Scribd
Upload
176 views

We

The preamble to the Philippine Constitution establishes the sovereign Filipino people's goal of building a just, humane, and democratic society under the rule of law with ideals of truth, justice, freedom, equality, and peace. It invokes God's aid to help establish a government that promotes the common good and conserves national patrimony and independence for current and future generations. The preamble performs an important function by establishing the authority and purpose of the Constitution.

Uploaded by

Rechelle Navarro
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
176 views

We

The preamble to the Philippine Constitution establishes the sovereign Filipino people's goal of building a just, humane, and democratic society under the rule of law with ideals of truth, justice, freedom, equality, and peace. It invokes God's aid to help establish a government that promotes the common good and conserves national patrimony and independence for current and future generations. The preamble performs an important function by establishing the authority and purpose of the Constitution.

Uploaded by

Rechelle Navarro
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 6

We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring

the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a


just and humane society, and establish a
Government that shall embody our ideals and
aspirations, promote the common good,
conserve and develop our patrimony, and
secure to ourselves and our posterity, the
blessings of independence and democracy
under the rule of law and a regime of truth,
justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace,
do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.

EXPLINATION:

It shall be the sovereign Filipino people


basically through the facilities and structures
of government and through peoples
organization.

It is said that the Preamble is not a part of


the Constitutions nor a source of rights. But it
can certainly be referred to in knowing the
aims or purposes of the Constitutions. Dean
Vicente Sinco says of the Preamble: The
preamble performs a vital function in a
constitution. Its value is not merely formal
but real and substantive. It is to the
constitution what the enacting clause is to a
statue. The authenticity of the authorship of
the constitution is made patent in the
preamble. Without this or something
equivalent to it, the source of authority that
gives valid force to the constitutional
mandates may lie concealed, perhaps left to
the dangers of uncertain conjectures.

Thus, it was pointed out that general


welfare should really mean ikabubuti ng
nakararami while common good shall mean
ikabubuti ng lahat. Thus, all efforts and
rules of society and government should be for
the welfare of all, without exceptions. The
patrimony of the Nation now read our
patrimony, to make it more emphatic, a
Nolledo amendment. The words blessings of
independence and democracy, an Edmundo
Garcia amendment, to underscore the
importance of true independence even in the
presence of democratic beliefs and practices.

Love is found in the preamble, an


amendment by Bishop Teodoro Bacani, to
assert the need for love in the face of
divisions and discords that take place among
our people because of varying political and
social beliefs, practices, and persuasions.

Imploring the aid of Divine Providence now


appear as imploring the aid of Almighty
God, to make the reference to God more
personal and direct. And by invoking God in
the preamble, Jose Laurel, Sr. said, the
Filipino people thereby manifested their
intense religious nature and place unfaltering
reliance upon Him who guides the destinies of
men and nations.

Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as


an instrument of national policy, adopts the
generally accepted principles of international
law as part of the law of the land and adheres
to the policy of peace, equality, justice,
freedom, cooperation, and amity with all
nations.

EXPLAINATION:

At issue in the Balikatan Case was the constitutionaly of


the conduct of the joint training exercise, reffered to as
Balikatan 02-01, of Us and the Philippine soldiers in
the mindanao. Petitioners asked the Supreme Court to
prohibit the exercise on the ground that the excercise is
not sanctioned by any treaty and is therefore
unconstitutional. Under the Terms of Reference ("TOR")
entered into on February 11, 2002 by the Philippines and
the United States, "The Exercise is a mutual counter-
terrorisism advising, assisting and training excercise
relative to philippine efforts against the ASG, [Abu SAyaf
Group], and well be conducted on the island Baasilan"
and "in MAlagutay and the Zamboanga area." The TOR
provied that "US exercise prticipants shall not engage in
combat without prejudice to thier right of self defense."
Petitioners claimed that "Balikatan 02-01'is actually a war
principally conducted by the UNited States government
[against ASG] and that the provision on self-defense
serves only as camouflage to conceal the true nature of
the excercise."
The Supreme Cuort ruled that the following "premises
leave no doubt that US forces are probihitedfrom
engaging in an offensive war on Philippine territory": (a)
neither the MDT [Mutual Defense Treaty] nor the VFA
[Visiting Forces Agreement between the Philippines and
the US] allow foriegn troops to engage in offensive war
on Philippine Territory,"The military presece in the
country, or of foriegn influencein general" and "foriegn
troops are allowed entry into the Philippines only by way
of direct exception," such exception being when the
foriegn troops allowed in the philippines "under a
treaty," and "our constitution authorizes the nollification
of a treaty,not only when it conflicts with the
fundamental law, but also when its run counter to act an
Congress."
But the Court dismissed the petition becuse the Supreme
Court is not a trier of facts" and the petition raised
"basically a question of fact," Wether American troops
were "actively engaged in combat alongside Filipino
soldiers under the guise of and alleged training and
assistance excercise."

You might also like