Upload File

philipp

372
1987 CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES Phil Con 87; New Features (1991) No 1: How is the Bill of Rights strengthened in the 1987 Constitution? SUGGESTED ANSWER: There are several ways in which the Bill of Rights is strengthened in the 1987 Constitution. 1. New rights are given explicit recognition such as, the prohibition against detention by reason of political beliefs and aspirations. The waiver of Miranda rights is now required to be made in writing with the assistance of counsel. The use of solitary, incommunicado and secret detention places is prohibited, while the existence of substandard and inadequate penal facilities is made the concern of legislation. 2. There is also recognition of the right of expression, an express prohibition against the use of torture, a mandate to the State to provide compensation and rehabilitation for victims of torture and their families. 3. Some rights have been expanded. For instance, free access to courts now includes access to quasi-judicial bodies and to adequate legal assistance. 4. The requirements for interfering with some rights have been made more strict. For instance, only judges can now issue search warrants or warrants of arrest. There must be a law authorizing the Executive Department to interfere with the privacy of communication, the liberty of abode, and the right to travel before these rights may be impaired or curtailed. 5. The Constitution now provides that the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus does not suspend the right to bail, thus resolving a doctrinal dispute of long standing. 6. The suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus and the proclamation of martial law have been limited to sixty (60) days and are now subject to the power of Congress to revoke. In addition, the Supreme Court is given the jurisdiction, upon the petition of any citizen to determine the sufficiency of the factual basis of the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus and the proclamation of martial law. 7. The Supreme Court is empowered to adopt rules for the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights. 8. Art. II. Sec. 11 commits the State to a policy which places value on the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights. 9. A Commission on Human Rights is created. 10. Under Article XVI. Sec. 5(2) the State is mandated to promote respect for the people's rights among the 1

Upload: ibiang-deleoz

Post on 16-Aug-2015

231 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

Report

Tags:

DESCRIPTION

Pines

TRANSCRIPT

1987 CONSTITUTION OF THEPHILIPPINESPhil Con 87; New Features (1991No1:Howis the !ill o" #i$htsstren$thene% inthe 1987 Constitution&SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+Thereareseveral waysinwhichtheBill of Rights is strengthenedinthe1987 Constitution.1. New rights are given exlicitrecognition such as! the rohi"itionagainst detention "y reason ofolitical "eliefs and asirations.The waiver of #iranda rights is nowre$uired to "e %ade in writing withthe assistance of counsel. The useof solitary! inco%%unicado andsecret detention laces isrohi"ited! whiletheexistenceofsu"standard and inade$uate enalfacilities is %ade the concern oflegislation.&. There is also recognition of theright of exression! an exressrohi"ition against the use oftorture! a %andate to the 'tate torovide co%ensation andreha"ilitation for victi%s of tortureand their fa%ilies.(. 'o%erights have"eenexanded.)or instance! free access to courtsnow includes access to $uasi*+udicial "odies and to ade$uatelegal assistance.,. The re$uire%ents for interferingwith so%e rights have "een %ade%ore strict. )or instance! only+udges can now issue searchwarrants or warrants of arrest.There %ust "ealawauthori-ingthe .xecutive /eart%ent tointerfere with the rivacy ofco%%unication! the li"erty ofa"ode! and the right to travel"efore these rights %ay "ei%aired or curtailed.0. The Constitution now rovides thatthesusensionof therivilegeofthe writ of ha"eas corus does notsusend the right to "ail! thusresolving a doctrinal disute of longstanding.1. Thesusensionof therivilegeofthe writ of ha"eas corus and therocla%ationof %artial lawhave"een li%ited to sixty 2134 days andarenowsu"+ect totheower ofCongress to revo5e. 6n addition! the'ure%e Court is given the+urisdiction! uon the etition ofany citi-en to deter%ine thesu7ciencyof thefactual "asis ofthesusensionof therivilegeofthe writ of ha"eas corus and therocla%ation of %artial law.7. The'ure%eCourt ise%oweredto adot rules for the rotectionandenforce%ent of constitutionalrights.8. 8rt. 66. 'ec. 11 co%%its the 'tate toa olicy which laces value on thedignity of every hu%an erson andguaranteesfull resectforhu%anrights.9. 8 Co%%ission on 9u%an Rights iscreated.13. :nder 8rticle ;4&.4 9ow %ay consent of the state to "esued "e givenJ .xlain. 2&>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+1.4 'T8T. 6##:N6T? )RL# ':6T %eansthat the 'tate cannot "e sued withoutitsconsent. 8 corollary of such rincile isthat1(roerties used"y the 'tate intheerfor%anceof its govern%ental functions cannot"e su"+ectto +udicial execution.&.4 Consent of the'tateto"esued%ay "e%adeexresslyas inthecaseof aseciDc!exressrovisionof lawaswaiverof'tatei%%unity fro% suit is not inferredlightly 2e.g. C.8.(&7 as a%ended "y @/ 1,,0U ori%liedly as whenthe 'tate engages in rorietaryfunctions 2:.'.v. Rui-! :.'. v. Euinto4 or when it Dles asuit inwhich case the adverse arty %ay Dleacounterclai%2)roilan v. @an Lriental'hiing4 orwhenthedoctrinewouldineAect"eused toeretuate an in+ustice 28%iga"le v.Cuenca! ,('CR8 (134.State I--unit4 "ro- Suit (1999No 4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+"4 'ince the ostone%ent of the casewouldnot violate the right of the accused toseedytrial! thereciitatedis%issal of thecase isvoid. The reversal of the dis%issal willnotlace the accused in dou"le Qeoardy.)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+"4 'incethedis%issal of thecaseisvalid! itsreversal will lace the accused indou"le+eoardy.(ou8le Meo,ar%4 (6771No;* )or thedeathof Qoey! .rningwascharged with the cri%e of ho%icide"efore theRegional Trial Courtof 4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+8s held in Cuison v. Court of 8eals!&89'CR8 109! for a clai% of dou"le+eoardy toroser! thefollowingre$uisites%ustconcur:214 a Drst +eoardy has attachedH2&4 the Drst +eoardy was validlyter%inatedH and2(4 the second is for the sa%e oAense.8 Drst +eoardy attaches:1. uon a valid co%laint orinfor%ationH&. "efore a co%etent courtH(. after arraign%entH,. a valid entry of leaH and0. thedis%issal orter%inationof thecasewithout the exress consent of theaccused.(ue Pro1ess; )8sen1e o" (enial(1999No677F(. /oes a @er%it to Carry )irear%LutsideResidence 2@TC)LR4 constitute aroertyright rotected "y the ConstitutionJ2&.0>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+No! it is not a roerty right under theduerocess clause of the Constitution. Qustli5eordinary licenses in other regulatedDelds! it%ay "e revo5ed any ti%e. 6t does notconfer ana"solute right! "ut only a ersonalrivilege!su"+ect to restrictions. 8 licensee ta5eshislicensesu"+ect tosuchconditions astheKegislature sees Dt to i%ose! and %ay"erevo5ed at its leasure withoutderiving thelicensee of any roerty 2Chave- v.Ro%ulo!E.R. No. 1073(1! Qune 9! &33,4.(ue Pro1ess; PP)>Pilots (6771No ;666 * The @hiliine @orts 8uthority2@@84Eeneral #anager issued anad%inistrativeorder to the eAect that all existingregularaoint%ents to har"or ilot ositionsshallre%ain valid onlyu to /ece%"er(1of thecurrent year and that henceforth allaoint%ents to har"or ilot ositionsshall "eonly for a ter% of one year fro% dateofeAectivity! su"+ect to yearly renewal orcancellation"ythe@@8afterconductof a rigidevaluation of erfor%ance. @ilotage asarofession%ay"eracticedonly"ydulylicensed individuals! who have to assDvegovern%ent rofessionalexa%inations.The 9ar"or @ilot 8ssociationchallenged thevalidity of said ad%inistrative orderarguing thatit violatedthehar"or ilots= right toexercisetheir rofession and their right to duerocess oflawandthat thesaidad%inistrativeorder wasissued without rior notice andhearing. The@@8 countered that the ad%inistrativeorderwas valid as it was issued in theexercise of itsad%inistrative controland suervisionover(9har"or ilots under @@8=s legislativecharter!and that in issuing the order as a ruleorregulation! it was erfor%ing itsexecutive orlegislative! and not a $uasi*Qudicialfunction./uerocess of lawis classiDedintotwo 5inds!na%ely! rocedural due rocess andsu"stantiveduerocess of law. Iasthere! or!wastherenoviolationof thehar"orilots= righttoexercisetheir rofessionandtheirright todue rocess of lawJ 20>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+Theright of thehar"or ilotstoduerocesswas violated. 8%heldinCoronavs.:nited9ar"or @ilots 8ssociation of the@hiliines!&8( 'CR8 (1 219974 ilotage as arofession isa roerty right rotected "y theguarantee ofdue rocess. The re*evaluationcancellation ofthe licenses of the har"or ilots everyyear isunreasona"leandviolatedtheir righttosu"stantiveduerocess. TherenewalisBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 97deendent on the evaluation after thelicenseshave"eencancelled. Theissuanceofthead%inistrative order also violatedroceduraldue rocess! since no rior u"lichearing wasconducted. 8s hold in Co%%issioner of6nternalRevenue vs. Court of 8eals! &11'CR8 &(7219984!&-en a reg*'a+ion is beingiss*ed *nder+-e 3*asi"'egis'a+i/e a*+-ori+y o) anad1inis+ra+i/e agency( +-ere3*ire1en+s o)no+ice( -earingandp*b'ica+ion1*s+beobser/ed.(ue Pro1ess; Pro1e%ural /s5Su8stanti/e(1999No. The'enatorsued the 'T8R! its reorter! editor andu"lisher for li"el! clai%ing the reortwasco%letely false and %alicious.8ccording tothe'enator! thereisno??'treet in#a5ati!and the tax cut was only &3>. 9eclai%ed one%illion esos in da%ages. Thedefendantsdenied Bactual %alice!B clai%ingrivilegedco%%unicationanda"solutefreedo%of theresstoreort onu"lic o7cialsand%atters ofu"lic concern. 6f there was any error!the'T8R said it would u"lish thecorrectionro%tly. 6s there Bactual %aliceB in'T8R='reortageJ 9ow is Bactual %aliceBdeDnedJ 8rethe defendants lia"le for da%agesJ20>4FI#ST )LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+'ince'enator ;;is au"lic ersonand the$uestioned i%utation is directedagainst hi% inhis u"lic caacity! in this case actual%alice%eans the state%ent was %ade with5nowledge that it was false or withrec5lessdisregard of whether it was false or not2Bor+a v.Court of 8eals!(31 'CR8 1 R19994.'incethereisnoroof that thereort wasu"lishedwith 5nowledge that it is false or withrec5lessdisregardof whether it was falseornot! thedefendants are not lia"le for da%age.SECON( )LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+'ince'enator ;;is au"lic ersonand the$uestioned i%utation is directedagainst hi% inhis u"lic caacity! in this case actual%alice%eans the state%ent was %ade with1,5nowledge that it was false or withrec5lessdisregard of whether it was false or not2Bor+alv. Court of 8eals! (31 'CR8 1 R1999G4. 'inceit is a %atter of u"lic 5nowledge thatthere isno ?? 'treet in #a5ati! the u"licationwas%ade with rec5less disregard ofwhether or notit is false. The defendants %ay "e heldlia"le forda%ages.Free%o-o" the Press; *arti-eCensorshi,(1987No. ;6473SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+The tae*recorded conversation is notad%issi"le in evidence. 8s held in'alcedo*Lrtane- vs. Court of 8eals! &(0'CR8 1112199,4. Reu"lic8ct No. ,&33%a5esthe taerecordingof a telehone conversation donewithout the authori-ation of all thearties to theconversation! inad%issi"le in evidence.6naddition! the taing of theconversation violatedthe guarantee of rivacy ofco%%unicationsenunciatedin'ection(! 8rticle666 oftheConstitution.Pri/a14 o" Corres,on%en1e (1998No 4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+The arrests are unlawful. Ihat isrohi"ited andenali-ed under 'ec. 1( 2a4 and 1, 2a4of [email protected] anyu"licasse%"lyas deDned in this 8ct "y any leader ororgani-erwithout having Drst secured thatwritten er%itwhereaer%it is re$uiredfro%theo7ceconcerned x x x @rovided! however!that noerson can "e unished or heldcri%inally lia"lefor articiating in or attending anotherwiseeaceful asse%"ly.BThus! onlytheleader or organi-er ofthe rallywithout a er%it %ay "e arrestedwithout awarrant whilethe%e%"ers %aynot"earrested! as they can not "e unishedor heldcri%inally lia"le for attending the rally.9owever!under 'ection 1& thereof! when theu"licasse%"ly is held without a er%itwhere aer%it is re$uired! the said u"licasse%"ly%ay "e eacefully disersed.#i$ht to )sse-8l4; Per-it#eHuire-ents(1996No. ,: Lly%ia 8cade%y! a rivateuniversity!7(issued a student regulation for%aintainingorder in the school ca%us and toensure thatacade%ic activities shall "e conductedeAectively.9enceforth! every student organi-ationintending to hold any sy%osiu%!convocation!rally or any asse%"ly within schoolroertyand involving at least &3 eole %ustDle! forthe rior aroval of the /ean of'tudents! an8lication setting forth the ti%e!lace!exectedsi-eof thegrou! andthesu"+ect%atterand urose of the asse%"ly.The Keague of Nationalist 'tudents$uestionsthe validity of the new regulation.Resolve.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+The regulation is valid. 8s held 6nRarnento us.#al*a"anan! 1&9 'CR8 (09! if anasse%"ly will"e held "y students in schoolre%ises! er%it%ust "e sought fro% the schoolauthorities! whoare devoid of the ower to deny suchre$uestar"itrarily or unreasona"ly. 6n grantingsucher%it! there %ay "e conditions as tothe ti%eand lace of the asse%"ly to avoiddisrution ofclasses or stoage of wor5 of thenonacade%icersonnel.#i$ht to )sse-8l4; Pu8li1 Tea1hers(6777No ;66 * @u"lic school teachers stagedfor days%ass actions at the /eart%ent of.ducation!Culture and 'orts to ress for thei%%ediategrant of their de%andfor additionalay. TheBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) DF/.C' 'ecretary issued to the% anotice of theillegalityof their unauthori-edaction!orderedthe%toi%%ediatelyreturntowor5!and warnedthe%of i%osa"le sanctions. Theyignored thisand continued with their %ass action.The/.C' 'ecretary issued orders for theirreventive susension without ay andchargedthe teachers with gross %isconductand grossneglect of duty for unauthori-eda"andon%entof teaching osts and a"senceswithout leave.a4 8re e%loyees in the u"lic sectorallowedto for% unionsJ To stri5eJ IhyJ 2(>4"4Theteachersclai%thattheirrighttoeacea"ly asse%"le and etition thegovern%ent forredressof grievanceshas"een curtailed. 8re they correctJ IhyJ2&>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+a4 'ection 8! 8rticle 666 of theConstitution allowse%loyees in the u"lic sector to for%unions.9owever! they cannot go on stri5e. 8sexlained in 'ocial 'ecurity 'yste%.%loyees8ssociationv. Court of 8eals. 170'CR8 181F1989G! the ter%s and conditions oftheire%loy%ent are Dxed "y law..%loyees inthe u"lic sector cannot stri5e tosecureconcessions fro% their e%loyer.". The teachers cannot clai% that theirright toeacea"ly asse%"le and etition fortheredress of grievances has "eencurtailed.7,8ccording to Bangalisan v. Court of8eals.&71 'CR8 119 219974! they canexercise thisright without stoage of classes.#i$ht to )sse-8l4; Pu8li1 Tea1hers(6776No;* Tenu"licschool teachersofCaloocanCity left their classroo%s to +oin astri5e! whichlasted for one %onth! to as5 forteachers="eneDts.The /eart%ent of .ducation!Cultureand'orts charged the% ad%inistratively!for whichreasontheywerere$uiredtoanswerandfor%allyinvestigated"yaco%%itteeco%osedof the /ivision 'uerintendent of'chools asChair%an! the/ivision'uervisor as%e%"erand a teacher! as another %e%"er. Lnthe"asisof theevidenceadducedatthefor%alinvestigationwhicha%lyesta"lishedtheirguilt! the /irector rendered a decision%etingout to the%theenalty of re%ovalfro% o7ce.The decision was a7r%ed "y the /.C''ecretary and the Civil 'erviceCo%%ission.Ln aeal! they reiterated theargu%ents theyraised "efore the ad%inistrative"odies! na%ely:2a4 Their stri5e was an exercise of theirconstitutional right to eacefulasse%"ly and toetition the govern%ent for redress ofgrievances.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+2a4 8ccording to /e la Cru- v. Court of8eals! (30 'CR8 (3( 219994! theargu%entof the teachers that they were %erelyexercisingtheir constitutional right to eacefulasse%"lyand to etition the govern%ent forredress ofgrievance cannot "e sustained!"ecause suchrights %ust "e exercised withinreasona"leli%its. Ihen such rights wereexercised onregular school daysinsteadof duringthe freeti%e of the teachers! the teachersco%%ittedacts re+udicial to the "est interests oftheservice.#i$ht to Tra/el; Or%er o" )rrest(1991No. 1: #r. .ste"an Trony! a )iliinociti-en! isarrested for the cri%e of s%uggling. 9eosts"ail for hisrelease. 'u"se$uently! he+u%s "ailand is a"out to leave the country whenthe/eart%ent of )oreign 8Aairs 2/)84cancelshis assort. 9e sues the /)8! clai%ingviolation of his freedo% to travel! citingthe newrovisionintheBill of Rights of the1987Constitution! to wit: BNeither shalltheright totravel "e i%aired excet in theinterest ofnational security! u"lic safety! oru"lic health!as %ay "e rovided "y law. /ecide thecase.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+The case should "e dis%issed. 8nyersonunder an order of arrest is underrestraint andtherefore he can not clai% the right totravel. 6fheisad%ittedto"ail hisfreedo%of%ove%entis conDned within the country.Therefore! if hesu"se$uently +u%s "ail! he cannotde%and70assort whichineAectwill facilitatehis escaefro% the countryH he is in fact lia"le to"earrested anyti%e. 6ndeed! the right totravelunder the Constitution resuosesthat theindividual is under no restraint such asthatwhich wouldfollow fro%the fact thatone has aendingcri%inal caseandhas "eenlacedunder arrest.#i$hts o" the )11use%; Counsel o"hisChoi1e (E8>677D214 #ariano was arrested "y the NB6 asasusect in the shoing %all"o%"ings.8dvised of his rights! #ariano as5ed fortheassistance of his relative! 8tty. 'antos.TheNB6 noticed that 8tty. 'antos wasinexerienced! inco%etent andinattentive./ee%inghi%unsuitedtorotect therightsof #ariano! the NB6 dis%issed 8tty.'antos.8ointed in his lace was 8tty.Barroso! aBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) D7"ar tonotcher who was in there%isesvisiting a relative. 8tty. Barroso a"lyassisted #ariano when the latter gaveastate%ent.9owever!#ariano assailedtheinvestigation clai%ing that he wasderivedof counsel of his choice.Ias the NB6 correct in dis%issing 8tty.'antos and aointing 8tty. Barroso inhissteadJ 6s #ariano=s state%ent! %adewiththe assistance of 8tty. Barroso!ad%issi"lein evidenceJ 20>4)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+The NB6 was not correct in dis%issing8tty.'antos and aointing 8tty. Barroso inhisstead. 8rticle666! 'ection1&214of the1987Constitution re$uires that a ersonunderinvestigation for the co%%ission of anoAenseshall have no less than Bco%etentandindeendentcounsel refera"lyof hisownchoiceB Thisis %eant tostress theri%acyaccordedtothevoluntariness of thechoiceunder the uni$uely stressful conditionsof acustodial investigation= Thus! thelawyer calledto "e resent during such investigationshould"easfar asreasona"lyossi"le! thechoice ofthe individual undergoing $uestioning.Theaoint%ent of 8tty. Barroso is$uestiona"le"ecause he was visiting a relativewor5ing inthe NB6and thushisindeendence isdou"tful.Kawyers engaged "y the olice!whatevertesti%onials are given as roof of theirro"ityand suosed indeendence! aregenerallysusect! as in %any areas! therelationshi"etween lawyers and law enforce%entauthorities can "e sy%"iotic.Considering that#ariano was derived of counsel of hisownchoice! thestate%ent isinad%issi"leinevidence. 2@eole v. Qanuario! E.R. No.98&0&!)e"ruary 7! 19974)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+71The NB6 was correct in dis%issing 8tty.'antosas he was inco%etent. The 1987Constitutionre$uires counsel to "e co%etent andindeendent. 8tty. Barroso! "eing a "artonotcher a"lyassisted#arianoandthere isno showing that his having a relative inthe NB6aAectedhisindeendence. #oreover!theaccused has the Dnal choice of counselas he%ay re+ect the one chosen for hi% andas5 foranother. 8 lawyer rovided "y theinvestigatorsis dee%ed engaged "y the accusedwhere heraises no o"+ection against the lawyerduringthe course of the investigation! andthe accusedthereafter su"scri"es to the truth of hisstate%ent "efore the swearing o7cer.Thus!once the rosecution shows there wasco%liance with the constitutionalre$uire%enton re*interrogation advisories! aconfession isresu%ed to "e voluntary and thedeclarant"earsthe"urdenof rovingthat hisconfessionis involuntary and untrue. 8 confessionisad%issi"le until the accusedsuccessfullyroves that it was given as a result ofviolence!inti%idation! threat or ro%ise ofreward orleniency which are not resent in thiscase.8ccordingly! the state%ent isad%issi"le.2@eole v. Qere-! E.R. No. 11,(80!Qanuary &9! 19984#i$hts o" the )11use%;Presu-,tion o"Inno1en1e /s5 Presu-,tion o"The"t (677=20*"4 LM lost Dve head of cattle whichhereortedtotheoliceasstolenfro%his "arn.9e re$uested several neigh"ors!including RR!for hel in loo5ing for the %issingani%als. 8fteranextensivesearch! the olicefoundtwo headinRR=sfar%. RRcouldnotexlaintothe olicehow they got hidden in a re%ote areaof hisfar%. 6nsisting onhis innocence! RRconsulteda lawyer who told hi% he has a right to"eresu%edinnocent under theBill ofRights. Butthereisanother resu%tionof theftarisingfro%his unexlained ossession ofstolencattleP under the enal law.8re the two resu%tions caa"le ofreconciliation6nthiscaseJ6f so! howcan they"e reconciledJ 6f not! which shouldrevailJ20>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+The two resu%tions can "ereconciled. Theresu%tion of innocence stands untilthecontrary is roved. 6t %ay "e overco%e"y acontrary resu%tion founded uonhu%anexerience. Theresu%tionthat RRis the onewhostolethecattleof LMislogical!since hewas found in ossession of the stolencattle.RR can rove his innocence "yresentingevidence to re"ut the resu%tion.The "urdenof evidenceisshiftedtoRR! "ecausehow heca%eintoossessionof thecattleiseculiarly77within his 5nowledge. 2/i-on*@a%intuan v.@eole! &(, 'CR8 1( 2199,44.#i$hts o" the )11use%; #i$ht to!ail (1999No. 9: Qohannlearnedthattheolicewereloo5ing for hi% in connection with therae of an18*year old girl! a neigh"or. 9e went totheolice station a wee5 later andresentedhi%self to the des5 sergeant.Coincidentally. therae victi% was in the re%isesexecuting anextra+udicial state%ent. Qohann! alongwith six214 other susects! werelacedinaolice lineuand the girl ointed to hi%as theraist.Qohann was arrested and loc5ed u in acell.BARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) D8Qohann was charged with rae in court"ut riorto arraign%ent invo5ed his right toreli%inaryinvestigation. Thiswasdenied"ythe+udge!and thus! trial roceeded. 8fter therosecutionresented several witnesses! Qohannthroughcounsel!invo5edtheright to"all andDled a%otion therefor! which was deniedoutright "ythe Qudge.Qohann now Dles a etitionforcertiorari "eforetheCourtof 8ealsarguingthat:(4 9e is entitled to "ail as a %atter ofright!thus the Qudge should not have deniedhis%otion to Dx "all outright. /ecide.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+(4 6n accordance with 8rt. 666. sec. 1( oftheConstitution! Qohann %ay "e denied"ail if theevidence of his guilt is strongconsidering thatthe cri%e with which he is charged isunisha"le "y reclusion eretua. 6t isthus nota %atter of right for hi% to "e releasedon "ail insuch case. The court %ust Drst %a5e adeter%inationof thestrengthof theevidence onthe "asis of evidence alreadyresented "y therosecution! unless it desires toresent so%e%ore! and give the accused theoortunity toresent countervailing evidence. 6fhaving donethis the court Dnds the evidence not to"estrong! thenit "eco%es theright ofQohann to"ead%ittedto"ail. Theerror of thetrial courtlies inoutrightlydenyingthe%otionfor "ail ofQohann.#i$hts o" the )11use%; #i$ht to!ail; Ca,italONense (E=>677F'tate whether or not the law isconstitutional..xlain "rieCy.&. 8 law denying ersons charged withcri%es unisha"le "y reclusioneretuaor death the right to "ail. 2&>4':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:The law is invalid as it contravenes'ection 1(! 8rticle 666 of the 1987Constitution which rovides that Ballersons! excet those charged withoAenses unisha"le "y reclusioneretuawhen evidence of guilt is strong! shall!"efore conviction! "e "aila"le "ysu7cientsureties! or "e released onrecogni-anceas %ay "e rovided "y law.B Theaccused%ay not "e derived of hisconstitutional78right to"ail evenif charged withacaitaloAense where the evidence of guilt isnotstrong.#i$hts o" the )11use%; #i$ht to!ail;(e,ortation Case (1989No. 10: #ay an alien invo5e theconstitutionalright to"ail duringtheendencyofdeortationroceedingsJSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+No. an alien %ay not invo5e theconstitutionalright to"ail duringtheendencyofdeortationroceedings. 6n 9arvey vs 'antiago!11& 'CR88,3! it was held that the constitutionalguarantee to "ail %ay not "e invo5edindeortation roceedings! "ecause theydo notarta5e of the nature of a cri%inalaction.#i$hts o" the )11use%; #i$ht to!ail; Aattero" #i$ht or a Aatter o" (is1retion(E7>677Da4 'tate with reason2s4 whether "ail isa %atterof right or a %atter of discretion in thefollowing cases: 2,>4a4 The i%osa"le enalty for the cri%echarged is rec'*sion perpe+*a and theaccused is a %inorHSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+6f theaccusedisa%inor wherethei%osa"leenalty for the cri%e charged isreclusioneretua! "ail would"ea%atter ofright. :nder8rticle18of theRevised@enal Code!when theoAender is a %inor under eighteenyears ofage! he is entitled to a enalty!deending onhis age! lower "y one or two degreesthan thatrescri"ed "y law for the cri%eco%%itted. TheConstitution withholds the guaranty of"ail fro%one who is accused of a caital oAensewherethe evidence of guilt is strong. Theo"viousreason is that one who faces aro"a"le deathsentence has a articularly strongte%tation toCee. This reason does not hold wheretheaccused has "een esta"lished withouto"+ectionto"ea%inorwho"ylawcannot "esentencedtodeath. 2Bravov. Bor+a! E.R. No. K*10&&8!)e"ruary 18! 19804"4 The i%osa"le enalty for the cri%echarged is life i%rison%ent and theaccused is a %inorH)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+6f the accused is a %inor and thei%osa"leenalty for the cri%e charged is lifei%rison%ent! "ail would not "e a%atter ofright. 6n the instant case! assu%ingthatevidenceof guiltstrong! "ail shall "edenied asthe rivileged %itigating circu%stanceof%inority is not availa"le for violation ofseciallaws enali-ed "y life i%rison%ent.)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+8lthough the Constitution %entionsonlyreclusion eretua! Rule 11, of theRules ofBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) D9Court adds life i%rison%ent! andtherefore!alying the PRO R;O In1ri-ination(E7>677F'elect the "est answer and exlain.1. 8n accused=s right against self*incri%inationis violated in the following cases: 20>4a. Ihen he is ordered "y the trial courttoundergo a ara7n test to rove he isguiltyof %urderH". Ihen he is co%elled to roduce his"an5"oo5s to "e used as evidenceagainsthis father charged with lunderHc. Ihenheisorderedtoroduceasa%le ofhis handwriting to "e used as evidencethathe is the author of a letter wherein heagreed to 5ill the victi%Hd. Ihen the resident of a cororationis su"oenaedto roduce certain docu%ents asroofs he is guilty of illegalrecruit%ent.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+The "est answer is c4 when he isordered toroduce a sa%le of his handwriting to"e usedas evidence that he is the author of aletterwhereinheagreedto5ill thevicti%.:nder8(8rticle 96! 'ection 17 of the 1987Constitution!Bno erson shall "e co%elled to "e awitnessagainst hi%self.B 'ince the rovisionrohi"itsco%ulsory testi%onial incri%ination!it does not%atter whether the testi%ony is ta5en"y oral orwritten %eans as either way it involvesthe :'.L) 6NT.KK.CT:8K )8C:KT6.'. Theuroseof the rivilege is to avoid and rohi"itthere"ythe reetition and recurrence ofco%elling aerson! in a cri%inal or any other case!tofurnish the %issing evidencenecessary for hisconviction 2Ber%ude- v. Castillo! @erRec. No.71,*8! Quly &1! 19(7H Beltran v.'a%son! E.R.No. (&3&0! 'ete%"er &(!19&94.Sear1hes an% Sei0ure; Pri/ateIn%i/i%uals(E8>677D2&4 .%ilio had long susected that8lvin! hise%loyee! had "een assing tradesecretstohisco%etitor! Randy! "ut hehadnoroof. Lne day! .%ilio "ro5e oen thedes5of 8lvin and discovered a letterwhereinRandy than5ed 8lvin for having assedonto hi% vital trade secrets of .%ilio..nclosed in the letter was a chec5 for@03!333.33 drawn against the accountofRandy and aya"le to 8lvin. .%iliothendis%issed 8lvin fro% his e%loy%ent..%ilio=s roof of 8lvin=s erDdy are thesaidletter and chec5 which are o"+ected toasinad%issi"le for having "een o"tainedthrough an illegal search. 8lvin Dled asuitassailing his dis%issal.Ruleonthead%issi"ilityoftheletterandchec5. 20>4)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+8s heldin@eolev. #arti 2E.R. No.81011!Qanuary 18! 19914! the constitution! inlayingdown the rinciles of the govern%entandfunda%ental li"erties of the eole!does notgovern relationshis "etweenindividuals. Thus!if the search is %ade at the "ehest orinitiativeof the rorietor of a rivateesta"lish%ent forits own and rivate uroses andwithout theinterventionof oliceauthorities! therightagainst unreasona"le search andsei-urecannot"e invo5ed for only the act ofrivateindividuals! not thelawenforcers! isinvolved. 6nsu%!+-e pro+ec+ion agains+*nreasonab'esearc-es and sei>*res canno+ bee?+ended +oac+s co11i++ed by PRI@AT;I=4&. an alien to a citi-enH on theirsouses andchildrenJ /iscuss. 21>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+1.4 8ccording to 'ection ,! 8rticle 6< oftheConstitution! )iliino citi-ens who%arry aliensretain their citi-enshi! unless "y theiract orBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 71o%ission they are dee%ed!under thelaw! tohave renounced it.&4 8ccording to #o ?a Ki% ?ao v.Co%%issioner of 6%%igration! ,1 'CR8&9&!under 'ection 10 of the RevisedNaturali-ationKaw! aforeignwo%anwho%arriesa)iliinociti-en "eco%es a )iliino citi-enrovided sheossesses none of the dis$ualiDcationsfornaturali-ation. 8 foreign %an who%arries a)iliino citi-en does not ac$uire@hiliineciti-enshi. 9owever! under'ection(of theRevisedNaturali-ation8ct! insuchacase the131residence re$uire%ent fornaturali-ation will "ereduced fro% ten 2134 to Dve 204 years.:nder'ection 12&4! 8rticle 6< of theConstitution! thechildren of an alien and a )iliinociti-en areciti-ens of the @hiliines.ENe1ts o" Phili,,ine!ill o" 1976(6771No 6 * )ro% %ainland China where hewas "ornof Chinesearents! #rNyaTsaChan%igratedto the @hiliines in 189,. 8s of 8ril11! 1899!hewasalreadyaer%anentresidentof the@hiliine 6slands and continued toreside inthis country until his death. /uring hislifeti%eand when he was already in the@hiliines! #r.Nya Tsa Chan %arried Charing! a)iliina! withwho%he"egot oneson! 9aChan!who was"ornonLcto"er18. 1897. 9aChangot%arriedalsotoNi%fa! a)iliina! andone oftheir children was Kac$ui Chan whowas "ornon'ete%"er&7! 19(1. Kac$ui ChanDnishedthe course Bachelor of 'cience inCo%%erceand eventually engaged in "usiness.6n the #ay 1989 election! Kac$ui Chanran forand was elected Reresentative2Congress%an4. 9is rival candidate!Ra%on/eloria! Dled a $uo warranto ordis$ualiDcationcase against hi% on the ground that hewas nota )iliino citi-en. 6t was ointed out inarticular!that Kac$ui Chan did not elect@hiliineciti-enshiuonreachingtheageof&1./ecide whether #r. Kac$ui ChansuAers fro% adis$ualiDcation or not. 20>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+Kac$ui Chanis a)iliinociti-enandneed notelect @hiliine citi-enshi. 9is father!9aChan! was a 'anish su"+ect! wasresiding inthe @hiliines on 8ril 11! 1899! andcontinuedto reside in the @hiliines. 6naccordance with'ection , of the @hiliine Bill of 193&!he wasa )iliino citi-en. 9ence! in accordancewith'ection 12(U of the 19(0 Constitution!Kac$uiChan is a natural"orn )iliino citi-en!since hisfather was a )iliino citi-en.Ele1te% OO1ial (1996No. 11: .dwin Nicasio! "orn in the@hiliinesof )iliino arents andraisedintherovince ofNueva.ci+a! ranfor Eovernor of hisho%erovince. 9ewonandhewassworninto o7ce.6t was recently revealed! however! thatNicasiois a naturali-ed 8%erican citi-en.a4 /oes he still ossess @hiliineciti-enshiJ"4 6f the second*lacer in thegu"ernatorialelections Dles a $uo warranto suitagainstNicasio and he is found to "edis$ualiDedfro%o7ce! canthesecond*lacer"esworninto o7ce as governorJc4 6f! instead! Nicasio had "een "orn 2ofthesa%e set of arents4 in the :nited'tatesand he there"y ac$uired 8%ericanciti-enshi "y "irth! would your answer"ediAerentJSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+13&a4 No! Nicasio no longer ossesses@hiliineciti-enshi. 8s held in )rivaldo vs.CL#.K.C!17, 'CR8 &,0! "y "eco%ing anaturali-ed8%erican citi-en! Nicasio lost his@hiliineciti-enshi. :nder 'ection 1214 ofCo%%onwealth 8ct No. 1(! @hiliineciti-enshi is lost "y naturali-ation in aforeigncountry!"4 &nd lacer can[t "e sworn to o7ce...c4 6f Nicasiowas "orninthe:nited'tates! hewould still "e a citi-en of the@hiliines! sincehis arents are )iliinos. :nder 'ection12&4!those whose fathers or %others areciti-ens ofthe @hiliines are citi-ens of [email protected] would ossess dual citi-enshi!sinceunder 8%ericanKawersons"orninthe :nited'tatesare8%ericanciti-ens. 8sheldin 8-norvs. CL#.K.C. 180 'CR8 73(! a ersonwhoossesses "oth @hiliine and8%ericanciti-enshiisstill a)iliinoanddoesnot losehis @hiliine citi-enshi unless herenouncesit.Ele1tin$ Phili,,ine Citi0enshi,(E8>677F1. 8tty. .%ily Eo! a legiti%ate daughterof aChinesefather anda)iliino%other!was"orn in 19,0. 8t &1! she elected@hiliine citi-enshi and studied law.'he assed the "ar exa%inations andengaged in rivate ractice for %anyyears. The Qudicial and Bar Councilno%inated her as a candidate for theosition of 8ssociate Qustice of the'ure%e Court. But her no%ination is"eing contested "y 8tty. Quris Castillo!also an asirant to the osition. 'heBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 76clai%s that 8tty. .%ily Eo is not anatural"ornciti-en! hence! not $ualiDed to "eaointed to the 'ure%e Court. 6sthiscontention correctJ 20>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+Thecontentionis not correct. :nder8rticle 6G2&4 Ihether 8ng is a natural "o%citi-en of the@hiliines. \0>G9ow should this case "e decidedJSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+BARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 791. The case is +usticia"le. 2grave a"useofdiscretion4...&. 8ndres 8ng should "e considered anatural"orn citi-en of the @hiliines. 9e was"orn of a)iliino%other onQanuary&3! 197(.Thiswasafter theeAectivityof the197(Constitutionon Qanuary 17! 197(. :nder 'ection214! 8rticle666 of the 197( Constitution! thosewhose fathersor %others are citi-ens of the@hiliines areciti-ens of the @hiliines. 8ndres 8ngre%ainedaciti-enof the@hiliinesafter theeAectivity of the 1987 Constitution.'ection 1!8rticle 6< of the 1987 Constitutionrovides:BThe following are citi-ens of the@hiliines:B2l4 Those who are citi-ens of the@hiliines atthe ti%e of the adotion of thisConstitutionHBNatural>!orn Fili,ino(1999No. 1: 6n 191,! RuAa! a )iliinado%estic helerwor5ingin9ong5ong! went toTaieifor avacation! where she %et Cheng 'io@ao! who%she %arried. :nder Chinese Kaw! RuAaauto%atically "eca%e a Chineseciti-en. Thecoule resided in 9ong5ong! where on#ay 9!1910! RuAa gave "irth to a "oy na%ed.rnest.:on reaching the age of %a+ority!.rnestelected @hiliine citi-enshi. 8fter the./'8Revolution! .rnest decided to liveer%anentlyin the @hiliines! where he roseredas a"usiness%an. /uring the #ay 11! 199(election! .rnest ran and won as acongress%an. 9is oonent! noting.rnest=sChinese ancestry! Dled a etition todis$ualifythe latter on the following groundsH 214.rnestChengis not anatural "orn)iliinoHand 2&4 heis under*aged. /ecide.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+14 .rnest cannot "e dis$ualiDed.'ection 1!8rticle 6< of the Constitution rovides:BThefollowing are citi-ens of the@hiliinesH;;; ;;; ;;;B2(4 Those "orn "efore Qanuary 17!197(! of)iliino %others! who elect @hiliineciti-enshiuonreachingtheageof%a+orityHB.rnest could elect @hiliineciti-enshi sincehewas"orn"eforeQanuary17! 197(and his%other isa)iliino. 8sstatedinthecases ofTorresvs. TanChi%! 19 @hil. 018andCu vs.Reu"lic! 8( @hil. ,7(! for thisrovision to130aly! the %other need not "e a)iliino citi-enat the ti%e she gave "irth to the childin$uestion. 6t is su7cient that she was a)iliinociti-enat the ti%eof her %arriage.Ltherwise!the nu%"er of ersons who would "e"eneDted"y theforegoing rovisionwould"eli%ited.9aving elected@hiliine citi-enshi!.rnest isa natural*"orn )iliino citi-en inaccordancewith 'ection &! 8rticle 6< of theConstitution!which reads:Thosewhoelect@hiliineciti-enshiinaccordance with aragrah 2(4!'ection 1hereof shall "edee%ednatural "ornciti-ens.B&4 .rnest is not under*aged. 2%ini%u%&0 yrsold4....Naturali0ation; Can1ellation o"Citi0enshi,(1998No ;. * Ki% Tong Biao! a Chinese citi-enalied for and was granted @hiliineciti-enshi"ythecourt. 9etoo5hisoath asciti-en of the @hiliines to Quly 191(!in 1970!the L7ce of the 'olicitor Eeneral Dleda etitionto cancelhis @hiliineciti-enshi forthereason that in 8ugust 191(! the Courtof Tax8eals found hi% guilty of taxevasion fordeli"erately understating his inco%etaxes forthe years 1909*1911.214 Could Ki%Tong Biao raise thedefense ofrescrition of the action forcancellation ofhis )iliino citi-enshiJ F(>G2&4 'uosing Ki% Tong Biao hadavailed ofthe Tax 8%nesty of the govern%ent forhistaxlia"ilities! wouldthisconstituteavaliddefense to the cancellation of his)iliinociti-enshiJ F&>GSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+1. No! Ki% Tong Biao cannot raise thedefense of rescrition. 8s held inReu"lic us.Eo BonKee! 1'CR81111! 1173! adecisiongranting citi-enshi is not res +udicataand theright of the govern%ent to as5 for thecancellation of a certiDcatecancellation is not"arred "y the lase of ti%e.&. The fact that Ki% Tong Biao availedof thetax a%nesty is not a valid defense tothecancellationof his)iliinociti-enshi.6nReu"lic vs. Ki ?ao! &1, 'CR8 7,8!70,! the'ure%e Court held:B6n other words! the tax a%nesty doesnothave the eAect of o"literating his lac5of good%oral character and irreroacha"leconductwhich are grounds fordenaturali-ation!B#esi%en14#eHuire-ents; Ele1ti/eOO1ial(E9>677D214 6n the #ay 8!1990 elections forlocalo7cials whose ter%s were toco%%enceon Qune (3! 1990! Ric5y Dled on #arch&3! 1990hiscertiDcateof candidacyforthe L7ce of Eovernor of Kaguna. 9ewon! "ut his $ualiDcations as anelectedo7cial was$uestioned. 6tisad%ittedthatBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 7=he is a reatriated )iliino citi-en and aresident of the @rovince of Kaguna.131To "e $ualiDed for the o7ce to which alocal o7cial has "een elected! when atthe latest should he "e: 20>42a4 8 )iliino Citi-enJ .xlain.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+Theciti-enshire$uire%ent is to"eossessed"y an elective o7cial at the latest as ofthe ti%ehe is roclai%ed and at the start of theter% ofo7cetowhichhehas"eenelected.'ection (9of the Kocal Eovern%ent Code! whichenu%erates the $ualiDcations ofelective localgovern%ento7cials!does not secifyanyarticular date or ti%e when thecandidate %ustossess citi-enshi. 2)rivaldo v.CL#.K.C!E.R. No. 1&3&90! Qune &8!199142"4 8 resident of the localityJ .xlain.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+:nder 'ection (9 of the KocalEovern%entCode! anindividual %ustossesstheresidencyre$uire%ent inthelocalitywhereheintends torun at least one year i%%ediatelyreceding theday of election.Status; Ille$iti-ate Chil% (1997No. (: ?was elected'enator inthe#ay 1987nationalelections. 9e was "orn out ofwedloc5in19,9of an8%ericanfatherandanaturali-ed)iliina %other. ? never elected@hiliineciti-enshiuonreachingtheageof%a+ority.214 Before what "ody should T! thelosingcandidate! $uestion the election of ?J'tate the reasons for your answer.2&4 6s ? a )iliino citi-enJ .xlain youranswer.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+214 T! the losing candidate! should$uestion theelection of ? "efore the 'enate.lectoralTri"unal! ....2&4 ?es! ? is a )iliino citi-en. #ore thanthat heis a natural "orn citi-en of the@hiliines$ualiDed to "eco%e a 'enator. 'ince ?is anillegiti%atechildof a)iliino%other!he followsthe citi-enshi of his %other. 9e neednot elect@hiliine citi-enshi uon reachingthe age of%a+ority as held 6n re #allare. 09 'CR8,0. 6nLsiasv. 8ntonino! .lectoral CaseNo.11!8ugust 1! 1971! the'enate.lectoralTri"unalheldthat theillegiti%atechildof analien fatherand a )iliino %other is a )iliinociti-en and is$ualiDed to "e a 'enator.Status; Ille$iti-ate Chil%; (ualCiti0enshi,(199FNo. 8: &4 ;was "orninthe:nited'tates of a)iliinofatheranda#exican%other.9ereturned to the @hiliines whenhewas twentysixyears of age! carrying an 8%ericanassortand he was registered as an alien withtheBureau of 6%%igration.Ias ; $ualiDed to run for %e%"ershiin the9ouse of Reresentatives in the 1990electionsJ .xlain.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+Ihether or not ; was $ualiDed to runfor%e%"ershi in the 9ouse ofReresentatives inthe 1990 election deends on thecircu%stances.6f ; was an 6llegiti%ate child! he is not$ualiDedto run for the 9ouse ofReresentatives.1378ccording to the case of in re #allare!09 'CR8,0! an illegiti%ate child follows theciti-enshi ofthe %other. 'ince the %other of ; is a#exican!he will "e a #exican citi-en if he is anillegiti%ate child! even if his father is a)iliino.6f ; is a legiti%ate child! he is a )iliinociti-en.:nder 'ection &2&4! 8rticle 6< of theConstitution! thosewhosefathersareciti-ens ofthe @hiliines are )iliino citi-ens.'ince ;was"orninthe:nited'tates! whichfollows +ussoli! ; is also an 8%erican citi-en. 6naccordance with 8-nar vs.Co%%ission! on.lections! 180 'CR8 73(! the %ere factaerson with dual citi-enshi registeredas analien with the Co%%ission on6%%igration and/eortation does not necessarily %eanthat heis renouncing his @hiliine citi-enshi.Ki5ewise! the %ere fact that ; used an8%erican assort did not result in theloss ofhis @hiliine citi-enshi. 8s held inTawa5itavs. :ntied 'tates! (,( :.'. 717! since aersonwith dualciti-enshi has the rights ofciti-enshiin "oth countries! the use of a assortissued"y one country is not inconsistent withhisciti-enshi in the other country.)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+6f ; has ta5en an oath of allegiance tothe :.'.he will "e dee%ed to have renouncedhis@hiliine citi-enshi. Conse$uently!he isdis$ualiDed to run for the 9ouse ofReresentatives.Status; Le$iti-ate Chil% (6779No 6< * #iguel 'in was "orn a year agoinChina to a Chinese father and a )iliino%other9is arents %et in 'hanghai wherethey wereBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 7Dlawfully %arried +ust two years ago. 6s#iguel'in a )iliino citi-enJSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+#iguel 'in is a )iliino citi-en "ecausehe is thelegiti%atechildof a)iliino%other.:nder8rticle 64SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+Cru- %ay reac$uire @hiliineciti-enshi in thefollowing ways:1. By naturali-ationH&. By reatriation ursuant to Reu"lic8ct No.8171H and(. By direct act of Congress 2'ection &ofCo%%onwealth 8ct No. 1(4.)#TICLE ?I Le$islati/e(e,art-ent),,ro,riation o" Pu8li1 Fun%s(1988138No. 1: * #etroolitan newsaers havereortedthat the @hiliine Ea%es and8%use%entCororation 2@8ECLR4 gives heftycontri"utions to#alacanang! tofundBsocioecono%icand civic ro+ectsB of the @resident!Thereortsaddthat for 1988alone!so%e sixhundred %illion 2@133#4 esos havealready"een ear%ar5ed for re%ittance to theL7ce ofthe @resident. @8ECLR had also "eenreorted to have funded! ascoordinated "y aCongress%anfro%#indanao! secialro+ectsof $uite a nu%"er of %e%"ers of the9ouse ofReresentatives.8ssu%ing that %oney earned "y@8ECLR fro%its oerations are u"lic funds! aresuchcontri"utions to #alaca]ang and tocertainCongress%en and their exenditure asreorted! legalJCiteconstitutional ordecisionalrules in suort of your answer.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+The contri"utions %ade to #alaca]angand tocertain congress%en are 6llegal. :nderart. AaCin$; O/erri%in$ thePresi%ential?eto (1991No. &: The @resident signs into law the8roriations 8ct assed "y Congress"ut shevetoes searate ite%s therein! a%ongwhich isarovisionstatingthat the@resident%ay notincreaseanite%of aroriation"ytransfer ofsavings fro% other ite%s.The 9ouse of Reresentatives choosesnot tooverride this veto. The 'enate!however!roceedstoconsidertwootions: 214tooverride the veto and 2&4 to challengetheconstitutionality of the veto "efore the'ure%eCourt.a4 6s otion 214 via"leJ 6f so. what is thevotere$uired to override the vetoJ"4 6s otion 2&4 via"leJ 6f not. why notJ6fvia"le! howshouldtheCourt decidethecaseJSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+2a4 Ltion 1 is not via"le in as %uch asthe9ouse ofReresentatives! fro%whichthe8roriations 8ct originated and towhich the@resident %ust have returned the law!isunwillingtooverridetheresidentialveto. Thereis! therefore! no "asis for the 'enate toevenconsider the ossi"ility of overridingthe@resident=s veto. :nder theConstitution thevote of two*third of all the %e%"ers ofthe9ouse of Reresentatives and the'enate!voting searately! will "eneededtooverride theresidential veto.2"4 6t is not feasi"le to $uestion theconstitutionality of the veto "efore the'ure%eCourt. 6nEon-alesvs. #acaraig! 191'CR810&! the 'ure%e Court uheld theconstitutionality of a si%ilar veto.:nder 8rticleAaCin$; Passa$e o" a Law(1988No. 1&: * &. 8"ill uon Dling "y a'enator or a#e%"er of the 9ouse ofReresentatives goesthrough seciDed stes "efore it leavesthe9ouse of Reresentatives or the'enate! as thecase %ay "e. 8fter leaving thelegislature!1&3lease na%e the three %ethods "ywhich said"ill %ay "eco%e a law.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+8 "ill assed "y Congress %ay "eco%ea law inany of the following cases:6f it is signed into law "y the @resident.28rt. Le$islati/e Powers (1988No. 1&: Kegislativeowers had"eenvested "ythe Constitution in the Congress of the@hiliines. 6n addition! theConstitution alsogranted the law%a5ing "ody! non*legislativeowers. Tindly na%e Dve of the latter.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+Congress has the following non*legislativeowers:214 To act as national "oard ofcanvassers for@resident and 42a4 /oes'antos= assu%tionof o7ceonthe "asis of the ad interi%aoint%entsissued "y the @resident a%ount to ate%orary aoint%ent which isrohi"ited "y 'ection 12&4! 8rticle 6;*Cof the ConstitutionJ)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+No! 'antos= aoint%ent does nota%ount to ate%orary aoint%ent. 8n ad interi%aoint%ent is a er%anentaoint%ent"ecause it ta5es eAect i%%ediatelyand can nolonger "ewithdrawn"ythe @residentonce theaointee has $ualiDed into o7ce. Thefact thatit is su"+ect to conDr%ation "y theCo%%issionon 8oint%ents does not alter itser%anentcharacter. The Constitution itself%a5es an adinteri% aoint%ent er%anent incharacter "y%a5ingit eAectiveuntil disaroved"y theCo%%issionon8oint%entsoruntilthe nextad+ourn%ent of Congress. 8 te%oraryoractingaointeedoesnot en+oyanysecurity oftenure! no %atter how "rieCy. 2#ati"agv.Beniayo! E.R. No. 1,93(1! 8ril &!&33&4)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+8n ad interi% aoint%ent is aer%anentaoint%ent and does not violate'ection 12&4!8rticle 6;*C of the Constitution.2@a%antasanng Kungsod ng #aynila v. 68C! E.R. No.K*10,(9! Nove%"er 1(!198042"4 8ssu%ing the legality of the Drst adinteri%aoint%ent and assu%tionofo7ce "y 'antos! were his second adinteri% aoint%ent and su"se$uentassu%tion of o7ce to the sa%eosition violations of the rohi"ition onreaoint%ent under 'ection 12&4!8rticle 6;*C of the ConstitutionJSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+No! the second ad interi% aoint%entandsu"se$uentassu%tionof o7cedoesnotviolate the Constitution. Therohi"ition onreaoint%entin'ection12&4! 8rticle6;*C ofthe Constitution does not aly to "y*assed adinteri% aoint%ents. 6t can "erevived "y anewadinteri%aoint%ent "ecausethere isno Dnal disarovalunder 'ection 11!8rticle4"4 Ihat are the constitutionalsafeguards ontheexerciseof the@resident=sowertoroclai% %artial lawJ 2&>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+a4 6f u"lic safety re$uires it! the@residentcan lace 'ulu and Basilan under%artial lawsince there is an actual re"ellion.:nder 'ection18!8rticle 677FThe @resident issued a @rocla%ationNo. 1318lacing the@hiliines under #artialKaw on theground that a re"ellion staged "ylawlessele%ents is endangering the u"licsafety.@ursuant to the @rocla%ation!susected re"elswere arrested and detained and%ilitarytri"unals were set u to try the%.Ro"ert delaCru-! a citi-en! Dled with the 'ure%eCourt aetition $uestioning the validity of@rocla%ationNo. 1318.1. /oes Ro"ert have a standing tochallenge@rocla%ation No. 1318J .xlain.2&.0>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#:?es! Ro"ert has standing. :nder 8rticle4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+6 do not agree that the 'ure%e Courtis acontinuing Constitutional Convention.Thecriticis%is"asedontheassu%tionthat inexercisingitsowerof +udicial reviewthe'ure%e Court 6s not %erelyinterreting theConstitution "ut is trying to re%a5e theEovern%ent on the "asis of theersonalredilections of the #e%"ers of the'ure%eCourt! this is a ower that roerly"elongs tothe eole and their electedreresentatives.The 'ure%e Court cannot decidecases%erely on the "asis of the letter of theConstitution. 6t has to interret theConstitutionto give eAect to the intent of itsfra%ers and ofthe eole adoting it. 6n 6nterretingtheConstitution! the 'ure%e Court has toadot it10&to the ever*changing circu%stances ofsociety.Ihen the 'ure%e Court stri5es downan actof the Kegislative or the .xecutive/eart%ent!it is %erely discharging its duty undertheConstitution to deter%ine conCictingclai%s ofauthority.)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+To a certain extent! the 'ure%e Courtis acontinuing Constitutional Convention.Ihen acase is "rought in court involving aconstitutional issue. 6t "eco%esnecessary tointerret the Constitution! 'ince the'ure%eCourt is sure%e within its ownshere! itsinterretationof theConstitutionwillfor% art ofthe law of the land.Issuan1e o" #estrainin$ Or%ersan%InBun1tions (1996No. 7: Congress is considering new%easurestoencourage foreigncororations to"ring theirinvest%ents to the @hiliines.Congress hasfound that foreign invest%ents aredeterred "ythe uncertain invest%ent cli%ate inthe@hiliines. Lne source of suchuncertainty isthe heightened +udicial intervention ininvest%ent %atters.Lnesuch%easurerovidesthat Bnocourt orad%inistrative agency shall issue anyrestrainingorderorin+unctionagainsttheBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 171Central Ban5B in the Ban5=s exercise ofitsregulatory owerover seciDc foreignexchangetransactions.Iould this "e a valid %easureJ.xlain.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+?es! the %easure is valid. 6n #antruste'yste%s! 6nc. vs. Court of 8eals! 179'CR81(1! the'ure%eCourt heldthat alawrohi"iting the issuance of anin+unction is valid!"ecause under 'ection &! 8rticle 4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+8ccording to 'ection 7! Chater &! Title6! Boo5< of the 8d%inistrative Code of 1987!thecareer service is characteri-ed "y214 .ntrance "ased on %erit andDtness to "edeter%ined as far as ractica"le "yco%etitiveexa%inationor "asedonhighlytechnical $ualiDcationsH2&4 oortunity for advance%ent tohighercareer ositionsH and2(4 security of tenure.The career service includes:214 [email protected] C8R..R @L'6T6LN' foraoint%ent to which rior$ualiDcations inan aroriate exa%ination isre$uiredH2&4 CKL'./ C8R..R @L'6T6LN' whicharescientiDc or highly technical in natureH2(4 @ositions in the C8R..R .;.C:T6G0. The rule re$uiring Congress torovide forthe standardi-ation of co%ensation ofgovern%ent o7cials and e%loyees.F&>GSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+1. 'ection 1(. 8rticle 4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+8ccording to @al%era v. Civil 'erviceCo%%ission! &(0'CR887! '.C:R6T?L)T.N:R. %eans that no o7cer ore%loyee inthe Civil 'ervice shall "e susended ordis%issed excet for cause as rovided"y lawand after due rocess.17()#TICLE IL COAELECEle1toral Tri8unal; Fun1tions ICo-,osition(ED>677F1.Ihatisthe function ofthe 'enate.lectoralTri"unal and the 9ouse ofReresentatives.lectoral Tri"unalJ 2&.0>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+:nder 8rticle 4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+The law granting the CL#.K.C+urisdictionover inclusion and exclusion cases isunconstitutional. :nder 'ection &2(4!8rticle 6;Cof the Constitution! the CL#.K.Ccannotdecidetherighttovote! whichrefersto theinclusion and exclusion of voters.:nder'ection &214! 8rticle 6;*C of theConstitution! itcan only Dle etitions in court forinclusion orexclusion of voters.Ele1tion Laws6n% Pla1er #ule (6779NoTer- Li-it; "ro-Auni1i,alit4 toNewl4>Create% Cit4 (E9>677D&. #anuel was elected #ayor of the#uniciality of Tu"a in the elections of199&!1990 and 1998. 9e fully served his Drsttwoter%s! andduringhisthirdter%! the%unicialitywas converted into the co%onent Cityof Tu"a. The said charter rovided for aholdoverand so without interregnu%#anuelwenton to serve as the #ayor of the City ofTu"a.1896n the &331 elections! #anuel Dled hiscertiDcate of candidacy for City #ayor.9edisclosed! though! that he had alreadyservedfor three consecutive ter%s as elected#ayorwhen Tu"a was still a %uniciality. 9ealsostatedinhis certiDcateof candidacythat he isrunningfor theositionof #ayor forthe Drstti%e now that Tu"a is a city.Reyes! an adversary! ran against#anuel andetitioned that he "e dis$ualiDed"ecause hehad already served for threeconsecutive ter%sas #ayor. The etition was not ti%elyacteduon! and #anuel was roclai%ed thewinnerwith &3!333 votes over the 13!333votesreceived"yReyesastheonlyothercandidate.6t was only after #anuel too5 his oathandassu%ed o7ce that the CL#.K.Cruled thathe was dis$ualiDed for having ran andservedfor three consecutive ter%s. 20>42a4 8s lawyer of #anuel! resent theossi"le argu%ents to revent hisdis$ualiDcation and re%oval.SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+8s lawyer of #anuel! 6 would arguethat heshould not "e dis$ualiDed andre%oved"ecause he was a three*ter% %ayor ofthe%uniciality of Tu"a! and! with itsconversion toa co%onent city! the latter has atotallysearate and diAerent cororateersonalityfro% that of the %uniciality.#oreover! as aBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 169rule! in a reresentative de%ocracy!the eoleshould "e allowed freely to choosethose whowill govern the%. 9aving won theelections! thechoice of the eole should "eresected.2"4 9ow would you rule on whether ornot#anuel is eligi"le to run as #ayor ofthe newly*created City of Tu"ai%%ediately after having alreadyserved for three 2(4 consecutive ter%sas #ayor of the #uniciality of Tu"aJSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+#anuel is not eligi"le to run as %ayorof the cityof Tu"a. The 1987 ConstitutionseciDcallyincluded an excetiontotheeole=sfreedo%to choose those who will govern the%in orderto avoid the evil of a single ersonaccu%ulatingexcessiveoweroveraarticularterritorial +urisdictionasaresult of arolongedstay in the sa%e o7ce. To allow#anuel to viefor the osition of city %ayor afterhavingserved for three consecutive ter%s asa%unicial %ayor would o"viouslydefeat theveryintentof thefra%erswhentheywrote thisexcetion. 'hould he "e allowedanother threeconsecutive ter%s as %ayor of the Cityof Tu"a!#anuel would then "e ossi"ly holdingo7ce aschief executive over the sa%eterritorial+urisdiction and inha"itants for atotalofeighteen consecutive years. This is theveryscenario sought to "e avoided "y theConstitution! if not a"horred "y it.2Katasa v.193CL#.K.C! E.R. No. 10,8&9! /ece%"er13!&33(42c4 8ssu%ing that #anuel is not aneligi"le candidate! re"ut Reyes= clai%that he should "e roclai%ed aswinner having received the next highernu%"er of votes.)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+Reyes cannot "e roclai%ed winner forreceivingthesecondhighest nu%"erof votes.The 'ure%e Court has consistentlyruled thatthe fact that a lurality or a %a+ority ofthe votesare cast for an ineligi"le candidate at aoularelection! or that acandidateis laterdeclared to"e dis$ualiDed to hold o7ce! does notentitlethe candidate who garnered thesecond highestnu%"er of votes to "e declaredelected. Thesa%e %erely results in %a5ing thewinningcandidate=s election a nullity. 6n theresentcase! 13!333 votes were cast forrivateresondent Reyes as against the&3!333 votescast for etitioner #anuel. The secondlacer iso"viously not the choice of the eolein thisarticular election. The er%anentvacancy inthe contested o7ce should "e Dlled "ysuccession. 2Ka"o v. CL#.K.C! E.R.No.130111! Quly (!199&4)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+Reyes could not "e roclai%ed aswinner"ecause he did not win the election. Toallowthedefeatedcandidatetota5eoverthe#ayoralty desite his re+ection "y theelectorateis to disenfranchise the electoratewithout anyfault ontheir art andtounder%inethei%ortance and %eaning of de%ocracyand theeole=s right to elect o7cials of theirchoice.2Benito v. CL#.K.C! E.R. No. 13130(!8ugust17! 199,4?a1an14; ENe1t o" ?i1e>Aa4or)1tin$ )sAa4or (6776No ;64SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+8. 'ince the #unicial #ayor iste%orarilyincaacitated to erfor% his duties! inaccordancewith'ection,12a4 of theKocalEovern%ent Code! the #unicial 42&4 two or %ore highly ur"ani-ed cities.21>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+1.4 :nder 'ection 1182"4 of the KocalEovern%ent Code! "oundarydisutesinvolvingtwoor%ore%unicialitieswithinthesa%erovince shall "e settled "y thesanggunianganlalawigan concerned.&.4 :nder 'ection 1182d4 of the KocalEovern%ent Code! "oundarydisutesinvolvingtwo or %ore highly ur"ani-ed citiesshall "esettled "y the sanggunianganlungsod of thearties.Creation o" New Lo1al 'o/ern-entUnits;Ple8is1ite #eHuire-ent (677=NL. 677F'tate whether or not the law isconstitutional..xlain "rieCy.(. 8 law Dxing the ter%s of localelectiveo7cials! other than "arangay o7cials!to 1years. 2&>4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+The lawis invalid. :nder 8rticle ;!'ection 8 ofthe 1987 Constitution! Bthe ter%ofo7ce ofelective local o7cials! excet "arangayo7cials!which shall "e deter%ined "y law! shall"e threeyearsandnosucho7cial shall servefor %orethan three consecutive ter%s.B The lawclearlygoes against the aforesaidconstitutionalre$uire%ent of three year ter%s forlocalo7cials excet for "arangay o7cials.Or%inan1e; Use I Lease o"Pro,erties;Pu8li1 Use (1997No. 9: /ue to over*crowding in theu"lic%ar5et in @aco! #anila! the CityCouncil assedan ordinance allowing the lease tovendors ofartsof thestreetswheretheu"lic%ar5et islocated! rovided that the lessees ayto thecity govern%ent a fee of @03 ers$uare %eterof theareaoccuied"ythelessees.Theresidents in the area co%lained to the#ayorthat the lease of the u"lic streetswould causeserioustra7cro"le%stothe%. The#ayorcancelledtheleaseandorderedthere%oval ofthe stalls constructed on the streets.Ias the act of the #ayor legalJSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+Thecancellation ofthe leaseandthere%ovalof the stalls are valid. 8s held in#acasiano vs./io5no! &1&'CR8,1,! theleaseofu"licstreets is void! since they are reservedforu"lic use and are outside theco%%erce of%an.Or%inan1e; ?ali%it4; Closure orLease o"Pro,erties "or Pu8li1 Use (6779No;6 * 8naggrievedresident of theCity of#anila Dled %anda%us roceedingsagainst thecity%ayor andthecityengineer toco%eltheseo7cials tore%ovethe%ar5etstalls fro%certain city streets which they haddesignatedas Cea%ar5ets. @ortions of thesaidcity streetswere leased or licensed "y theresondento7cials to %ar5et stallholders "yvirtue of a cityordinance. /ecide the disute.FI#ST )LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+The etition should "e granted. 6naccordancewith#acasianov. /io5no. &1&'CR8,1,198F199&G! since u"lic streets areroerties foru"lic use and are outside theco%%erce of%an! the City #ayor and the City.ngineercannot lease or license ortions of thecitystreets to %ar5et stallholders.SECON( )LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+Theetitionshould"edenied. :nder'ection&12d4of the Kocal Eovern%ent Code! acity %ay"y ordinance te%orarily close a streetso thata Cea %ar5et %ay "e esta"lished.Or%inan1e; ?ali%it4;Co-,ensation;Tortuous )1t o" an E-,lo4ee(199=No. 1H Qohnny was e%loyed as adriver "y the#uniciality of Calu%it! Bulacan.Ihile drivingrec5lessly a %unicial du% truc5 withits loadof sand for the reair of %unicialstreets!BARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 168Qohnnyhita+eeney. Twoassengersof the+eeney were 5illed.The 'angguniang Bayan assed anordinancearoriating @(33!333 asco%ensation forthe heirs of the victi%s.14 6s the %uniciality lia"le for thenegligenceof QohnnyJ&4 6s the %unicial ordinance validJSU''ESTE( )NS*E#+&4 The ordinance aroriating@(33!333.33 fortheheirsof thevicti%sof Qohnnyisvoid. Thisa%ounts to aroriating u"lic fundsfor arivate urose. :nder 'ection ((0 ofthe KocalEovern%ent Code! no u"lic %oneyshall "earoriated for rivate uroses.)LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#;:on the foregoing considerations! the%unicial ordinance is null and void for"eingultra vires. The %uniciality not "einglia"le toayco%ensationtotheheirsof thevicti%s!the ordinance is utterly devoid of legal"asis. 6twould in fact constitute an illegaluseorexenditure of u"lic funds which is acri%inaloAense. Ihat is%ore! theordinancedoes not%eet one of the re$uisites for validityof%unicialordinances! ie.! that it %ust"e inconsonance with certain well*esta"lished and"asic rinciles of a su"stantivenature! to wit: itdoesnot contravenetheConstitutionor the law!it is not unfair or oressive. 6t is notartial ordiscri%inatory. 6t is consistent withu"lic olicy!and it is not unreasona"le.Or%inan1e; ?ali%it4; Lo1al Ta*foreign cororation. The oeration of arawnhatchery does not involve exloitationof naturalresources within the %eaning of'ections & and(! 8rticle ;66 of the 1987 Constitution.2'ecretary of Qustice! L. No. (! s.19884 'incethe ortion of the ar5 had "eenwithdrawn fro%u"lic use! it could "e disosed for anylawfulurose including leasing it to aforeigncororation.)#TICLE LI )11ounta8ilit4 o"Pu8li1 OO1ers)8an%on-ent o" OO1e (6777No 4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+8lcantara cannot reassu%e o7ce as%e%"er ofthe 'angguniang Bayan. 8s held in'angguniangBayanof 'an8ndresv.Court of8eals! &8, 'CR8 &71 219984!8lcantarashould "e dee%ed to have a"andonedhisosition as %e%"er of the'angguniang Bayan.9is intention to a"andon his osition isshown"y his failure to erfor% his function as%e%"erofthe 'angguniang Bayan! hisfailureto collectthe salary for the osition! his failure too"+ect totheaoint%ent of his relace%ent!and hisfailure to initiate any act to reassu%ehis ostafter the reorgani-ation of the'angguniangBayan was voided.8lcantara eAected his intention "y hisletter ofresignation! his assu%tion of o7ce as%e%"er&38of the 'angguniang @anlalawigan! hisdischarge of his duties as its %e%"er!and hisreceit of the salary for such ost.8lcantaracannot "edee%edtohavelost hiso7ce as %e%"er ofthe 'angguniangBayan "yresignation. :nder 'ection8&of theKocalEovern%ent Code! the resignationshould "esu"%ittedtothe 'angguniang Bayan.9esu"%itted it to the #ayor instead! andtheresignation was not acceted.(is1i,line; Cle-en14; (o1trine o"Con%onation (6777No 4':EE.'T./ 8N'I.RHa4 Cru-cannolonger holdo7cefortheortion of the ter% he failed to servesince hister% has exired."4 'antos was not a usurer. 9e was ade facto o7cer! since he had a color ofelectionto the o7ce of #unicial #ayor "yvirtue of thedecision in the election rotest. 9ence!he isentitled to the e%olu%ents of theo7ce.Ele1ti/ePu8li1OO1ers; (eFa1toOO1er;eNe1ts (677=L>B. 84':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:?es! cronyis% is a legal ground for thei%each%ent of the@resident. :nder'ection&! 8rticle ;6 of the Constitution!"etrayal ofu"lic trust is one of the grounds for6%each%ent. Thisreferstoviolationof theoathof o7ceandincludes cronyis%whichinvolves unduly favoring a crony to there+udice of u"lic interest! 2Record oftheConstitutional Co%%ission! G&. 8 religious cororation is $ualiDed to have lands in the @hiliines onwhich it %ay"uild 6ts church and %a5e otheri%rove%entsrovided these are actually! directlyandexclusively used for religious uroses.F&>G(. 8 religious cororation [email protected]&>G,. 8 religious cororation can ac$uirerivate lands in the @hiliinesrovided all its%e%"ers are citi-ens of the@hiliines. F&>G0. 8 foreign cororation can [email protected]&>G':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:1. 6 disagree. :nder 'ection 7! 8rticle;66 of the Constitution! a cororation orassociation which is sixty ercentowned "y)iliino citi-ens can ac$uire rivateland!"ecauseit canleaseu"liclandandcantherefore hold u"lic land. 9owever! itcannotac$uireu"licland. :nder 'ection(!8rticle ;66of the Constitution! rivatecororations andassociations can only lease and cannotac$uireu"lic land.:nder 'ection 8! 8rticle ;66 of theConstitution! a natural*"orn )iliinociti-en wholost his @hiliine citi-enshi %ayac$uirerivatelandonlyandcannot ac$uireu"licland.&. 6 disagree. The %ere fact that acororation is religious does not entitleit to ownu"lic land. 8s held 6n Register of/eeds vs.:ng 'iu 'i Te%le! 97 @hil. 08! 11! landtenureis not indisensa"le to the freeexercise and&&(en+oy%ent of religious rofession ofworshi.The religious cororation can ownrivate landonly if it is at least sixty er centowned "y)iliino citi-ens.(. 6 disagree. :nder 'ection 1 of@residential /ecree No. ,71!cororations andassociations owned "y aliens areallowed toleaserivatelands utotwenty*Dveyears!renewa"le for another eriod oftwenty*Dveyears uon agree%ent of the lessorand thelessee. 9ence! even if the religiouscororationis owned "y aliens! it can lease rivatelands.,. 6 disagree. )or a cororation= to$ualify to ac$uire rivate lands in the@hiliines! under 'ection 7! 8rticle ;nof theConstitutioninrelationto'ection&!8rticle ;66of the Constitution! only sixty er cent213>4 ofthe cororation is re$uired to "eowned "y)iliino citi-ens for it to $ualify toac$uire rivatelands.0. 6 agree. 8 foreign cororation canlease rivate lands only and cannotlease u"licland. :nder 'ection &! 8rticle ;66 of theConstitution! the exloration!develo%ent andutili-ation of u"lic lands %ay "eunderta5enthrough co*roduction. Qoint venture orroduction*sharing agree%ents onlywith)iliino citi-en or cororations orassociationswhich are at least sixty er cent owned"y)iliino citi-en.)1Huisition o" Lan%s (1987No. ;4SU''ESTE( )NS*E#+; cannot recover the land whetherfro% C or 8and B. :nder 8rticle 6 of thecaital of which is owned "y suchciti-enscertain areas of invest%ent. There can"e no$uestion then as to the validity of theNationali-ation of Retail Trade Kaw! theconstitutionality of which wassustained in6chongv. 9ernande-! 131@hil. 1100219074even in the a"sence of a si%ilarexress grantof ower to Congress under the 19(0Constitution. 8lthough Congress canreeal ora%end such law! it %ay not "ea%ended "y atreaty in view of 8rt. ;66! 'ec. && whichdeclaresacts of circu%vent or negate anyrovisions ofthis8rt. ;66 to"eini%ical tonationalinterestandsu"+ect theoAenderstocri%inaland civilsanctions. )or then the Retail TradeNationali-ation Kaw"eco%es art of8rt. ;66!having"eenassedursuant tothe%andate in'ec. 13.9owever! it %ay also "e lausi"lyargued that atreaty %ay a%end a rior lawandtreaty offriendshi! co%ity and co%%erce with6ndonesia %ay "e dee%ed to havecreated anexcetion in the Nationali-ation ofRetail Trade&&9Kaw in favor of 6ndonesian citi-en.Ec4 133>&4 Eive two cases in which aliens %ay"eallowed to ac$uire e$uity in a "usinessactivity"ut cannot articiate in the%anage%entthereofJ':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:14a48tleastsixty ercent213>4ofthe e$uityof the entities engaged in the following"usiness%ust "e owned "y )iliino citi-ensunder theConstitution.1. Co*roduction! Qoint venture! orroduction*sharing agree%ent withthe 'tate for the exloration!develo%ent! and utili-ation ofnatural resources 2'ection &! 8rticle;664&. Leration of a u"lic utility 2'ection11! 8rticle ;664(. .ducation 2'ection ,2&4! 8rticle ;64':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:The law is valid as under 8rticle ;66!'ection & of the 1987 Constitution! theexloration! develo%ent! andutili-ation ofnatural resources shall "eunder thefullcontrol and suervision of the 'tate. 6tisalso rovided that the 'tate %aydirectlyunderta5e such activities or it %ayenterinto co*roduction! +oint venture orsharingagree%ents with )iliino citi-ens orcororations or associations! at least13>)iliino*owned.)urther%ore! the@resident%ayenterintoagree%ents with foreign*ownedcororations involving technical orDnancial assistance for large*scaleexloration! develo%ent! andutili-ation of%inerals! etroleu% and other %ineraloils!according to ter%s and conditionsrovided "y law. 8 state cororation!unli5e a rivate cororation! %ay "ecreated "y secial law and lacedunderthe control of the @resident! su"+ect tosuch conditions as the creating statute%ay rovide.)#TICLE LIII So1ial Musti1e an%Hu-an #i$hts)$rarian #e"or-Law; Co/era$e(1996No. 1&: Teodoro Ku-ung is engaged inthe"usiness of rawn far%ing! The rawnsarenurturedinhis Dshonds in#indoroand! uonharvest! are i%%ediately fro-en forexort.Congress assed the Co%rehensive8grarian Refor%Kawof 1988 whichrovidesa%ong others that all rivate landsdevoted toagriculture shall "e su"+ect to agrarianrefor%.The law includes under the ter%BagricultureBthefollowingactivities: cultivationofthe soil!lanting of cros! growing of fruittrees! raisingof livestoc5! oultry or Dsh. The/eart%ent of8grarian Refor% issued ani%le%enting order&((which rovides that co%%ercialfar%sused fora$ua*culture! including salt*"eds!Dshonds andrawnfar%s arewithinthescoeofthe law.Can the law "e declaredunconstitutionalJ/ecide.':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:8s held in L*> 9ar1s /s. 8ecre+ary o)+-e4BARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 1D7':EE.'T./ 8N'I.RHThe osition of the /eart%ent of@u"lic Ior5sand 9ighways and of the localgovern%ent unitis correct. 8s held in .xort @rocessingMone&(08uthority v. Co%%ission on 9u%anRights! &38'CR81&0 2199&4! no rovision in theConstitution or any law confers on theCo%%ission on 9u%an Rights+urisdiction toissuete%oraryrestrainingordersorwrits ofreli%inary in+unction. TheCo%%ission on9u%an Rights has no +udicial ower. 6tsowersare %erely investigatory.Co--ission on Hu-an #i$hts;Power;Li-itations (E=>677D2&4 '$uatters and vendors have ut ustructures in an area intended for a@eole=s @ar5! which are i%eding theCowof tra7c in the ad+oining highway.#ayorCru- gave notice for the structures to"ere%oved! and the area vacated withina%onth! or else! face de%olition ande+ect%ent. The occuants Dled a casewiththe Co%%ission on 9u%an Rights2C9R4 tosto the #ayor=s %ove.The C9R then issued an Border todesistBagainst#ayorCru-withwarningthathewould"eheldinconte%tshouldhefail toco%ly with the desistance order.Ihen theallotted ti%e lased! #ayor Cru-caused thede%olition and re%oval of thestructures.8ccordingly! the C9R cited hi% forconte%t. 20>42a4 Ihat is your concet of 9u%anRightsJ/oes this case involve violations ofhu%an rights within the scoe of theC9R=s +urisdictionJ':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R::nder the :niversal /eclaration of9u%an Rights! the 6nternationalCovenant on .cono%ic! 'ocial andCultural Rights and 6nternationalCovenant on Civil and @olitical Rights!the scoe of hu%an rights includesB+-ose +-a+ re'a+e +o an indi/id*a'Hssocia'( econo1ic( c*'+*ra'( po'i+ica' andci/i' re'a+ions... a'ong &i+- &-a+ isgenera''y considered +o be -is in-eren+and ina'ienab'e rig-+s( enco1passinga'1os+ a'' aspec+s o) 'i)e.B6n the case at "ar! the land ad+oins a"usy national highway and theconstruction of the s$uatter shantiesi%edes the Cow of tra7c. Theconse$uent danger to life and li%"cannot "e ignored. 6t is aradoxicalthata right which is clai%ed to have "eenviolated is one that cannot! in the Drstlace! even "e invo5ed! if it is! in fact!extant. Based on the circu%stanceso"taining in this instance! the C9Rorder forde%olitiondonotfallwithintheco%art%ent of hu%an rightsviolationsinvolving civil and olitical rightsintended "y the Constitution. 2'i%on v.Co%%ission on 9u%an Rights! E.R.No. 133103! Qanuary 0! 199,42"4 CantheC9RissueanBorder todesistBor restraining orderJ':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:The C9R %ay not issue an Border todesistB or restraining order. Theconstitutional rovision directing theC9R to rovide for reventive%easures to those whose hu%anrightshave "een violated or need rotection%ay not "e construed to confer+urisdiction on the Co%%ission to issuea restraining order or writ of in+unctionfor! it that were the intention! theConstitution would have exressly saidso. Qurisdiction is conferred only "y theConstitution or "y law. 6t is neverderived "y i%lication. 2.xort@rocessing Mone 8uthority v.Co%%ission on 9u%an Rights! E.R.No. 131,71! 8ril 1,! 199&42c4 6s the C9R e%owered to declare#ayor Cru- in conte%tJ /oes it haveconte%t owers at allJ':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:&(1The C9R does not ossess ad+udicativefunctions and therefore! on its own! isnot e%owered to declare #ayor Cru-in conte%t for issuing the Border todesist.B 9owever! under the 1987Constitution! the C9R isconstitutionallyauthori-ed! in the exercise of itsinvestigative functions! to Badot itsoerational guidelines and rules ofrocedure! and cite for conte%t forviolations thereof inaccordancewiththeRules of Court.B 8ccordingly! the C9R!in the course of an investigation! %ayonly cite or hold any erson inconte%tandi%osethearoriateenaltiesinaccordance with the rocedure andsanctions rovided for in the Rules ofCourt. 2Carino v. Co%%ission onBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 1D19u%an Rights! E.R. No. 91181!/ece%"er &! 19914La8or; #i$ht toSel">Or$ani0ation(1988No. &: Because of the %ar5ed increasein theincidence of la"or stri5es and of wor5stoages in industrial esta"lish%ents!Congress intending to hel ro%oteindustrialeace! assed! overtheo"+ectionsof%ilitantla"or unions! an a%end%ent to theKa"or Code!roviding that no erson who is or has"een a%e%"er ofthe Co%%unist @arty %ayserve asan o7cer of any la"or organi-ation inthecountry. 8n association of for%er N@8s2New@eoles 8r%y4 whohadsurrendered!availed ofa%nesty! and are resently leading$uiet andeaceful lives! co%es to you as5ingwhat could"e done against the a%end%ent. Ihatwouldyou advise the association to doJ.xlain.':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:6n PA9L7 /. 8ecre+ary o) Labor! &7'CR8 ,3 219194 the 'ure%e Courtuheld thevalidity of sec. &( of the 6ndustrial@eace 8ctre$uiring la"or unions to su"%it! within13 daysof the election of its o7cers! a7davitsof thelatter that they are not %e%"ers of theCo%%unist @arty! against the clai%that there$uire%entundulycurtailedfreedo%ofasse%"lyandassociation. TheCourtointedout that the Dling of the a7davits was%erely acondition for the ac$uisition "y a la"ororgani-ation of legal ersonality andtheen+oy%ent of certain rights andrivileges whichtheConstitutiondoes not guarantee.Ln theother hand! the re$uire%entconstitutes a validexercise of the 'tate=s olice ower torotectthe u"lic against a"use! fraud andi%ostors.But the dis$ualiDcation of %e%"ers ofthe C@@ and its %ilitary ar%! the N@8!fro%"eingo7cersof ala"or unionwould214 nullifythe a%nesty granted "y the @residentwith theconcurrence! it %ay "eassu%ed! ofthe%a+orityof the%e%"ersof Congressand 2&4er%it the conde%nation of the for%erN@8%e%"ers without +udicial trial in a waythat%a5es it contrary to the rohi"itionagainst theenact%ent of "ill of attainderandexost factolaw. The a%nesty granted to thefor%er N@8s&(7o"literatedtheir oAenseandrelievedthe% ofthe unish%ent i%osed "y law.2Barrio$uintov! )ernande-! 8& @hil. 1,& 219,944. Thea%end%ent would %a5e the% guilty ofan act!that of having"eenfor%er %e%"ersof theN@8! for which they have already "eenforgiven"y @residential a%nesty.)or these reasons! 6 would advise theassociation to wor5 for the veto of the"ill and! ifit is not vetoed "ut "eco%es a law! tochallengeit in court.La8or; #i$ht to StriCe (1988No5 1: 9earings "efore a congressionalco%%ittee have esta"lished that %anyDr%s atthe Bataan .xort @rocessing Monehad closeddown or ulled out "ecause ofunsta"le la"orconditions resulting in so %any stri5es.Tore%edy the situation and in+ect vitalityto theexort exansion rogra%! so%econgressionalleaders and "usiness executivesroose thatstri5e*free exort -ones "eesta"lished./o you "elieve that under the resentConstitution! it is legally ossi"le tout u sucha stri5e*free exort rocessing -one inthecountryJ Ihy or why notJ':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:No. Thefact that %anyDr%sat theBataan.@M8 have "een forced to close down"yunsta"le la"or condition "rought a"out"y stri5edoes not +ustify the "an on stri5e. TheConstitutionguarantees therights ofwor5ers toengage in Beaceful concertedactivities!including the right to stri5e inaccordance withlaw.B 28rt. ;666! sec. (4. 6t is illegalstri5es whichcan"erohi"ited"ut not all stri5es.)or stri5e isla"or=s legiti%ate weaon. 6n thea"sence of aco%ellinginterestofthestate2suchas healthand safety! e.g.! the rohi"ition ofstri5e inhositalsandindustriesindisensa"leto thenational interest4 it cannot "erohi"ited.La8or; #i$ht to StriCe (1999No. 10: Congress%an Cheng says he isone ofthe co*authors of the 'u"ic Bay#etroolitan8uthority Charter. 9e declares that the'B#8 istheanswertoraidecono%icgrowthand theattain%ent of the @resident=s @hiliine&333Bdrea%. 9owever! Cheng is worried thatforeigncaital %ight "e slow in co%ing in duetounsta"lewor5ingconditions resultingfro% too%any stri5es. To re%edy this situation.Chengrooses an a%end%ent to 'B#8 lawdeclaring it as a stri5e*free -one ortotal "an onstri5es. 6s this roosal legallydefensi"leJ.xlain "rieCy.':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:8rt. ;666. sec. ( of the Constitutionguaranteestheright of all wor5erstoengageineacefulconcerted activities! including the rightto stri5eBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 1D6inaccordance withlaw. Thus! alawcannottotallyrohi"it theright tostri5e"utcan only&(8regulate the exercise thereof. 9isroosal to"an stri5es totally in the 'u"ic 'ecial.cono%ic and )reeort Mone is!thereforeunconstitutional.8KT.RN8T64':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:8. 8ccording to Reyes /. Co*r+ o)Appea's! 19, 'CR8 ,3&! acade%icfreedo% isthefreedo%of afaculty%e%"er toursue hisstudiesinhisarticularsecialtyandthereafterto %a5e 5nown or u"lish the result ofhisendeavors without fear that retri"utionwould "e&,&visitedonhi%intheevent that hisconclusionsarefounddistasteful or o"+ectiona"le"y theowers that "e! whether in theolitical!econo%ic! or acade%icesta"lish%ents.6n 4arcia /. 9ac*'+y Ad1issionCo11i++ee! 18 'CR8 &77! it was heldthat theacade%icfreedo%ofaninstitutionofhigherlearning includes the freedo% todeter%ine who%ay teach! what %ay "e taught! how itshall "etaught! andwho%ay"ead%ittedtostudy.Because of acade%ic freedo%! aninstitution ofhigher learning can refuse to re*enrolla studentwhoisacade%icallydeDcient or whohasviolated the rules of disciline.8cade%icfreedo%grants institutions of higherlearningthe discretion to for%ulate rules for thegrantingof honors. Ki5ewise! "ecause ofacade%icfreedo%! an institution of higherlearning canclose a school.E%u1ation; )lien Enrollees I(onors (1999No66 * C. Ihat is the rule on thenu%"er ofalienswho%ayenroll ineducationalinstitutionsinthe@hiliines. Eivetheexcetionto therule. #ay such institutions accetdonationsfro% foreign students under theretext thatsuch donations are to "e used to "uye$ui%ent and i%rove schoolfacilitiesJ.xlain. 2&>4':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:C. :nder 'ection ,2&4! 8rticle ;6< ofthe Constitution! no grou of aliensshallco%rise%orethanone*thirdof theenroll%entin any school. The excetion refers toschoolsesta"lished for foreign dilo%aticersonnel andtheir deendents and! unlessotherwiserovided "y law! for other foreignte%oraryresidents..ducational institutions %ay accetdonations fro%foreign students. Norovision inthe Constitution or any law rohi"its it.E%u1ation; (utieso" Statein#eE%u1ation(1999No 66 * B. Eive two duties of the state%andated "y the Constitutionregardingeducation. 2&>4':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:B. 8rticle ;6< of the Constitutioni%oses thefollowing duties regarding educationuon the'tate:1. The 'tate shall rotect and ro%otethe right of all citi-ens to $ualityeducation at all levels and shall ta5earoriate stes to %a5e sucheducation accessi"le to all. 2'ection14BARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 1DD&. The 'tate shall esta"lish! %aintainand suort a co%lete! ade$uate!and integrated syste% of educationrelevant to the needs of the eoleand society. F'ection &214G(. The 'tate shall esta"lish and%aintaina syste% of free u"lic education inthe ele%entary and high schoollevels. F'ection &2&4G,. The 'tate shall esta"lish and%aintaina syste% of scholarshi grants!student loan rogra%s! su"sidies! andother incentives which shall "eavaila"le to deserving students in"oth u"lic and rivate schools!&,(esecially to the underrivileged.F'ection &2(4G0. The 'tate shall encouragenonfor%al!infor%al and indigenouslearning syste%s! as well asselCearning!indeendent and out*ofschoolstudy rogra% articularlythose that resond to co%%unityneeds! F'ection &\,\G1. The 'tate shall rovide adultciti-ens!the disa"led! and out*of*school youthwith training in civics! vocationale7ciency and other s5ills. F'ection&204G7. The 'tate shall ta5e into accountregional and sectoral needs andconditions and shall encourage locallanning in the develo%ent ofeducational olicies and rogra%s.F'ection 021\G8. The 'tate shall enhance the rights ofteachers to rofessionaladvance%ent. Non*teachingacade%ic and non*acade%icersonnel shall en+oy the rotection ofthe 'tate. F'ection 02,4G9. The 'tate shall assign the highest"udgetary riority to education andensure that teaching will attract andretain its rightful share of the "estavaila"le talents through ade$uatere%uneration and other %eans of +o"satisfaction and fulDll%ent. F'ection0204GFNote: The $uestion as5s for twoconstitutional duties of the stateregardingeducation.GE%u1ation; Fla$ Salute (1987No. ;666: There$uire%ent that schoolchildrenarticiate in Cag cere%onies has"een thesu"+ect of controversy. Ln the onehand it is theview that the re$uire%ent violatesreligiousfreedo%H on the other is the 'ure%eCourtdecision that "ecause of relevantrovisions ofthe19(0ConstitutiontheCagsalute%ay "evalidly re$uired.Ihich of the a"ove Dnds suort on1987 Constitution! Cite at least tworovisionsto rove your oint.':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:TheviewthatCagsalute%ayvalidly"ere$uired Dnds suort in the followingrovisions of the 1987 Constitution:2a4 8rt! ;68. /istinguish "rieCy "ut clearly"etween:&4 The contiguous -one and theexclusiveecono%ic -one.&01':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:2&4 CLNT6E:L:' MLN. is a -onecontiguousto the territorial sea and extends u totwel/enauti1al -iles fro% the territorial seaand overwhichthecoastal state%ayexercisecontrolnecessarytorevent infringe%ent ofitscusto%s! Dscal! i%%igration orsanitary lawsandregulationswithinitsterritoryorterritorialsea. 28rticle((of theConventiononthe Kaw ofthe 'ea.4The .;CK:'64The incu%"ent @resident is Rosalyn9iggins.0. Ihat is hisRher nationalityJ 21 >4'he is a national of the :nitedTingdo% ora British su"+ect.2NLT.: 'ince $uestions 6;2,4 and 6;204donot test the exa%inees=5nowledge ofthelaw! it is suggested that they "edisregarded41. 6n 1983! the :nited 'tates Dled withthe6nternational Court of Qustice aco%laintagainst 6ran alleging that the latter isdetaining 8%erican dilo%ats inviolationof 6nternational Kaw. .xlain how the6nternational Court of Qustice canac$uire+urisdiction over these contendingcountries. 20>4:nder 8rticle (1 of the 6.C.Q. 'tatutes!"oth arties %ust agree to su"%itthe%selves to the +urisdiction of the6nternational Court of Qustice.International Law /s5 Auni1i,alLaw;Territorial Prin1i,le; InternationalCri-es(E6>677D2&4 @olice L7cer 9enry #agiting of theNarcotics 'ection of the Iestern @olice/istrict alied for a search warrant intheRegional Trial Court of #anila forviolationBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 176of 'ection 11! 8rticle 66 2@ossession of@rohi"ited /rugs4 of Reu"lic 8ct 2R.8.4No. 9110 2Co%rehensive /angerous/rugs 8ct of &33&4 for the search andsei-ureof heroinintheca"inof theCatainof the #'' 'eastar! a foreign*registeredvessel which was %oored at the 'outh9ar"or! #anila! its ort of destination.Based on the a7davits of thealicant=switnesses who were crew %e%"ers ofthevessel! they saw a "ox containing ten21345ilogra%sof heroinunder the"edintheCatain=s ca"in. The RTC foundro"a"lecause for the issuance of a searchwarrantHnevertheless! it denied the alicationonthe ground that @hiliine courts havenocri%inal +urisdictionover violationsofR.8.No. 9110 co%%itted on foreign*registeredvessels found in @hiliine waters.6s the ruling of the court correctJ'uortyour answer with reasons. 20>48KT.RN8T6Li-itation(E17>677F&. Ihat is the relationshi "etweenrecirocity and the rincile ofautoli%itationJ2&.0>48KT.RN8T6B.;n ro*+eto the tuna Dshinggrounds inthe@aciDcLcean! avessel registeredinCountry TI entered the BalintangChannelnorth of Ba"uyan 6sland and withsecial hoo5sand nets dragged u red corals foundnearBatanes. By international conventioncertain&77corals are rotected secies. Qust"efore thevessel reached the high seas! theCoast Euardatrol interceted the vessel andsei-ed itscargo including tuna. The %aster ofthe vesseland the owner of the cargo rotested!clai%ingthe rights of transit assage andinnocentassage! andsought recoveryof thecargo andthereleaseof theshi. 6stheclai%%eritoriousor notJ Reason "rieCy. 20>4':EE.'T./ 8N'I.RHThe clai% of innocent assage is not%eritorious. Ihilethevessel hastheright ofinnocent assage! it should notco%%it aviolation of any internationalconvention. Thevessel did not %erely navigate throughtheterritorial sea! it also dragged redcorals inviolation of the internationalconvention whichrotected the red corals. This isre+udicial tothe good order of the @hiliines.28rticle 192&4of theConventionontheKawof the'ea4#i$hts an% O8li$ation un%er UNCharter(1991No. 1,: 'tate ; invades and con$uers'tate ?.The :nited Nations 'ecurity Councildeclarestheinvasionandcon$uestillegal andorders aninternational e%"argo against 'tate ;.'u"se$uently! the sa%e :.N. "odyadots aresolutioncallingfor anenforce%entactionagainst 'tate;under Chater 677F(. 9ow is state sovereignty deDned in6nternational KawJ 2&.0>48KT.RN8T68. /istinguish "rieCy "ut clearly"etween:214 The territorial sea and the internalwaters ofthe @hiliines.':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:8. 214 T.RR6TLR68K '.8 is an ad+acent"elt ofsea with a "readth of twel/e nauti1al-iles%easured fro% the "aselines of a stateandoverwhichthestatehassovereignty.28rticles &and ( of the Convention on the Kaw ofthe 'ea.4'hiof all states en+oytheright ofinnocentassage through the territorial sea.28rticle 1,of theConventionontheKawof the'ea.4:nder 'ection 1! 8rticle 6 of the 1987Constitution! the 6NT.RN8K I8T.R' ofthe@hiliines consist of the watersaround!"etween and connecting the islands ofthe@hiliine 8rchielago! regardless oftheir"readth and di%ensions! including thewaters in"ays! rivers and la5es. No right ofinnocentassagefor foreignvessels exists inthe case ofinternal waters. 29arris! Cases and#aterials on6nternational Kaw! 0th ed.! 1998! .,37.46nternal waters are the waters on thelandward side of "aselines fro% whichthe"readth of the territorial sea iscalculated.2Brownlie! @rinciles of @u"lic6nternationalKaw! ,th ed.! 1993! . 1&3.4Use o" For1e; E%e"ense(6776No;6;. Ln Lcto"er 1(! &331!%e%"ers of 8liBa"a! a olitical extre%ist organi-ation"ased inand under the rotection of Country ;andesousing violence worldwide as a%eans ofachieving itso"+ectives!lantedhigh*oweredexlosives and "o%"s at the6nternationalTrade Tower 26TT4 in Qewel City inCountry ?! a%e%"er of the:nitedNations. 8saresult ofthe"o%"ingandthecollaseof the133*storytwin towers! a"out &!333 eole!includingwo%en and children! were 5illed orin+ured! and"illions of dollars in roerty were lost.6%%ediately after the incident! 8liBa"a!sea5ing through its leader Bin/erdandat!ad%itted and owned resonsi"ilityforthe"o%"ing of 6TT! saying that it wasdone toressure Country ? to release catured%e%"ers of the terrorist grou. 8liBa"athreatenedtoreeatitsterrorist actsagainstCountry?if thelatter andits alliesfailed toaccede to 8li Ba"a=s de%ands. 6nresonse!Country?de%andedthat Country;surrenderand deliver Bin /erdandat to thegovern%entauthorities of Country ? for theurose of trialand Bin the na%e of +ustice.B Country ;refusedto accede to the de%and of Country ?.Ihat action or actions can Country ?legally ta5e against 8li Ba"a andCountry ; tosto the terrorist activities of 8li Ba"aanddissuade Country ; fro% har"oring andgivingrotection to the terrorist organi-ationJ'uortyour answer with reasons. 20>4FI#ST )LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#:214 Country ? %ay exercise the rightof self*defense! as rovided under8rticle 01 ofthe :N Charter Buntil the 'ecurityCouncil hasta5en %easure necessary to %aintaininternational eace and securityB. 'elf*defenseena"les Country ? to use force againstCountry; as well as against the 8li Ba"aorgani-ation.2&4 6t %ay "ring the %atter to the'ecurityCouncil which%ayauthori-esanctionsagainst Country;! including%easureinvo5ingthe use of force. :nder 8rticle , of the:NCharter! Country ? %ay use forceagainstCountry;aswell as against the8liBa"aorgani-ation "y authority of the :N'ecurityCouncil.SECON( )LTE#N)TI?E )NS*E#+:nderthe'ecurityCouncil ResolutionNo.&871(18! theterrorist attac5of 8li Ba"a%ay "edeDned as a threat to eace! as it didin deDningthe 'ete%"er 11! &331 attac5sagainst the:nited 'tates. The resolutionauthori-es %ilitaryand other actions to resond toterrorist attac5s.9owever! the use of %ilitary force%ust "eroortionate and intended for theurose ofdetaining the ersons allegedlyresonsi"le forthe cri%es and to destroy %ilitaryo"+ectivesused "y the terrorists.The funda%ental rinciles ofinternationalhu%anitarian law should also "eresected.Country ? cannot "e granted sweeingdiscretionaryowersthat includetheower todecide what states are "ehind theterroristorgani-ations. 6t is for the 'ecurityCouncil todecide whether force %ay "e usedagainstseciDc states and under whatconditions theforce %ay "e used.Use o" For1e; Sel">(e"ense;*a$in$ *ar(1998No ;64':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:8.4 The doctrine of exhaustion ofad%inistrativere%edies %eans that when anade$uatere%edy is availa"le within the.xecutive/eart%ent! a litigant %ust Drstexhaust thisre%edy "efore he canresort to thecourts. Theuroseof thedoctrineistoena"lethead%inistrative agencies to correctthe%selves ifthey have co%%itted an error. 2Rosalesv.Court of 8eals! 110 'CR8 (,,F198814B.4 The following are the excetions tothealication of the doctrine ofexhaustion ofad%inistrative re%edies:1. The $uestion involved is urelylegalH&. The ad%inistrative "ody is inestoelH(. Theact co%lainedof isatentlyillegalH,. There is an urgent need for QudicialinterventionH0. The clai% involved is s%allH1. Erave and irreara"le in+ury will "esuAeredH7. There is no other lain! seedy andade$uate re%edyH8. 'trong u"lic interest is involvedH9. Thesu"+ect of thecontroversy isrivatelawH13. The case involves a $uo warrantoroceeding 2'unville Ti%"er @roducts!6nc. v. 8"ad. &31 'CR8 ,8& V199&4HBARQ&A(as arranged by Topics) POLITICAL LAW (19!"#$$%) 18D11. The arty was denied due rocess2'a%ahang #ag"u"u5id ng Tadula!6nc. v. Court of 8eals! (30 'CR8 1,7F1999G4H1&. The decision is that of a/eart%ent'ecretary. 2Na-areno v. Court of8eals! E.R. No. 1(11,1! )e"ruary&(. &3334H1(. Resorttoad%inistrativere%edieswould"e futile 2:niversity of the @hiliinesBoard of Regents v. Rasul &33 'CR8180 F1991G4H1,. There is unreasona"le delay2Reu"lic v! 'andigan"ayan! (31 'CR8&(7 F1999G4H10. BThe action involves recovery ofhysical ossession of u"lic land2Ea"rito u. Court of 8eals! 117 'CR8&91771 V1988G4H11. The arty is oor 2'a"ello v./eart%ent of .ducation! Culture and'orts! 183 'CR8 1&( F1989G4H and17. The lawrovides for i%%ediateresortto the court 2Rulian v Mu%i1ial !o%4 or )$en14 (ED>677F(. Ihat is a $uasi*+udicial "ody oragencyJ2&.0>4':EE.'T./ 8N'I.R:8 $uasi*+udicial "ody or agency is anad%inistrative "ody with the ower tohear!deter%ine or ascertain facts anddeciderights! duties and o"ligations of thearties"y the alication of rules to theascertained facts. By this ower!$uasi+udicialagencies are ena"led to interretand aly i%le%enting rules andregulationsro%ulgated"ythe%andlawsentrusted to their ad%inistration.&97


Isidor Philipp Exercises

Bachelorarbeit Philipp Hänggi

Projecte philipp

Georg Philipp Telemann

Philipp Ernst Bagatelles

Linux – PDA Anja Philipp 25.08.03 Linux – PDA von Anja Philipp 25.08.2003

Portfolio Philipp Schürmann

PHILIPP Cast-in lifting hoop · PHILIPP Cast-in lifting hoop 4 2018 PHILIPP GmbH, 63741 Aschaffenburg Technical changes and errors reserved May 2018 PHILIPP Cast-in lifting hoop 2

Jan-Philipp Sendker

Philipp Gladkov, Pixonic

Philipp Blom

All About Us by Philipp KeelAll-About-Us-by-Philipp-Keel

Runenhäuser - Philipp Stauff

Civetta - Philipp Flamm

tr.c philipp philipp Kevin Knoblich Philipp philipp M€iWÇI ... filetr.c philipp philipp Kevin Knoblich Philipp philipp M€iWÇI eh' Mq freq Ar o { prh n Gerd Pr ab Bekkaye Rabi

Philipp Pausder

Berkessy Philipp RO

Dühring Philipp

Vandenberg Philipp - Relikvie.txt

Philipp vorndran

Portfolio - Philipp Reinhardt

nightlife Philipp Abbass

Philipp CA

Lehman, Philipp. bibLaTeX

Philipp Vossen

Philipp am slides

Philipp Selva catalog

Philipp Rauchengel

EPROG – TUTORIUM SS2003 Philipp Blauensteiner [email protected]

Philipp Tresch_Casa Madaio

Danke, philipp!

Copyright Philipp Slusallek IBR: View Interpolation Philipp Slusallek

Die Simulation von Planetenbewegungen Sirch Lorenz Hotka Philipp Hotka Philipp

Philipp Eden – Piano Xaver Rüegg – Double Bass Vincent ......Philipp Eden Trio Philipp Eden – Piano Xaver Rüegg – Double Bass Vincent Glanzmann – Drums Philipp Eden Philipp

PHILIPP LOOS GMBH