POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY.

GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

I. PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATION

POLITICAL LAW

- Defined as that branch of public law which deals with the organization and operation of
the governmental organs of the State and define the relations of the state with the
inhabitants of its territory
- Embraces:
 constitutional law
 law of public corporations
 administrative law: law on public officers & elections

CASE:

Macariola vs Asuncion

- Where there is change in sovereignty, the political laws of the former sovereign, whether
compatible or not with those of the new sovereignty, shall be automatically abrogated
- In the case at hand, the respondent is accused of committing a violation of Article 14 of
the Code of Commerce, which prohibits judges to have any direct administrative or
financial intervention in commercial or industrial associations
- HOWEVER, Political law saved the respondent in the sense that Article 14 of the Code of
Commerce, although it was commercial law, it was political in nature because of how it
regulates the relationship between the government and certain public officers;
therefore, the said provision was as well abrogated during the change of sovereignty,
and without it being re-enacted in the new sovereign

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

- Standards through which the fundamental stability of the state and its organs is legally
regulated and protected
- Determines the political organization of the state, and regulates the political relations
between the state and the individuals who compose it

* The basic framework of the PH government has been patterned after the American
system

CONSTITUTION

 to provide a higher law by which all other laws, rules and government actions may be
measured against
- (1) defines the powers of the government
- (2) foundation of the entire legal system
- (3) a social contract whereby the people have surrendered their sovereign powers to the
state for common good
 SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND – standard to which the other acts of those in the
government have to adopt, adapt to, and obey
 DEFINITION OF THE POWERS OF THE GOVERNMENT
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

- The power that the Constitution grants, it also RESTRAINS

- Any legislative or executive act contrary to its terms CANNOT survive

1987 CONSTITUTION

* establishes the Philippines as a "democratic and republican State", where "sovereignty

resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them"

* a reaction to the abuses of the Marcos regime – most of the provisions are to protect
basic human rights which were trampled during the Marcos era

CASE:

MANILA PRINCE HOTEL v GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM

- DOCTRINE OF CONSTITUTIONAL SUPREMACY:

“if a law or contract violates any norm of the constitution, that law or contract
whether promulgated by the legislative or by the executive branch or entered
into by private persons for private purposes is NULL and VOID and without any
force or effect “

 Fundamental and paramount law of the nation

 Supreme, absolute and UNALTERNABLE except by the authority of which

it emanates

NOTE: A state can still exist without a Constitution; fundamental right of the people can still be
protected through the adherence to international agreements: Universal Declaration of Human
Rights and the Covenant on Civil and Political Right

WRITTEN CONSTITUTION UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTION

May consist of only one document which may Simply grows and amasses more rules,
be modified through amending or revising it principles and doctrines with each new law,
decision or tradition

PARTS:

1. Constitution of Sovereignty

- Provisions pointing out the

modes and procedure in
accordance of which formal
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

changes in the constitution

are made

2. Constitution of Liberty

- Series of prescriptions setting

forth the fundamental civil
and political rights of the
people

3. Constitution of Government

- Provisions that provide for the

structure of the government

REQUISITES OF A GOOD WRITTEN CONSTI:

1. BROAD

- provide the basic and general

outline of government and
relations between it and the
people

2. BRIEF

- only provides the

fundamentals ; leaving the
details to be worked out by
the legislators
3. DEFINITE
- to ensure an orderly society
free from much ambiguities
and uncertainties

PRINCIPLES OF CONSTITUTIONAL CONSTRUCTION:

POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

1. verbal egis – the words used in the constitution must be given their ordinary meaning EXCEPT
where technical terms are employed

2. ratio legis est anima – where there is ambiguity, the words of the constitution should be
interpreted in accordance with the intent of its framers

3. ut magis valeat quam pereat – constitution should be interpreted as a whole

GENERAL RULE: ALL PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION ARE SELF-EXECUTING

EXCEPTION: if it is EXPRESSLY provided that a legislative act is necessary to enforce a constitutional

mandate

II. THE STATE

- STATE: community of persons permanently occupying a definite portion of territory,

independent of external control, and possessing an organized government to which the
great body of inhabitants render habitual obedience.

- ELEMENTS:

(1) People

(2) territory

 Archipelagic doctrine: waters around, between, and connecting

the islands, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form
part of the internal waters

CASE:

MAGALLONA v ERMITA
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

- Upheld the constitutionality of RA NO. 9522 – law which adjusted the

country’s archipelagic baselines

- This statute was a tool to demarcate the country’s maritime zones and
continental shelf, NOT to delineate the PH territory

- (1) Shortened one baseline, (2) optimized the location of some

basepoints around the PH archipelago and (3) classified the Kalayaan
Island Group and Scarborough Shoal as regimes of islands that generates
their own maritime zones – IN COMPLIANCE W/ UNCLOS (observance of
pacta sunt servanda)

* maritime zones:

- Territorial waters – 12 nautical miles from the baselines

- Contiguous zone – 24 nautical miles from the baselines

- Exclusive economic zone – 200 nautical miles from the

baselines

REAGAN v COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

- Clark Air Base was still part of the PH territory, thus PH tax laws are still
applied ; it did NOT become foreign soil or territory

- Military Base Agreement – merely consented that the US can exercise

its jurisdiction in certain cases

(3) sovereignty

- represents the supreme power of the state to command and enforce

obedience

LEGAL SOVEREIGNTY POLITICAL SOVEREIGNTY

POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

Authority based on the law Authority of the people

themselves

INTERNAL SOVEREIGNTY EXTERNAL SOVEREIGNTY

Ability of the State itself to have Independence from outside

its will imposed and followed by authority (BUT not complete
all those within its jurisdiction freedom: e.g. international
agreements)

(4) government

- entity which exercises power and with appropriate authority to enforce

and command obedience from the people

- de jure – government is rightfully and legally in possession of the powers

- de facto – one who has the actual exercise of power but not legally
entitled to do the same

CASES:

BACANI v NACOCO

- FUNCTIONS OF THE GOVT:

(1) constituent – Those which constitute the very bonds of

society; COMPULSORY in nature

(2) ministrant – undertaken only by way of advancing the

general interests of society; merely OPTIONAL

- COURT DECISION:
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

NACOCO (government owned or controlled corporation), which

exercises ministrant functions, is not exempt from the payment
of the fees of stenographers since it did not fall within the term
“government of the republic of the PH”

HOWEVER, those that are classified as ministrant are now being absorbed by the
government; boundaries between the two functions are now blurry

ACCFA v CUGCO

- Despite ACCFA being tasked to just assist in the land reform program of
the govt, wherein the functions performed are NOT considered
constituent – it was still deemed to be performing government functions

Despite this, the traditional classification of functions is NOT entirely obsolete

SHIPSIDE v CA

- COURT RULED: BCDA (being a govt agency) could not make use of the
principle/rule: that prescription does not run against the State, for it
can’t be applied to corporations or artificial bodies created by the state
for special purposes

- BCDA was created as a separate entity with the main function of

developing former military bases into economically viable undertakings
– such function is PROPRIETARY (ministrant) in nature

- Although such functions aims at promoting public interest and public

welfare, they still can’t be considered government-function
corporations

INHERENT/ FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATE:

- Does not need any particular law for it to be vested in the government
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

- Exists independent of the Constitution, BUT the latter provides

limitations on their exercise to prevent abuse of power

a. Police Powers of the PH state – power to regulate society and its inhabitants
through restrictions on life, liberty and property for the promotion of the
general welfare of the people

 in terms of restricting property, difference with eminent domain is there

is no need for just compensation

 may be delegated to the President, administrative agencies, and local

governments – BUT could not come up with rules/regulations that
would go against the national policy of the laws enacted by Congress

b. Power of Eminent Domain – enables the state to acquire private property,

upon payment of just compensation ; exercised when the owner refuses to
sell

 Right of the sovereign power to appropriate any property within its

territorial sovereignty for public purpose

POSSESSORY REGULATORY

Government confiscates or physically Government’s regulation leaves no

occupies property reasonable economically viable use of the
property

Leaves the property economically idle for

the common good

NOTE: temporary takeover (in times of national emergency)

POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

 Not required to compensate the private owner

 Only a takeover of business operation, NOT of ownership

 Exercise of POLICE POWER not eminent domain

c. Power of Taxation – power of the state to demand from the people their
proportionate share or contribution in the maintenance of the govt ; simply
the power to collect taxes

 TAXATION – power of the State to impose a BURDEN upon a person,

property, or property rights for the use and support of the government

 THEORY behind it: without taxes, government cannot fulfill its mandate
of promoting the general welfare and well being of the people (taxes
are lifeblood of the state)

 LIMITATION: proceeds be for PUBLIC PURPOSE (heart of tax law)

 “ power of taxation is also the power to destroy, therefore it should be

exercised with caution to minimize injury to the proprietary rights of the
taxpayer”

III. STATE IMMUNITY

General rule: The State may NOT be sued without its consent

Logical ground: “there can be no legal right as against the authority that makes the law on

which the right depend”

POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

- Such doctrine extends to the government’s unincorporated agencies that has NO

independent personality (part/parcel of the govt itself) that does NOT perform
proprietary functions
- Applies as well to government officials for acts allegedly performed by them in
the discharge of their duties
EXCEPTIONS:
- Sued for abuse of authority
o in his official capacity, acts that are unlawful and
injurious to the rights of the people
- Sued in their personal capacity
o Even if committed while occupying a public
position

“The State can’t be sued without its consent”

- WAIVES ITS IMMUNITY

- CONSENT

 express – only congress can waive the immunity of the State through a LAW

- General / specific law

CASE:

MERITT v GOVERNMENT

- Special law (Act 2547): enabled an injured motorist to sue the

government
- Suffered injuries through a collision of an ambulance belonging
to a government-owned hospital
- Despite the driver’s negligence, he was held not liable since he
was not considered a “special agent” of the government

 Implied  contract

 jure imperii – governmental acts/ for public use ;

NO WAIVER
 jure gestionis – commercial, private, proprietary acts ; you
have descended to the level of a private individual ; THERE
IS WAIVER
CASE:
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

USA v RUIZ
- Existence of a contract does not mean that at all times there is a
waiver of immunity by the state
- Restrictive theory – brought about by increasing commercial
activities remotely connected with the discharge of govt
functions

 president sues

* if the state/president commences a suit there is a waiver of

immunity – YOU EXPOSE YOURSELF TO COUNTERSUIT

- because denying the other party to countersue would

be tantamount to violation of due process for it denies
the other party of his defense which may be expressed
in the countersue

CASE:

REPUBLIC v SANDIGANBAYAN

- By entering into a Compromise Agreement with private

respondent, the petitioner stripped itself of its immunity from
suit
MINISTERIO v COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF CEBU
- Involves taking of property for street expansion (power of
eminent domain) without just compensation
- Court decision: did not allow state immunity
- the doctrine of governmental immunity from suit CANNOT serve
as an instrument for perpetrating an injustice on a citizen
(implied waiver of immunity)

if function is governmental, state can’t be held liable

MUNICIPALITY OF SAN FERNANDO, LA UNINO v FIRME

- the dump truck driver was transporting grave and sand for the
maintenance and repair of municipal streets (a governmental
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

function) when he collided with other vehicles and caused

deaths
- municipality is NOT liable for torts committed by its regular
employee, despite the driver being negligent, because he was
engaged in the discharge of governmental function

NOTE: WAIVER OF IMMUNITY DOES NOT EQUATE TO

ACKNOWLEDGING LIABILITY; it just means that the State is allowing the
suitor to prove his case in court

SUABILITY LIABILITY
Depends on the consent of the Depends on the applicable law
state to be sued and established facts

NOTE: WHEN LIABILITY IS ASCERTAINED, THE STATE IS AT LIBERTY TO

DETERMINE FOR ITSELF WHETHER TO SATISFY THE JUDGMENT OR NOT

* NO execution shall issue upon any judgment rendered by any court

against the Government (ACT 3083, SEC 7)

- statutes waving non-suability DO NOT authorize the seizure of

properties and government funds to satisfy judgments
recovered by the action
- it only conveys that an implication that the legislature will
recognize such judgment as final and MAKE PROVISIONS FOR
ITS FULL SATISFACTION

CASE:

MUNICIPALITY OF MAKATI

- properties of a municipality (real or personal) which are

necessary for public use CANNOT be sold at execution sale to
satisfy a money judgment against the municipality
- When a municipality fails or refuses, without justifiable reason,
to give payment of a final money judgment against it, the
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

remedy of MANDAMUS can then be used to compel the

approval of disbursement of municipal funds

HOWEVER, while Congress could not be mandamus to appropriate funds to

satisfy the judgment, IT’S NOT THE SAME WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT – they can
be mandamus to pay what has been adjudged against them

EXCEPTION TO THE IMMUNITY OF PUBLIC FUND FROM SEIZURE:

o When funds to be levied under execution are already allocated by law

for the satisfaction of money judgment against the government

CASE:

COSCULLUELA v COURT OF APPEALS

- The government failed to comply with the responsibility of

paying the owners for property seized for the Barotac Viego
Project
- DEFENSE: rule on functions rendered by the state cannot be
disrupted by the diversion of public funds from their legitimate
purpose is deemed INVALID
Reason: there is no showing of disruption of public
service if the fees collected for the use of the irrigation
project were utilized to pay for the property
- Court decision: execution was then allowed for the absence of
specific appropriation for the property taken for an irrigation
project

However, execution does NOT automatically follow when judgment is

rendered. STILL SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COMMISSION ON
AUDIT

o COA must act within 60 days upon its filing

CASE:

UP v DIZON
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

- Court decision: UP funds, being government funds, are not

subject to seizure
- the final decision of RTC regarding the money claim against UP is
NOT yet for execution, IT IS STILL SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF
COA

DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION – does not warrant the court the

authority to resolve a controversy if the jurisdiction over which is initially
given to an administrative body of special competence

STATE IMMUNITY IN THE CASE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

- Exemption of the state and its organs from the judicial jurisdiction of another
state
- Principle of the Sovereign Equality of States
One state cannot assert jurisdiction over another in violation of the
maxim par in parem non habet imperium (AN EQUAL HAS NO POWER
OVER AN EQUAL)

CASE:

MINUCHER v COURT OF APPEALS

- Scalzo was indeed working for the US Drug Enforcement Agency

and was tasked to conduct surveillance of suspected drug
activities within the country
- Scalzo, being a foreign agent of a foreign government and
despite not being a diplomatic personage, having acted well in
the performance of his function is QUALIFIED for the immunity
of foreign sovereign from suit (diplomatic immunity)
- “suing a representative of state is believed to be suing the
state itself”

ARIGO v SWIFT

- Claim for damages on a US military ship for grounding in the

Tubbataha Reefs National Park
- said grounding was committed while in the performance of their
military duties
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

- execution against the damages by the US Navy is a suit deemed

to be one against the US State itself, for it requires the
appropriation of US government funds to repay such damages.
- Court decision: they cannot be sued through the Principle of
State Immunity with respect to International Laws

PURPOSE OF IMMUNITY:

- To assure unimpeded performance of their functions.

- To shield the affairs of International Organizations, in accordance with
international practice, from political pressure or control by the host country

CASE:
LIANG v PEOPLE
- Petitioner who was a bank official of ADB is not entitled to Diplomatic Immunity
 the bank official was only an official of an international
organization, therefore he is only granted INTERNATIONAL
IMMUNITY – only with respect to acts performed in their official
capacity; NOT including their private acts (unlike w/ diplomatic
immunity)
- DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DIPLOMATIC & INTERNATIONAL IMMUNITIES
ACCORDING TO THE COURT:

DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY INTERNATIONAL IMMUNITY

Members may be appointed from Elected/ appointed to their position by
among the nationals of the receiving the organization itself
State ONLY with the EXPRESS
consent of that state
FUNCTION OF DIPLOMATS: FUNCTION OF OFFICIALS:
- national interests - international interests
- they represent their state (e.g. - does NOT represent a state or the
ambassadors) organization
- functions are administrative in
nature (can be judicial / executive)
Nationals enjoy such immunity from Specially important in relation to the
jurisdiction as granted by the state of which the official is a national
receiving state - FUNCTIONAL IMMUNITY ONLY; in
- IMMUNITY FROM ALL ACTS: the exercise of one’s functions
PRIVATE OR OFFICIAL
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

Does NOT exempt him from the There is no sending State; equivalent
jurisdiction of the sending State for the jurisdiction of the sending state
is the waiver of immunity or an
international disciplinary/judicial
procedure
Effective sanctions to secure respect No similar protection/ security
for diplomatic immunity: PRINCIPLE * DOES NOT ADMIT OF THE PRINCIPLE
OF RECIPROCITY (a state is free to OF RECIPROCITY for it will contradict
treat the envoy of another state as the basic principle of Equality of States
its envoy are treated by that state) & 
DANGER OF RETALIATION BY THE
AGGRIEVED STATE

IV. SEPARATION OF POWERS & CHECKS AND BALANCES

PRINCIPLE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS:

- Governmental powers are distributed among the 3 branches of the government:

Legislative
Executive
Judiciary
- One could not unduly interfere what has been entrusted to the others
- Such vast powers are distributed and NOT concentrated in the hands of just one
branch to PREVENT POSSIBLE ABUSIVE, OPPRESSIVEM AND TYRANNICAL
EXERCISE OF POWER.
- “power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” (Lord
Acton)

NOTE: separation and COOPERATION – there still has to be intermingling of concerns

and sharing of responsibilities and powers at times

“does NOT create a hermetic (tight) division among the branches, but a carefully
crafted system of checked and balanced power within the branch”

* each branch does not only have to do its job, but also has to work with other
branches to keep the State moving forward
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG

CASE:

ENDENCIA v DAVID

- The courts have to interpret and ascertain the meaning, NOT

ONLY of the said law, but also the pertinent portion of the
Constitution – to determine whether it is constitutional or not; if
unconstitutional, then its invalid

* there is a violation of the principle when there is impermissible: INTERFERENCE with ;

and ASSUMPTION of another department’s function

EXECUTIVE v LEGISLATIVE POWERS & FUNCTIONS

CASE:
OPLE v TORRES
- Administrative Order No. 308 which establishes a National
Computerized Identification Reference System; under it, a
citizen cannot transact business with government agencies
without the contemplated identification card
- Clearly, it affects the citizens’ exercise of rights and enjoyment of
his privilege – it is a subject that should be covered by law
- it is then a violation of separation of powers in the sense that
such implementation is of nature an exercise of legislative
power not a mere implementation of the Administrative code
CASE
KILUSANG MAYO UNO v DIRECTOR-GENERAL, NEDA
- also involves an executive issuance of a national ID system
- difference is, it is within the presidential authority
- the executive order only applies to government entities that
issue ID cards, as part of their functions UNDER EXISTING LAWS
- only being required to adopt a uniform data collection and
format for their IDs – to reduce cost, for more efficiency, and
convenience
- it does not establish a national ID system, MERELY ensuring
that laws regarding cost-reduction, increase efficiency and
improvement in public services are executed
POLITICAL LAW BY ATTY. GOROSPE
REVIEWER BY: JG