain.

 

10.How would you justify this principle vis-à-vis the equal protection clause of the constitution?

      Under the section 1 article 3 of the bill of rights of our Constitution that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. Thus all persons and thing similarly situated should be treated alike. Let us not put a negative connotation on the phrase that not all people shall be treated equality for we are situated differently and responsibilities in our society. An example of this is, there are two different taxpayers B a minimum wage earner and C with a higher paying job, they are taxed differently for they are not similarly situated in terms of their salary thus will be taxed accordingly, for a tax payer similarly situated as C should be taxed the same as C. Thus equal protection clause is not absolute.

 

Part 11

 

11. If you were the judge would you grant her petition?

  No, I would denied her petition for the only ground that one public officer can avail in order to be reinstated is an acquital and not pardon. But she is not barred from being reinstated, she must re apply to regain her appoinment.

 

12.Is the appointment of the new chief justice valid? How about the new head of the Probation Office? Reconcile the seemingly “opposing” provisions.

  Yes, the appointment of the new chief justice is valid, while the appointment of the Probation Officer is considered a midnight appointee and is invalid.

 

13. Resolve the issue.

    (a) Is he correct in saying that only the Supreme Court en banc has jurisdiction over him as he is a duly accredited consul?

          No, all courts have the jurisdiction over him he will be tried like a normal citizen of the country for he does not possess privileges like immunity from suit.

 

    (b) what is the work of a consul?

        Consuls are official representatives of a government to another country to assist, protect, maintain the friendship of the two state and facilitate trade, these are some of the works and mandates of a consul.

 

    (c) Does he enjoy immunity from suit in our jurisdiction? Explain.

        No, under the Revised Penal Code Consuls are not included in the Foreign Authorities that possesses the immunity from suit in our jurisdiction.

 

14.Can these persons, if they refuse to appear, be compelled under pain of legislative contempt? In the light of the doctrine of executive privilege, what is your stand on the issue of compulsion and the threat that they will be detained in case of non-appearance before said body?

 

15.Rule on his contentions.

(a) Is he under custodial investigation in such a way that he should be given his Miranda rights?

  No,he is not under custodial investigation  for he was not investigated and then admitted the act under a government officer, thus she should not be given his miranda rights.

 

(b) is his right against self-incrimination violated? Explain.

  No, for he was not under oath and he is the one who voluntarily admitted it, thus his right against self-incrimination was not violated.

 

16.Rule on his contentions:

(a) is the search of his bag without his permission a violation of his constitutional rights?

          No, the search is valid and is under the warrantless search and seizures, for we all know that it is mandatory for ports to check the items of the passengers for the safety of the public. 

 

(b) Is he entitled to the Miranda rights? Explain.

  Yes, he is entitled to the Miranda rights as per all accused are entitle to Miranda rights.

17. Questions:

(a) Is the act of the judge in dismissing the case valid?

  Yes, for the the Secretary of Justice ruled that there is no probable cause and also the prosecutor filed a motion to dismiss, for no one should be tried without a probable cause.

 

(b) Can he change his decision and then reinstate the case without violating the constitutional provision on double jeopardy?

  No, because there is already a decision that acquits the accused, thus changing the decision will put the accused in double jeopardy.

(c) what is double jeopardy and what are the elements thereof? Explain.

  Double jeopardy is the prohibition of  filling the same case against anyone twice. The elements are there must be and arraignment and the decision must be rendered. Also the second case must be of the same cause as the first case.

 

18.QUESTIONS:

(A) WHAT is a qou warranto proceeding?

Quo Warranto is a legal action questioning the capabilities and qualifications in holding a position.

(B) WHO are the impeachable officials under our constitution?

  The impeachable officials under our constitution are the President, Vice-President, Supreme Court Jurices, Ombudsman, Civil Service Commision members, COMELEC members and COA members.

 

(C) State the reasons why a chief justice can be removed by qou warranto?

 

(d) It is a principle even that a qou warranto petition must be filed within one year from the discovery of the disqualification to hold office, was this applied to the case of Sereno?

 

19.Question:

(a) IS the accused correct in saying that he is already placed in double jeopardy and hence the judgment, despite the visible error of the judge, cannot be changed anymore? Explain.

Yes, because the decision of the judge is final and executory and filling or recalling the decision will put him in double jeopardy. 

20.Decide whether his petition will push through and will be decided in his favor. Explain your answer.

Yes, the petition can push through in the grounds that accused has the right to bail under the constitution.

 

 

 

Vanessa Mawile

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1116

Writing time: 178 minutes

Email: vanessamawile04@gmail.com

Class: JD-1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

Part I. 

a. Constitution of Liberty - sets forth the fundamental civil and political rights of citizens. Can be found in Art. 3, Bill of Rights.

 Constitution of Government - composed of provisions outlining the government and its power. Found in Art. VI, VII, VIII - the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Department

 Constitution of Sovereignty - manner of amending or revisiong the constitution. Art. Amendments and Revisions

 

b. 

 

c. Under the law, it is prohibited to receive salary from another office if you are already receiving from one, except if the other is non-governmental. In the case at bar, Philippine Red Cross is a non-government agency. Thus, Supreme Court held that it is okay.

 

d.

 

e. Jus soli and Jus Sanguinis are the two principles in determining the citizenship of a person . Jus Soli refers to the law of the land where one is born, and jus sanguinis refers to principle which uses the blood that runs in a person as a defining factor. Jus sanguinis is used at the moment, while jus soli was used during the Spanish period. 

 

f. Foundling refers to a person abondoned and who has no definite/identified citizenship. In a case of foundling like that of Grace Poe, her physical appearance was analyzed and it turns out she has the characteristics of a Filipino.

 

g. Operative fact is one which establishes the beneficiary's legal right to receive e.g. the insurance benefits. Like that of a diable person receiving benefits from a disability insurance.

 

h. The requisites of Judicial inquiry are:

  1. Actual case/controversy - refers to the assertion of opposite legal claims.

  2. The constitutional questions must be raised by the proper party - refers to one who will be endangered as a result of the act complained of.

  3. The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible time - it has to be raised as early as possible. Not during the filing of an appeal in higher courts for its late already.

  4. The decision must be determinative of the case -there must be basis in the decision and that it deals with no other than the question raised.

 

i. Rule of Constitutional Construction:

  1. The words in the constitution must be given their ordinary meaning - words has to be understandable by common people and they should be u nderstood in the common sense.

  2. Words in the constitution must be understood in the intent of the framers - the constituion should be viewed in connection to its history.

  3. Words in the constitution must be interpreted as a whole - sections should be considered and interpreted together. 

 

j. It means people similarly situated should be treated the same. For example in taxation, State does not tax people equally but they are taxed basing on their income that is equitably. 

 

PART II. 

a. No. The case might be moot and academic which means a case ceases to provide justiciable controversy as there is a supervening event, which is in this case is the pardon given by the President. But, the court cannot be disuaded by such because she still committed  a crime and that is against the constituion, her being a public employee. 

 

b.  1. Yes, it is. Under the law, any vacancy shall be filled within 90 days from the occurence thereof.

 2. No, it is not. 

  

 

c. 1. No. Under the law,the laws of the Philippines shall govern to its citizens and to those who sojourn in the country.

  2. A consul is a representative of a country dealing with commercial issues or concerns.

  3. He does not. Under the law, a consul does not enjoy the immunity enjoyed by the ambassadors and ministers, i.e., because he is not considered as a diplomat

 

d. 1. Yes. 

 

e. No.  Under the law, custodial investigation is when a person is taken into the custody of police officers or other law enforcement agents for questioning.  In the case at bar, he is not under custodial investigation for the company created its own committee and they are not law enforcing agents; he is not entitle of Miranda Rights either.H is right against self-incrimination is not violated because he admitted his crime. 

 

f. 1. No, the search of his bag without a permission is not a violation of his constitutional rights. Under the law, warrantless searches are allowed given that: it a customs search; search of a moving vehicle; plainview; stop and frisk; and port searches. In the case at bar, it is a port search thus it does not need a warrant and obvioulsy it does not infringe his rights. It a routinary inpection and if he is a constant traveller he should be aware of it. 

 2. Yes, he is. He should be informed of his right to remain silent; right to an attorney or counsel; lastly, the right to be inforemed of the preceding rights. In all criminal proceedings, one must be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Thus, he is entitled to Miranda Rights.

 

g. 1. No. 

  2. Yes, he can. In the case at bar, there is no double jeopardy.

  3. Double jeopardy is a defense that prevents an accused from being tried again on the same charges following an acquittal or conviction. 

  Elements are: (1) a valid complaint/ information; (2) court competent jurisdiction; (3) deefndant had pleaded to the charge; (4) defendant was acquitted or convicted.

 

h. 1. A quo warranto proceeding is that which questions a person holding two offices. 

  2. Under the law, the President, Vice President, Members of the Supreme Court , members of COMELEC, CSC, COA, and the Ombudsman can be removed from their offices by impeachment.

 3. A chief justice can be removed by quo warranto because under the law, members of the Supreme Cuort shall be be designated to any agency performing administrative functions. 

 4. 

 

i. Yes, he is. Under the law, no person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. Jeopardy is terminated by acquittal and final conviction. In the case at bar, he is already acquitted for the crime of rape on the same day. In one of thecases decided by the Supreme Court, even if the evidences leading to the acquittal is erroneous, appeal by the prosecution will not be allowed. Thus, he is acquitted.

 

j. Yes, his petition will push through. Under the law, one is presumed innocent untill proven guilty, it is his constitutional right. Also, this prohibition is contrary to the power of the supreme court concerning protection and enforcement of the constitutional rights and pleadings. Thus, this prohibition is against the constitution and that petition will be decided in his favor. 

Yasser Nasser Galvez

Exam: constitutional / political law exam preliminary

Word count: 1692

Writing time: 139 minutes

Email: engrgalvez92@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

Galvez, Yasser Nasser A.

JD-1 Constitutional Law 1

 

Part I. Basic Questions

1. The three essential parts of a Constitution are as follows:

  a.) Constitution of Liberty. It is where the series of prescriptions of fundamental civil and political rights of the citizens are set forth and imposing limitations on governmental powers as a means of securing the enjoyment of those rights.. It can be found in Articles III (Bill of Rights), II, IV, V and XII.

  b.) Constitution of Government. It contains the series of provisions containing the organization of the government, enumerating its powers, laying down certain rules vis-a-vis its administration and defining the electorate. It can be found in Articles VI, VII, VIII and IX.

  c.) Constitution of Sovereignty. The provisions mainly points out the mode or procedure with which the Constitution , the fundamental law of the land, can be amended and/or revised. It can be found in Article XVII.

 

2. The doctrine of condonation, in Political Law, connotes a conclusive presumption of knowledge on the part of the condoning party - the electorate - which meant that mere re-election absolves a re-elected public official from administrative liability regardless of his or her guilt. The fifty-six year old doctrine was abandoned by the Supreme Court because it has been found out contrary to Constitution wherein it is enshrined that a "public office is a public trust," which was not given full application. Having seen the havoc that could be wrought by unbridled power and keeping in mind the negative attitude of the Filipino people towards public service service, the said doctrine was ultimately abandoned by the SC, in the instant case because of a burgeoning legal unrest and because of the practiced of impunity running contrary to the constitutional and statutory provisions on accountability of public officers.

 

3. The SC held that the PNRC is a privately owned, privately funded and privately run charitable organization, and is not goverment-owned or controlled corporation, thus a special case of its own or sui generis. Sen. Richard Gordon, thus at the time of him being the Prsident does not contravene the Constitutional prohibition as expressly provided in Sec. 13, Aricle VI of the 1987 Constitution.

 

4. The principle of rebus sic stantibus constitutes an attempt to formulate a legal principle which would justify non-performance of a treaty obligation with relation to which the parties contracted have changed so materially and unexpectedly creating a situation wherein performance of the contract stipulations would be unreasonable.

 

5. The two principles in determining citizenship are one, jus soli or law of the land; and two, jus sanguinis or law of the blood. Citizenship is conferred under the first principle by virtue of the place of birth and under the second by virtue of blood relationship. The 1935 Constitution expressly provided that those who were residing at the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of the Commonwealth Constitution on November 1935 are citizens of the Philippines. Further was in the ratification of the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions so long as they retained their Philippine Citizenship. There was actually an attempt to adopt the jus soli as an additional criterion, in a proposal made during the Constitutional Convention of 1971 but said proposal was voted down.

 

6. A foundling is an infant that has been abandoned by its parents and is discovered and cared by others. In the Philippine context, they are recognized as natural-born citizens of the Philippines and shall automatically be afforded such right and protection as those belonging to such class of citizens. In the International arena, while there is no customary international law conferring a specific nationality to foundlings, the laws that shall govern should be consistent with the obligations of a country under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the Convention on the Rights of Children (CRC). All in all, the Philippine Constitution, International law, and our domestic laws all favor protecting foundlings like Grace Poe.

 

7. The doctrine of operative fact merely nullifies a void law or executive act but sustains its effects.

 

8. There are four (4) requisites to a judicial review.

  a.) there must be an actual case or controversy, wherein there are conflicting legal rights 

  that seek to enforced and are demanded susceptible of judicial resolution;

  b.) The question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party, who sustained or

    is in immediate danger of sustaining an injury as a result of the act being complained of;

  c.) The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest possible time;

  d.) The decision of the constitutionality must be necessary to the determination of the

    case itself.

    

9. The fundamental tenets of Constitutional construction, are as follows:

  a.) First, verba legis, that is, the wherever possible, the words used in the Constitution

    must be given their ordinary meaning except where technical terms are employed;

  b.) Second, where there is ambiguity, ratio legis est anima. The words must be

    interpreted in accordance with the intent of the framers.

  c.) Finally, ut magis valeat quam pereat. The Constitution is to be interpreted as a

    whole.

 

10. The fundamental right of equal protection clause is not absolute, but is subject to reasonable classification. Classification, to be valid, must (1) rest on substantial distinctions, (2) be germane to the purpose of law, (3) not be limited to existing conditions only, and (4) apply equally to all members of the same class. This is evident in the case of Tiu et.al. vs. CA et. al G.R. No. 127410, January 20, 1999 wherein the SC ruled the difference of those living inside the so-called "secured area" of Subic Special Economic Zone (SSEZ) and those outside it.

 

Part II. Problem Solving

 

1. If I were the judge, I will deny Miss X's petition. Pardon is simply forgiveness or remission of guilt. In short, pardon implies guilt. It does not erase the fact of the commission of the crime and the conviction thereof. Under our laws, acquittal, not absolute pardon, of a former public official is the ONLY ground for reinstatement to her former position and entitlement to payment of her salaries, benefits and all other emoluments. Under our Constitution, public office is a public trust, thus, a pardon does not blot the guilt of Ms. X and once absolved shouldn't be treated innocent. In the case at bar, she cannot be reinstated to her previous position but she can file for reappointent before she can reassume her former position.

 

2. 

3. 

4. The Secretary of Justice, the Head of the Philippine Military Academy, the Manager of Philippine Finance Corporation and the Chairman of the Commision on Human Rights, if they refuse to appear cannot be held with legislative contempt in light with the doctrine of executive privilege.

 

5. a.) Mr. Jose Sy is not under custodial investigation in the case at bar. Custodial investigation is meant as the questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person hadss been taken into custody. Mr. Sy, in the instant case, is only under investigation by the Cebu Pacific and thus should not be given his Miranda rights because under our law the rights in custodial interrogation only operates when there is an actual custodial investigation done.

  b.) No, his right against self-incrimination is not violated. The said right is not self-executing or automatically operational. It must be invoked, otherwise it does not come into play. In the case at bar, Mr. Sy voluntarily admitting the misappropriation is his implied consent to the waiving of such right, and thus not violated.

 

6. 

7. a) The act of the Judge in dismissing the case is not valid. The separation of powers, as

    an principle enshrined in the Constitution, should be upheld and in one way or another,

    thus would not dissuade the Judge's decision as belonging to a co-equal branch of

    government (i.e., Judiciary), unless such order by the Secretary of Justice are found valid

    and reasonable.

  b) NO, the judge cannot. Decisions, once dispensed, are final and executory, unless

  appealled in the Appellate Court or the Supreme Court.

  c) Double jeopardy simply means the prosecution of a person twice for the same offense.

  Three (3) requisites must be present to raise a defense of double jeopardy: (1)  a first

    jeopardy must have attached prior to the second; (2) the first jeopardy must have been

    validly terminated; and (3) the second jeopardy must be for the same offense as the first.

    

8.

 

9. Yes, the accused is correct in invoking the principle of double jeopardy. Three (3) requisites must be present to raise a defense of double jeopardy: (1)  a first jeopardy must have attached prior to the second; (2) the first jeopardy must have been validly terminated; and (3) the second jeopardy must be for the same offense as the first.

 

Under our laws, legal jeopardy attaches only (a) upon a valid indictment, (b) before a competent court, (c) after arraignment, (d) a valid plea having been entered, and (e) the case was dismmised otherwise terminated without the express consent of the accused. 

 

In the instant case, it is well-established that a legal jeopardy existed in the first case wherein the accused had been acquitted. Convicting him of the same crime, for the second time constitute a double jeopardy as the elements of which are present, thus the Judge, though, committed a grave wrong in the dispense of the scale of justice cannot recall the first decision more so aggravate the same with yet another set of evidence. The jusge here is administratively liable for his assignment of error.

 

10. The petition of the accused will push through. In a recent landmark case of Estipona v. Lobrigo, the Supreme Court granted the petition and ruled that Sec. 23, which prohibits plea bargaining for drug  cases, in R.A. No. 9165, is unconstitutional fpr being contrary to the rule making authority of the Court under Section 5(5), Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution, it being a rule of procedure.

 

Yasser Nasser Galvez