Friday, February 5, 2021

MIDTERM EXAMINATION IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW DEC. 5,2020

 


 

Albertine Din

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1318

Email: albertine.din@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Bastasa

1. (a) This is a revision for it proposes a substantial change in the 1987 Constitution. Specifically, it changes the type of government from a republican state where government authority resides in and emanates from the people to a socialist government where sovereignty resides in and emanates from the party.

(b) The process of revising the Constitution begins with a proposal from the Congress or from a Constitutional Convention. In the former, the Congress can simply start the task of drafting a proposal for the revision. In the latter, a vote of two thirds of the Congress can start the Constitutional Convention. After the draft has been made, this will be subject to ratification by the people through a plebiscite. The revision will pass by a majority of the votes casted during the plebiscite.

 

2.  (a) The ground of Mr. X's non-appearance is not valid. In order for an official to claim executive privilege, she must argue that the information she has cannot be disclosed as part of the Executive's exercise of his powers and privileged communication.

(b) Yes, Mr. Y's refusal is valid as closed-door Cabinet meetings with the Chief Executive are protected by executive privilege.

 

3. (a) No, Component 1 is not constitutional because only the Chief Executive alone exercises control over AFP.

(b) Yes, the President as the Commander-in-chief solely exercises the executive power, and the Constitution does not limit the President from relying on other sources of intelligence information during martial law.

 

4. (a) Yes, the Ombudsman erred in not giving credence to the defense of condonation of Mayor X. Althought the Carpio-Morales v. CA decision was promulgated after the re-election of Mayor X in 2013, judicial decisions apply to pending cases. Thus, the doctrine of condonation applies to Mayor X, and he cannot be removed from office for administrative charges.

(b) Y canot invoke the condonation doctrine because this is only reserved for elected public officials who have administrative misconduct and are subsequently re-elected.

 

5. (a) No, the curfew ordinance does not violate the primary right and duty of parents to rear their children because the State also shares in this responsibility of rearing the children to become productive members of the society as parens patriae.

(b) Yes, the curfew ordinance infringes on the minor's right to travel since tha exceptions are very narrow and limiting. The Constitution protects the citizens right to travel, including those of minors.

 

6. (a) Commission on Audit

(b) Congress

(c) Congress

(d) Congress

(e) Congress

 

7. (a) Yes,  Atty. B's contention is correct as appointments made by the President when the Congress is not in session is effective only after consent by the Commission on Appointments.

(b) A cannot be reappointemed because Comissioners of COMELEC may not be reappointed.

 

8. (a) Natural-born citizens are those who are born as Filipino citizens without having to perform any process to gain citizenship, while those who are naturalized are gain Filipino citizenship by process according to law.

(b) X is qualified to run for Congress if he was a natural-born Filipino citizen before who lost his citizenship and subsequently re-acquired the same. Foreigners who are naturalized may not run Congress.

(c) X's proclamation divests the COMELEC of its jurisdiction to decide the case because X is now a part of the House of Representatives, subject to the jurisdiction of the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal.

 

9. (a) The CA is correct in saying that the issuance of the writ of amparo renders the temporary protection order unnecessary. This is because the writ of amparo already provides protection for people who are under threat of violation of rights from unlawful acts or ommission by public officials. 

(b) The President's immunity from suit will not continue after his term has ended because this immunity is co-terminous with his presidency. The President's immunity from suit as applied in the Philippines covers all his acts during his term. As such, after his term has ended, the immunity will also have ended and he may be sued.

 

10. (a) This is unconstitutional because only the Supreme Court has the constitutional mandate to decide on matters related to the practice of law in the Philippines.

(b) This is unconstitutional as the Constitution already provides for the requirements of public officials, and excludes by implication the requirement of college degree.

(c)This is constitutional as the President has the power to designated Commissioners of the Civil Service Commission.

(d) This is unconstitutional as ten years of practice of law is required to be appointed as such.

(e) This is unconstitutional as party-list representatives must be a bona fide member of the party-list that they represent.

 

11. No, PO1 Adrian's contentions are not correct. The constitutionality protected right of the accused against self-incrimination is only applicable to alleged voluntary confessions, and not to drug test results which is documentary evidence againts PO1 Adrian. 

 

12. The Republic's motion cannot be granted because it has waived state immunity in this case. State immunity cannot be invoked in instances when the State has given its content to be sued, such as when the State enters into a contract with an individual.

 

 

13. Yes, the drugs found at the foreigners' bags during luggage inspection at the airport can be admitted as evidence for a charge of illegal possession of drugs. This is because port search is a valid type of warrantless search in the country, in the interest of public safety. While traveling, people have a lesser expectation of privacy as the safety of the public and other travelers on board are of primary importance.

 

14.

 

15. (a) The law protecting women from violence against their partners is not violative of the equal protection clause because the equal protection clause only requires equal treatment for those who are similarly situated. The  classification between sexes is valid because it is based on substantial distinctions between the two sexes.

(b) This is conention is not valid as the position of Barangay Chairman has minor judicial powers, which allows them to issue a Barangay Protection Order.

 

16.

 

17.

 

18. Yes, Patricio is correct. The Constitution specifically provides that matters of the Court which are procedural in nature are within the exclusive mandate of the Supreme Court. As such, the provision of RA 9165 which prohibits plea bargaining, while the Rules of Court allows for such, is unconstitutional and violates the exclusive power of the Court.

 

19. (a) Amelia is not administratively liable because she is exercising her right to freedom of religion. According to her religion, members of their congregation who have been abandoned by their respective spouses may enter marital relations under a "Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness". As such, she is observing what is acknowledged by their religion is a valid relationship.

(b) The concept of "benevolent neutrality" is an understanding of the Constitutional provision on the separation of Church and State, wherein the latter does not actively sanction or support a specific religion, but allows the members of their congregation to observe their customs and practices and profess their religion.

 

 

20. The random drug testing of students and officers and employees of public and private officers are reasonable as these categories of people have waived some of their rights in entering the institutions--whether school or office--and subjected themselves to the rules and regulations of the institutions. Moreover, the purpose of random drug testing is to ensure order within the institution against abuse of substance. As such, these provisions are valid.

On the other hand, persons whohave already been charged with criminal offenses are already deprived of their liberty and thus, no reasonable random drug test can be conducted within the prison. In addition, these subjects have already been convicted of crimes and are in prison to ensure that the society is in order. In other words, this provision fails the test of reasonableness in intruding their right to privacy, and this provision is unconstitutional.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Albertine Din

2020-12-05

Audey Principe

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1173

Writing time: 161 minutes

Email: audeygprincipe@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

1. a. It is a revision and not an amendment. Constitutional revision suggests fundamental change, thus is the question number 1 implies.

b. In accordance with the Article XVII of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines, Section 1 states that any amendments or revision may be proposed by: either the Congress, upon the vote of 3/4 of all its Members or a Constitutional convention.

 

2. a. Yes it is permissible. According to the Executive Order No. 464, series of 2005, section 2 (i) and section 3, that senior officials of executive departments including department heads like the Secretary of Foreign Affairs shall first secure a consent from the President prior to their appearance in the Congress to ensure the observance of the principle of separation of powers between legislative and execurtive branch.

b. Invoking executive previlege by the Secretary of Energy is correct. EO no. 464 s. 2005, section 2 (i) that being a head of an executive department, he/she is covered under such previlege.

 

3. a. It is unconstitutional under Article VII, Section 18 in which the President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. 

b. It is unconstitutional under Artcile VII, section 18 that martial law can be invoked by the President to supress rebellion and insurgency confirmed and ratified by the Secretary of National Defense and AFP and not by other sources.

 

4. a. It did not erred. The Office of the Ombudsman is an independent fiscal office with autonomy under the Article XI, section 5 of the 1987 Constitution.

b. The condonation doctrine which connotes the same sense of complete extinguishment of liability can be validly invoke by an elective official and not on an appointed official.

 

5. a. No. It does not violative with the primary duty and right of parents in rearing children. Thus, with the 1987 Constitution Article II, section 12 the State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family. Its primary right is to rear the youth for civic efficiency and development of moral character.

b. No. Under the jurisprudence of GR 225442, the Supreme Court held that legal restriction to minors, maybe important to the child's chances for the full growth and maturity. Curfew ordinances are but examples of legal restrictions designed to aid parents in their role of promoting their children's well-being.

 

6. a. Commission on Audit.

b. The Congress.

c. The Congress.

d. The Congress.

e. The Congress.

 

7. a. It is incorrect. In one of the jurisprudence held by the SC in Gr No. 149036, it was ruled that an ad interim appointment is a permanent appointment because it takes effect immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the appointee has qualified into office. The fact that it is subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments does not alter its permanence character.

b. No he can never be reappointed by the president because under the 1987 Constitution, Article IX, section 1(2) prohibits reappointment.

 

8. a. Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship, whereas, naturalized citizen is an acquired citizenhip in accordance with the law.

b. Yes. In accordance with the COMELEC Resolution No. 9989 section 4 that it allows naturalized Filipino citizen to run, even it is duly noted in the Certificate of Candidacy (COC). 

c. No it does not. The COMELEC under its constitutional provision has jursidiction over electoral protest.

 

9. a. Yes. The petition for writ of amparo is a remedy available to person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or ommission of a public official or employee. Thus it would be redundant for the CA if thery will issue TRO in leiu with the petition for writ of amparo.

b. No. Under the constitution, the President is immune from suit only during his or her tenure of office. 

 

10. a. Unconstitutional. It should be 10 years.

b. Unconstitutional.

c. Constitutional.

d.  Constitutional.

 

11. No, its not. According the jurisprudence held by the SC in GR 200748 that drug test i snot covered by allowable non-testimonial compulsion.

 

12. Yes. State immunity from suit shall be invoked by the Republic for the dismissal of case.

 

13. Yes. In accordance with RA 9165 Article 2, Section 5.

 

14. a. No. It is a sole duty of the DFA under the Executive branch for the deportation of undesirable alien, thus no judicial review is needed. 

b. Yes. Diplomatic agency shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving state.

 

15. a. The law does not violate equal protection clause because the Constitution recognize the frailty of children and women over the superiority of strenght of men.

b. The barangay has a quasi judicial autonomy which is bound to its area of jurisdiction. Thus, the issuance of BPO is in congruent with the power vested in Barangay Government Unit.

 

16. a. It can exercise jurisdiction provided that the USA has provided to waive its State Immunity from suit. With the consent from the US, the Philippines will have jurisdiction over the case.

 b. According to GR 206510, even that the US is not an asignatory in UNCLOS, still they are bound to customary international rules on the "traditional uses of oceans" as codified by UNCLOS.

 

17. a. According to the Jurisprudence in Gr No. 149036, it was ruled that an ad interim appointment is a permanent appointment because it takes effect immediately and can no longer be withdrawn by the President once the appointee has qualified into office.

b. No. According to the Jurisprudence in Gr No. 149036, the fact that it is subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments does not alter its permanence character.

 

18. He is correct in his assertion. It is true the the plea bargaining is under the sole power of the judicial department in accordance with the constitution. The RA 9165 on the other hand, encroached on the constititutional provisions of court, thus the certain provision on the prohibition of plea bargaining under the statute shall be ineffective.

 

19. a. No, it is not. The Constitution  recognizes the separation of the separation between the State and Church , and on one of the cases ruled by the supreme court that the State respects Chruches autonomy on marital relations.

b. The SC  ruling in 2003 and 2006 in the landmark case of Estrada vs. Escritor established the doctrine of benevolent neutrality accommodation. With religion looked upon with benevolence and not hostility, it allows accommodation under certain circumstance.

 

20. According to GR No. 15770, the SC held that the abovementioned provisions are unconstitutional for infringing the constitutional right to privacy, unreasonable searches and seizures and right of self incriminationand for being contrary to the due process and equal protection guarantees.

Audey Principe

2020-12-05

Cesar Tinga

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1050

Writing time: 149 minutes

Email: sartings@yahoo.com.ph

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

1 a. This is an amendment to the constitution.

    b. the Constitutional revision of the Constitution are as follows;

        The government or one or two members from the House of Representative submit a proposal to revise the constitution. The House of the Representative adopt the bill, after the second reading,  by 2/3 of the majority of its memebers.

2. a. No. Mr. X non appearance is not permissible. a Senate committee has the power to invite him as a resource speaker.

    b. Yes it is valid. Mr. Y as Secretary of Foriegn Affairs may invoked the executive privilege for reasons of his closeness to the Chief Executive and to protect what trnaspired between the executive branch and other foreign agreements, as in the case of Romulo Neri V. Senate. Neri invoked the executive privilege thus enable him not to answer queiries from the senate on the DOTC project.

 

3. a. Component 1 is Constitutional. the Constitution provides that the President as the Chief Executive may exercise all the powers granted to him by the Constitution in cases of state of emergency.  the Chief executive shall take over the administration and the supervision of both government and private facilities and institution as in the recent case: To Heal as One.

    b. Component 2 is also Constitutional. The Chief Executive as the Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines shall have the power to mobilize under his commands all the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

4. a. The Ombudsman err in not giving credence to the defence of Mayor X because his election to another term of office as Mayor shows and proves the people's vote of confidence on him.

    b. Y as the city administrator cannot invoke the privilege of condonation because his position into office does not emanate from the vote of confidence of the people.

5. a. No. The Curfew Ordinance does not violate the right of the parent but rather serves as an aid for the parents to keep their children from the rise of criminality where the suspect and the victim are minors.

    b. No, the Curfew Ordinance does not infringe the fundamental right of the minor. In this case, the State is exercising its Police Power, regulating the acts of its citizens for a peaceful and safe society.

6. a. The Judicial branch shall have the general power to keep the accounts of the Government provided by law. 

    b. Legislative branch. Under the Constitution, the legislative branch shall have the power to enact laws for the safeguard and safe use of all our mineral resources.

    c. Legislative branch shall have the power to enact laws on the standardization of government employees.

    d. The Executive barnch nelongs the power to declare the exixtence of state of war.

    e. The function to ratify treaties and international agreements belongs to the Executive branch of the government.

7. a.The contention is not correct. A's official function commence at the time of the appointment of the President and his acceptence as in the case of the late Sec. Gina Lopez of the DENR, only that she was not confirmed by the C.A.

    b. Yes. The President can still re-appoint as he is the Chief Executive of the land. The President can even veto the passage of a law.

8. a. Natural-born are those citizens born in the Philippines upon the adoption of the 1987 Constitution and whose parents are Filipino. Naturalized citizens are those born outside the Philippines upon the adoption of the 1987 Constitution.

    b. X being a naturlaized citizen is qualified to run for congress.

    c. No, it did not divest. The Tribunal can still push through with the complaint even after the proclamation of X.

9. a.The CA was correct because the writ of Amparo ahd been satisfied.

    b. The immunity from suit of the President ends during his tenure only.

10. a. Constitutional as it is required by law.

    b. Unconstitutional because it is an infringement to the right to run public office.

    c. Unconstitutional. The law provides a full time Commissioner

    d. Constitutional as it is provided by law.

    e. Unconstitutional. A non-bona member of a party list, can not be a standard bearer of the said party list

11. PO1 Adrain Andal's contentions are not correct. The procedure coducted against are procedural matter in RA 9165.

12. Yes. The motion of the Republic is granted. Under the law, if the state does not consent to be sued, the case will not prosper.

13. Yes. The shabu can be admitted in evidence for they were discovered in a rotinary way of inspection. There was no violation of right accrued on the 5 foreigners.

14. a. No. Under the national law treaty, the President shall have the discretion of deporting undesirable aliens.

    b. Aristotle's claim for immunity is not proper.  Under the law only those foreigners whose is on official function are immuned.

15. a. Condrado is wrong in saying that the law should exxtend also to husband.  What the law envision is to protect only the weaker sex.

    b. Conrado's allegation is wrong on the ground that what is delegated to the BPO is not a judicial power but the power to administer only.

16. a. True. Under the law we are bound by international treaties.

    b. The mere fact that US is not a signatory, the more binding shall they be.

17. a. Their appointment by the President are temporary and are interim.  under the law, President shall be confirmed first by the Committee on Appointment before they can be permanent and regualar.

    b. They are not correct because the appointees to the office is not yet official and regular.

18. Patricio is correct in his assertion. The plea bargaining is an exclusive power that belongs to the judiciary.

19. a. Amelia cannot be held liable for her acts as she was permitted to do such by her religion. Under the law, the non establishment and the free exercise of religious clause shall be observe.

    b. Benevolent neutrality is leeway given by the law to some practices of religion as in the case at bar.

20. They are not unstitutional.  The State in doing is only exercising the Police Power which is inherent as to safeguard and protect the citizens.

 

Cesar Tinga

2020-12-05

Cherrie May Baes Pancho

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1411

Writing time: 139 minutes

Email: cmb102792@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

1. (a) No, "The Philippines is a democratic and socialist state. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from it" is a revision. If it is change it need to revised as stated in Article XVII section 4. "Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution under section 1 hereof shall be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the approval of such amendment or revision."
(b) The process to revise the 1987 constitution are here follows:
First, any Amendment to, or revision of the 1987 Constitution may be proposed the Congress, with the three fourths from the members and Constitutional convention. Second, The petition atleast twelve per centum of the total number of registered voters therein. It shall authorized within five years following the Constitution.
Third, the Congress may by a vote of two thirds of all its members, call a constitutional convention. Fourth, Under section 1 shall be valid when ratified by a majority of votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held in sixty days to ninety days after the approval of amendment or revision. Lastly, the majority of vote cast in a plebiscite which shall be held earlier sixty days to ninety days after the certification of Commission of Election of the petition. 
2. (a) X, is not permissible because in a Senate Committee it may approve or reject the legislation with or without amendment. It must be noted under Section 9 of the Rules of the Senate if the reports submitted are unfavorable they shall be transmitted to the archives of the Senate unless five members shall in the following session and to move their inclusion in the Calendar for ordinary business in which case the president shall order.
(b) Yes, it is based on executive privilege where he stands his argument to the Senate.

3. (a) Yes, it is constitutional as stated in R.A 6826 section 1 of declaring the national emergency will be accompanied by the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) to give rise by the emergency of the national proportion. 
(b) Yes, it constitutional in the declaring of Martial Law as stated in Section 18 of the Article VII provides that within forty eight hours from the proclamation or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of harbeas corpus , the president shall submit a report in person or in writing in Congress.
4. (a) No, the mayor commits a criminal liable as stated under Act 3815, in Article 134 Revised Penal Code of the Rebellion, Sedition and Disloyalty the crime is committed by rising publicly and taking arms against the government for the purpose of removing from the allegiance to said government or its laws. In Article 135 of the Revised Penal Code states the penalty for rebellion, insurrection or coup d etat by any person who promotes, maintain or heads of the rebellion or insurrection shall suffer for the penalty of reclusion perpetua. 
(b) No, Y cannot be invoke his condonation because he already committed an administrative case as stated he violates of the existing Civil Service Law and he will suspend for one to six months. 
5. (a) Yes, it is the government who make the ordinance to keep their community safe.
(b) Yes, the curfew made by the government is helpful to the minors to keep them away from danger. 

6. (a). In Article IX of the Constitutional Commissions Section 2 stated No member of the Constitutional Commission shall hold any other office or employment. It shall keep the general accounts of the government to avoid fraudulent activities.
(b) In Article XII in National Economy and Patrimony of Section 2 stated that the Congress may by law, allow small scale utilization of natural resources by the Filipino Citizens as well as cooperative fish farming, with priority to subsistence fishermen and fishworkers in rivers, lakes, bays and lagoons. Alienable lands of the public domain shall be limited to agricultural lands. 
(c) In Joint Resolution no.4 states the authorizing the president of the philippines to modify the compensation and position classification of the system of civilian personnel and the base pay schedule of government officials and employees.
(d) the sole power to declare the existence of state of war shall fall on the Senate and the House of Representatives with two thirds vote in a joint session.
(e) The treaty power is a coordinated effort between the executive branch and the senate. 
7. (a) No, and he need to follows the rules of the Supreme Court.
(b) Under Article IX of the 1987 Constitution stated no elective or appointive public officer or employee shall receive additional, double,or indirect compensation, unless specifically authorized by law, nor accept without the consent of the Congress, any present, emolument office,or title of any kind from any foreign government.
8. (a) Under Article IV  Citizenship section 1 states first, those citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this constitution. Second, those fathers or mothers  are the citizens of the Philippines. Third, those born before January 1973 of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority. Lastly, those who are naturalized in accordance with law. 
(b) Yes, X will be qualified in Congress as stated in Section 1 paragraph 4 if he is naturalized in accordance with law. 
(c) No, X need to present any documents he should be qualified to ran in Congress.
9. (a) No, but unless the petition of the writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity. 
(c) Yes, as stated in Article XVII of the 1987 Constitution that the immunities herein provided shall apply to the incumbent President.

10. (a) No, it is unconstitutional, because it is stated every applicant for admission as a member of the bar must be a citizen of the Philippines , at least 21 years of age, he or she has a good moral character, and a resident of the Philippines.
(b) No, it is unconstitutional, all the canditates for the bar exams shall finish his or her 4 years Juris Doctor degree.
(c) It is constitutional, The chairman and the commissioner shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the commission of the Commission of Appointments for a term of seven years without reappointment. 
(d) It is constitutional, as stated in Article XI Section 8 the ombudsman and his deputies shall be natural born citizens of the Philippines, and at the time of their appointment, at least forty years old of recognized probity and independence , and the members of the Philippine bar and must not have been candidate for any elective office in the immediately preceding election. 
(e). First, A nomination for a party list if a voting for a party or organization.
11. No, by the urine test, he committed and charged with violation of Section 15, Article II of R.A No.9165  or the comprehensive dangerous drug act of 2002.
12.  Yes, the Republic may have the chance to grant the motion of Annika for installing the lighting facilitites in the offices. 
13. Yes, as stated in Section 29 of RA 9165 that any person who is found guilty of planting any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and the essential chemical, regardless of quantity and purity shall suffer the penalty of death. 
14. (a) Yes
(b) No
15. Yes, Conrado, violates Article 9162 in Section 3 of paragraph A refers to any act of series of acts committed by any person against a woman. He may be a Physical, Sexual, Psychological or Economic Abuse. In Paragraph C section 3 conrado has a Battered Woman Syndrome refers to a scientifically defined pattern of psychological and behaviorial symptons found in women living in battering  abuse. 
16.
17.

18. No,Patricio plead guilty but he cant apply the R.A 9165 Section 25 about imposing a penalty of his crime. 
19. (a). Yes, Amelia administratively liable for having a disgraceful and immoral act.
(b) benevolent neutrality combines neutrality and accommodationaism.  It toward the religion attempts to combine the ideas of the neutrality.
20. Yes, it is unconstitutional as stated in Section 36. 

 

 



Cherrie May Baes Pancho

2020-12-05

DC Kimberly Cuenca

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1473

Writing time: 214 minutes

Email: kimberlycuenca@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastas

1.

    a.

     It is an amendment. Amendment means piecemeal change only. Thus, there is mere amendment of a provision of the 1987 Constitution when the term "republican State" is changed to "socialist State", and when the term "in the people" is changed to "in the party".

 

    b.

        There are two steps involved in the process to revise the 1987 Constitution. The first is the proposal and the second is the ratification. The proposal is usually made either by a constitutional convention or directly by the Congress. The proposals to amend the Constitution must be ratified within a given and reasonable time after the are made. The proposals are intented to answer the current problems and issues. The ratification requirement involves the people in the sovereign act of drafting or altering the fundamental law. If the case is a mere statute, it is enacted by their chosen representatives pursuant to their mandate. The imperative and proper approval should come directly from the people themselves if it is being revised or amended.

 

2.

 

3.

    a.

        Yes, the component 1 of the CNSS is constitutional. The President has the right to execute such power as to call-out the Armed Forces of the Philippines for a more effective and immediate response to the ground situation during a state of emergency. In addition, the President has the right to mandate the AFP since he is the Commander-in-Chief of the said force.

 

    b.

        No, the component 1 of the CNSS is unconstitutional. The President should not rely upon any intelligence information he may have gathered through other sources in declaring Martial Law. He should rely and wait for the recommendation of the Secretary of National Defense and the AFP for a preemptive action because this is the jurisdiction of the said departments. These two departments has knowledge and knows what to do and what not to do with the concerning issue.

 

4. 

    a. 

        Yes, the Ombudsman is err in not giving credence to the defense of condonation as raised by Mayor X. Mayor X, under the condonation doctrine, cannot be removed for administrative misconduct committed during his previous term because he is re-elected to office by the same electorate. Even if Mr. X is found administratively liable for a fraudulent scheme to defraud the city government, the people of his town still put their trust in him despite of his administrative charges. The condonation doctrine should be given credence.

 

    b.

        No, Y cannot validly invoke the condonation doctrine to absolve him of the administrative charges. The condonation doctrine only covers for the elected public officials, Y is not an elected public official. He was appointed by Mayor X, therefore, he cannot invoke the condonation doctrine.

 

5.

    a.

            No, the curfew ordinance is not violating the primary right and duty of the parents to rear their children. The curfew ordinance is helping and supporting the parents in their role of promoting and ensuring their children's well-being and safety. Yes, the parents have the primary role in rearing their children, but the State, through the curfew ordinance, may override the parents' right in rearing their children when the children's actions concerns the public welfare, public safety, peace, order, and in cases which harms to their physical and mental health.

 

    b.

            No, the curfew ordinance does not infringe any of the minors' fundamental rights. The Supreme Court stated that constitutional rights does not mature and come when one attains the state-defined age of maturity or legal age. Minors and adults are equally protected by the Constitution, and equally posseses constitutional rights. The State has a wider range of interests that justify the infringement of minors' rights.

 

6.

    (a.) The Commission on Audit has the authority to keep the general accounts of the Government.

    (b.) The Congress has the power to allow small-scale utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizensm as well as cooperative fish farming.

    (c.) The Department of Budget and Management has the authority to provide for the standardization of compensation of government officials and employees.

    (d.) The Legislative Department, particularly the Congress, has the sole power to declare the existence of state of war.

    (e.) The Legislative Department, particularly the Senate, has the power to ratify treaties and international agreements.

 

7. 

    a.

        No, B is incorrect. Although Article IX-C of the 1987 Constitution stated that "in no case shall any member of the COMELEC be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting capacity", Article VII, Section 15 of the 1987 Constitution gives the President the power to make temporary appointments. A is an ad interim appointee because of the recess of Congress, and the recess appointment power keeps on continous operation on the business government, in this case, in the COMELEC, when Congress is not in session.

 

    b.  

        Yes, A can still be reappointed by the President if the Commission on Appointments by-passed him, but he will be reappointed until it reaches one regular session. A maximum of one year is given for by-passed appointee.

 

8. 

    a.  

        Under the 1987 Constitution, a natural-born citizen is who at the moment of his birth is already a citizen of the Philippines or citizen by birth, and who is born to Filipino parents. A naturalized citizen is originally a citizen of another country, but by an intervening act, through naturalization, has acquired a new citizenship in the Philippines.

 

    b.

        No, X is not qualified to run for Congress. Art. VI, Sec. 7 of the 1987 Constitution states that a representative must be a natural-born citizen of the Philipines, X is a naturalized citizen. Therefore, X is not qualified to run for Congress.

 

    c.

        Yes, X's proclamation deprives the COMELEC of its jurisdiction to decide the case and vest the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal jurisdiction to hear the case. The COMELEC and the HRET has the primary right to decide the case, not the Provincial Election Supervisor of Batanes. 

 

9. 

    a.

        Yes, the CA was correct in saying that the writ of amparo renderede unnecessary the issuance of the temporary protection order. There is no need to issue a temporary protection order because the writ of amparo covers the right to life, liberty and security which is violated by an unlawful act committed by a a public official, in this case, by General Altamirano and several of his military men.

 

    b. 

          No, the President's immunity from suit will not contimue after his term has ended, The presidential immunity from suit is only for the concurrence with the President's incumbency. His term has ended, so he can spend all his time in attending to litigations.

            

10.

    (a) Unconstitutional because all appointees to these courts must be a natural-born citizrns.

    (b) Unconstitutional because it is not one of the qualifications specifically required for these offices by the Constitution.

    (c) Unconstitutional  because the Constitution provides that no person shall be appointed or designated in any of the constitutional commissions in a temporary or acting capacity.

    (d.) Constitutional because the Constitution requires only the Ombudsman to have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years, not a Deputy Ombudsman.

    (e) Unconstitutional because nominees of a national party-list must be their bona fide members.

 

11.

        Yes, PO1 Adrian's contentions is correct. The mandatory drug test under R.A No. 9165 is a violation of the accuesed's right to privacy and right against self-incrimination. Futhermore, recquiring him to submit a sample of his urine is far flung from the case he is being investigated on. 

 

12. 

        Yes, the motion of the Republic should be granted. There is no consent on the part of the State to be sued. Art. XVI, Sec. 3 of the Constitution provides that the State shall not be sued without its consent.

 

13.

        Yes, the shabu found inside the boxes be admitted in evidence against the five foreigners for the charge of illegal possession of drugs in violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. The shabu found inside the boxes is covered by the controlled delivery under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. The authorized examiner found the shabu through investigative technique and warrantless search which is granted to the airport authority.

 

14. 

    a.

            No, the President's act of deporting an undesirable alien  is not subject to judicial review. The power to deport an undesirable alien is an act of State, and an act of State cannot be questioned in a court of law. Thus, deporting an undesirable alien is not subject to judicial review.

 

    b.

            No, Aristiotle's claim of diplomatic immunity is improper. Slandering a person cannot possibly covered by the immunity agreement because our law does not allow the commission of a crime, such as oral defamation to be considered as an official duty. Uttering defamatory words against a colleague at work is not covered in his official capacity.

 

       


       

 

 

DC Kimberly Cuenca

2020-12-05

Edison alviar

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 954

Writing time: 196 minutes

Email: raiv_alviar@yahoo.com

Class: Constitution

Teacher: Hon. Ric S Bastasa

1. a. Revision. because under the law, if it will totally change the entirely the state it will fall to revision.

b. upon the three fourth (3/4) vote of the congress both from the lower and upper house voting separately and through constitutional assembly.

 

2. a. No. Mr. X non-appearance is not permissible if it is due to his reason that the senate cannot compel him to appear before the senate body. Unless Mr. X has valid reason for not attending the hearing. However, in the instant situation, he may be place in contempt if he refuse to attend the hearing. Because, it is power of the senate to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation pursuant to Art. VI, section 21 of the philippine constitution.

    b.Yes. because any information derived from and excerpt from the executive meeting which attended by the committee member only will not be made public unless authorized through majority votes from the members present.

 

3. a. Yes. because the executive power is vested upon the President. thus its it constitutional.

b. Yes. under the constitution the president being the Commander in chief of the armed forces, when the national security are at stake and when public safety requires may place the entire state under martial law to preempt and supress lawlessness as provided under section 18 od article VII of the constitution.

4. a. No. the Ombudsman is correct, because the in the obeved mentioned case, condonation doctrine has been abandoned and became judicial decision in interpreting and applying the laws and constitution.

 

b. No. because the doctrine speaks for the complete extinguishment of liablity.

 

5. a. No. because, parents are not only given the priviledge of exercising authority over their children but they equally obliged to exercise this authority concientiuosly. as parens patriae concept, explains that the state has inherent  right and duty to aid parents in moral development of their children and assumes supporting role, fro parents to fulfill their parental obligation. therefore, it is not a violation.

b. No. because, it crafted in order to served for teh best interest of the public safety. Moreso, curfew period percieved to reduce the probability of the minors to became a victim or getting involved in crimes and criminal activity.

6. a. Commission on Audit.

    b. DENR

    c. Civil Service Commission

    d. President of the Republic

    e. Department of foreign Affairs.

7. a. No. because, being ad interim and temporary in nature, but he is not barred in excercising the function vested upon to him even when confirmation is still pending from the commission on appointments.

b. Yes. but not in the same commission where he was rejected.

8. a. Naturalized citizen by virtue of existing laws, while natural-born citizen are those natural born citizen since birth.

    b. No. because, it requires natural-born filipino.

    c. No. it shall be decide within COMELEC. with matters pertaining recount of votes, it should be done under the HRET.

 

9. a. NO. although both remedy were both intended for protection against abuse, but writ of amparo specifically a protection issued by the court to prevent from malicius law enforcemnet operation. while TPO is only temporary that could be revoke anytime.

b. Yes. the president is still immune from suit absolutely even after his tenure for an alleged wrong doing done during his term.

 

10. a. NO. because under section 7 of art. 8 of the constitution appointment of person to be member of the supreme court must be a natural born citizen.

    b.  No.

    c. No.

    d. Yes.

    e. No.

11. Yes. indeed it is self incriminatory because, it has nothing to do with his pending case for robberry extortion.

12. Yes. because as a rule the state cannot sued without its consent.

13. Yes. because, it is properly obtain. it cannot be considered as evidence illegallyn obtained which make the items inadmissible in court as evidence.

14. a. Yes. he cannot invoke immunity from  sued, because only diplomatic official performing diplomatic function as representatitve of foreign state were immune from suit.

b. No. because he was not immune from suit.

15.a. No. because, naturally the husband are much stronger than the wife who is considered as weaker.

    b. No. because, barangay council thru it barangay chairman are vested with executive, legislative and judicial power within their cognizance as provided by law. issuing BPO dose not constitute as undue delegation of judicial power.

16. a. Yes. it should be tried to international court where both sovereign state is under or within their jurisdiction.

    b. No. the US cannot raised a defense that they are not signatory, even they did not affixe they signature, they are still under the UN convention where all state are members and where this UNCLOS emanates from.

17. a. Temporary and Interim because all appointment should be confirm by the commission on appointment by the house of congress.

    b. No. because even they are temporary in status but they can perform already their function or else, the department which they are about lead will become idle thus, the basic goverment service could not be delivered to the people.

18. No. plea bargaining is indeed an procedure, but it is not impliedly absolute and as a general rule, what was provided in th law it should be followed as to what it provides in the law.

19. a. Yes. administratively but not criminally, in the context of immorallity as penalized under the admin code, excercise of religion does extinguish her liability.

    b. Benevolent Neutrality allows accomdation of religion under certain circumstances.

20. Constitutional. simple, if it is unconstitutional, it will be a law. because, in order for bill to become a law it should be tested its constitutionality.

 

 

Edison alviar

2020-12-05

Holly-Ann Cabasag

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1755

Writing time: 228 minutes

Email: cabasaghollyann4@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

1. a. This is a revision. Revision is a fundamental change. Considering the fact that there's a proposal to change a provision, hence there's a fundamental change of the said provision.

    b. Article XVII, section 1 provides that any amendments or revisions of the Constitution may be proposed by 3/4 of all the members of the Congress and constitutional convention of two thirds of the members. The use of people's initiative towards the revision of the Constitution cannot not be executed and only limited to amendments. 

 

2. a. No. Mr. X's non-appearance is not permissible. Considering the fact that X is does not include him having an executive privilege.   

    b. No. Mr Y's refusal to answer based on executive privilege is not valid. Mr Y cannot invoked executive privilege as this is solely limited to the core constitutional power of the executive branch of the government which includes the President. The executive privilege covers the confidential information between the President and public officers. This privilege includes the President's power to remove and appoint executive officials.   

 

3. a. Yes. The component of the CNSS is constitutional. Article XII, section 17 provides that during the times of national emergency, when the public interests is concern, the state has the right to take under reasonable terms. The President, being the Head of State has the authority to exercise his police power with response to the general welfare of the people. 

    b. Yes. The component 2 of the CNSS is constitutional. The president, being the commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the Philippines and the Head of State has the sole authority to declare Martial Law in preemptive action and without waiting for the recommendation of the Secretary of National Defense and AFP, may rely upon intelligence information he may gathered through othe souces. As a chief executive, the President excercises controll over all the executive departments, bureaus, and offices. 

 

4. a. Yes. The Ombudsman conduct a mistake in not giving credence to the defense of condonation as raised by Mayor X. Under this doctrine, a public official cannot be removed for misconduct committed during a prior or previous term wherein his reelection operates as a condonation of the officer's previous misconduct. In the case of Mayor X, the term of office during which the said misconduct was committed expired before the filing of the said petition against him. Thus, if a public official is not removed before his term of office expires, he can no longer be removed if he is reelected. In the case of Mayor X, he was reelected when the said petition was executed. 

b. No. Y cannot validly invoke the condonation doctrine to absolve him of charge. The said doctrine is limited to public officials wherein they are undergo election and voted by the people. Thus, the doctrine of condonation may be invoked by public officials who were reelected through election process. In the case at bar, Y is a City Adminisratitor, and this position is duly appointed. Thus, he cannot be absolve of charge. 

 

5. a. No. The curfew ordinance doesn't violate the primary right and duty of parents to rear their children. This can be a case under the doctrine of parens patriae. In this doctrine, the State has the authority to intervene and protect the children who is in need of protection especially those parents who weren't able to protect and being negligent. In this case, because of the unabated rise of criminality and the reported identification of delinquent children loitering in the wee hours of night, the government of the City Z has the sole authority to implement the said ordinance.

   b. No. The curfew ordinance does not infringe the minor's fundamental rights. Considering the fact the they are still minors, they need attention as well as protection if there parents failed to do so. In the doctrine of parens patriae, the state will act as their parents in order to protect them due to negligence.

 

6. a. The authority to keep the general accounts of the government and for such period provided by law, preserve the vouchers and other supporting documents pertaining thereto shall be vested upon the the COA (Commission on Audit).

   b. The power to allow small-scale utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizens, as well as cooperative fish farming, with priority to substinence fishermen and fisherworkers in rivers, lakes, bays, and lagoons vested upon the DENR (Department of Environment and Natural Resources).

  c. The Congress shall have the authority to provide for the standardization of compensation of governement officials and employees.

  d. The Congress by a vote of two thirds shall have the power to declare of state of war.

  e. The President has the power to ratify treaties and international agreements. 

 

7. a. Yes. Atty B's contenction is correct. Article IX-C of the 1987 Constitution provides that no member of the COMELEC be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting capacity. Thus, the said appointment of A by the President is invalid as there's no consent from the Commission on Appointments as well. Under the Constitution, any member of the COMELEC should be appointed with the consent of The President and the Commision on Appointments.  

   b. No. The said appointment should have the consent of both the President and the Commission on Appointments.

 

8. a. Article IV, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution provides that natural-born citizens are those citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire the said citizenship or to perfect the said citizenship.  Upon other hand, naturalized citizens are those who performed the act of naturalization process by which non-citizen acquired its Filipino citizenship.

  b. Yes. X can be qualified to run for Congress. Considering the fact that X is already a naturalized Filipino citizen, he has the right and the legal capacity to ran in a public office. As what the Constitution provides, naturalized citizens already acquired their citizenship through naturalization process. 

  c. No. X's proclamation doesn't divest the COMELEC of its jurisdiction to decide the case and vest the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) jurisdiction to hear the case. COMELEC, being a quasi-judicial body has the right to hold hearings and conduct investigations into disputed claims. In this case, the COMELEC has the authority to hold investigations regarding the proclamation of X and the election protest made by Y. 

 

9. a. No. The CA was incorrect in invoking the writ of amparo rendered unnecessary the issuance of the temporary protection order. The writ of amparo was necessary as a remedy to those whose right to life, liberty and security is violated. In this case, Agnes' right to life which is one of human rights as an inherent right was violated. 

   b. No. The Presidents's immunity from suit will not continue after his term ended. the cloak of immunity of the President will be exercised during the term of his office. He will be immune from any suit considering that he still hold public office. However, the removal of the cloak of immunity will be rendered the President to be sued from any form of misconduct. 

 

10. a. Yes. It's constitutional. Under the law, in order for the the appointment to any lower than the Supreme Court, the following requirements must be met. This includes, natural born or naturalized citizens, of 35 years of age and at least eight years as a member of the Philippine Bar. 

     b. Yes. It's constitutional. In order to hold public offices, college degree must be presented. 

     c. Yes. It's constitutional. There should be a consent from the President under Article               XI-C of the 1987 Constitution. 

     d. No. Its unconstitutional. 

     e. No. It's unconstitutional. 

 

11. No. PO1 Adrian's contentions are not correct. The said apprehension was made during the operation of the National Bureau of Investigation and thus, warrant of arrest was not necessary. The said drug test was a requirement for him to be able to invalidate the said accusations made. Considering the fact that he was positive for dangerous drugs made him guilty.  

 

12. Yes. The Republic's motion can be granted. The state can invoked it's right for an immunity. The state cannot be sued for the reason that the principle of state of immunity from suit rests on reasons of public policy. Article XVI, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution provides that the State cannot be sued without its consent. However, this provides that the state can be sued with consent either impliedly or expressly.   

 

13. Yes. The shabu found inside the boxes can be admitted in evidence against the five foreigners for the charge of illegal possession of drugs in violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. The said place were the drugs was confiscated and apprehensions were made falls under the exceptions for warrantless searches and seisures. Hence, the said evidence is admissible. 

 

14. a. Yes. The President's act of deporting an undesirable alien be subject to judicial review. Considering the fact that the said commission of crime happened in the Philippines where there's sovereignty. 

     b. Yes. Aristotle's claim for diplomatic immunity is proper. Under treaty stipulations, any diplomatic relations are immune frim suit thus Aristotle being a diplomat is immune from any suit. 

 

15. a. No. It doesn't violate the equal protection clause. Equal protection clause is not centered to a single person. Women are considered under the law less powerful than men thus, they need protection. 

     b. No. The Barangay can have an authority to settle disputes. 

 

16.

 

17.

 

18. No. Patricio's contention is not correct. Under the law, plea-bargaining shall not be allowed in violation of R.A. No. 9165 or the Compehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. Thus, considering that it's constitutional doesn't encroached on the rule-making power of the Supreme Court. 

 

19. a. No. Amelia is administratively liable. Considering the fact that Amelia only exercise his freedom of religion. Under their religion, she and his spouse belong to a religious sect and that allows members of the congregation who have been abandoned by their respective spouses to enter marital relations under a "Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness". Furthermore, his marital status doesn't affect her work. 

     b. Benevolent neutrality provides that there is neutrality of religion. 

 

20. In this case, it depends on the means of how it is conducted. Section 36 of the Republic Act No. 9165 can be unconstitutional  if it violates the right to privacy and against self-incrimation. Furthermore, the constitution provides that no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. 

 

 

Holly-Ann Cabasag

2020-12-05

Joseph Vallecer

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1350

Writing time: 414 minutes

Email: jvallecer1980@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

1 a. Yes, it is a amendments or revision becuase it change government from democrat to socialist form of government

  b.Under the law, any amendments to, or revision of, this constitution may be proposed by: 1. The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its member.

2. A constitutional Convention.

 

2 Yes, it is permissible. Under  law, all public officials shal secure prior consent of the President prior to appearing before either House of Congress to ensure the observance of the principle of separation of powers, adherence to the rule on executive privilege and respect for the rights of public officials appearing in inquiries in aid of legislation.

 

b. Yes, Mr. Y can refuse to answer, The rule confidentially based on executive privilege is fundamental to the operation of government and rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution. Mr. Y covered the executive privilege because he is the head of office appoint by the President.

 

3 a. Yes, under the law, The President shall have control of all the executive departments, breaus, and offices. He shall ensure that the laws be faithfully executed. He may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence.

 b. Yes, under the law, the President shall be the Commander-in Chief of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary,  he may call out such armed forces to prevent  or suppress lawless violence. Incase of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety reruires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspent the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines, or any part thereof under martial law.

 

4. Yes, the Ombudsman err in not giving Mayor X credence to defense of condonation, considering that if it were established that the acts subject of the administrative cases against Mr. X, were all committed his prior term, then. applying the condonation doctrine, Mayor X re-election meant that he con longer be administatively charged.

 

 b. No, Y cannot invoke the condonation doctrine, prior to its abandonement without the respondent elective official invoking the same as a defense was whimsical, and amounted abuse of discretion. Condonation doctrine, being a matter of defense, must be specifically invoked by the respondent elective public official.

 

 5. No, under the Constitution, the State can properly conclude that parents and others, teacher for example, who have the primary responsibility for children's well being are entitled to the support of laws designed to aid discharge of that responsibility. The curfew ordinance are but the examples of legal restriction to design aid parents in their role  of promoting their children well being. These ordinances further compelling State interest particularly, the promotion of juvenile safety and the prevention of juvenile crime, which necessarily entails limitation on the primary rightd of parenst to rear their children.

 b. No, the curfew ordinance not infringe any right of the minor's, under the law, the restrictions set by the Curfew Ordinances that apply solely to the minors are likewise constitutionally permissible. In this relation, the Court recognizes that minors do posses and enjoy constitutional rights, but the exercise of these rights is not co-extensive as those adults. They are always subject to the authority or custody of another, such as their parents, guardians,or the State.

 

6.a  Commission on Audit-It shall keep the general accounts of the Government

  b. Congress- allows small-scale utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizens, as well as cooperative fish farming.

 c. Congress shall provide for the standardization of compensation of government officials and employess

  d. Congress- the sole power to declare the existence of state of war by a vote of  two-thirds of both Houses in joint session assembled.

 e. President- the Senate the sole power to approve, by two-thirds votes, treaties negotiated by executive branch. The senate does not ratify the treaties.

 

7 a. Yes,  under the law, the President shall have the power to make appointments during the recess of the Congress, wether voluntary or compulsory but such appointments shall be effective only until disapproval by the Commision on Appointments or until next adjournment of the Congress.

   b. No, under the law, the President shall nominate and with the consent of the Commission  on Appointments.

8. Natural- born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph 3. Section 1 of the Article IV. 

  Naturized citizen- The foreigner was born, who studied and he resided in the Philippines. Those who are naturalized accordance with law. 

  b. No, under the law, no person shall be a member of the House of Representatives unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines.

c. Yes,  HRET has jurisdiction to hear the case, is electoral tribunal that decides election protests in the House of Representative of the Philippines.

 

9. Yes, the writ of amparo apply only provides judicial relief as it partakes of a summary proceeding that requires only substantial evidence, such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.

  b. No, The President shall be immune from his tenure. Thereafter, no suit whatsover shal lie for officials acts done by him or by others others pursuant to his specific orders during his tenure.

 

10. a Not Constitutional- as a member of the Supreme Court must be at least forty years of age, and must have been for fifteen years or more judge of a lower court.

       b Not Constitutional -  No required degree at least the candidates are natural-born filipino and legal age required by the Constitution

       c. Not Constitutional- No elected official shall be eligible for the appointment or designation in any capacity to any public office

        d. Not Constitutional- unless for ten years or more ,been a judge or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.

         e. Not Constitutional-  No votes cast on favor of political party except for those registered under the party-list system as provided this Constitution.

 

11 a. Yes, because he was not apprehended or arrested on possesion of dangerous drug. but their is sanction against him.

 

12 a. No, State immunity, sate cannot be sued without its consent.

 

13 a. Yes, because they apprehend and arrested bringing illegal drugs.

 

14. a.No, there is agreement between the Philippine Govenment and the ADS.

b. No, becuase it against the agreement he caught a illegal drugs.

 

15. No, VAWC is not violation of eaqual protection, its protection of women as they are more prone to abuse than men. Women cannot defend themselves compared to men who has strength.

b. No, because as chairman in the his duties and obligation is to execute minor judicial power as a part of Barangay Justice System

c. the validity of the ground raised by conrado is void, and not acceptable.

 

16. a. Yes, the court cannot exercuse jurisdiction,it is about territorial jurisdiction as long as it does not damage our resources they are not liable.

b. UN CLOS is not signed by USA but still adheres to international law.

 

17. a. Depending on the basis on which the employee was temporarily employed, he or she will be entitled to a permanent position upon appointment for more three years or four years.

b. No, WAMP is not correct, under the President shall have the power of appointments during the recess of the Congress,whether voluntary or compulsory

 

18 Pleading should be exercised by supreme court  under Constitution and not by Congress. Congress  no right or not authorized.

 

19. Amelia administtratively liable,under Revised Penal Code, Amelia religious belief no matter how she sincere cannot exempt her administrative case.

 b. Thery believes that with respect to these government action , accomodation of religion may be allowed, not to promote the government's  favored form of religion,but to allow individuals and groups to exercise their religion without hindrance.

 

 

20 Drug test is constitutional since the drug test results will not treat the students and employees as criminals. It is a legal restriction to help the society away from any crime.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joseph Vallecer

2020-12-05

Kyle Kristian Jay Geromo

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1591

Writing time: 223 minutes

Email: kylekristianjaygeromo@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

1. a. The proposal made is considered as a revision. The proposed text has intentions of changing the important text of the Constitution, in the clauses such as sovereignty resides in the party and all government authority emanates from it. Meaning it will determine it extent of which the Constitution will be changed and its end part shall have structural changes and eventually affect certain provisions of the Constitution.

b. The process of revision of the 1987 Constitution shall follow the process of: first, there must be a proposal for the revision of the 1987 Constitution and the formulation of changes contemplated; second, there is a submission of the proposed revision provided that it constitute an electorate through people's initiative; lastly, is the ratification of the submission by the congress.

 

2. a. No, because the senate can conduct inquiries or investigations. 

b. Yes, it is valid since cabinet meetings by officials of the executive department in subject to the executive privilege.

 

3. a. Yes, the component 1 is constitutional. According to Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution, the President as the commander-in-chief of the armed forces when it is necessary may call out the Armed Forces to prevent violence. In this case, it was advised by the National Security to adopta Comprehensive National Security Strategy and the power of the President to call out the armed forces in times of security purposes is enshrined in our Constitution. Therefore, component 1 is constitutional.

b. No, the component 2 is unconstitutional. Under the law, the President may only apply martial law in times of rebellion and invasion when it is advised by the National Security Adviser and it is approved by the congress votation for the declaration of martial law. Therreofore, component 2 is unconstitutional.

 

4. a. Yes, it erred in giving credence.

 

5. a. No, it does not violate the primary rights and duty of parents to their children. Under the law, the duty of the parents shall include caring and rearing of their children. The law also becomes the parens patritae or the parents of his or her country meaning the law has the right and responsibility to also look after the minors for guidance.

b. No, it does not infringe the fundamental rights of the minors. Under the law, every person shall have equal protection as stated in the Constitution. In this case, the minors being apprehended by the law during curfew hours shall undergo counseling which is another right by the law and that is to parent his country as the guardian of the minors who are not able to look after themselves and for safety purposes as well.

 

6. a. Commission on Audit has the authority to keep general accounts of the government.

b. Department of Environment and Natural Resources has the power to allow untilization of natural resources.

c. Department of Budget and Management has the authority to provide compensation of government officials and employees.

d. Congress has the sole power to declare the existence of state of war.

e. The President has the power to ratify treaties and international agreements. 

 

7. a. Yes, Atty. B's contention is correct. Under the law, any appointment made by the President shall be subject to the consent of the Commission on Appointment as per stated in the constitution because the position of the Commissioner of the Commisison on Election is under the Executive Department that belong to the power of the President. In this case, A was appointed by the President as Commissioner on Election as fuctioned his mandated duty without the consent and confirmation by the Commission on Appointment. Therefore, Atty. B's contention is correct that A's fuction is a pending confirmation and he cannot act in his duties.

b.Yes, he can be reappointed since there was no consent by the Commission on Appointment.

 

8. a. As stataed in the Constitution, natural-born citizens are those who are living in the Philippines during birth and did not performed any act to acquire their Philippine citizenship. While naturalized citizen are those aliens who have made a legal adoption of the privilege of a native born filipino citizen. It can be through complying to procedural requirements of naturalization law. 

b. Yes, X is qualified to run for Congress. Those who are naturalized filipino citizens are qualified for an office as long as they have have adopted the requirements for naturalization and have resided in the country for a number of years.

c. 

 

9.

 

10. a. Yes, it is constitutional. Qualifications are important as to determine who has the capacity to be appointed and covered by the Constitution.

b. No, it is not constitutional. Under the Constitution, anyone has the capacity to run for an office with qualifications, however college degree is not stated.

c. Yes, it is constitutional. It is under the Constitution that the President has the capacity to appoint members of the Executive Department.

d. No, it is constitutional. Under the Constitution, there is a prescribed years to be appointed as Deputy Ombudsman.

e. Yes, it is constitutional. 

 

11. No, PO1 Adrian's contention is wrong. Under the law, Public officials and employees must be accountable and must serve the people with responsibility and live a modest life. It means that all public servants must be subject to the law and must follow order. In this case, the mandatory drug testing did not violate his right to privacy since he is subject for such litigation and must in a way prove his innocence of the crime. 

 

12. Yes, the Republic's motion must be granted. Under the law, there shall be no suit against the State unless is allowed or consented as provided by law. In this case, the Republic of the Philippines is to be sued by Annika for failure of the donee to install lighting facilites and water system as per stated in the donation executed. The shall have its immunity against suability, thereofore the motion for dismissal must be grated.

 

13. Yes, it can be charged to the foreigners. Under the law, possession of shabu is prohibited and penalized when it is committted inside the country regardless of the nationality. Also, the search that was made is reasonable since it happened in NAIA, a public transportation. 

 

14. a. Yes, it can be a subject for judicial review. Under the law, all persons who committed crimes as part of the Philippine territory regardless of their nationality is subject to penal laws inside the country. In this case, Andreas who is a foreign national is caught importing illegal drugs in the country which is against the Dangerous Drugs Act, and those persons caught are subject to criminal liability. The act of the President in deporting undesirable aliens can be a subject to judicial review since the act was illegally committed to the country and the foreign national is not subject to the law of the Philippines.

b. Yes, he can claim for diplomatic immunity. The dipolomatic immunity is given to an alien who is inside a host country and when that alien commits a crime he or she will be acquitted for the crime. 

 

15. a. On the first ground raised by Conrado, it does not violate the equal protection clause since the Constitution does not give absolute protection on one person. The equal protection is based on valid and reasonable means. In this case, it does not violate since under the Constitution the equal protection is applied equally to all members of the same class.

b. On the second ground raised, the BPO does not constitute undue delegation of power since the barangay is also part of the lower courts that settles disputed and it has its own mandated power.

 

16. a. The first ground raised by the U.S. Government is not valid. The rule on jurisdiction can be applied since it is stated in the Constitution that national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, will all the islands and waters embraced therein. The incident happened inside the jurisdiction of the Philippines, and damages are made in the Philippines, therefore it is subject to such liability.

b. On the second ground, the UNCLOS determines the nautical miles for the exclusive economic zone of the country and Palawan is under nautical miles of the country, thereofor the country can exercise jurisdiction and the US is bound by its provision.

 

17. 

 

18. Yes, Patricio is correct. The plea-bargaining is only within the exclusive power of the Court. The creation of the law, that includes the plea-bargaining, is in favor of the innocent victim. Therefore, only the court has the power to go over the plea of guilty of Patricio on the possession of drugs.

 

19. a. No, Amelia is not admistratively liable. Under the Constitution, freedom of religion is enshrined and is bound to be followed by every person covered. In this case, Fernando filed an administrative case against Amelia for living with another man other than her husband. However, it is in her religion that it is allowed. Freedom of religion practices can be followed as long as it is not contrary to public order or public policy.

b. Benevolent neutrality means being neutral to religion. 

 

20. No, the assailed provision are unconstitutional. Under the Constitution there are reasonable warantless searches and seizures that are acceptable. There are instances wherein a person is evidently using or holding drugs can be considered as Evidence in Plain view or Searches of Moving Vehicles. These arrest and searches are possible. Therefore, the following portions of Sec. 26 does not violate searches and seizures. 

 

Kyle Kristian Jay Geromo

2020-12-05

Livina Petralba

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 700

Email: petralbalivina@gmail.com

Class: JD-1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

1.  a) Revision. To change it to socialist from a republican state, it needs a revision

     b) Under the law, to revise the 1987 Philippine Constitution, there are two ways, it should be proposed by congress upon a vote of three-fourths of its members and a constitutional convention.

 

2.  (a) Mr X's non-appearance is not permissible. The senate and not its committee has the power to compel attendance without merit. The matters under legislation is a form f innvestigation. The ppower of inquiry is an important auxilliary to its legislative function.  A legislation will not be effective when  there is an absent of information holds to an executive officials.

     (b) Yes, Mr Y's refusal to answer oon executive privilege is valid.  Executive privilege extends from the Chief executive down to its cabinet members. Under the law, executive privilege can be invoked in relation to specific  informationwhich are detrimental to national security and privacy. On the case at bench, closed-door meeting can be concluded that informations discussed are confidential, and is exempted in  divulgement.

3.  (a) Yes, component 1 of the CNSS is constitutional. Under the law, only the President can call-out for such armed forces to prevent  lawless violence and threats whenever it is necessary as the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces in the Philippines.

    (b)

4. (a) No, the Ombudsman was right of  not considering Mayor X's defense. It was found that there is no legal authority  to suntain its doctrine of condonation. 

     (b) No, Y cannot invoke the doctrine of condonation to excuse himself of the case file against him.  He cannot invoke since he is an appointed and not elected.

5.  (a) No, curfew ordinance does not violate the primary rightand duty of parents to rear their children. It is not an absolute prohibition but of regulation.

     (b) No, curfew ordinance does not infringe any minor's fundamental  rights because it does not inviolate their rights. Curfew ordinance for the minor's are just preventions against juvenile delinquency and only for their concern and safety.

6.  (a) Commission on Audit

     (b) Department of Environment and Natural Resources

     (c) Congress

     (d) Congress

     (e) President

 

7.

 

8.  (a)  Under the law, natural-born filipino citizens are those citizens of the Philipines from birth and does not perform any act foracquiring the said citizenship. While naturalized citizens are those who performed the act of naturalization process to acquire the said citizenship.

 

9.  (a) Yes, writ of amparo is a remedy for protection of people with rights of right to life and security violated by the public officials. Issuance of TRO is no longer relevant.

     (b) No, the President's immunity from suit is enjoyable only during his tenure. The case is heard after he was out from service, and thus can be liable. 

 

10.  (a) Constitutional

       (b) Constitutional

       (c) Unconstitutional

       (d) Unconstitutional

       (e) Unconstitutional

 

11. PO1 Andal's contention is correct because under Section 36 of RA9165, no pperson shall be compelled to be a witness against himself and it also violates his right to privacy.

12.  No.

13. Yes.

14. (a) No, the President's act of deporting an undesirable alien is not subject for judicial review since under the law, the former is a sole authority of the state. Judicial  review is only if there is a political question involve or constitutionality of the law.

(b) No.

18. Yes, because plea bargaining will depend on the weight of the illegal drugs confiscated.

19. (a) Yes, Amelia is administratively liable because she is  already marred and is not allowed to live with  another man aside from his husband even if it is allowed in their new religion. Her contention of her new religious affiliation is inadmissible not unless they are muslims and their relationship is recognized under PD1083.

     (b) Benevolent neutrality is the combination of neutrality and accomodationaism. On the case at bar,  it is trying to combine the religious view and the govennment law to mak the situation justifiable or considerable.

20. It depends on how it will be conducted. Section 36 might be unconstitutional in the sense that under the law, it violates the right to privacy and against self-incrimination. And also, no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.

Livina Petralba

2020-12-05

lovelle naquila

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 741

Writing time: 231 minutes

Email: lovellenaquila@gmail.com

Class: jd1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

1.a. Revision. It is so because in this proposal there are only few changes made to the new proposal.

b. Under Article V of the Constitution, To ratify amendments , 3 fourths of the state legislatures must approve them or ratifying conventions in 3/4s of the states must approve them.

5.a. Yes, because the ordinance should illustrate how the parents guide their children.

b. Yes because it violates the rights of the minors to have other activities besides going to church and other basic lawful errands.

7. a. Yes because according to law when it comes to appointment it needs an approval of the Commission of Appointments.

b.Yes, because the Executive has the power in appointment.

8.a. Natural born are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire their Philippine citizenship. Naturalized citizen are those who applied for citizenship in accordance with law.

b.Yes because Filipino may run whether natural born or naturalized.

c. Yes because the Electoral Commission is the soul judge of all contests relating to the elections, returns and qualifications 

9.a. Yes it is unnecessary because she the court already issue the said writ of amparo.

b. No, according to sec 15, The President shall be immune from suit during his tenure. Thereafter, no suit whatsoever shall lie for official acts done by him or by otheres pursuant to his specific orders during his tenure.

 

10.a. Constitutional

b.Unconstitutional

c.Constitutional

d.Unconstitutional

e.Unconstitutional

11. P01 Adrian`s contentions are not correct because requiring him to sumbmit a sample of his urine is not a violation against to privacy and right against self incrimination.It is a requirement to prove if he is guilty or not.

12. Yes because  accoridng to Article XVI of the 1987 Constitution Sec 3 The State may not be sued without its consent.

13. No, because there are process needed to be done so that it wont violate some of the rights of those person like the bill of rights sec. 1 and section 2.

14. a. The Deportation Board upon complain of any person is authorized to conduct investigation and if found undesirable alien thereafter to recommend to the President of the Philippines the deportation of such alien.

b. No it is not proper  to claim diplomatic immunity because those two are not desirable aliens. 

15. a. It does not extend  the same protection to husband who may be battered by their wives because generally women  are identified as the weaker sex.The law is made to protect them.

b.Issuance of BPO by the barangay is  valid because delegation to Barangay has an easy access when it comes to monitoring about that person and even contacting that person is easier.

16. a. The Philippine courts can exercise jurisdiction only to the naval officials because according to EO 292  Chapter 3 The state shall not be bound by the mistakes or errors of its officers or agents in exercise of their function.

b. The United States even though is not signatory still bound to its provisions because UNCLOS is a customary internaltional law and it is the Law of the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea Treaty and Philippines is a member of that  so we have the right to sue the naval officials of US.

17. a.It is an ad interim appointment because it is issued during the recess of Cogress.

b. Yes it is correct according to section 44 The Secredtaries of Departments shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the Commission of Appointments.

19.a.No she is not administratively liable for she is exempted from the law based on her fundamental right to freedom of religion.Exercising Benevolent neutrality which protects religious realities, tradition and established practice with a flexible reading of the principle.In this case her Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness.

b. Benevolent neutrality combines neutrality and accomodationaism.It suggests a preference for accommodating over inhibiting religion.

20. c. It`s unconstitutional for violating the equal protection clause because most of the student in secondary  are still minors.

d. It is not unconstitutional as long as it will undergo correct process.

f. It is not unconstitutional for as a person charged with criminal offense even if it is only less than 6 yrs because that person might be guilty with other charges especially about drugs.

lovelle naquila

2020-12-05

Marie Beth Revilla

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 999

Writing time: 222 minutes

Email: mariebeth.revilla1432@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

1.)

A.This is an Amendment.

    Both phrases have the same point but some of the words are changed into different ones, but not to the point of strongly changing the whole meaning of the said provision as oppose to being amended.

 

B. The congress must firstly pass a proposal of the constitutional amendment or revision after that it will be ratified.

 

2.)

 

A. His non appearance is only permissible if there is a representative or a letter from him with information an acceptable probable cause of his non-appearance.

 

B. Executive privilege can only be used by the Executive Branch which is the President and is not valid for Mr. Y to use in this situation.

 

3.)    

 

A. No, the president is the only one allowed to sxercise the calling out of powers under Article VII Section 18 of the constitution. He is the only one who has the full discretion to call upon the military when it is necessary to do so to prevent lawless violence and invasion or rebellion that might endanger the people.

 

B. Yes, the power of the president to declare maryial law is not subject to other conditions except for two which are the requirements of actual invasion or rebellion if it requires public safety.

 

4.)

 

A. The ombudsman made a mistake in depriving the submission of credence for the defense of Mayor X. Public officials cannot be removed due to a misconducted action during or prior to their term. 

 

B.

 

5.)

 

A. No, it is not violative of their rights because a law is not made out of context it is made for the protection of the people and in this situation for the protection of the children.The law in this case applies the doctrine of Parens Patriae which refers to public policy of power to intervene against the negligence of parents to a child who is in need of protection, in this case the children that are running at the wee hours of night which is a danger to their safety.

 

B. No, Minors are important in the eyes of the law therefore a law that is passed to protect them must be followed.

 

6.)

 

A. This authority shall be vested upon the COA Commission On Audit.

 

B. DENR has the power to conserve, manage, or develop and make proper use of our country's resources.

 

C. The Congress shall have the authority to provide the standardization of compensation of government officials and employees.

 

D. The Congress by a vote of two thirds shall have the power to declare of state of war.

 

E. The president has the power to rafity treaties and international agreements.

 

7.)

 

A.

B.

 

8.)

 

A. Natural Born is a person that came from both filipino parents and is born in philippine land. Naturalized citizens are foreigners that become a legal citizen in the philippines through legal process.

 

B. No, because you have to be a natural born filipino in order to run for congress here in the philippines.

 

C.No, because according to the Supreme court the PBOC can be procalimed as the successful one here. The proclamation of the PES is declared void ab initio without any legal effects. The HRET did not acquire over the qualification of X as his proclamatio was void even before.

 

9.)

 

A. Yes, filing a case to the president will be taken aside as the president is immune from suit during his term, under the law it is done so in order for him/her to exercise the duties and functions of running the country's affairs free from any hindrance or distractions.

 

B. No, although cases filed during the presidents duty cannot take retroactive effect even after his term.

 

10.)

 

A. Constitutional

B. Constitutional

C. Constitutional

D.Unconstitutional

E.Unconstitutional

 

11.)No, because under the law if investigation must be made under R.A 9165 Drug testing is mandatory and can never be deemed random and suspicionless. 

 

12.) Yes, the state can only be sued when it gives consent. If it clearly implied in the context of the contract then it can be constituted as a consent.

 

13.) Yes, because it was placed upon their possesion and sets the foreigners act as importing the drugs in another place.

 

14.)

 

A. Yes, it will be subject to a judicial review.

 

B.Yes, although he is considered not susceptible to lawsuit or prosecution under a host country's law, although they may still be expelled which in this case what the president did deporting Aristotle as an undesirable alien.

 

15.)

 

A. Yes, although the law is intended to protect women because women are naturally seen as the weaker sex.

 

B. Yes, it is an execise of judicial power to protect whom requested the BPO order.

 

16.)

 

A.

 

B.

 

17.)

 

A. It is temporary upon the time of the presidents term therefore they will be the ones who will assist the president but can be replaced when another president comes along.

 

B. Yes the heads of the executive department must be informed and the president must have their consent in appointing heads of the executive department.

 

18.)

 

19.)

 

A. NO, the state lacked compelling interest to overthrown the clause. Everyone has the fundamental right to freedom of religion. For Amelia to be not deemed liable nor penalizedher religion must need to be recognized by the law as a legit religion.

 

B. Benevolent neutrality means of a notion that the government can exercise this towards religion attemps to combine the ideas of neutrality and accommodationism.

 

20.)

 

C.The supreme court has upheld the constitutionality of random drug testing without suspicion for students who choose to participate in school-sponsored activities.

 

D. All uniformed and non-uniformed personel are subject to annual mandatory drug testing.

 

F. The provision is unconstitutional only without a warrant or issue of probably cause or an oath of affirmation supported by a Judge.

Marie Beth Revilla

2020-12-05

MARIETTA RAEL

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1184

Writing time: 235 minutes

Email: ursomarietta@yahoo.com

Class: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

1. a.) The proposed text is a revision,for it suggest fundamental change and not just a mere correction of detail.

b.) Any amendment to or revision of the Constitution may be proposed by 1.)The Congress with 3/4 votes from its members and 2.) Constitutional Convention 3.)People's Initiative upon a petition of at least 12 per cent of the total number of registered voters.The Congress shall provide for the implementation of the exercise of this right.

 

2. a.) No, Mr. X's non appearance is impermissible.Congress has the inherent powers to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation and are authorized to compel the attendance for not cooperating and obeying the rules of law.

b.) No.Mr. Y's refusal cannot be covered as executive privilege for the reason that it was not a confidential or classified information between the President  and the public officers. Mr Y not answering the question could be considered as an offense of being disobedient to or disrespecful for refusing the right of Congress to information and obstucting the work.

 

3. a.) No,it is unconstitutional Under the law, only the President is vested with calling out of powers, as the Commander in Chief of the Republic.One Executive, One Commander in Chief.It has already been established that there is only one repository of executive powers, and that is the President of the Republic.

b.) No, it is unconstitutional. Under the Constitution, the President can declare martial law provided with the full knowledge and advise from the Council. President cannot just rely on any intelligence information,as it is to protect and secure the state and its citizen.

 

4.)a.) No, the Ombudsman cited the Supreme Courts Decision in Carpio-Morales v Ca.There was already a ruling of the court with the same case given.Doctrine of  Stare Decisis.

b. No.it has already been decided citing the case of Carpio-Morales v CA as the court follows the principles,rules, standards of its prior decisions or decisions of higher tribunals when deciding a case with arguably similar facts.

 

5.) a.No.The state's policy involving the rights of parents in rearing their children is found under Section 12 of Article II of the 1987 Constitution. Curfew ordinances for is in consonance with the Parens Patriae Doctrine. As parents patriae,the State has the inherent right and duty to aid parents in the moral development of their children and assumes supporting role for parents to fulfill their parental obligations.

b.) No,an ordinance providing curfew for minors does not infringe their fundamental rights instead protect them not to be exposed in potential harm especially at night.

 

6.) a. Commission on Audit

      b. Congress

      c. Congress

      d. The Congress, by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses in joint session assembled, voting separately,shall have the sole power to declare the existence of a state of war.

     e. The 1987 Constitution provides that No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless concurred by at least two-thirds vote of all the members of the Senate.

 

7.a. No. Under the law,1987 Constituiton also empowers the President to issue appointments while Congress is not in session.Such appointments are called ad interim appointments, and is permanent in nature and takes effect effect immediately.

b. Yes, as a rule,if the Commission bypasses the official, the president can re appoint the same person.

 

8. a.) Under 1987 Constitution, natural born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act acquire of perfect their Philippine citizenship while naturalized citizen are foreigners who do not have Filipino blood  but can obtain Philippine citizenship through naturalization, which signifies the act of formally adopting a foreigner into the political body of a nation by clothing him or her with the privileges of a Filipino citizen.

b.) Yes,X is qualified to run for congress as long as he did not  acquired the citizenship of another country.Provided that he meets the qualifications for holding such office as required by the 1987 Constitution.

c.Yes,the board of canvassers including the Provincial Election Supervisor shall not proclaim any candidate as winner unless authorized by the Commision and it is the jurisdiction of the HRET to hear the case

 

9.)a. No. Writ of Amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life,liberty and security is violated and threatened with violation by an unlawful act while teporary protection order refers to the protection order issued by the court. Agnes should not be deprived of such serious human rights.

b. No. Under the law, President's immunity from suit shall be applicable only during his tenure.Considering that the events covered the petition took place during his term,but given the fact that he is already a non-sitting President, and the cases filed agains him is criminal in character,therefore he cannot invoke immunity from suit as a defense.

 

10.a. Constitutional as it is the Rules of Court.

b. Uncostitutional, as the law only requires able a filipino citizen, being of age, registered voter and the requirement of being able to read and write.

c. Constitutional as the the President has its inherent powers to designate or appoint with the consent of of the Commision on Appointments

d. Constituttional as it prescribes the qualifications  of The Ombudsman Act of 1989.

e. Unconstitutional. A person must be a bonafide member of such party list befor he can be moninated to any position.

 

11. Yes, the nature of the crime committed by PO1 Andal is bribery. Requiring him for a mandatory  drug test  can be prejudicial question that which must precede the criminal action. Yes, it is indeed a violation of the accused's right to privacy and right  against self incrimination as the accused was arrested not for violation of Comprehensive dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 but was arrested of a case of bribery.

 

12. Yes. State immunity is a principle of  international law that is often relied on states to claim that particular court does not have jurisdiction over it.

 

13. Yes, it can be admitted as an evidence against the five foreigners. As the law provides in Article 14 in Revised Penal Code, penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the Phillipine territory, sepecifically means irregardles of its nationality,age and conditions.therefore, foreigners can be held criminally liable.

 

14.a. No.Under the law, the power to deport aliens is lodged in the President  and vested in the Executive by virtue of his office,

b. No. As it is stated in the law, that the State shall not be bound by the mistakes or errors of its officers or agents in the exercise of their fubnctions therefore Aristotle's claim claiming of diplomatic immunity is inadmissible.

 

15. It is believed  that the State condemns discrimination against women in all its forms.It does not violates the equal protection clause as it requires the equal treatment of men and women under the law.

 

 

MARIETTA RAEL

2020-12-05

Mary Choleene Bautista

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1583

Writing time: 188 minutes

Email: leenebautista98@gmail.com

Class: Consti 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

1.  

a. This is a revision of the 1987 of the Constitution because for it to be an amendment is only when there is a correction in the words of the law.  However, what happened here is there is a revision of the Original Text of the 1987 Constitution, because instead of just having corrections in the words of the law, there is a fundamental change in the interpretation of the law.

 

b.  To revise the 1987 Constitution, there should be a proposed new constitution either by the congress or a constitutional convention or a petition proposed by the people of the Philippines.  The said proposed constitution will then be voted by either two-thirds of the congress or  twelve percent of the total number of registered voters in the country.

 

 

2. 

a.  No, the non appearance of Mr. X is not permissible.  His refusal to appear will render him compelled under the pain of the legislative contempt.  The legislative contempt is used to discipline officials that disrespect proceedings.

 

b.  Yes, Mr. Y's refusal to answer based on executive privilege is valid.  Executive privilege is the power of the president or other high-leved executive officers in the executive branch to refuse to disclose information from the Congress, the courts and the public.

 

Mr. Y has the right to not disclose confindetial conversations that had happened during a closed-door cabinet meeting.  This privilege is fundemental to the executive branch's operation is making policies or decisions, this way the officers had the freedom to give out alternative ideas without fearing the disagreement from the public.  This priviledge is also rooted in the separation of powers under the Constitution.  Therefore, Mr. Y's refusal to diclose any information to the congress based on executive privilege is valid.

 

 

3.

a.  Yes the Component 1 of the CNSS is contitutional.  Being the Comander-in-Chief, the president has the power to call out the armed forced, suspending the writ of hebeas corpus and declaring martial law.  With this being said, the President has the power to call out the armed forces of the Philippines for more effective and immediate response during a state of emergency.

 

b.  The component 2 of the CNSS is consitutional.  The president also has the power to declare martial law in a preemptive action and without waiting for the recommendation of the Sevretary of National Defences and AFP.  It is one of the extraordinary powers that is granted upon the president and he may use it during state of emergency.

 

 

4.  

a.

 

 

5.  

a.

 

 

6.

a.  The Commission on Audit (COA) had the authority to keep the general accounts of the Government and for such provided by law, preserve the vouchers and other supporting documents pertaining thereto.

 

b.  The Congress are the one who has the power to allow small-scale utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizens, as well as coopertive fish farming, with priority to subsistence fishermen and fishworkers in rivers, lakes, bays, and lagoons.

 

c.  The Congress is also the one who is authorized to provide for the standardization of compensation of government officials and employees.

 

d.  The House of Representatives and the Senate, both have the sole power to declare the existence of state of war.

 

e.  The president has the power to ratify treaties and international agreements.

 

7.  

a.  No, Atty. B's contention is not correct.  The president has the power to appoint ay official and such appoint is effective until the Commission on Appointments reject it.  The appointment does not need the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments, however, the latter may disapprove of such appointment.

 

b.  No, if A's appointment has been rejected by the Commission on Appointments, he can no longer be reappointed by the president for the reason that, his appointment was already rejected and if he so, is again reappointed by the president, such appointment will still go over the Commission on Appointment which would render it uncessesary.

 

 

8.

a.  Natural-born citizens, under the 1987 Constitution, are those who have acquired such citizenship by birth and did not perform any act to acquire the same.  Naturalized citizen, on the other hand, are those aliens who have undergone acts to acquire and perfect the Philippine citizenship.

 

b. Yes, X is disqualified to run for Congress.  X is a naturalized citizen of the Philippines, for you to be qualified to run for the Congress, you must be a natural born Filipino of the Philippines.  Being X is not a natural born and only a naturalized citizen, then he is not qualified to run for Congress because being a natural born filipino is one of the requirement for your to run for the Congress.

 

c. The COMELEC has jurisdiction over the said case.  The jurisdiction of the COMELEC covers any relating to the elections, and qualifications of the elective officials.  Therefore, X is wrong for proclaiming that COMELEC has no jurisdiction over the case.

 

 

9.

a.  Yes, the CA was correct.  Being that the writ of amparo is permanent then the issuance of the temporary protection order, which is temporary, render unecessary.  Both has the same qualities and is to protect the person of Agnes.  Therefore, granted a TPO after the writ of amparo has been given, is unecessary.

 

b.  Yes, because according to our Constitution, the president will not be liable for whatever act that he does using his presidential power to the extent of his term.  Since he is not liable during his term, he will also be not liable after ne finish his term being that he was immune before.

 

 

10.

a. Constitutional

b. Constitutional

c. Constitutional

d. Unconstitutional

e. Unconstitutional

 

 

11.  Yes, his contentions are correct.  His acts did not perceive as using drug and thus, the mandatory drug test under R.A. NO. 9165 is a violation of his right to privacy and right against self-incrimination.  For him to go through the mandatory drug test, it must be seen that he was using drugs or that the people were speculating that he is.  However, in this case, he was not speculated to be using drugs, his crime was only taking bribes from apprehended motorsist who have violated traffic rules.  Thus, using the urine test as evidence that P01 Adrian had used drugs is a violation of his right and right against self-incrimination.

 

 

12.  Yes, the Republic's motion should be granted.  Our Constitution had provided that the state cannot be sued without its consent.  In this case, Annika sued the Republic of the Philippines by its name, but is represented by the Director of the Bureau of Plant Industry, which means she had sued the state.  However, the State had not given any implied or express waiver of being sued by Annika.  Therefore, the Republic invoking state immunity is correct and its motion for the dismissal of the case should be granted.

 

 

13.  Yes, it can be used as evidence against the five foreightners for the charge of illegal possession of drugs in violation of the Comprehensice Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.  The foreigners had undergone the mandatory search on airports.  

 

 

14. 

a.  

 

 

15.  The first ground raised by Conrado is not correct.  it has always been percieved that men are stronger than the women and so the law making body had made such law with the intention to protect those women who have been maltreated by their husbands. The SC agrees that based on statistics, woman and children are the usual and most likely victims of violence.  Therefore, such law did not violate the equal protection clause by favoring the women over men.

 

His second ground is also not valid.  The act of the Punong Barangay to execute a BPO to protect a women or children from violence against man is  purely executive in nature.  Such BPO orders the perpetrator to stop causing physical harm to the woman or child and to stop threatening to cause violance against the woman and child.  The punong Barangay is only acting to comply with is duty to "maintain public order in the barangay."  Therefore, Conrado's contention regarding the BPO as a judicial power is invalid.

 

 

16.  

a.  The Philippine courts has jurisdiction over another sovereign State, including its warship and naval officials if such crime had been committed within the territory of the Philippines.  

 

b.  

 

 

17. 

a. The appointments are considered as temporary and regular.  The president has the power to appoint any official even during when the Congress is not in session.  However, such appointment will only be effective until the Commission of Appointments rejects it or the next adjourment of the Congress.

 

b.  No, the claim of VAMP is not correct.  There is no need for the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments on the appointments that the president have made, however, they have the authority to disapprove with such appointment if the dont agree with the same.

 

 

18. 

 

 

19. 

a.  No, Amelia is not administratively liable.  Amelia is part of a religious sect that allows members of the congregation who have been abandoned by their respective spouses to enter marital relations under a "Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness."  Our Constitution had gave us the Freedom of religion, and as the act that  Amelia had done was in accordance with her religion, then she has the right to execise the same.

 

b.  the concept of benevolent neutrality is like to ensure that our government does not treat believers or unbelievers as outsiders.  The government respects the religion so long as they are not contrary to law.

 

 

20.  

 

 

Mary Choleene Bautista

2020-12-05

Meg Dianne Paler

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1678

Writing time: 230 minutes

Email: megdianne@yahoo.com

Class: Constitution 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

PALER, Meg Dianne C. 

Constitution 1

 

1. A. In the case at bar, the proposal text to change in the provision of the 1987 Constitution is a revision. 

 

Under the law, Article 17 states that there are two ways to change our Constitution. 

1. Amendment - it is when you only change minor / certain or a little part of the Consitution. It only affect the specific provision being amended. 

2. Revision - when you overhaul the provision 

 

Hence, in the case given, since the proposal is to change or shift from Republican state into Socialist state, which involves an overhaul on the provision of the Constitution. revision affects the several provisions of the Constitution. 

 

This is related to the Lambino case where Lambino used the people's initiative to change our constitution by gathering millions of signatures, however when the Supreme Court checked their proposal, it is not for the purpose of amending the Constitution but otherwise it is a revision, so the mode of amending the Constitution through people's initiative is not applicable. 

 

1. B. The process to revise the 1987 Constitution is as follows: 

 

a. 3/4 vote of all members of the Congress - all members Congress must vote and get 3/4 majority votes 

b. Constitutional Convention - the Congress to constitute an assembly and propose for revision which can be done by majority vote of all the members of the Congress.

 

2.  A No, X's non -apperaence is not permissable since he is a governemtn official and hence obliged to be present as a form of judicial courtesy. 

 

2. B Yes, Y's refusal to answer is absed on executive previlige provided by our constitution. 

 

3. A Yes, its constitutional, the law provides that the President can authorize the LGUs as reinforcement as purpose for the general good of the country during state of emergency.  

 

3. B Yes, its constitutional, the law provides that the President can declare martial law as his right. 

 

 

4. A. 

4. B 

 

 

5. A. No, the city ordinance does not violate the primary right and duty of the parents to rear their children. Infact, the city is even helping the parents and the minors to by protecting them from harm, refrain from possible crimes and helping the minros realize the improtance of safty during wee hours. the ordinance is very specific, minors which means parental guidance is needed and wee hours 10Pm until 5AM is a time to rest alraedy so they should be staying home. 

 

5. B No, the ordinance does not infringe the fundamental rights of the minors as the city is only looking for the best interest of the city to be crime free. Moreover the ordinance also serves as protection to the minors not to get involved in crimes and not to be exposed or influenced to criminal acts. 

 

 

6. A  COA

6. B BFAR

6.C CSC 

6.D President

6.E Ambassadors 

 

7. A Atty B's contention is correct. Under the Article 9, C of the COnstitution that the appointment of the Chairman and the Commmissins  by the Pesident with the consent of the Commission of Appointment. In the case of A, his appointment is ad interim as Congress was in recess, however it still allows the appointee to preform the functions and powers of the position until rejected by the CA or until the next Congress adjournment. 

 

7. B In the case where the Commission on Appointment is by-passed the confirmation of A, the President can once again make an appointment to be confirmed by the Commission on Appointments. 

 

8.A Under the law, Art 4, Natural born is when a citizen of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any  act to acquire citizenship. On the other hand, naturalized citizen is a foreign natinals who became filipino citizensin accordance to the law like making an oath of allegiance to the Philippines. 

 

8.B Yes, X is qualified to run for Congress. As per 1987 COnstitution, Art 4, naturalized citizen is considered citizen of the Philippines and as per COMELEC resolution, shall enjoy civil and political rights under Philippine law and condition: shall meet the qualifications of the public office as required by law and sowrn renunciation of any foreign citizenship before an authorized public officer. 

 

9.  A No, the Ca was not correct. the writ of amparo was defective as it was issued when Agnes was under appeal of force or intimidation and must be treated null and void. 

 

9. B No, the President's immunity from suit is only during his tenure. once he is ousted from his office, he no longer enjoys the immunity. 

 

10. A. Unconstitutional. Qualifications are: natural born citizen of Phils., registered voter, able to read and write and atleast 40 years old and must be a resident of 10 years in the Philippines before the election. 

 

 

10. B Unconstitutional. The qualifications for aspiring to become public officials does not include the candidate to be college degree holders. Even the highest position of the President only requires the following qualifications under Art 7, Sec 2: natural born citizen of Phils., registered voter, able to read and write and atleast 40 years old and must be a resident of 10 years in the Philippines before the election. 

 

10. C Unconstitutional. There is no case where the President can appoint in a temporary of acting capacity under the our law, Art 9, Sec 2. 

 

10. D Unconstitutional. Under the law, the Ombudsman Deputy of a lawyer must have 10 years or more engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines, 

 

10. Nomination must be born from a bonafide member of the party list, 

 

 

11. Yes, PO1 Adrian's contention is correct that it is a violation of his right to privacy and agaisnt self-incrimination. Such positive result of the drug test should not be used or inadmissable against him. 

 

The entrapment conducted to him is for the purpose of  taking bribes and not for the purpose of drug abuse. 

 

 

12. Yes, it should be granted. Under Art 16, Sec3 , the State may not be sued without its consent and thus enjoy the state immunity.  

 

Just like in the Vinuya case, where the "comfort women" as victims of Japanese soldiers are trying to make Japan liable. 

 

Private individuals are not allowed to sue a state. It should be state against state. 

 

13. No, the shabu found inside te boxes is inadmissable as evidence against the five foreigners for illegal possession of drugs in violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Act 2002 because, there is no correct protocol followed by the examiner. 

 

Although the search is not illegal as they are in the aiport, it is a warrantless search but then examiner must follow a procedure. One is to call the attention if who owns the bag that contains the suspected boxes with drugs, second, the examiner must let the owner of the bag open the bags to proceed with proper optical inspection. 

 

In the case at bar, it was the examiner who did all the necessary steps and just let the foreigners sign the labels with their names. 

 

 

14. A. The President shall have the power to deport an undesirable alien subject to the requirements of due process. In the case at bar, the criminal proceedings have not commenced. 

 

14. B Aristotle's claim of diplomatic immunity is not proper. ADB since created by a treaty making it immune from suit. An official diplomat is immune from suit as long as they are serving under the scope of their work. In his case, utterring defamatory words causing grave oral defamation is not part of his function, so he can be sued. 

 

 

15. A. The VAWC does not violate equal protection because the VAWC was craeted due to rising violence against women showing that women and children are the usual and most likely the victoms of violence. Unlike men, they have the strength to defend themselves upon violence. According to the Supreme Court, The VAWC is a protection for women and children from violence and does not violate the protection clause.  

 

15. The BPO is a protection order issued by the Barangay Captain or in his absence by the Kagawad to order the husband to desist of abusing or being violent agaisnt his family. Barangay as the basic unit of our government is authorized to do issue BPO. 

 

16. A No, the Philippine courts can excercise jurisdiction over a foreign vessel  in transit  as long as it brings disastrous effects in our territory. Same goes to the naval officials onboard the warship. In the case at bar, the warship have damaged the coral reefs our marine resources, hence the naval official will be liable for the damages. This is Territorial issue under Article 1 of our Constitution. 

 

16. B US could still be bound by the UN CLOS even it has not signed the treaty. The relationship between countries are binded by International laws and treaties which cannot be compromised. 

 

17. DOT - Regular and temporary position 

     CSC - Regular and temporary position 

      CHR - Regular and temporary position 

      Ambassador - Regular and temporary position 

 

All are appointed regular or during the seesion of Congress and all are in temporary position as the president can change. 

 

18. Yes, Patricio is correct contending that plea bargaining is a procedural in nature and is a substantive issue which the making power is only the Supreme COurt under our Constituion, Art 5, Sec 5. Thus the Congress has no authority to repeal, alter, supplement rules concerning pleading, practice and procedure. 

 

19. A. No, Amelia is not adminsitratively liable because her religion or faith allows her to such marital arrangement and under the law, we are free to excercise our religion. Its in our Constituion Article 2, Sec 6. 

 

19. B "benevolent neutrality." is a theory believing that the government must allow the practice or excercise of religion without any hindrance. 

 

20. No, it is not  unconstitutional. The result of the drug test does not necessarily treat the students and employees as criminals.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meg Dianne Paler

2020-12-05

Nicefel Villomo

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1320

Writing time: 235 minutes

Email: Nicefelvillomo@yahoo.com

Class: Constitutional I

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

1. A. Revision- The proposed text changed the Philippines from a republican state to a socialist state and that sovereignty resides in the party instead of the people.

     

    B.  Any amendment to,or revision of, this Constitution may be proposed by (1) The Congress, upon the vote of three-fourths of all its members. And by ratification where the revision of the constitution shall be valid when ratified by majority of the votes cast in plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the approval of such amendment or revison. (Section 1,3 and 4, Articl17)

 

2. A. No. Jurisprudence provides that in the exercise of  its legislative power, the Senate of the Philippines through its various Senate Committees, can conduct inquiries or investigations in aid of legislation which call for, interalia, the attendance of the officials and employees of the executive department. 

    In this case Mr. X argued that only the Senate and not it's committee has the power to compel attendance to legislative inquiries. Such argument does not hold water.

 

    B.  No. Jurisprudence provides that considering the highly exceptional nature of executive privilege, it is essential to limit to the president the power to invoke the privilege. The President may authorize the executive secretary to invoke the privilege on her behalf, in which case the Executive Secretary must state that the authority is  "by order of the President" which means that he personally consulted with her. The privilege being an extraordinary power, it must be wielded only by the highest official in the executive hierachy.

    In this case, Mr Y is simply the Secretary of Energy. He is not allowed to invoke executive privilege.

 

3. A. No. only the President is authorized to exercise the calling out of powers under Article VII Section 18 of the Constitution. He is the only one who has the full discretion to call the military when in his judgement it is necessary to do so in order to prevent or supress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. (Kaluyan v. Tan G.R. No. 197298, July 3,2012)

 

    B. Yes. The President's power to declare martial law is not subject to any condition except for the two (2) requirements of the actual invasion or rebellion and that public safetyrequires it. It does not need the recommendation of the Defense Secretary and the AFP. (Lagman v. Medialdea, G.R. no. 231658, July 4, 2017)

 

4. A.  Yes. the ombudsman erred in its ruling. Although the SC in Carpio-Morales v. CA, G.R. Nos. 217126-27, November 10,2015, has abandoned the condonation doctrine, the same however, is prospective in effect. Hence, a public official can benefit from this doctrine if relected to office before November 10,2015 by the same body politic electing the person.

 

  B. No. The condonation doctrine would not apply to appointive officials, since as to them, there is no sovereign will disenfranchise. (Carpio-Morales v. CA, G.R. No. 2126-27, November 10, 2015, citng Civil Service Commision v. Sojor, 577 Phil 52, 72 [2008])

 

5. A. No. Under the law it is the power of the state to act as guardian for those who are unable to care for themselves, such as children, or disabled individuals. Curfew Ordinances are restrictions designed to aid parents in their role of promoting their child,s well being.

   

     B. No. it does not infringe any minors fundamnetal rights. Under the law it is not absolute. The restrictions set by the Curfew Ordinances that apply solely likewise constitutionally permissible. In this relation, the Court recognizes that minors so possess and enjoy constitutional rights, but the exercise of this rights is not co-extensive as those adults.

 

6. A. Commission on Audit

    B.The Congress

    C.The Congress

    D. The Congress

    E. The President

 

7. A. No. Atty. B' contention is incorrect. An ad interim appoinment is a pemanent appointment because it takes effect immediately and can no longer withdrawn by the President once the appointee has qualified into office.

 

    B. Yes. Subsequently renewals by the President of ad interim appointment of comissioners of the COMELEC do not violate the constitutional provision prescribing their reappointment (Section 1 (2), Article IX-C) because the Commission on Appointment did not act on the said appointments after submission by the President.

 

8. A. Under the constitution, Natural born are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without havint to perform any act to acquire or perfect their philippines citizenship. While Naturalized citizen are foreigners that haven been adopted into the political body of a nation by clothing him or her with the privileges of a citizen.

 

   B. No. Under the law, a Member of the Representatives should be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines.

 

    C. No. According to the SC Provincial Board of Canvasser (PBOC) can proclaim the winner, So here, the proclamation of X  by the Provincial Election Supervisor  (PES) can be said to be void ab initio, thus, without any legal effect. The House of the Representative Electoral Tribunal  (HRET) did not acquire jurisdiction over X's qualification as his proclamation is void from the outset.

 

9. A.

    B. 

 

10. A.Constitutional 

      B. Unconstitutional

      C. Constitutional 

      D. Constitutional

      E.Constitutional

 

11.  Based on the case provided PO1 Adrian's contention is not correct. Under the Law if the investigation must be made under R.A 9165 Drug testing is mandatory and can never be deemed random and suspicionless.

 

12.  The Republic's motion can be granted since the state can only be sued when their is a consent,provided that is it clearly implied in the context of the contract then it can be constituted as a consent.

 

13. Yes. Since it was placed upon their possession and sets the foreigners act an importing the drugs in another place.

 

14. A. Yes. It will subject to a judicial review.

   

       B. Yes. Althougnhe is considered not susceptible to lawsuit or prosecution under a host counrty's law, they may still be expelled. Wherein this case the Pesident deported aristotle as undesirable alien.

 

15.  A. Yes. Under the law the wife has the right to protect herself as given in the Violence Against Women (VAWC) wherein the right of a woman can be raised.

       

        B. Yes. It is in the exercise of the Barangay Chairman to issue the Barangay  Protection Order (BPO) since they have the Authority to release it.

 

16.

 

17. A. It will  be temporary upon the time the Pesident's term. Thus they will be the ones who will assist the president but can be replaced when another president is being elected.

     

B.Yes. The headd of the department must be informed and the Presidet must have their consent in appointing the ne elected head of the exeutive department.

 

18. Yes. Patricio is correct. Based ont he case provided  there must be a due process and there must be a burden of proof.

 

19.  A.  No. given the state lacked compelling state interest to overthrow the freedom clause. Thus, in this particular case and under these distinct circumstances, Amelia cannot be penalized as she has made out a case for exemption from the law based on her fundamental right to freedm of religion. The Court recognizes that the state interest must be upheld in order that freedoms, including religious freedom may be enjoyed.

 

      B.  Benevolent neutrality combines neutrality and accomodationaism. From time to time, scholars and others attempt to combine one or another approach. For example, the notion that the government can exercise "benevolent neutrality" towars religion attempts to combine the ideas of neutrality and accomodation.

 

20.  Under the law it is constitutional since the provision does not intend to criminally prosecute those found positive for illegal drugs but to give them a chance to undergo rehabilitation. The court also said that the privacy and dignity of the employees would not compromise during the drug test, as trained professionals in access-controlled laboratories monitored by the Department of Health to prevent tampering will handle this.

Nicefel Villomo

2020-12-05

Raul Ronnel Barbosa

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1053

Writing time: 203 minutes

Email: barbosaraul21@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Basta

1.

   a.) This is a revision. Although there is only one provision that will be changed; jurisprudence says that: when the change will overhaul the entire system of government, it is not anymore an ammendment but a revision. In this case, one provision will be changed but the net effect of that change will overhaul the entire system of governance. Therefore, it is a revision.

b.) The revision has to be proposed by congress through voting or a constitutional convention.

 

2. 

  a.) No. Congress has the power to put a person in contempt.

  b.) Yes. Commissions does not have contempt power.

 

3. 

  a.) Yes. As long as there is a state of emergency the President has the power mobalize military personel and delegate LGUs.  

  b.) Inorder for the President to declare martial law there has to be a well founded belief that their imminent danger. Preemptively declaring martial law without well founded evidence is abuse of power.

4.)

  a.) No. According to recent jurisprudence, the court has done away with the doctrine of condonation. Following the precedent stated above, the Ombudsman did not err in dismissing Mayor X's defense. 

  b.) No. Y is a colloteral of X's re-election. Recent jurisprudence says that the doctrine of condonation is no more. Therefore, Y cannot validly raise it as a defense.

5. 

  a.) No. Jurisprudence says that curfew ordinances are there to help parents in protecting their children. 

  b.) No. Right to travel may be impaired if national security, public safety, or public health. Cities can enact curfew ordinances given that they have reasonable grounds. City Z gave reasonable grounds for the children's impairment of their right to travel given the rise of criminality.

6.

  a.) Executive

  b.) Executive, Legislative

  c.) Legislative 

  d.) Legislative

  e.) Senate 

7.) 

   a.) Yes. The law is clear that no member of the COMELEC be appointed temorarily.

   b.) It is provided in the constitution that there can be no reappointment of the chairman.

8.) 

   a.) Natural born citizens are those who are citizens from birth without having to perform acts to acquire citizenship. Naturalized citizens are those who have to do certain acts, provided by law, inorder to acquire citizenship

   b.) It is provided in the constitution that: no person shall be a senator or congressman if he/she is not a natural-born citizen. X is naturalized not natural-born. Hence, X is not qualified.

   c.) The COMELEC has the jurisdiction to decide cases relating to elections. 

9.)

    a.) No. Temporary protection order is an interim relief if the writ of amparo has not been issued yet. The writ has to be issued regardless of a temporary protection order. 

    b.) The President's immunity from suit exists during his term in office. To remove that immunity from him, he has to be have been impeached, dead, disabled or resigned. Given the President Amayo is no longer in office, his immunity will not extend after his term.

10. 

    a.) The supreme court has that authority. It's unconstitutional.

    b.) Constitutional. Congress has the power to provide qualifications. 

    c.) Constitutional

    d.) Unconstitutional. The Ombudsman must have 10 years experience in practicing law. 

    e.) Consititutional

11. Yes. No personal shall be a witness against himself. He was also arrested for suspected bribary not illegal drugs.  

12. No. States are immnune from suit unless the state expressly or impliedly gave its consent.

13. Yes. Under the law, penal laws apply to all of those who are inside the country. Customs are required to do warrantless searches. The foreigners were caught with Shabu, a dangerous drug prohibited in the country and is penalized by the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. Therefore, they can be charged in violation of Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.

14. 

    a.) The power to deport is vested in the President. Therefore, the court has no jurisdiction over it. 

    b.) No. In general diplomats are immune from suit. The exception is that if that foreign agent committed acts not within his mandated duties, then he can be sued. In the instant case, Aristotle's job is not to hurl defamatory statements at his coworker. Therefore, his claim is improper. 

15. 

   a.) It does not violate equal protection clause because there is reasonable differentiation. In general it is men who beat women and therfore women must be protected. 

   b.) Invalid. Judicial power entails that BPO has the power to judge wheather or not a person is guilty. BPO is not judicial power but rather valid Police Power. 

16.

      a.) Yes. In general states cannot be sued if the state did not give its consent. 

      b.) Valid. With the US a non signatory to UN CLOS, it is not bound by its provisions

17.

    a.) CHR and CSC chairmans shall enjoy 7 years in office. The appointments under the prisdent's wing are regular.

    b.) VAMP is incorrect insofar as the appointment CHR and the CSC needs consent from the commission on appointments. The other appointments are executive bodies directly under the president.  

18. Yes. Jurisprudence says that: the Supreme Court holds exclusive power to promulgate rules and procudure in its proceedings. Plea bargaining is procedural in nature. Therefore, the Supreme Court should hold that procedural power not Congress. 

19.

   a.) No. Jurisprudence says that if  that act was will within her religion's practices then she should not be liable for immoral conduct. Religious freedom is an indespensable right.

   b.) Benevolant neutrality is the accomodation of religion may be allowed so that individuals or institutions can practice their religion without hindrance.

20. 

    a.) paragraph c is consitututional because it is a valid exercise of police power and there is a reasonable classification. Namely, students from secondary and tertiary shcools are the most likely group to be in posession of drugs.

   b.) Again it is consitutional because there is valid exercise of police power and no volation of the equal protection clause. 

  c.) Unconstitutional because why not test everyone whose been charged with a crime? there is a violation in the equal protection clause, insofar as only persons charged with 6 years are being tested.

Raul Ronnel Barbosa

2020-12-05

Raymund Morgia

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1266

Writing time: 268 minutes

Email: morgiaraymund@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Ric Bastasa

1.     A. 

            Yes, its is only an amendment because these is no major changes what will result to an overhaul of the Constitution.

 

        B.

            A process to revise the constitution is trhough proposal and Ratification. Proposal shall have two ways one is the vote of 3/4 of all members of the congress, second is Constitutional convention. 

 

2.    A.

                No, it is not permissible and he can be signed for contemp.

        B.

                No, for under the constitution and according to jurisprudence the legislative branch has the power to inquire into the operations of government.

3.   

 

A.

        Yes, component 1 of the CNSS is constitutional because under our 1987 Constitution it is the mandate and duty of the president to be the Commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines in times of state emergency and war. And also has the power of ordinance which grants the president to give executive issueances and one of those is the Adminitrative order that will realate to particular aspects of governmental operations in pursuant to his duties.

 

  B.

        Yes, component 2 of the CNSS is constitutional because as under our 1987 constitution the president takes control of the AFP for he is the commander-in-chief and it is right to take action without waiting for the recommendation of the Secretary of National defense because as this times of state emergency and time of the essence to eradicate the enemies of the state the state must react as fast as possible thus the president must make a decision on what information he has at the time and with or without the recommendation of the Secretary Of National Defense. Also the Secretary of Defense if under the office of the president so he has no power to prevent the President he has only the power to advice and help the president in making these decisions.

 

 

 

4.

    

A.

        No, the Ombudsman didnt err in not giving credence to the defense of condonation because under the recent jurisprudence the Supreme Court abandons the docrtine of condonation because it is and it may be subjected to adbuse by government officials.

 

B.

 

        No, Y cant also invoke the doctrine of condonation even if it os not abandoned because under the doctrine of condonation a public official that had commited a crime will be absolved by his re-election by the people of the philippines, Y cant invoke the doctrine of condonation because he is not an elected official, he is merely an appointed one, thus he cant avail the doctrine of condonation even if it was not abandoned by the Supreme Court. 

 

 

 

5. 

 

A.

       No, they are wrong because according to jurisprudence the right to impose cerfews is primarily with the parent and not with the state.

 

 

B.

        No, because it is also the duty of the state as its parens patriae to protect the children.  

 

 

6.

 

A. Commission on Audit

 

B. The Congress

 

C. The Congress

 

D.   The Congress

 

E.  The Senate

 

 

7.

 

A.  

        Yes, Atty, B is correct as it is found under Article IX-C of our 1987 Constitution that in no case shall any member be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting capacity.

 

B.

        Yes, under our Constitution he/she can stil be re appointed.

 

 

8.

 

A.

        A natural-born citizen is a citizen of the Philippines by birth without having to perform any act to acquire their citizenship while naturalized citizen is a foreigner who came to the philippines and through judicial act became a naturalized filipino citizen.    

 

B.

        No, X is not qualified to run for congress because under the 1987 Constitution, no person shall be a member of the House of Representatives unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines which X is not, thus he is not legible to run for Congress.

 

C.

        Yes, because under the 1987 Constitution all contest relating to the election, return, and qualifications of their respective member shall only be judged by the House of Representative Electoral Tribunal, thus the COMELEC doent have the jurisdiction over the matter.

 

 

9.

 

A.

    No, because at the time of the petition, Amoyo is no longer the President of the Philippines thus he/she doesnt have the immunity from suit anymore.

 

B.

        No, the immunity from suit of the President will only last during his tenure as the President and will cease as soon as he is no longer the president, if the petition was made during his/her tenure as President of the Philippines, Pres. Amoyo cant be sued. 

        

 

10.

 

A. Unconstitutional

B. Unconstitutional

C. Unconstitutional

D. Unconstitutional

E. Unconstitutional

 

11.

     No, because the mandatory drug test is provided by law and must be observed and it doesnt violate his rights to privacy and self-incrimination because the mandatory drug test is part of the protocol when he was apprehended due to his misconduct.

 

12.

        Yes, the motion must be granted. for the state is immune from suit without its consent. And as a jus cogens ordinary people cant directly sue a state, it must be sued by another state. Thus Annika cant sue the Republic of the Philippines.

 

13.

        Yes, the shabu found inside the bags of the foreigners can be admitted as evidence for it was lawfully acquired by the authorities through the port search which by law doesnt need a search warrant to search luggage of the passengers entering a post of any kind, may it be an airport, seaport or a landport. Thus the shabu will be an admissible evidence.

 

14.

        No, under the law the power of the president to deport an undesirable alien is in the full discretion of the of the Chief Executive which is the president and his action is final ang executory, thus it doent need a judicial review.

 

15.

     With regards to the equal protection clause in one case, according to jurisprudence husbands dont need to be protected for they can protect their own, it is the women and children who needs protection the most for they dont have the capacity to defend themselves, thus Conrado cant invoke the violation of the equal protection clause. with regards to the authority of the barangay chairman Conrado is right for they dont have a judicial power to issue that order.

 

16.

         The Philippines can made the US Government for they are negligent and due to this negligent damage the coral reefs of Palawan. Even if it is not a signatory to the UNCLOS it will still be liable for damages solely because of its negligence.

 

17.

 

A.

        The appointments is still temporary and is an interim appointee and will be determine as soon as the conformation of the Commission on Appoinments will arrive.

 

B.

        Yes, VAMP is correct because under the 1987 Constitution the president shall have the power to make appointments during the recess of the Congress, whether voluntary or compulsory, but such appointments shall be effective only until after disapproval by the Commission on Appointments or until the next adjournment of the Congress.

        

 

18.

        Yes, he is correct in one case, according to jurisprudednce that the SC should be allowed and have the authority to allow offenders for plea bargaining.

 

19.

        Yes, she can still be held administratively liable for there is a doctrine of separation of church and state, that the action may be allowed by your sect. but in the eyes of the law you still have commited a crime or an offense.

        The concept of benevolent neutrality  allows accomodation of religion under certain circumstances.

 

20.

    Yes, it is unconstitutional according to jurisprudence sec. 36 was deemed unconstitutional because of being overbreadth and overextends its scope.     

Raymund Morgia

2020-12-05

Vanessa Mawile

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 1296

Writing time: 228 minutes

Email: vanessamawile04@gmail.com

Class: Constitutional Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric S. Bastasa

1. a. This is a revision to the constitution. This is so because it alters the basic principle involved. This action affects several provisions in the constitution.

b. The 1987 constitution can be revised by the Congress upon vote of 3/4 of all its members or by calling for a constitutional convention.

 

2.a. No, it is not. The law provides that inquiries may be done by senate or by its committee.

b. Yes, Mr. Y's refusal to answer based on executive privilege  is valid. Under the law, discussions in a closed-door cabinet meetings by a senior official of an executive department is entiled to executive privilege. In the case at bar, Mr. Y can envoke it having Energy as under executive department.

 

3.a. Yes, it is. The constitution provides for the emergency power of the president.

   b. Yes, it is. To declare a martial law is one of the powers of the president if he finds it needed.

4.a.Yes.

   b. Yes.

 

5. a. No, it does not. Our constitution provides that the duty of the parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiencyshall reveive the support of the government. While the preants have the primary role of rearing his children it should be noted that if actions concerning the child have a realtion to the public welfare or the child's well-being, the state may act to promote such interests. This interest can override the parents' control to their children.

b. To some extent, yes it does. But, it is ruled in SPARK case that these are justified by the possible harm that might be brought by some ofminor's actions, especially during the night. 

 

6. a. The Commission on Audit.

b. The DENR or Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

c. The DBM or Department of Budget and Management.

d. The Congress shall have the sole power to declare existence of war.

e. The President.

 

7. a. Yes. The law is very clear that the President shall appoint the commissioners with the consent of Commission on Appointment and there shall be no temporary or acting capacity. Thus, Atty. B's contention is correct.

b.Yes, he can still be appointed by the President because reappointment is not allowed only if the officer already assumed office. However if it reaches three times, the by-pass, he cannot be reappointed anymore.

 

8. a. A natural born citizen according to the 1987 Constitution is a citizen of the Philippines from birth, who is born before January 1973, of Filipino mothers, and who elects during election upon reaching the age of majority. Whereas, a naturalized citizen is a citizen in accordance with the law. One has to apply for citizenship to be naturalized.

b. No, he is not qualified. Under the law, no person shall be a member of the House of Representatives unless he is a natural-born citizen. In this case, X is a naturalized citizen, not a natural-born citizen. Therefore, he cannot run for the said position.

c. No, it did not. It is the duty of the HRET and COMELEC to solve such issues. 

 

9.  a.Yes, the CA is correct. Upon filing a writ of amparo, certain relief are granted by the court. one of the reliefs is temprary protection order. 

b. No. Under the law, the President has immunity against any leagl proceedings and they cannot be sued in any court during their term of office.The law is very clear "during their term of office" which means that if the term of office has already ended, then he can be sued. In the case at bar, even if the event happened during his tenure it does not qualify as a part of the immunity for it is not stated in the law. 

10. a. No, it is not constitutional. The law provides for definite and differing age and years being a member of Philippine Bar. Like judges in first level, it need not be 8 years being a member but only 5 years.

    b. This is not constitutional. The law does not say that a candidate has to be a college graduate, it only says "able to read and write."

     c.No, this is not constitutional. Under the law, the president shall appoint commisioners with the consent of commission on appointment but it is no way that a president  may designate a commissioner in an acting or temporary capacity.

    d. This is not constitutional. The law provides that in order to be appointed as a deputy ombudsman you have to be 10 years of a judge.

e. This is not constitutional because in order to be nominated you a have to be a registered member of the party.

11. No, he is not correct. The maxim "dura lex sed ex" shall apply. In this case, the drug testing is mandatory and given that it is, it shall be followed. The law maybe hard but its is the law.

12. No, it should not be granted. Under the law the doctrine of state immunity can only be applied to governmental acts and cannot be extended to commercial, private, and propriety acts. In the case at bench, the act involved is not a governmental acts. 

13. Yes, the shabu can be admitted as evidence. The law provides for valid warrantless searches i.e.,  customs searches , moving vehicles, stop and frisk, and plain view. In the case at bar, the event happened at NAIA which falls under the valid warrantless searches specifically customs searches.

14. a. Yes, it can be. Judicial review in which executive or legislative are subject to review by the judicial department. It is to check whether they exceed their authority or not. In this case, the president is on executive branch therefore it could be subect for review.

15. a. Conrado has a point in raising the issue but the women are seen as the weaker sex thus the protection. Also, there might be no laws protecting men like that of VAWC but there are laws which he can used like articles 19 and 20 of the civil code. Article 19, every person must act with justice, give everyone his due and observe honsety and good faith. Articel 20 state that, every person who contrary to law causes damge to another shall indemnify that person. Thus, his contention is not valid.

b. Under the law, the barangay captains are given the authority to solve cases that they can.  Therefore, his contention has no merit.

16. a. Their defense is valid. Under the law, warships have complete immunity from suits of any state other than their own state.

b. It is not valid since there is an international law governing it; that warships have complete immunity.

17. a. The appointment is a temporary appointment, it having no consent from the commission on appointment.

b. Yes, their claim is correct. The law provides that thethe president shall appoint commissioners with the consent of the commission on appointment. The law is very clear that the consent from the commission on appointment is necessary.

18. Yes, he is correct. Under the law, the constituion is seen as the supreme law and paramount law. If a law conflicts with the constitution, the constituion must remain supreme. Thus, it shall be followed and not the special law.

19. a.No, she is not. the constituio provides for freedom of religion and her, living with a married man, does not affect her work.

b. Benevolent neutrality refers to one's freedom to believe in any High Being not subject to judicial or legislative inquiry.

20. The assailed provisions are constitutional. The constituion provided those rights with an addition of the phrase "except upon probable cause" and I believe that those provisions are reasonable enough. 

 

Vanessa Mawile

2020-12-05

Yasser Nasser Galvez

Exam: midterm examination in constitutional law first year dec. 5, 2020

Word count: 2013

Writing time: 221 minutes

Email: engrgalvez92@gmail.com

Class: JD 201 Consti Law 1

Teacher: Judge Ric Bastasa

1. (a) The proposed change is a revision. The change from a republican state to one that is a socialist overhauls the system of government and affects not just the text of the Constitutional provision on Declaration of Principles and State Policies but also other texts dependent upon it, such as, but not limited to, the Constitution of Government on elections, governmental set-up and administration, and the Constitution of Liberty specifically the Bill of Rights wherein some democratically and fundamentally recognized rights (i.e., freedom of speech, press, etc) will be infringed upon when a changed from a democratic set-up is done.

    (b) To revise the 1987 Constitution, the process of which may be proposed by: 1)The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members; or 2) A constitutional convention called by the Congress by a vote of two-thirds of all its Members or by a majority vote of all its Member and submit to the electorate the question of calling such a convention. 

 

    The revision of the Constitution can only be valid when ratified by a majority of votes casted in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the approval of such revision.

 

2. (a) Mr. X's non-appearance is not permissible. Even more his argument that the Senate, and not its committe has the power to compel attendance is without merit. Under our laws, the Congress' power of inquiry is co-extensive with the power to legislate. The matters which may be proper subject of legislation and those which may be proper subject of investigation are one. In other words, the power of inquiry is an essential appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function. A legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively absent the information in the possession of executive officials and thus, attendance in inquiries in aid of legislation is but compulsory.

(b) Yes. Mr. Y's refusal to answer is clothed by the executive privilege which extends from the Chief Executive and down to its cabinet members. Under our laws, executive privilege can be and is properly invoked  in relation to specific categories of information which are detrimental to national security and diplomatic secrets to name a few. In the case at bar, the fact of holding a closed-door cabinet meeting can be deduced that information tackled therein is of sensitive character and thus, exempted from disclosure.

 

3. (a) Component 1 of the CNSS is unconstitutional. Under Art. 7, Section 18 of our Constitution, it is clear that only the President can call-out such armed forces to prevent or supress lawless violence whenever it becomes necessary being the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines. Moreover, in the case of Integrated Bar of the Philippines vs. Zamora, the Court ruled that the calling-out powers belong solely to the President as commander-in-chief. In the case at bar, it is clear that it contravenes the Constitutional provision and therefore unconstitutional. It is not even advisable to grant local chief executives such power as it may spawn warlordism and bossism to name a few.

(b) Component 2 of the CNSS is constitutional. The President being the commander-in-chief, can declare Martial Law given in the case at bar, but this is without prejudice to the Congress' power to review the sufficiency of the factual basis thereof and even the revocation of such proclamation, if so warranted.

 

4. (a) No, the Ombudsman was right in not giving credence to the defense of condonation raised by Mayor X. The Supreme Court's landmark case decision in Carpio-Morales v. Court of Appeals (G.R. Nos. 217126-27) serves as a legal precedent in this case wherein it found no legal authority to sustain condonation doctrine, thus abandoned. The Court's abandonment of the said doctrine already formed part of the legal sytem of the Philippines and is prospective in application warrants the dismissal of the defense by the petitioner in the herein case.

(b) No. Y cannot validly invoke the condonation doctrine to absolve him of the charge against him. In same vein, that the condonation doctrine is already abandoned by the Supreme Court and thus reverses its past judicial decisions concerning the same. Also, assuming, arguendo, that the doctrine still has legal and binding effect, it cannot be invoked by Mr. Y because his position is not elective but appointive compared to the position of Mayor X.

 

5. No, the curfew ordinance is not violative of the primary right and duty of parents to rear their children. The State, in Section 12, Article II of the Constitution, recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen it. In this case, it is even supportive of parents' duty to rear. and while parents have the primary role in child-rearing, it bears noting that when actions concerning the child's public welfare or well-being the State may act to promote these legitimate interests. Thus, the curfew ordinance is not violative of the parental duty of child-rearing.

(b) No, the curfew ordinance does not infringe upon any of the minors' fundamental rights as it clothe itself with the exceptions clearly nonviolative of the minors' right to travel, right to education, to assembly, etc. Also, the required counseling once apprehended is in accordance with RA9344 as amended by RA 10630 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act which stated that minors cannot be penalized but is subject to other remedies available.

 

6.  (a) Commission on Audit

(b) The Congress

(c) The Congress

(d) The Congress

(e) The President

 

7. (a) No, Atty. B's contention is not correct. While Section 1(2), Article IX-C of the Constitution expressly provides that "The Chairman and the Commisioners shall be appointed by the President with the consent of the Commission on Appointments xxx In no case shall any Member be appointed or designated in a temporary or acting capacity," an ad interim appointment only ceases to be valid when the commission explicitly rejects the same. In the case at bar, A's discharge of duties appurtenant to his position is immediate and valid.

(b) Yes, because a by-pass is different from rejection. When the CA rejects an appointee, as expressly provided in the Constitution, he/she cannot be reappointed.

 

8. (a) As provided by Section 2, Article IV of the 1987 Constitution, natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Also, those born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority, provided in Section 1(3), Article IV of the Constitution, are deemed natural-born citizens. Meanwhile, naturalized citizens are those who lost or reacquired hilippine citizenship in the manner provided by law.

(b) X is qualified to run for the said position because he is natural-born,. He only lost his Filipino citizenship thereby needs the reacquiring of such and is considered now a naturalized citizen.

(c) Yes, X's proclamation is tantamount to him being considered a Member of the House of Representatives and thus divests the COMELEC of its jurisdiction to decide the case and vests the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) jurisdiction to hear the same.

 

9. (a) Yes, the CA was corrrect. A writ of amparo is already a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or ommision of a public official or employee which is the military men in this case. The issuance of a temporary protection order is but redundant.

(b) No. As a general rule, a president's immunity from suit is only valid during his tenure and incumbency. In the case at bar, considering that he is the President and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines means to say that he has power over the military and knows its operations and actuations, and thus can be held liable.

 

10. (a) Unconstitutional. It contravenes the Court's power particularly Section 5(6), Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution.

(b) Unconstitutional, it being unfounded in the Constitution as included in the minimum requirement for candidates of national or local elective offices.

(c) Unconstitutional. It contravenes Section 1(2), Artcile IX-B of the 1987 Constitution.

(d) 

(e)

 

11. 

12. No. As a general rule, the State cannot be sued without its consent. In the case at bar, clearly,  it is the Director of the Bureau of Plant Industry is sued in his personal capacity. This is by no means considered under the state's immunity from suit.

 

13. Yes, the boxes can be admitted in evidence against the five foreigners. Search and seizure of an illegal drug during routine airport inspection made pursuant to aviation security procedures has been sustained by the Court in a number of cases.

 

14. (a) No, as it is clearly a political move by the President.

(b) No, Aristotle's claim of diplomatic immunity is not proper and without merit. He is maligning his colleague at work which is not an act performed in his official capacity, thus defamation, of any national under the Philippine territory, can still be made criminally liable.

 

15. (a) Conrado was wrong. He clearly violated a provision of a statute and should be held liable under it. Arguing, that there are indeed men battered by their housewives, is without merit and wrong for him to challenge the constitutionality of the law on the ground of equal protection because he is not similarly situated with other men in his allegation.

(b) There is no undue delegation of judicial power to a barangay chairman in his issuance of a Barangay Protection Order (BPO) as this is clearly a power to enforce and administer the laws into practical operation, which is purely executive in nature. There is no judicial issue at hand for such, and thus not under judicial power as provided in the Constitution.

 

16. (a) The Philippines cannot exercise jurisdiction over another sovereign state, in this case, the US as in the doctrine of state immunity under the International Law prevents it.

(b) The US, while not a signatory to UNCLOS can still be bound by its provisions because it is a member of UN. Being such, the UN's General Assembly declaring it as an international legally binding instrument is valid and enforceable against the US.

 

17. (a) The appointments made are ad interim and shall remain valid until rejected by the Commission on Appointments. That being said, their appointments are but temporary pending approval by the same commission.

(b) No. Ad interim appointees can assume the functions of the office immediately and all acts are valid. It only ceases to be valid once a rejection from the Commission on Appointments is arrived at.

 

18. Yes, Patricio is correct. In a Supreme Court's decision in Estipona case, it allowed plea-bargaining for drug cases and declares unconstitutional Sec. 23 of R.A. No. 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. Thus, under the principle of stare decisis, such decision can be used as a legal precedent to consider Patricio's claim with merit.

 

19. (a) Yes, Amelia is administratively liable. Her religious belief and practice cannot override the norms of conduct required by law for government employees. To rule otherwise would create a dangerous precedent for others to execute the same and use religion as defense against liability.

(b) Benevolent neutrality is the concept of combining neutrality and accommodationism.

Here the State is required to establish that a challenged law is justified by compelling state interest.

20. The assailed provisions are not unconstitutional. It bears stressing the proliferation of prohibited drugs in the country that threatens the well-being of the people, particularly the youth and school children. The drug test prescribed in paragraphs c, d and f of Section 36 of Republic Act No. 9165, while mandatory, is a random testing and suspicionless arrangement. Also, this is an evidence of the compelling State interest in safeguarding its citizenry, particularly the youth from the harms of dangerous drugs; the State is but exercising the doctrine of parens patriae.

 

 

 

 

Yasser Nasser Galvez

 

No comments:

IN THE MATTER OF THE ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED IN THE COLUMNS OF MR. AMADO P. MACASAET PUBLISHED IN MALAYA DATED SEPTEMBER 18, 19, 20 AND 21, 2007. D E C I S I O N

  Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC A.M. No. 07-09-13-SC             August 8, 2008 IN THE MATTER OF THE ALLEGATIONS ...