DOCTRINES sought and provided in said statute runs counter to a previous

interpretation already given in a case by the highest court of the land.

Ocampo vs Enriquez / Lagman vs Medialdea (2016)
Francisco vs House of Representatives (2003)
Marcos Burial
Davide’s 1st and 2nd Impeachment Proceedings
The second sentence of Sec. 17 of Art. VII is likewise not violated by
It is basic that all rules must not contravene the Constitution which is the
public respondents. Being the Chief Executive, the President represents
fundamental law. If as alleged Congress had absolute rule making
the government as a whole and sees to it that all laws are enforced by
power, then it would by necessary implication have the power to alter or
the officials and employees of his or her department. Under the Faithful
amend the meaning of the Constitution without need of referendum.
Execution Clause, the President has the power to take "necessary and
proper steps" to carry into execution the law. The mandate is self- J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. vs. Land Tenure Administration (1970)
executory by virtue of its being inherently executive in nature and is Interpretation
intimately related to the other executive functions. It is best construed as Expropriation was constitutional
an imposed obligation, not a separate grant of power. The provision
The question if one of constitutional construction (of interpreting the
simply underscores the rule of law and, corollarily, the cardinal principle
constitution). The task is to ascertain the realization of the purpose of
that the President is not above the laws but is obliged to obey and
the framers and of the people in adopting the Constitution. It is assumed
execute them.
that that the words in the constitutional provisions express the
Marbury vs Madison (1803) objectivity sought to be attained. They are to be given their ordinary
Judicial Review meaning except when technical terms are employed in which case the
significance attached to them prevails. This case is such a case and is
1. A law repugnant against the constitution is void
therefore one of minimal construction. The congress has the legislative
2. The Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction in all cases affecting will to expropriate and subdivide lands it deems to be fit for sale.
ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which the Moreover, it cannot be denied that congress has the capacity to exercise
state shall be a party. In all other cases, the Supreme Court shall have such authority. The language employed is not swathed in obscurity
appellate jurisdiction. (because congress has the legislative power as stated in the constitution).
It is presumed that the constitution suffices to govern the life of the
Angara vs Electoral Commission (1936)
Election Protest Deadline people not only at the present time but also in the indefinite future. The
constitution though does not give rigid answers but is flexible and
The grant of power to the Electoral Commission to judge all contests accommodates the problems the future may pose.
relating to the election, returns and qualifications of members of the
National Assembly, is intended to be as complete and unimpaired as if it Ramon Gonzales vs COMELEC (1967)
had remained originally in the legislature. The express lodging of that Congress as Constitutional Assembly
power in the Electoral Commission is an implied denial of the exercise Plebiscite Simultaneous with General Election
of that power by the National Assembly. The power to amend as well as the power to propose amendments to the
Constitution is not included in the general grant of legislative powers to
Endencia vs David (1953)
Judges’ Salary Taxation Congress. Such powers are not constitutionally granted to Congress. On
the contrary, such powers are inherent to the people as repository of
The interpretation and application of the Constitution and of statutes is sovereignty in a republican state. That being, when Congress makes
within the exclusive province and jurisdiction of the judicial department, amendments or proposes amendments, it is not actually doing so as
and that in enacting a law, the Legislature may not legally provide Congress; but rather, it is sitting as a constituent assembly. Such act is
therein that it be interpreted in such a way that it may not violate a not a legislative act. Since it is not a legislative act, it is reviewable by
Constitutional prohibition, thereby tying the hands of the courts in their the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has the final say whether or not
task of later interpreting said statute, especially when the interpretation such act of the constituent assembly is within constitutional limitations.
Raul Lambino vs COMELEC (2006)

1
 People’s Initiative MILF MOA-AD
Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE)
The framers of the Constitution intended that the “draft of the proposed
constitutional amendment” should be “ready and shown” to the people The Constitution, however, does not contemplate any state in this
“before” they sign such proposal. The framers plainly stated that “before jurisdiction other than the Philippine State, much less does it provide for
they sign there is already a draft shown to them.” The framers also a transitory status that aims to prepare any part of Philippine territory for
“envisioned” that the people should sign on the proposal itself because independence.
the proponents must “prepare that proposal and pass it around for
Even assuming arguendo that the MOA-AD would not necessarily sever
signature.”
any portion of Philippine territory, the spirit animating it – which has
The essence of amendments “directly proposed by the people through betrayed itself by its use of the concept of association – runs counter to
initiative upon a petition” is that the entire proposal on its face is a the national sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic.
petition by the people. This means two essential elements must be
The MOA-AD cannot be reconciled with the present Constitution and
present. First, the people must author and thus sign the entire proposal.
laws. Not only its specific provisions but the very concept underlying
No agent or representative can sign on their behalf. Second, as an
them, namely, the associative relationship envisioned between the GRP
initiative upon a petition, the proposal must be embodied in a petition.
and the BJE, are unconstitutional, for the concept presupposes that the
These essential elements are present only if the full text of the proposed associated entity is a state and implies that the same is on its way to
amendments is first shown to the people who express their assent by independence.
signing such complete proposal in a petition. Thus, an amendment is
Merlin Magallona vs Secretary Eduardo Ermita (2011)
“directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition” only
UNCLOS
if the people sign on a petition that contains the full text of the proposed
amendments. UNCLOS may term our waters as “archipelagic waters” and that we
may term it as our “internal waters”, but the bottom line is that our
Pablo Sanidad vs COMELEC (1976)
country exercises sovereignty over these waters and UNCLOS itself
President sits as Legislature in Emergency
recognizes that. However, due to our observance of international law,
The President can propose amendments to the Constitution and he was we allow the exercise of others of their right of innocent passage. No
able to present those proposals to the people in sufficient time. The modern State can validly invoke its sovereignty to absolutely forbid
President at that time also sits as the legislature. innocent passage that is exercised in accordance with customary
international law without risking retaliatory measures from the
Josue Javellana vs Executive Secretary (1973)
international community.
Ratification
Underage Voters In Re: the South China Sea Arbitration; Philippines vs China (2016)
Plebiscite not Supervised by Comelec South China Sea
4-2-3 vote by the Court
Having found that none of the features claimed by China was capable of
1. The votes of persons less than 21 years of age render the proceedings in generating an exclusive economic zone, the Tribunal found that it could—
the Citizen’s assemblies void. without delimiting a boundary—declare that certain sea areas are within the
exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, because those areas are not
2. The plebiscite on the constitution not having been conducted under the
overlapped by any possible entitlement of China. The Tribunal finds that China
supervision of COMELEC is void.
has, by virtue of the conduct of Chinese law enforcement vessels in the vicinity
3. 4-2-3 Votes means the Constitution is in force. of Scarborough Shoal, created serious risk of collision and danger to Philippine
vessels and personnel.

Province of North Cotabato vs Government of the Republic of the

Philippines Peace Panel on Ancestral Domain (2008)
Sovereignty

2
3