recourse to Section 1, be submitted at the request

MCQ – 15 QUESTIONS (30 POINTS) of any party to the dispute to the court or tribunal
having jurisdiction under this section.

1. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES - PIL Duties of states

a. Non-interference
b. None-use of force
Dispute Resolution
c. Pacific settlement of disputes
d. Respect for human rights
Short of instituting an action before the International
e. Other duties based on conventions, treaties
Court of Justice, States may resort to any of the following
concluded by states
options to settle their disputes –

a. Mediation procedure which has the following 2. JURISDICTION IN PIL

elements: (1) a requirement that the parties
attempt to arrive at a negotiated resolution of their Basis of Jurisdiction
dispute, subject to a time limit that can be extended
only by agreement; (2) an opportunity for either 1. Territoriality Principle: The fundamental source of
party to refer the dispute to a mediator; and (3) a jurisdiction is sovereignty over territory. A state has
time limit on the mediation process, extendable absolute, but not necessarily exclusive, power to prescribe,
only by agreement of the parties, after which the adjudicate and enforce rules for conduct that occurs within
parties are free to pursue whatever other remedies its territory
are available to them under international law,
including appropriate retaliation. 2. The nationality principle provides that every state has
b. International arbitration is the process of jurisdiction over its nationals even when those nationals
resolving disputes between or among transnational are outside the state.
parties through the use of one or more arbitrators Stateless persons are those who do not have a nationality.
rather than through the courts. It requires the They are either de jure or de facto stateless individuals.
agreement of the parties, which is usually given via
an arbitration clause that is inserted into the De jure stateless persons are those who have lost their
contract or business agreement. The decision is nationality, if they had one, and have not acquired a new
usually binding. one.

Alternative means for the settlement of disputes De facto stateless persons are those who have a nationality
established by the Convention but to whom protection is denied by their state when out
of the state.
Aside from the ITLOS, it also established the International
Court of Justice, an arbitral tribunal constituted in 3. The Protective Principle is the principle that
accordance with Annex VII to the Convention and a special provides that a state may exercise jurisdiction over
arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with Annex VIII conduct even outside its territory that threatens its
of the Convention. security, as long as that conduct is generally recognized as
criminal by states in the international community.
Q: As a signatory of UNCLOS, may the PH seek legal relief
on its claim as a coastal state against another signatory to 4. The universality principle recognizes that certain
the agreement? activities, universally dangerous to states and their
A: A party to UNCLOS may avail of three remedies, to wit: subjects, require authority in all community members to
1. Article 279. Obligations to settle disputes by punish such acts wherever they may occur, even absent a
peaceful means link between the state and the parties or the acts in
2. Article 280. Settlement of dispute by any peaceful question.
means chosen by the parties Examples: acts of terrorism, human trafficking, illegal
3. Article 286 of INCLOS provides that subject to drugs trade
Section 3, any dispute concerning the
interpretation or application of this Convention
shall, where no settlement has been reached by
5. The passive personality principle asserts that a state This must be related to state immunity as a generally
may apply law — particularly criminal law — to an act accepted principle in international law.
committed outside its territory by a person not its national
where the victim of the act was its national. The principle JURISDICTION OF STATES AND UN (The Principal
has not been ordinarily accepted for ordinary torts or Organs of the U.N.)
crimes, but it is increasingly accepted as applied to
terrorist and other organized attacks on a state’s nationals 1. General Assembly (GA): binding effect of acts -
by reason of their nationality, or to assassination of a  …resolutions and recommendations are not
state’s diplomatic representatives or other officials. binding…
 …opinio juris or become part of state practice…
Example: U.S. capture of terrorists from Afghanistan after  …resolutions are binding in the following
the 9-11 incident instances - The allotment and collection of
dues is a mandatory function of the General
Conflicts of Jurisdiction Assembly.

Since there are various accepted principles for assuming 2. Security Council (SC)
jurisdiction, more than one state may have a valid claim to SC Composition: It has 15 members with 5 permanent and
jurisdiction. U.S. courts have attempted to develop more 10 non-permanent members elected by the General
sophisticated modes of resolving conflict of jurisdiction. Assembly.
The five (5) permanent members are:
The tests to resolve conflicts of jurisdiction are – 1. Republic of China
2. France
1. the Balancing Test wherein the resolution of conflict 3. Russia
will involve three aspects: fact-balancing; rule-balancing 4. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
and result-balancing Ireland
2. International comity is a principle where a nation 5. United States of America
recognizes the legislative, executive or judicial acts of Security Council (SC): SC Voting Rules
another nation.
Yalta Voting Formula: Each member of the Security
Council shall have one vote, but distinction is made
3. the forum non conveniens which "allows a court to
between the permanent members and non-permanent
dismiss a civil action (even though the forum or venue is
members in the resolution of non-procedural questions.
proper and the court has jurisdiction over the case and the
parties) where an appropriate and more convenient Rule of Great-Power Unanimity: Procedural matters
alternative forum exists in which to try the action." are to be decided by the affirmative vote of any nine or
more members.
Exemptions from jurisdiction
Non-procedural or substantive questions are to be
a. Act of State: a claim for immunity from suit is rooted decided by affirmative vote of nine members including the
in claim of state immunity concurring votes of the permanent members.

(Note: This is also referred to as the veto power of the 5

b. International organizations and its officers: a
permanent members.)
claim of immunity may be invoked by officers of
international organizations acting as its agents. The
burden of proof is on the agents to show that at the
Effect of Acts of the Security Council
time of incident the acts performed are within the
scope of their official duty.  …legally binding on member States.

The act-of-state doctrine states that every  …Article 25 of the U.N. Charter
sovereign state is bound to respect the independence of  …Article 103 of the U.N. Charter, …conflict
every other sovereign state, and the courts will not sit in
judgment of another government's acts done within its …Chapter VII on powers of the Security Council, … action
own territory. with respect to a threat to peace, breach of peace or act of
aggression … binding on all State parties
 3. SOURCES OF PIL
Other organs of the United Nations

1. Economic and Social Council (ESC) PPT: The sources of international law are from the statute
governing the creation of the United Nations, the statute
2. Trusteeship Council (TC): The trust territories—most of the International Court of Justice, treaties, and
of them former mandates of the League of Nations or international customs.
territories taken from nations defeated at the end of
World War II – have all now attained self-government or 1. Sources of International Law: The sources of
independence either as separate nations or by joining international include a survey of the process whereby
neighboring independent countries. rules of international law emerge.

3. International Court of Justice (ICJ)

The sources of international are:
4. Secretariat of the General Assembly a. Primary Sources include: Charter of the United
Nations; U.N. General Assembly Resolutions;
Subsidiary Organs of the U.N. Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of
 Little Assembly
Justice (Treaties or International Conventions;
 Military Staff Committee
 Human Rights Commission international Custom; and generally accepted principles of
Specialized Agencies of the U.N. law recognized by civilized nations.)
 World Health Organization
 International Monetary Fund b. Secondary Sources include: Judicial Decisions; and
 Technical Assistance Board Teachings of authoritative publicists
Other UN-created agencies:
1. UNICEF
Note: Under Article 38 of the ICJ Statute, the primary
2. UNDP
3. UNHCR sources of international law are:
4. UNESCO a. International conventions, whether general or
5. FAO particular, establishing rules expressly
recognized by the contesting States;
b. International custom, as evidence of a general
The Jurisdiction of the ICJ
(a) by the conclusion between them of a special agreement practice accepted as law; and
(b) by virtue of a jurisdictional clause...; or c. General principles of law recognized by
(c) through the reciprocal effect of declarations… civilized nations.
d. Subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial
Composition, Term of Office, Voting Rules and decisions (decisions of the International Court
Inhibitions of Judges of Justice and municipal tribunals dealing with
 The ICJ is composed of 15 judges.
issues of international law) and teachings of the
 ICJ Voting Rules
 Rule for Inhibition of Judges most highly qualified publicists of various
 Nicaragua Case (1986 ICJ Report 14) nations as subsidiary means for determination
of rules of law. These authors include, among
others, Hugo Grotius, Lassa Francis Lawrence
5. International Criminal Court (ICC)
Oppenheim, Hirsch Lauterpacht and Hans
Independent judicial institution Kelsen.
Created by the treaty known as Rome Statute However, upon agreement of contesting parties, the ICJ
Power to try and punish individuals for the most serious may decide a case ex aequo et bono. (Art. 59, ICJ Statute)
crimes of international concern, to include the following:
1. Genocide SUMMARY: SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
2. Crimes against humanity Treaties and A treaty is an international
Conventions agreement concluded between
3. Crimes of aggression, and
states in written form and
4. War crimes
governed by international law,
Pimentel, Jr., v. Office of the Executive Secretary, 462 SCRA
whether embodied in a single
622, 6 July 2005: submission of the Rome Statute to the
Senate instrument or in two or more
related instruments and
 whatever its particular articulation of jurisprudence in
designation.” 1 books and journal articles. 6
A treaty may also refer to a
convention.
4. EFFECT IN FILING COC (APPOINTIVE –
A treaty or a
CONSIDERED RESIGN & ELECTIVE – NAKABALIK PA
convention becomes legally DIN SA SENADO)
binding to a particular State
when that State ratifies it.
EFFECT OF FILING OF CERTIFICATES OF CANDIDACY
Customary Elements - (a) State practice
UPON ELECTIVE AND APPOINTIVE OFFICIALS
International Law (that is general and consistent);
and (b) Opinio juris sive
General Rule: An appointive official is deemed resigned
necessitates, a belief that this
upon filing of COC while an elective official may continue
practice is rendered obligatory
to serve until the end of his terms .
by the existence of a rule of law
requiring it. 2
Substantial distinctions clearly exist between elective
Unlike treaties, customary
officials and appointive officials. The former occupy their
international law is binding
office by virtue of the mandate of the electorate. They are
upon all states regardless of
elected to an office for a definite term and may be removed
their objections. 3
therefrom only upon stringent conditions.
General Principles considered general
On the other hand, appointive officials hold their office by
Principles of Law principles of international law:
virtue of their designation thereto by an appointing
1. Roman law: estoppel, res
authority. Some appointive officials hold their office in a
judicata, res inter alios
permanent capacity and are entitled to security of tenure
acta, and prescription;
while others serve at the pleasure of the appointing
2. Other substantive
authority. (Quinto v. COMELEC, G.R. 189698, December 1,
principles, such as the
2009)
duty to make reparations4,
principle of reciprocity,
pacta sunt servanda, 5. MANDANAS V. SEC. OF FINANCE (SHARE IN IRA &
separate corporate INCLUSION OF DEFINITION ON WHAT IS NATIONAL
personality; 5 INCOME)
3. Procedural rules such as
rules governing the use of Local Autonomy and the Share of the LGUs in National
circumstantial and Income (Mandanas v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 199802, July 3,
hearsay evidence 2018)
4. Jurisdictional principles,
such as the power of a Ruling: The phrase national internal revenue
tribunal to determine the taxes engrafted in Section 284 is undoubtedly more
extent of its own restrictive than the term national taxes written in Section 6
jurisdiction of Article X. As such, Congress has actually departed from
Judicial Decisions The writings of jurists are the letter of the 1987 Constitution stating that national
and Teachings of important in describing and taxes should be the base from which the just share of the
highly qualified analyzing evolving norms and LGU comes. Such departure is impermissible. Verba legis
Publicists identifying general principles of non est recedendum (from the words of a statute there
law. In the absence of decisions should be no departure). Equally impermissible is that
of international tribunals, the Congress has also thereby curtailed the guarantee of fiscal
body of international legal autonomy in favor of the LGUs under the 1987
doctrine depends on the Constitution.
1
Article 2(1), VCLT
Section 284 has effectively deprived the LGUs from
2

3
North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (ICJ, 1969)
deriving their just share from other national taxes, like the
Article 34, VCLT
4 customs duties. It is clear from the foregoing clarification
Chorzow Factory Case (PCIJ, 1927)
5 6
see Barcelona Traction Case (ICJ, 1970) Gillian Triggs, International Law: Contemporary Principles and Practices, LexisNexis, 2nd ed, 2011
that the exclusion of other national taxes like customs Ruling: The creation of Dinagat Island as a province is
duties from the base for determining the just share of the valid despite the fact that it did meet the land area
LGUs contravened the express constitutional edict in requirement. Island provinces need not meet the 2,000 sq.
Section 6, Article X the 1987 Constitution. km. requirement because by their very nature islands do
not form a mass that could be contiguous and adjacent.
6. LGUS CREATION (LAND, INCOME, POPULATION)
Average of income for two years under Sec. 450 of the
LGC:
A. Requisites for creation of local government units (a) Province: P20 M
(memory aid: PILA) (b) Highly Urbanized City: P50 M (R.A. 2009 increased this
to P100 M)
B. Factors to consider (Sec. 7. LGC): (c) City: P20M
(d) Municipality P2.5 M
1. Population to be certified by the Philippine Statistics
Authority; and League of Cities of the Philippines (LCP) v.COMELEC, 571
2. Income to be certified by the DOF; SCRA 263(2008), 608 SCRA 636 (2009), 628 SCRA 819
3. Land Area to be certified by the Land Management (2010), 643 SCRA 149 (2011), 648 SCRA 798 (2011)
Bureau of the DENR
Ruling: The new requirements under a congressional act
Population Requirement: will not affect the cityhood laws which are pending prior to
(a) All barangays: 2,000 inhabitants the effectivity of the new law. Thus, all measures
(b) Barangays in Metro Manila and other Highly Urbanized introduced prior to the new law are exempt from the
Areas: 5,000 inhabitants higher income requirement.
(c) Municipality: 25,000 inhabitants
(d) City: 150,000 inhabitants
(e) Province: 250,000 inhabitants 7. APPEAL IN ADMIN CASES

Aldaba v. COMELEC, 611 SCRA 137 (2010) Administrative Appeal

Ruling: Congress must ensure that all statutory requisites ~ Refer to: Sections 19-24, Book VII, Administrative Code
in amending the charter of a city (Malolos City) including of 1987
the creation of a new congressional district are complied Boracay Foundation v. The Province of Aklan, G.R. No.
with. 196870, 2012: The power of the Mayor to order demolition
In case of the population requirement, a certification as to as part of his quas-judicial function in implementing an
census of population must be issued by the public officer ordinance in his jurisdiction.
designated by law. The population must be based on actual
number of inhabitants. Administrative appeal
It includes the review by a higher agency of decisions
Aquino III and Robredo v. COMELEC, 611 SCRA 137 rendered by an administrative agency, commenced by
(2010) petition of an interested party.
Ruling: The creation of new congressional districts in a
province need not meet the 250,000 inhabitant threshold. NOTE: Under the 1987 Administrative Code,
The population threshold of 250,000 inhabitants applies administrative appeals from a decision of an agency are
only to highly urbanized cities. There are also other factors taken to the Department Head, unless such appeal is
to consider in apportioning congressional districts. governed by a special law.

Area Requirements: Administrative review

(a) Municipality: 50 sq. km. A superior officer or department head, upon his or her
(b) City: 100 sq.km. own volition, may review the decision of an administrative
(c) Province: 2,000 sq.km agency or that of a subordinate’s decision pursuant to the
power of control.
Navarro v. Ermita 613 SCRA 131 (2010) and 648 SCRA
400 (2011) It is, however, subject to the caveat that a final and
executory decision is not included within the power of
control, and hence can no longer be altered by the specific matters under their jurisdiction (Reyna v. COA,
administrative review. G.R. No. 167219, February 8, 2011).

Different kinds of administrative appeal and review

8. AGUINALDO DOCTRINE LIMITATION

1. Inheres in the relation of administrative superior to

administrative subordinate; The rule that public official cannot be removed for
administrative misconduct committed during a prior term,
2. Statutes which provide for determination to be made by since his re-election to office operates as a condonation of
a particular officer or body subject to appeal, review or the officer’s previous misconduct to the extent of cutting
redetermination by another officer or body in the same off the right to remove him therefore. Note that this has no
agency or in the same administrative system; application to pending criminal cases. (Aguinaldo v. Santos,
G.R. No. 94115, Aug. 21, 1992)
3. The statute makes or attempts to make a court a part of
the administrative scheme by providing in terms or effect FACTS: Petitioner was the duly elected Governor of the
that the court, on review of the action of an administrative Province of Cagayan, having been elected to said position
agency; during the local elections held on January 17, 1988, to
serve a term of four (4) years therefrom. He took his oath
4. The statute provides that an order made by a division of sometimes around March 1988.
a commission or board has the same force and effect as if
made by the subject to a rehearing by the commission; Shortly after December 1989 coup d'etat was crushed,
5. The statute provides for an appeal to an officer on an respondent Secretary of Local Government sent a telegram
appeal to the head of the department or agency; and a letter, both dated December 4, 1989, to petitioner
requiring him to show cause why should not be suspended
6. Statutes which provide for appeal at the highest level or remove from office for disloyalty to the Republic, within
namely, the president (De Leon, Administrative Law: Text forty-eight (48) hours from receipt thereof.
and Cases (2010) page 311.)
After conducting a series of hearings, DILG Secretary
Enforcement of Administrative Decisions Santos dismissed Aguinaldo from service. Aguinaldo
1. As provided for by law; or challenged his dismissal from office. During the pendency
2. Through the court’s intervention. of his appeal, he was re-elected as Governor of Cagayan.

Non-applicability of the doctrine of res judicata SC: The Court held that Aguinaldo’s re-election to the
The doctrine of res judicata applies only to judicial or position of Governor of Cagayan has rendered the pending
quasi-judicial proceedings and not to the exercise of purely administrative case moot and academic.
administrative functions. Administrative proceedings are
non-litigious and summary in nature; hence, res judicata Aguinaldo Doctrine is Abandoned
does not apply (Nasipit Lumber Company, Inc. v. NLRC, G.R.
No. 54424, August 31, 1989). Carpio-Morales v. CA et al., G.R. Nos. 217126-27 ,
November 10, 2015, PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
Exceptions to the Non-Applicability of Res Judicata in
Administrative Proceedings The Court held that the concept of public office is a public
1. Naturalization proceedings or those involving trust and the corollary requirement of accountability to
citizenship and immigration; the people at all times, as mandated under the 1987
2. Labor relations; and Constitution, is plainly inconsistent with the idea that an
3. Decisions affecting family relations, personal status or elective local official's administrative liability for a
condition, and capacity of persons. misconduct committed during a prior term can be wiped
off by the fact that he was elected to a second term of
NOTE: It is well settled that findings of fact of quasi- office, or even another elective post.
judicial agencies, such as the COA, are generally accorded
respect and even finality by this Court, if supported by FACTS: On September 9, 2014, the Ombudsman
substantial evidence, in recognition of their expertise on constituted a Special Panel of Investigators to conduct a
fact-finding investigation, submit an investigation report,
and file the necessary complaint, if warranted (1st Special people. It includes within its scope election, plebiscite,
Panel). Pursuant to the Ombudsman's directive, on March initiative and referendum
5, 2015, the 1st Special Panel filed a complaint (OMB Limitation on the Exercise of the Right of Suffrage
Complaint) against Binay, Jr., et al, charging them with six
(6) administrative cases for Grave Misconduct, Serious The exercise of the right of suffrage is subject to existing
Dishonesty, and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of substantive and procedural requirements embodied in the
the Service, and six (6) criminal cases 18 for violation of Constitution, statute books, and other repositories of law
Section 3 (e) of RA 3019, Malversation of Public Funds, and (Akbayan-Youth v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 147066, March 26,
Falsification of Public Documents (OMB Cases). 2001).
As to Binay, Jr., the OMB Complaint alleged that he was
involved in anomalous activities attending the following Scope of Suffrage
procurement and construction phases of the Makati
Parking Building project, committed during his previous 1. Plebiscite – The electoral process by which an initiative
and present terms as City Mayor of Makati. on the Constitution is approved or rejected by the people.
It may also involve the creation of provinces, cities,
SC: While the Court held that the C.A. may review the acts municipalities or barangays.
of the Ombudsman, it also said that election is not a mode
of condoning an administrative offense, and there is simply 2. Initiative - The power of the people to propose
no constitutional or statutory basis in our jurisdiction to amendments to the Constitution or to propose and enact
support the notion that an official elected for a different legislations through election called for the purpose. [R.A.
term is fully absolved of any administrative liability arising 6735, The Initiative and Referendum Act, Sec. 3(a)].
from an offense done during a prior term. This effectively Note: Refer to Section 2, Article XVII if it involves
abandoned the Aguinaldo doctrine. amending the Constitution.

PROSPECTIVE EFFECT OF ABANDONMENT OF Initiative may therefore cover the following exercises:
AGUINALDO DOCTRINE a. Initiative on the Constitution;
b. Initiative on statutes; or
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN v MAYOR JULIUS CESAR c. Initiative on local legislation.
VERGARA G.R. No. 216871. December 6, 2017 (Violation of
R.A. 9003 – Burning in an Open Dumpsite) 3. Referendum – The power of the electorate to approve or
reject a piece of legislation through an election called for
The abandonment of the doctrine of condonation is the purpose.
prospective in application, hence, the same doctrine is still i. Referendum on statutes; or
applicable in cases that transpired prior to the ruling of the ii. Referendum on local laws.
SC in Carpio-Morales v. CA and Binay,Jr.
4. Recall – The mode of removal of an elective public
The most important consideration in the doctrine of officer by the people before the end of his term of office.
condonation is the fact that the misconduct was done on a
prior term and that the subject public official was Election
eventually re-elected by the same body politic. Election is the means by which people choose their
officials for a definite and fixed period and to whom they
It is inconsequential whether the said re-election be on entrust for the time being the exercise of the powers of
another public office or on an election year that is not government (Nachura, 2014).
immediately succeeding the last, as long as the electorate
that re-elected the public official be the same.
10. IMPEACHMENT (PUBLIC OFFICER)

9. NATURE OF ELECTION LAW (NOT ONLY THE It pertains to the method by which persons holding
ABILITY BUT ALSO THE RIGHT OF A PERSON TO
government positions of high authority, prestige, and
SUFFRAGE)
dignity and with definite tenure may be removed from
office for causes closely related to their conduct as public
Suffrage is the right and obligation of qualified citizens to officials.
vote in the election of certain local and national officers
and in the determination of questions submitted to the
NOTE: It is a national inquest into the conduct of public a. Verified complaint filed by any member of the House of
men. It is primarily intended for the protection of the State, Representatives or any citizen upon resolution of
not for the punishment of the offender. The penalties endorsement by any member thereof;
attached to the impeachment are merely incidental to the
primary intention of protecting the people as a body NOTE: If the verified complaint is filed by at least 1/3 of all
politic. its members of the House of Representatives, the same
shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by
Impeachable officers the Senate shall forthwith proceed[1987 Constitution, Art.
1. President; XI, Sec. 3 (4)].
2. Vice-President;
3. Members of the Supreme Court; b. Inclusion in the order of business within 10 session
4. Members of the Constitutional Commissions; and days;
5. Ombudsman. c. Referred to the proper committee within 3 session days
from its inclusion;
NOTE: The enumeration is exclusive (1987 Constitution, d. The committee, after hearing, and by majority vote of all
Art. XI,Sec. 2). its members, shall submit its report to the House of
Representatives together with the corresponding
Grounds for impeachment (CTB-GOB) (1999, 2012, resolution;
2013 Bar) e. Placing on calendar the Committee resolution within 10
1. Culpable violation of the Constitution; days from submission;
2. Treason; f. Discussion on the floor of the report; and
3. Bribery; g. A vote of at least 1/3 of all the members of the House of
4. Graft and Corruption; Representatives shall be necessary either to affirm a
5. Other high crimes ; and favorable resolution with the Articles of Impeachment of
6. Betrayal of public trust (1987 Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. the committee or override its contrary resolution[(1987
2). Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 3 (2-3)].

NOTE: The enumeration is exclusive. 2. Trial and Decision in impeachment proceedings a. The
Senators take an oath or affirmation; and
Culpable violation of the Constitution
It refers to wrongful, intentional or willful disregard or NOTE: When the President of the Philippines shall be
flouting of the fundamental law. Obviously, the act must be impeached, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall
deliberate and motivated by bad faith to constitute a preside, otherwise the Senate President shall preside in all
ground for impeachment. Mere mistakes in the proper other cases of impeachment (Senate Resolution No. 890).
construction of the Constitution, on which students of law b. A decision of conviction must be concurred in by at least
may sincerely differ, cannot be considered a valid ground 2/3 of all the members of Senate.
for impeachment.
NOTE: The power to impeach is essentially a non-
Betrayal of public trust legislative prerogative and can be exercised by Congress
This refers to “acts which are just short of being criminal only within the limits of the authority conferred upon it by
but constitute gross faithlessness against public trust, the Constitution (Gutierrez v. House of Representatives
tyrannical abuse of power, inexcusable negligence of duty, Committee on Justice, G.R. No. 193459, February 15, 2011).
favoritism, and gross exercise of discretionary powers.”
Acts that should constitute betrayal of public trust as to The Senate has the sole power to try and decide all cases of
warrant removal from office may be less than criminal but impeachment [1987 Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 3(6)].
must be attended by bad faith and of such gravity and
seriousness as the other grounds for Determination of sufficiency of form and substance of
impeachment(Gonzales III v. Office of the President, G.R. No. an impeachment complaint
196231, September 4, 2012). An exponent of the express constitutional grant of
rulemaking powers of the HoR.
Steps in the impeachment process (2012 Bar)
1. Initiating impeachment case In the discharge of that power and in the exercise of its
discretion, the House has formulated determinable
standards as to form and substance of an impeachment triggers the series of steps that follow. The term “to
complaint. Furthermore, the impeachment rules are clear initiate” refers to the filing of the impeachment complaint
in echoing the constitutional requirements in providing coupled with Congress’ taking initial action of said
that there must be a “verified complaint or resolution” and complaint (Francisco v. House of Rep., G.R. No. 160261, Nov.
that the substance requirement is met if there is “a recital 10, 2003).
of facts constituting the offense charged and determinative
of the jurisdiction of the committee.” (Gutierrez v. House of One-year bar rule (2014 Bar)
Representatives Committee on Justice, G.R. No. 193459, Initiation takes place by the act of filing of the
February 15, 2011). impeachment complaint and referral to the House
Committee on Justice. Once an impeachment complaint has
Power of the HoR to determine the sufficiency of form been initiated in the foregoing manner, another may not be
and substance of an impeachment complaint filed against the same official within the one year period
It is an exponent of the express constitutional grant of (Gutierrez v. HoR Committee on Justice, ibid.).
rulemaking powers of the HoR. In the discharge of that
power and in the exercise of its discretion, the House has NOTE: The limitation refers to the element of time, and not
formulated determinable standards as to form and the number of complaints. The impeachable officer should
substance of an impeachment complaint. Furthermore the defend himself in only one impeachment proceeding, so
impeachment rules are clear in echoing the constitutional that he will not be precluded from performing his official
requirements in providing that there must be a “verified functions and duties. Similarly, Congress should run only
complaint or resolution” and that the substance one impeachment proceeding so as not to leave it with
requirement is met if there is “a recital of facts constituting little time to attend to its main work of law-making
the offense charged and determinative of the jurisdiction (Gutierrez v. The House of Representatives Committee on
of the committee” (Gutierrez v. House of Representatives Justice, ibid.).
Committee on Justice, ibid.).
Purpose of the one-year bar rule
Limitations imposed by the Constitution upon the 1. To prevent undue or too frequent harassment; and
initiation of impeachment proceedings 2. To allow the legislature to do its principal task of
1. The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive legislation (Francisco v. House of Representatives supra.).
power to initiate all cases of impeachment; and
2. Not more than one impeachment proceeding shall be The consideration behind the intended limitation refers to
initiated against the same official within a period of one the element of time, and not the number of complaints.
year (One-year bar rule). The impeachable officer should defend himself in only one
impeachment proceeding, so that he will not be precluded
NOTE: An impeachment case is the legal controversy that from performing his official functions and duties. Similarly,
must be decided by the Senate while an impeachment Congress should run only one impeachment proceeding so
proceeding is one that is initiated in the House of as not to leave it with little time to attend to its main work
Representatives. For purposes of applying the one-year of law-making. The doctrine laid down in Francisco that
bar rule, the proceeding is initiated or begins when a initiation means filing and referral remains congruent to
verified complaint is filed and referred to the Committee the rationale of the constitutional provision (Gutierrez v.
on Justice for action (Francisco v. House of Representatives, The House of Representatives Committee on Justice, supra).
et. al., G.R. No. 160261, November 10, 2003).
NOTE: Congress may look into separate complaints against
The power to impeach is essentially a non-legislative an impeachable officer and consider the inclusion of
prerogative and can be exercised by Congress only within matters raised therein, in the adoption of the Articles of
the limits of the authority conferred upon it by the Impeachment(Francisco v. House of Representatives, et. al.,
Constitution (Francisco v. House of Representatives, ibid). It supra).
is, by its nature, a sui generis politico-legal process
(Gonzales III v. Office of the President, G.R.196231, January Effects of conviction in impeachment (2012 Bar)
28, 2014). 1. Removal from office;
2. Disqualification to hold any other office under the
Impeachment is deemed initiated Republic of the Philippines; and
A verified complaint is filed and referred to the Committee
on Justice for action. This is the initiating step which
3. Party convicted shall be liable and subject to Page 185 to 189 GN
prosecution, trial and punishment according to law[1987
Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 3 (7)].
13. RECOGNITION OF BELLIGERENT ESTATE

Q: Can a Supreme Court Justice be charged in a

criminal case or disbarment proceeding instead of an Recognition of Belligerency
impeachment proceeding? Recognition of belligerency is the formal acknowledgment
A: NO, because the ultimate effect of either is to remove by a third party of the existence of a state of war between
him from office, circumventing the provision on removal the central government and a portion of that state.
by impeachment thus violating his security of tenure (In Belligerency exists when a sizable portion of the territory
Re: First Indorsement from Hon. Raul Gonzalez, A.M. No. 88- of a state is under the effective control of an insurgent
4-5433, April 15, 1988). community which is seeking to establish a separate
government and the insurgents are in de facto control of a
An impeachable officer who is a member of the Philippine portion of the territory and population, have a political
bar cannot be disbarred first without being impeached organization, and are able to maintain such control and
(Jarque v. Desierto, A.C. No. 4509, December 5, 1995). conduct themselves according to the laws of war. For
example, Great Britain recognized a state of belligerency in
Judicial review in impeachment proceedings the United States during the Civil War.
The precise role of the judiciary in impeachment cases is a
matter of utmost importance to ensure the effective Belligerency
functioning of the separate branches while preserving the It exists when the inhabitants of a State rise up in arms for
structure of checks and balance in our government. The the purpose of overthrowing the legitimate government
acts of any branch or instrumentality of the government, or; when there is a state of war between two states.
including those traditionally entrusted to the political
departments, are proper subjects of judicial review if Requisites in recognizing belligerency (OSSO)
tainted with grave abuse or arbitrariness (Chief Justice v. 1. There must be an Organized civil government directing
Senate, G.R. No. 200242, July 17, 2012). the rebel forces;
2. The rebels must occupy a Substantial portion of the
territory of the state;
11. JURISDICTION OF DOMESTIC COURTS IN PIL 3. The conflict between the legitimate government and the
rebels must be Serious, making the outcome certain; and
Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court 4. The rebels must be willing and able to Observe the laws
(“ICC”): The Rome Statute established four core of war.
international crimes: genocide, crimes against
humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Those Legal Consequences of Belligerency
crimes "shall not be subject to any statute of limitations"
PERIOD EFFECT
Complementary jurisdiction of ICC to domestic courts:
Under the Rome Statute, the ICC can only investigate and Before Recognition of It is the legitimate government
prosecute the four core international crimes in situations the parent state that is responsible for the acts
of the rebels affecting foreign
where states are "unable" or "unwilling" to do so
nationals and their properties.
themselves; the jurisdiction of the court is complementary After recognition of 1. The belligerent community is
to jurisdictions of domestic courts. The court has the parent state considered a separate state for
jurisdiction over crimes only if they are committed in the the purposes of the conflict it is
territory of a state party or if they are committed by a waging against the legitimate
national of a state party; an exception to this rule is that government;
the ICC may also have jurisdiction over crimes if its 2. Their relations for the
duration of hostilities be
jurisdiction is authorized by the United Nations Security
governed by the laws of war;
Council. 3. Troops of other belligerent
when captured, shall be treated
as prisoners of war;
12. QUASI-JUDICIAL AND QUASI-LEGISLATIVE
4. Parent state shall no longer
FUNCTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
be liable for any damage that
may be caused to third parties
 by rebel government; damage to the government or bribery arising from the
5. Both belligerents may same or closely related transactions or acts in an amount
exercise the right to visit and not exceeding One million pesos (P1,000,000.00)(R.A.
search upon neutral merchant 10660, Sec. 2).
vessels; and,
6. Both the rebel and the
legitimate government shall be Jurisdiction over the violation of R.A. No. 9165
entitled to full war status committed by a public official with Salary Grade 31
during incumbency
As to third States They are under obligation to A plain reading of R.A. 9165, as of R.A. 6425, will reveal
observe strict neutrality and that jurisdiction over drug-related cases is exclusively
abide by the consequences vested with the Regional Trial Court and no other. The
arising from that position.
clear intent of the legislature not only to retain the
"exclusive original jurisdiction" of the RTCs over violations
14. JURISDICTION OF RTC of the drugs law but to segregate from among the several
RTCs of each judicial region some RTCs that will
The regional trial court has original jurisdiction in "exclusively try and hear cases involving violations of [R.A.
expropriation proceedings. 9165)." If at all, the change introduced by the new
phraseology of Section 90, R.A. 9165 is not the deprivation
Jurisdiction of boundary disputes of the RTCs' "exclusive original jurisdiction" but the
further restriction of this "exclusive original jurisdiction.
RTC (original jurisdiction) Municipality and an The exclusive original jurisdiction over violations of R.A.
independent component 9165 is not transferred to the Sandiganbayan whenever
city the accused occupies a position classified as Grade 27 or
Sangguniang Panlalawigan Two municipalities of the higher, regardless of whether the violation is alleged as
(original jurisdiction) same province committed in relation to office. The power of the
Sandiganbayan to sit in judgment of high-ranking
Joint Sangguniang Two municipalities of the
government officials is not omnipotent. The
Panlalawigan (original different provinces
Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction is circumscribed by law and
jurisdiction)
its limits are currently defined in R.A. 10660.
Sangguniang Panlungsod Two barangays of the
Section 4(b) of P.D. 1606, as amended by R.A. 10660, is the
(original jurisdiction) same city
general law on jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan over
Joint Sangguniang Two barangays of two
crimes and offenses committed by high-ranking public
Panlungsod (original different cities
officers in relation to their office; Section 90, R.A. 9165 is
jurisdiction)
the special law excluding from the Sandiganbayan's
jurisdiction violations of R.A. 9165 committed by such
*RTC exercise appellate jurisdiction over boundary
public officers. In the latter case, jurisdiction is vested
disputes among LGUs.
upon the RTCs designated by the Supreme Court as drugs
court, regardless of whether the violation of R.A. 9165 was
Since Passi is an independent component city, while
committed in relation to the public officials' office (De
Duenas is a municipality, the procedure in Section 118 of
Lima v. Guerrero, G.R. No. 229781, October 10, 2017).
the Local Government Code does not apply to them. Since
there is no law providing for the jurisdiction of any court
or quasi-judicial agency over the settlement of their TRUE OR FALSE
boundary dispute, the Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction
to adjudicate it. Under Section 19 (6) of the Judiciary
POWER TO EXPROPRIATE
Reorganization Act, the Regional Trial Court has exclusive
original jurisdiction in all cases not within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court or quasi-judicial agency GN, pages 200-206
(Municipality of Kananga v. Madrono, G.R. No. 141375. April
30, 2003). EMINENT DOMAIN is a power inherent in the state where
it sheds off its immunity from suit while performing a
The Regional Trial Court shall have exclusive original governmental function because it submits to the
jurisdiction where the information: (a) does not allege any jurisdiction of the court to forcibly take private property
damage to the government or any bribery; or (b) alleges for a public purpose upon payment of just compensation.
It is well settled that eminent domain is an inherent power 2. The right of expropriation is not an inherent power in a
of the State that need not be granted even by the municipal corporation, and before it can exercise the right
fundamental law. Section 9 of Article III of the Constitution some law must exist conferring the power upon it. When
merely imposes a limit on the government’s exercise of the courts come to determine the question, they must only
this power.7 find (a) that a law or authority exists for the exercise of the
right of eminent domain, but (b) also that the right or
The repository of eminent domain powers is lodged in the authority is being exercised in accordance with the law.10
legislature which is exercised through the enactment of
laws. 3. The award of land under tenancy can be done through a
natural person or collectively through a juridical person. A
Requisites: The Court has recognized the following resolution of an administrative agency has the effect of a
requisites for the valid exercise of the power of eminent law and can be governed by the operative fact doctrine.11
domain:
(1) the property taken must be private property; 4. The government cannot interpose the defense of
(2) there must be genuine necessity to take the private laches/etoppel where it would result to deprivation of
property; property of the owner. The just compensation is based on
(3) the taking must be for public use; the time of taking.12
(4) there must be payment of just compensation; and
(5) the taking must comply with due process of law.8 5. The private property owner may seek reversion of the
title of its property when the government abandons the
Authorities authorized to exercise the Power of purpose for the property was acquired.13
Eminent Domain: It may be exercised by entities other
than the government itself or its subdivisions and 6. The retirement of the transmission lines necessarily
instrumentalities. The private corporations serving the stripped the expropriation proceedings of the element of
public, such as public utilities, may likewise validly public use. To continue with the expropriation proceedings
exercise it through delegation by Congress. despite the definite cessation of the public purpose of the
project would result in the rendition of an invalid
Scope and limitations: The exercise of the right of judgment in favor of the expropriator due to the absence of
eminent domain is not unlimited, for two mandatory the essential element of public use.14
requirements should underlie the Government’s exercise
of the power of eminent domain, namely: (1) that it is for a 7. The enactments of the Legislature decreed that the
particular public purpose; and (2) that just compensation money to be paid to the landowner as just compensation
be paid to the property owner. [Mactan-Cebu for the taking of his land is to be taken only from the
International Airport Authority v. Lozada, Sr, G.R. No. Agrarian Reform Fund. As such, the liability is not the
176625, February 25, 2010] personal liability of Land Bank, but its liability only as the
administrator of the ARF. In fact, Section 10, Rule 19 of the
Circumstances which indicate there is government 2003 DARAB Rules of Procedure, reiterates that the
“taking” satisfaction of a judgment for just compensation by writ of
When the owner is deprived of his proprietary rights, there execution should be from the ARF in the custody of Land
is taking of private property. It may include Bank.15
(1) Diminution in value;
(2) Prevention of ordinary use; and 8. A party is entitled to just compensation despite no
(3) Deprivation of beneficial use. apparent physical taking was done by the government.16

Doctrinal rulings: 9. Compensation cannot be just to the owner in the case of

1. The exercise of eminent domain requires a genuine property that is immediately taken unless there is prompt
necessity to take the property for public use and the 10
consequent payment of just compensation.9 11
City of Manila v. Chinese Community of Manila et al., Johnson, J., G.R. No. L-14355, October 31, 1919.

Hacienda Luisita, Inc. v. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council, G.R. No. 171101, April 24, 2012.
12
Secretary of the Department of Public Works and Highways v. Tecson, G.R. No. 179334, July 1, 2013 and Resolution
dated 21 April 2015, G.R. No. 179334, 21 April 2015.
13
Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority v. Lozada, Sr., G.R. No. 176625, February 25, 2010.
7
Republic v. Hon. Tagle, G.R. No. 129079 December 2, 1998. 14
Republic v. Heirs of Saturnino Q. Borbon, G.R. No. 165354, January 12, 2015.
8
Manotok v. National Housing Authority, G.R. No. L-55166-67, May 21, 1987, 150 SCRA 89, 99-100 cited in Manapat v. 15
Land Bank of the Philippines v. Suntay, G.R. No. 188376 : December 14, 2011.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 110478, October 15, 2007.
9 16
Department of Transportation and Communications v. Abecina, G.R. No. 206484, June 29, 2016. National Power Corporation v. Heirs of Macabangkit Sangkay, G.R. No. 165828, August 24, 2011.
payment, considering that the owner thereby immediately (f)To take possession of the property, the local
suffers not only the loss of his property but also the loss of government must deposit the amount with the court. The
its fruits or income. Thus, in addition, the owner is entitled court will fix the amount.
to legal interest from the time of the taking of the property (g) The basis of compensation of the property of is at the
until the actual payment in order to place the owner in a time of TAKING.
position as good as, but not better than, the position he (h) If just compensation is not paid or partially paid
was in before the taking occurred. 17 only, the property owner may demand payment.
(i) If property was taken not for the use intended, the
10. Traditional distinctions exist between police power property owner may demand reconveyance.
and eminent domain. In the exercise of police power, a
property right is impaired by regulation, or the use of City of Manila v. Chinese Community, 40 Phil. 349 (1919)
property is merely prohibited, regulated or restricted to Ruling: When the courts come to determine the question,
promote public welfare. In such cases, there is no they must only find (a) that a law or authority exists for
compensable taking, hence, payment of just compensation the exercise of the right of eminent domain, but (b) also
is not required. Examples of these regulations are property that the right or authority is being exercised in accordance
condemned for being noxious or intended for noxious with the law. Even if it has the power to expropriate, the
purposes (e.g., a building on the verge of collapse to be court may determine if there was grave abuse of
demolished for public safety, or obscene materials to be discretion.
destroyed in the interest of public morals) as well as
zoning ordinances prohibiting the use of property for The exercise of the right of eminent domain, whether
purposes injurious to the health, morals or safety of the directly by the State, or by its authorized agents, is
community (e.g., dividing a city’s territory into residential necessarily in derogation of private rights, and the rule in
and industrial areas.18 that case is that the authority must be strictly construed.

Power of Eminent Domain (LGUs) Where the LGU failed to discharge the burden of proof of
Requisites for the Exercise (Sec. 9, Art. III, 1987 the necessity of opening the same through the cemetery,
Constitution, Sec. 19, LGC and Art. 32 and 36, IRR, Rule expropriation cannot be granted. The cemetery already
97,1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, DILG Opinion No. 10- serves a public purpose.
1996)
Masikip v. Pasig City, 479 SCRA 391 (2006)
The Constitution provides that no private property shall be Ruling: Public purpose is not met if the property will
taken for public purpose without just compensation. utilized for the same purpose of an existing facility.
Expropriation is one of the harshest proceedings against a Bgy Sindalan, San Fernando, Pampanga v. CA 518 SCRA
private party for it deprives the owner of his property. (2007)
Ruling: Public funds must not be used to serve the needs of
Principles: a private subdivision developer.
(a) Power to expropriate private property must be for
public purpose, public use as well as the benefit of Garnishment of public funds
the poor, the landless and the general public Ortega v. City of Cebu, 602 SCRA 601 (2009)
(b) The first step is to pass an ordinance identifying the Ruling: As a matter of public policy, government funds and
property to be acquired, the purpose for which it is properties may not be seized under writs of execution or
acquired and setting specific funds for the acquisition as garnishment to satisfy judgments; disbursements of public
certified by the local treasurer. funds must be covered by the corresponding
(c) The approved ordinance must give authority for the appropriation as required by law.
chief local executive to negotiate with the owner of the
property. Q: Spouses Ramos sued the Air Transportation Office
(d) If negotiations should fail, the local government may (“ATO”) for non-payment of the portion of their property
initiate expropriation proceedings. which ATO had been utilizing in Loakan Airport. ATO
(e) The regional trial court has original jurisdiction in moved to dismiss the suit upon the claim that it is immune
expropriation proceedings. from suit. Is the claim of ATO proper?

17
Id.
A: No. The Court held that ATO is an agency of the
18
Manila Memorial Park, Inc. v. Secretary of the Department of Social Welfare and Development, G.R. No. 175356,
government not performing a purely governmental or
December 3, 2013.
sovereign function, but was involved in the management
and maintenance of the Loakan Airport, an activity that General Rule: The Civil Service Decree (PD 807) prohibits
was not the exclusive prerogative of the State in its all appointments in the national and local governments or
sovereign capacity. Hence, ATO had no claim to the States any branch or instrumentality thereof made in favor of
immunity from suit. relatives within the third degree of consanguinity or
affinity of:
Furthermore, the doctrine of state immunity cannot be (a) appointing authority;
used as a shield to defeat a valid claim for compensation (b) recommending authority;
arising from the taking without just compensation and (c) chief of the bureau office; or
without the proper expropriation proceeding being first (d) person exercising immediate supervision over the
resorted to. appointee

Q: Did the court commit an error when it included the In the last two cases, it is immaterial who the appointing or
inflation rate of the PH peso in determining the just recommending authority is. To constitute a violation of the
compensation due to respondents? law, it suffices that an appointment is extended or issued
in favor of a relative of the chief of the bureau or office, or
A: Yes. The formula for determination of just the person exercising immediate supervision over the
compensation to landowners does not include the factor appointee
for inflation rate, as inflation is properly accounted for
through payment of interest on the amount due to the Case: CSC v. Dacoycoy (1999): The appointment of his two
landowner, and through the award of exemplary damages sons who regularly reported to his office is a badge of
and attorney’s fees in cases where there was irregularity in nepotism.
the taking of property.
Exceptions to rule on nepotism:
Q: The municipality of Teresa, Rizal enacted an ordinance (a) persons employed in a confidential capacity
which sought the expropriation of a property upon which (b) teachers
it will build an evacuation center as part of its Disaster (c) physicians
Preparedness Program. The Sangguniang Panlalawigan (d) members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines
disapproved the ordinance. May the municipality still (f) those that were already appointed to the same office,
exercise the power of eminent domain despite the but later got married.
disapproval of its proposed ordinance?
NEPOTISM under P.D. 907
A: Yes. The exercise of power of eminent domain is a
power delegated by Congress to political subdivisions. (p. Sec. 59. Nepotism.
45, 2017 Political Law Reviewer) (1) All appointments to the national, provincial, city and
municipal governments or in any branch or
Q: Iloilo City initiated expropriation proceedings against instrumentality thereof, including government owned or
Spouses Espinosa. During the pendency of the case, the controlled corporations, made in favor of a relative within
city government and the property owner agreed to settle the third degree either of consanguinity or of affinity of the
the case through a compromise agreement. The Court appointing or recommending authority, or of the bureau or
approved the compromise agreement between the parties. office, or of the persons exercising immediate supervision
Before fully paying for the property, the city government over him, are hereby prohibited.
questioned the compromise agreement arguing that it was (2) The following are exempted from the operations of the
not the court which fixed the just compensation. Is the rules on nepotism: (a) persons employed in a confidential
argument of the city government valid? capacity, (b) teachers, (c) physicians, and (d) members of
the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
A: No. A compromise agreement is valid since it has the
effect of a ruling on the merit. The city government is also CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION v. PEDRO O. DACOYCOY G.R.
precluded to question such ruling of the trial court because No. 135805, 29 April 1999
it voluntary submitted itself to the jurisdiction of the court.
FACTS: This is an appeal via certiorari interposed by the
Civil Service Commission from a decision of the Court of
NEPOTISM
Appeals ruling that respondent Pedro O. Dacoycoy was not
guilty of nepotism and declaring null and void the Civil A de jure officer is one who is deemed, in all respects,
Service Commissions resolution dismissing him from the legally appointed and qualified and whose term of office
service as Vocational School Administrator, Balicuatro has not expired.
College of Arts and Trade, Allen, Northern Samar.
That notwithstanding, Agra was a de facto officer during
George P. Suan, a Citizens Crime Watch Vice-President, his tenure as Acting Secretary of Justice. During their
Allen Chapter, Northern Samar, filed with the Civil Service tenure in the questioned positions, respondents may be
Commission, Quezon City, a complaint against Pedro O. considered de facto officers and as such entitled to
Dacoycoy, for habitual drunkenness, misconduct and emoluments for actual services rendered.
nepotism. After the fact-finding investigation, the Civil
Service Regional Office No. 8, Tacloban City, found a prima De jure officer
facie case against respondent, and, on March 5, 1996, A de jure officer is one who is in all respects legally
issued the corresponding formal charge against him. appointed or elected and qualified to exercise the office.

The Civil Service Commission promulgated its resolution De facto officer (2000, 2004, 2009, 2010 Bar)
finding no substantial evidence to support the charge of A de facto officer is one who assumed office under the
habitual drunkenness and misconduct. However, the Civil color of a known appointment or election but which
Service Commission found respondent Pedro O. Dacoycoy appointment or election is void for reasons that the officer
guilty of nepotism on two counts as a result of the was not eligible, or that there was want of power in the
appointment of his two sons, Rito and Ped Dacoycoy, as electing body, or that there was some other defect or
driver and utility worker, respectively, and their irregularity in its exercise, wherein such ineligibility, want
assignment under his immediate supervision and control of power, or defect being unknown to the public.
as the Vocational School Administrator Balicuatro College
of Arts and Trades, and imposed on him the penalty of De jure officer vs. De facto officer
dismissal from the service.
DE JURE OFFICER DE FACTO OFFICER
SC: The Court affirmed the decision of the Civil Service Has lawful title to the Has possession of and
Commission. It said that to constitute a violation of the law office. performs the duties under
on nepotism, it is immaterial who the appointing or a colorable title without
recommending authority is. It suffices that an appointment being technically qualified
is extended or issued in favor of a relative within the third in all points of law to act.
degree of consanguinity or affinity of the chief of the Holding of office rests on Holding of office rests on
bureau or office, or the person exercising immediate right. reputation.
supervision over the appointee. Officer cannot be removed Officer may be ousted in a
through a direct direct proceeding against
NEPOTISM under Section 13, Article VII proceeding (quo him.
warranto).
“The spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity
within the fourth civil degree of the President shall not, Effects of the acts of de facto public officers
during his tenure, be appointed as Members of the 1. The lawful acts, so far as the rights of third persons are
Constitutional Commissions, or the Office of the concerned are, if done within the scope and by the
Ombudsman, or as Secretaries, Undersecretaries, apparent authority of the office, are considered valid and
chairmen or heads of bureaus or offices, including binding;
government-owned or controlled corporations and their 2. The de facto officer cannot benefit from his own status
subsidiaries. ” because public policy demands that unlawful assumption
of public office be discouraged;
DE JURE AND DE FACTO
NOTE: The general rule is that a de facto officer cannot
claim salary and other compensations for services
De jure and De facto officers, Distinguished
rendered by him as such. However, the officer may retain
salaries collected by him for services rendered in good
faith when there is no de jure officer claiming the office.
3. The de facto officer is subject to the same liabilities Recovery of the salary received by a de facto officer
imposed on the de jure officer in the discharge of official during a wrongful tenure
duties, in addition to whatever special damages may be As a rule, the rightful incumbent of the public office may
due from him because of his unlawful assumption of office; recover from a de facto officer the salaries received by the
and latter during the time of the latter's wrongful tenure even
4. The acts of the de facto public officer, insofar as they though he entered into the office in good faith and under a
affect the public, are valid, binding and with full legal colorable title. The de facto officer takes the salaries at his
effect. risks and must therefore account to the de jure officer for
the amounts he received. However, where there is no de
Manner by which challenge to a de facto office is made jure officer, a de facto officer shall be entitled to the
1. The incumbency may not be challenged collaterally or in salaries and emoluments accruing during the period when
an action to which the de facto officer is not a party; he actually discharged the duties (Monroy v. CA, G.R. No. L-
2. The challenge must be made in a direct proceeding 23258, July 1, 1967).
where title to the office will be the principal issue; and
3. The authorized proceeding is quo warranto either by the NOTE: In Monroy v. CA, the Supreme Court said that the
Solicitor General in the name of the Republic or by any Rodriguez ruling cannot be applied for the absence of
person claiming title to the office. factual and legal similarities.

Q: Ross ran as congressman of Cagayan province. His Essence of de facto doctrine

opponent, Paulo, however, was the one proclaimed as The de facto doctrine has been formulated, not for the
the winner by the COMELEC. Ross filed seasonably a protection of the de facto officer principally, but rather for
protest before the HRET. After two years, the HRET the protection of the public and individuals who get
reversed the COMELEC’s decision and Ross was involved in the official acts of persons discharging the
proclaimed finally as the duly elected Congressman. duties of an office without being lawful officers.
Thus, he had only one year to serve in Congress.
1. Can Ross collect salaries and allowances from the Q: May the salary of a public officer or employee be
government for the first two years of his term as subject to garnishment? Why?
Congressman? A: NO. It may not, by garnishment, attachment, or order of
2. Should Paulo refund to the government the salaries execution, be seized before being paid to him, and
and allowances he had received as Congressman? appropriated for the payment of his debts, because of the
3. What will happen to the bills that Paulo alone following reasons:
authored and were approved by the HoR while he was 1. While it is still in the hands of the disbursing officer, it
seated as Congressman? Reason and explain briefly. belongs to the government;
2. Public policy forbids such practice since it would be fatal
A: to the public service; and
1. NO. Ross cannot collect salaries and allowances from the 3. It would be tantamount to a suit against the State in its
government for the first two years of his term, because in own court, which is prohibited, except with its consent.
the meanwhile Paulo collected the salaries and allowances.
Paulo was a de facto officer while he was in possession of De facto officer vs. USURPER (2000 Bar)
the office. To allow Ross to collect the salaries and Usurper DE FACTO
allowances will result in making the government pay a OFFICER
second time. Complies with the 3 Takes possession of an
2. NO. Paulo is not required to refund to the government elements of a de jure officer, office and does official acts
the salaries and allowances he received. As a de facto namely: without any actual or
officer, he is entitled to the salaries and allowances 1. Existence of a de jure apparent authority.
because he rendered services during his incumbency. office;
3. The bills which Paulo alone authored and were 2. Must possess the legal
approved by the House of Representatives are valid qualifications for the office
because he was a de facto officer during his incumbency. in question; and
The acts of a de facto officer are valid insofar as the public 3. Must have qualified
is concerned(Rodriguez v. Tan, G.R. No. L-3913, August 7, himself to perform the
1952). duties of such office
according to the mode
prescribed by law. franchise or office and to oust the holder from its
enjoyment, if his claim is not well-founded, or if he has
Has color of right or title to Has neither color of right forfeited his right to enjoy the office (Tecson v. Comelec,
office. or title to office. G.R. No. 161434, March 3, 2004).
Acts are rendered valid as Acts are absolutely void.
to the public until his title is Propriety of Quo Warranto as a mode to remove an
adjudged insufficient. Impeachable Officer
GR: The rightful incumbent Not entitled to The language of Section 2, Article XI of the Constitution
of a public office may compensation does not foreclose a quo warranto action against
recover from an officer de impeachable officers. The provision uses the permissive
facto the salary received by term "may" which, in statutory construction, denotes
the latter during the time of discretion and cannot be construed as having a mandatory
his tenure even though he effect. We have consistently held that the term "may" is
entered into the office in indicative of a mere possibility, an opportunity or an
good faith and under color option. The grantee of that opportunity is vested with a
of title. right or faculty which he has the option to exercise. An
option to remove by impeachment admits of an alternative
XPN: mode of effecting the removal.
Where there is no de jure
public officer, the officer de We hold, therefore, that by its tenor, Section 2, Article XI of
facto who in good faith has the Constitution allows the institution of a quo warranto
had possession of the office action against an impeachable officer. After all, a quo
and has discharged the warranto petition is predicated on grounds distinct from
duties pertaining thereto, is those of impeachment. The former questions the validity of
legally entitled to the a public officer's appointment while the latter indicts him
emoluments of the office, for the so-called impeachable offenses without questioning
and may, in an appropriate his title to the office he holds (Republic vs. Sereno, G.R. No.
action, recover the salary, 237428, May 11, 2018).
fees and other
compensations attached to NOTE:The courts should be able to inquire into the validity
the office. (Gen. Manager, of appointments even of impeachable officers. To hold
Philippine Ports Authority otherwise is to allow an absurd situation where the
v. Monserate, G.R. No. appointment of an impeachable officer cannot be
129616, April 17, 2002) questioned even when, for instance, he or she has been
determined to be of foreign nationality or, in offices where
Quo Warranto Bar membership is a qualification, when he or she
fraudulently represented to be a member of the Bar.
It is a proceeding or writ issued by the court to determine Unless such an officer commits any of the grounds for
the right to use an office, position or franchise and to oust impeachment and is actually impeached, he can continue
the person holding or exercising such office, position or discharging the functions of his office even when he is
franchise if his right is unfounded or if a person performed clearly disqualified from holding it. Such would result in
acts considered as grounds for forfeiture of said exercise of permitting unqualified and ineligible public officials to
position, office, or franchise. continue occupying key positions, exercising sensitive
sovereign functions until they are successfully removed
NOTE: It is commenced by a verified petition brought in from office through impeachment. This could not have
the name of the Republic of the Philippines or in the name been the intent of the framers of the Constitution. (ibid.)
of the person claiming to be entitled to a public office or
position usurped or unlawfully held or exercised by Prescription does not lie against the State in Quo
another(Rules of Court, Rule 66, Sec. 1). Warranto Proceedings

Nature and purpose of quo warranto When the Solicitor General himself commences the quo
It literally means “by what authority” and the object is to warranto action either (1) upon the President's directive,
determine the right of a person to the use or exercise of a (2) upon complaint or (3) when the Solicitor General has
good reason to believe that there is proof that (a) a person
usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises· a Indeed, there is no proprietary right over a public office.
public office, position or franchise; (b) a public officer does Hence, a claimed right over a public office may be waived.
or suffers an act which is a ground for the forfeiture of his In fact, even Constitutionally-protected rights may be
office; or (c) an association acts as a corporation without waived. Thus, we have consistently held that the inaction
being legally incorporated or without lawful authority so of a person claiming right over a public office to assert the
to act, he does so in the discharge of his task and mandate same within the prescriptive period provided by the rules,
to see to it that the best interest of the public and the may be considered a waiver of such right. This is where
government are upheld. In these three instances, the the difference between a quo warranto filed by a private
Solicitor General is mandated under the Rules to individual as opposed to one filed by the State through the
commence the necessary quo warranto petition. Solicitor General lies. There is no claim of right over a
public office where it is the State itself, through the
When the government is the real party in interest, and is Solicitor General, which files a petition for quo warranto to
proceeding mainly to assert its rights, there can be no question the eligibility of the person holding the public
defense on the ground of laches or prescription. office. As We have emphasized in the assailed Decision,
Indubitably, the basic principle that "prescription does not unlike Constitutionally-protected rights, Constitutionally-
lie against the State" which finds textual basis under required qualifications for a public office can never be
Article 1108 (4) of the Civil Code, applies in this case. waived either deliberately or by mere passage of time.
While a private individual may, in proper instances, be
Jurisprudence across the United States likewise richly deemed to have waived his or her right over title to public
reflect that when the Solicitor General files a quo warranto office and/or to have acquiesced or consented to the loss
petition in behalf of the people and where the interests of of such right, no organized society would allow, much
the public are involved, the lapse of time presents no more a prudent court would consider, the State to have
effective bar. Aptly, in State ex rel Stovall v. Meneley, it was waived by mere lapse of time, its right to uphold and
held that a quo warranto action is a governmental function ensure compliance with the requirements for such office,
and not a propriety function, and therefore the doctrine of fixed by no less than the Constitution, the fundamental law
laches does not apply. upon which the foundations of a State stand, especially so
when the government cannot be faulted for such lapse
That prescription does not lie in this case can also be (Republic vs. Sereno, G.R. No. 237428, June 19, 2018).
deduced from the very purpose of an action for quo
warranto. People v. City Whittier explains that the remedy Quo warranto under Rule 66 vs. Quo warranto in
of quo warranto is intended to prevent a continuing electoral proceedings
exercise of an authority unlawfully asserted. Indeed, on
point is People v. Bailey when it ruled that because quo QUO WARRANTO UNDER RULE QUO WARRANTO IN
warranto serves to end a continuous usurpation, no 66 ELECTORAL
statute of limitations applies to the action. PROCEEDINGS
The issue is legality of the The issue is eligibility
Needless to say, no prudent and just court would allow an occupancy of the office by virtue of the person elected.
unqualified person to hold public office, much more the of a legal appointment.
highest position in the Judiciary. In this case, the Republic Grounds: usurpation, forfeiture, Grounds: ineligibility
cannot be faulted for questioning respondent's or illegal association (Rules of or disqualification to
qualification· for office only upon discovery of the cause of Court, Rule 66,Sec. 1). hold the office (OEC,
ouster(Republic vs. Sereno, G.R. No. 237428, May 11, 2018). Sec. 253).
Presupposes that the Petition must be filed
One-year prescriptive period applies only to private respondent is already actually within 10 days from
individuals holding office and action must the proclamation of
be commenced within one year the candidate.
The long line of cases decided by this Court since the from cause of ouster or from the
1900's, which specifically explained the spirit behind the time the right of petitioner to
rule providing a prescriptive period for the filing of an hold office arose.
action for quo warranto, reveals that such limitation can be Petitioner is person entitled to Petitioner may be any
applied only against private individuals claiming rights to office. voter even if he is not
a public office, not against the State. entitled to the office.
Person adjudged entitled to the Actual or
office may bring a separate compensatory
action against the respondent to damages are MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Homeowners Assn., Inc: MMDA
recover damages (Rules of recoverable in quo cannot require the opening of certain streets inside a
Court, Rule 66, Sec. 11). warranto proceedings private subdivision since it cannot make an ordinance
under the OEC. because it has no rule-making powers. The opening of a
street is a way of regulating the use of property. Therefore,
NOTE: If the dispute is as to the counting of votes or on MMDA cannot also validly exercise police power.
matters connected with the conduct of the election, quo
warranto is not the proper remedy but an election protest Q: When may the exercise of police power be
(Cesar v. Garrido, G.R. No. 30705, March 25, 1929). questioned?
A: In MMDA v. Bell-Air Village Assn, the court held that
where there is no explicit grant of power, a government
MMDA
agency cannot exercise police power. The Court said:
“Clearly, the MMDA is not a political unit of government.
MMDA v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay G.R. The power delegated to the MMDA is that given to the
Nos.171947-48, Dec. 18, 2008: The Court may scrutinize the Metro Manila Council to promulgate administrative rules
findings of the lower court where there is a patent grave and regulations in the implementation of the MMDA’s
abuse of discretion. functions. There is no grant of authority to enact
ordinances and regulations for the general welfare of the
In this case, the Court held that the trial court should have inhabitants of the metropolis.
upheld the constitutional guaranties of the right to good
health and the right to balance ecology of the petitioners. Q: Can MMDA exercise police power?
This is the first case where the Court applied the concept A: NO. The MMDA cannot exercise police powers since its
of a continuing mandamus without having it adopted as powers are limited to the formulation, coordination
part of the Rules of Court. regulation, implementation, preparation, management,
monitoring, setting of policies, installing a system, and
Under what other judicial discipline describes as administration. Nothing in RA No. 7924 granted the MMDA
“continuing mandamus,” the Court may, under police power, let alone legislative power (MMDA v.
extraordinary circumstances, issue directives with the end Trackworks, G.R. No. 179554, December 16, 2009).
in view of ensuring that its decision would not be set to
naught by administrative inaction or indifference. In India, Q: The Quezon City Council issued Ordinance 2904
the doctrine of continuing mandamus was used to enforce which requires the construction of arcades for
directives of the court to clean up the length of the Ganges commercial buildings to be constructed in zones
River from industrial and municipal pollution. designated as business zones in the zoning plan of
Quezon City, along EDSA. However, at the time the
Writ of Amparo/ Writ of Habeas Data/Writ of Kalikasan: ordinance was passed there was yet no building code
Caram v. Segui, 732, SCRA 86(2014): When a parent passed by the legislature. Thus, the regulation of the
knowingly consented to give up her parental authority and construction of the buildings are left to the discretion
agreed to have her infant adopted, she is not entitled to the of the LGUs. Under this ordinance, the city council
writ of amparo. required that the arcade is to be created in a way that
Vivires and Suzara v. STC-Cebu City, G.R. No. 202666, building owners are not allowed to construct his wall
September 29, 2014: The parents of the students are not up to the edge of the property line, thereby creating a
entitled to the writ of habeas data since the photographs space under the first floor. In effect, property owners
were not directly collected by the school. The Court cited relinquish the use of the space as an arcade for
that users of OSN have the control over certain pedestrians instead of using the property for their
information that they can publicly share. own purposes.
Paje v. Casino, G.R. No. 206527, February 3, 2015: The Court Subsequently, Justice Gancayo sought to be exempted
did not issue the writ of Kalikasan as prayed for because from the application of the ordinance to which the City
the Environmental Clearance Certificate was issued in Council responded favorably in his favor.
accordance with law. The ECC is subject to regular review MMDA then sent a notice of demolition to Justice
and requires adjustments when the project adversely Gancayco alleging that a portion of his building
affects both the environment and lives of the stakeholders. violates the National Building Code in relation to the
ordinance. Is the Ordinance a valid exercise of police The period of time prior to the recall term, when another
power in regulating the use of property in a business elective official holds office, constitutes an interruption in
zone? continuity of service. Clearly, Adormeo established the rule
A: YES. In the exercise of police power, property rights of that the winner in the recall election cannot be charged or
individuals may be subject to restraints and burdens in credited with the full term of three years for purposes of
order to fulfill the objectives of the government. Property counting the consecutiveness of an elective official's terms
rights must bow down to the primacy of police power in office.
because it must yield to the general welfare. It is clear that
the objective of the ordinance were the health and safety Same; Constitutional Law; Term of Office; The intent in
of the city and its inhabitants. At the time he ordinance Section 8, Article X of the Constitution and under Section
was passed, there was no national building code, thus 43 (b) of RA No. 7160 is that only consecutive terms count
there was no law which prohibits the city council from in determining the three-term limit rule; Involuntary
regulating the construction of buildings, arcades and severance from office for any length of time interrupts
sidewalks in their jurisdiction (Gancayco v. City continuity of service.—These constitutional and statutory
Government of Quezon City, G.R. No. 177807, Oct. 11, 2011). provisions have two parts. The first part provides that an
elective local official cannot serve for more than three
consecutive terms. The clear intent is that only consecutive
WRIT OF MANDAMUS
terms count in determining the three-term limit rule. The
second part states that voluntary renunciation of office for
General Rule: A person illegally detained may seek any length of time does not interrupt the continuity of
judicial relief through a petition for issuance of a writ of service. The clear intent is that involuntary severance from
mandamus. office for any length of time interrupts continuity of
A separate criminal prosecution may also be instituted service and prevents the service before and after the
against the persons responsible for the illegal detention. interruption from being joined together to form a
Resolutions/ actions of CSC, COA and COMELEC are continuous service or consecutive terms.
reviewed by S.C. en banc because the Constitution
provides for this. Rule 65 is normally applied. Same; Same; Same; After three consecutive terms, an
elective local official cannot seek immediate reelection for
Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus: distinguish one a fourth term; Any subsequent election, like a recall
from the other, requisites for issuance of the writs; election, is no longer covered by the prohibition.—After
certiorari normally invoked where there is no other three consecutive terms, an elective local official cannot
speedy remedy available particularly where there is abuse seek immediate reelection for a fourth term. The
of discretion on the part of the respondent-party and to prohibited election refers to the next regular election for
correct errors of jurisdiction; prohibition – the same office following the end of the third consecutive
prevents/enjoins the party from acting on a matter term. Any subsequent election, like a recall election, is no
presented the court; and mandamus – will be issued longer covered by the prohibition for two reasons. First, a
only when there is particular law which commands the subsequent election like a recall election is no longer an
party to perform an act and will not to compel the immediate reelection after three consecutive terms.
performance of a discretionary duty (ex. issuance of a Second, the intervening period constitutes an involuntary
passport or visa). interruption in the continuity of service.

Same; Same; Same; Recall; A recall election mid-way in the

ESSAY term following the third consecutive term is a subsequent
election but not an immediate reelection after the third
term.—Clearly, what the Constitution prohibits is an
1. SANDOVAL V. COMELEC immediate reelection for a fourth term following three
consecutive terms. The Constitution, however, does not
Sandoval v. COMELEC G.R. No. 154683 Nov. 12, 2002: prohibit a subsequent reelection for a fourth term as long
Winning in a recall election is not counted as a regular as the reelection is not immediately after the end of the
term. third consecutive term. A recall election mid-way in the
term following the third consecutive term is a subsequent
One who wins and serves a recall term does not serve the election but not an immediate reelection after the third
full term of his predecessor but only the unexpired term. term.
 If public officer is part of GOCC without original charter,
Same; Same; Same; Same; The winner in the recall election goes to NLRC.
cannot be charged or credited with the full term of three
years for purposes of counting the consecutiveness of an
Jurisdiction of Ombudsman
elective official’s terms in office.—In Adormeo, the recall
term of Talaga began only from the date he assumed office
R.A. 6770, Section 21. Officials Subject to Disciplinary
after winning the recall election. Talaga’s recall term did
Authority; Exceptions. — The Office of the Ombudsman
not retroact to include the tenure in office of his
shall have disciplinary authority over all elective and
predecessor. If Talaga’s recall term was made to so
appointive officials of the Government and its
retroact, then he would have been disqualified to run in subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies, including
the 2001 elections because he would already have served Members of the Cabinet, local government, government-
three consecutive terms prior owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries,
to the 2001 elections. One who wins and serves a recall except over officials who may be removed only by
term does not serve the full term of his predecessor but impeachment or over Members of Congress, and the
only the unexpired term. The period of time prior to the Judiciary.
recall term, when another elective official holds office,
constitutes an interruption in continuity of service. Clearly,
Adormeo established the rule that the winner in the recall Some of the functions –
election cannot be charged or credited with the full term of
 Investigate and prosecute on its own or on
three years for purposes of counting the consecutiveness
complaint by any person, any act or omission of
of an elective official’s terms in office. any public officer or employee, office or agency,
when such act or omission appears to be illegal,
In summary, we hold that Hagedorn is qualified to run in unjust, improper or inefficient. It has primary
the September 24, 2002 recall election for mayor of Puerto jurisdiction over cases cognizable by the
Princesa because: Sandiganbayan and, in the exercise of this primary
1. Hagedorn is not running for immediate reelection jurisdiction, it may take over, at any stage, from
any investigatory agency of Government, the
following his three consecutive terms as mayor which
investigation of such cases (2012 Bar);
ended on June 30, 2001;
2. Hagedorn's continuity of service as mayor was  Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate
involuntarily interrupted from June 30, 2001 to September action against a public officer or employee at fault
24, 2002 during which time he was a private citizen; or who neglect to perform an act or discharge a
3. Hagedorn's recall term from September 24, 2002 to June duty required by law, and recommend his
30, 2004 cannot be made to retroact to June 30, 2001 to removal, suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or
prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith; or
make a fourth consecutive term because factually the
enforce its disciplinary authority as provided in
recall term is not a fourth consecutive term; and Section 21 of R.A. 6770: provided, that the refusal
4. Term limits should be construed strictly to give the by any officer without just cause to comply with
fullest possible effect to the right of the electorate to an order of the Ombudsman to remove, suspend,
choose their leaders. demote, fine, censure, or prosecute an officer or
employee who is at fault or who neglects to
perform an act or discharge a duty required by
2. JURISDICTION OF CSC AND OMBUDSMAN law shall be a ground for disciplinary action
against said officer(2009 Bar);
Scope of the Civil Service (1999, 2003 Bar)
The civil service embraces all Effect of charges arising from same act/omission
1. branches, lodged before the Ombudsman and regular courts
2. subdivisions,
Administrative and criminal charges filed before the Office
3. instrumentalities, and of the Ombudsman and the trial court, respectively, are
4. agencies of the Government, including separate and distinct from each other even if they arise
government-owned or controlled corporations from the same act or omission. This is because the
with original charters [1987 Constitution, Art. IX-B, quantum of proof required in criminal cases is proof
Sec. 2(1)]. beyond reasonable doubt, while in administrative cases,
only substantial evidence is required. Moreover, the
purpose of the administrative proceedings is mainly to
protect the public service, based on the time-honored 8. Sec 14, second paragraph, of the Ombudsman Act, which
principle that a public office is a public trust. On the other says, “No court shall hear any appeal or application for
hand, the purpose of the criminal prosecution is the remedy against the decision or findings of the Ombudsman,
punishment of crime. Thus, even the dismissal of a except the Supreme Court, on pure question of law” is
criminal case does not necessarily foreclose the UNCONSTITUTIONAL for it attempts to effectively increase
administrative action against the respondent (Gonzales v. SC’s appellate jurisdiction without its advice and
Serrano. G.R. No. 175433, March 11, 2015). concurrence(Carpio-Morales v. Binay, Jr., ibid.).

Scope of powers Power of the Ombudsman to directly dismiss a public

officer
1. The Ombudsman can investigate only officers of
government owned corporations with original charters Under Sec. 13(3) of Art. XI, the Ombudsman can only
(Khan, Jr v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 125296, July 20, 2006). recommend to the officer concerned the removal of a
public officer or employee found to be administratively
2. The jurisdiction of the Ombudsman over disciplinary liable(Tapiador v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No.
cases involving public school teachers has been modified 129124. March 15, 2002). Be that as it may, the refusal,
by Sec. 9 of R.A. 4670 (Magna Carta for Public School without just cause, of any officer to comply with such an
Teachers) which says that such cases must first go to a order of the Ombudsman to penalize erring officer or
committee appointed by the Secretary of Education employee is a ground for disciplinary action. Thus, there is
(Ombudsman v. Estandarte, G.R. 168670, April 13, 2007); a strong indication that the Ombudsman’s
recommendation is not merely advisory in nature but
actually mandatory within the bounds of law. This should
3. The Ombudsman Act authorizes the Ombudsman to not be interpreted as usurpation of the Ombudsman of the
impose penalties in administrative cases(Ombudsman v. authority of the head of office or any officer concerned. It
CA, G.R. No. 167844, Nov. 22, 2006; Ombudsman v. Lucero, has long been settled that the power of the Ombudsman
G.R. No. 168718 November 24, 2006); to investigate and prosecute any illegal act or omission
of any public official is not an exclusive authority, but a
NOTE: According to Sec. 60 of the LGC, elective officials
shared or concurrent authority in respect of the
may be dismissed only by the proper court. “Where the
offense charged (Ledesma v. CA, G.R. No. 161629, July 29,
disciplining authority is given only the power to suspend
2005).
and not the power to remove, it should not be permitted to
manipulate the law by usurping the power to remove.”
(Sangguniang Barangay v. Punong Barangay, G.R. No.
170626, March 3, 2008). Power of the Military Deputy Ombudsman to
investigate civilian police
4. The Special Prosecutor may not file information without
authority from the Ombudsman(Perez v. Sandiganbayan, Since the power of the Ombudsman is broad and the
G.R. No. 166062, September 26, 2006). Deputy Ombudsman acts under the direction of the
Ombudsman, the power of the Military Deputy to
5. The Ombudsman has been conferred rule making power investigate members of the civilian police has also been
to govern procedures under it (Buencamino v. CA, GR affirmed(Acop v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 120422, September
175895, April 12, 2007). 27, 1995).
6. A preventive suspension will only last 90 days, not the
entire duration of the criminal case(Villasenor v.
Sandiganbayan G.R. No. 180700, March 4, 2008). The Ombudsman may still investigate even if the
private complainants lack sufficient personal interest
7. Sec 14, first paragraph, of the Ombudsman Act, which in the subject matter of grievance
says, “No writ of injunction shall be issued by any court to
delay an investigation being conducted by the Ombudsman Sec 20 of R.A. 6770 has been clarified by the Rules of
under this Act, Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman. Under, Sec 4,
Rule III thereof, even if the ground raised is the supposed
unless there is a prima facie evidence that the subject lack of sufficient personal interest of complainants in the
matter of the investigation is outside the jurisdiction of the subject matter of the grievance under Sect 20(4) [R.A.
Office of the Ombudsman” is DECLARED INEFFECTIVE until 6770], the dismissal on that ground is not mandatory and
SC issues a procedural rule on the matter(Carpio-Morales is discretionary on the part of the Ombudsman or Deputy
v. CA, G.R. No. 217126-27, November 10, 2015); and Ombudsman evaluating the administrative complaint. The
Ombudsman cannot be faulted for exercising its discretion
under Sec 20 of R.A. 6670, which allows the Ombudsman
to decide not to conduct the necessary investigation of any
administrative act or omission complained of, if it believes Where do you challenge the admin case filed before
that the complainant has no sufficient personal interest in the Ombudsman?
the subject matter of the grievance (Bueno v. Office of the If admin case, PFR under Rule 43 before the CA. If criminal
Ombudsman, G.R. No. 191712, September 17, 2014). case, PFC under Rule 65 before the SC.

Would Ombudsman have jurisdiction ONLY over cases

Authority of the Ombudsman in reviewing cognizable by the Sandiganbayan?
Administrative proceedings No. If it is covered by the law creating the Ombudsman,
In the exercise of its duties, the Ombudsman is given full even if RTC, it is covered. The power to investigate and
administrative disciplinary authority. His power is not to prosecute granted by law to the Ombudsman is plenary
limited merely to receiving, processing complaints, or and unqualified. It pertains to any act or omission of any
recommending penalties. He is to conduct investigations, public officer or employee when such act or omission
hold hearings, summon witnesses, and require production appears to be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient. The law
of evidence and place respondents under preventive does not make a distinction between cases cognizable by
suspension. This includes the power to impose the penalty the Sandiganbayan and those cognizable by regular courts.
of removal, suspension, demotion, fine, or censure of a It has been held that the clause "any illegal act or omission
public officer or employee(Ombudsman v. Galicia, G.R. No. of any public official" is broad enough to embrace any
167711, October 10, 2008). crime committed by a public officer or employee.

NOTE: Appeals from resolutions of the Office of the

Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases should be
taken to the Court of Appeals via Petition for Review under
Rule 43 of the Rules of Court (Fabian v. Desierto, G.R. No.
129742, September 16, 1998).
3. ARCHDIOCESE OF BACOLOD V. COMELEC
(FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION)

Authority of the Ombudsman in reviewing penal

proceedings The right to suffrage not only includes the right to vote for
one’s chosen candidate, but also the right to vocalize that
In the exercise of its investigative power, the Court has choice to the public in general, in the hope of influencing
consistently held that courts will not interfere with the their votes. It may be said that in an election year, the right
discretion of the fiscal or the Ombudsman to determine the to vote necessarily includes the right to free speech and
specificity and adequacy of the averments of the offense expression. The protection of these fundamental
charged. He may dismiss the complaint forthwith if he
constitutional rights, therefore, allows for the immediate
finds it to be insufficient in form and substance or if he
resort to this court.
otherwise finds no ground to continue with the inquiry; or
he may proceed with the investigation of the complaint if,
in his view, it is in due and proper form(Ocampo v. Constitutional Law; Freedom of Expression; In a
Ombudsman, G.R. No. 103446-47, August 30, 1993). democracy, the citizen’s right to freely participate in the
exchange of ideas in furtherance of political decision-
NOTE: In Garcia-Rueda v. Pascasio, G.R. No. 118141, making is recognized.—In a democracy, the citizen’s right
September 5, 1997, the Court held that “while the to freely participate in the exchange of ideas in furtherance
Ombudsman has the full discretion to determine whether of political decision-making is recognized. It deserves the
or not a criminal case is to be filed, the Court is not
highest protection the courts may provide, as public
precluded from reviewing the Ombudsman’s action when
participation in nation-building is a fundamental principle
there is grave abuse of discretion.”
in our Constitution. As such, their right to engage in free
expression of ideas must be given immediate protection by
this court.
Difference between administrative case you filed
before the CSC and Ombudsman?
Same; Same; The right to suffrage not only includes the
Ombudsman CSC right to vote for one’s chosen candidate, but also the right
Wider in scope, it covers GOCC with original to vocalize that choice to the public in general, in the hope
even GOCC without charters are only covered of influencing their votes.—In the case before this court,
original charter there is a clear threat to the paramount right of freedom of
speech and freedom of expression which warrants opposing them with criticism or requests for justification.”
invocation of relief from this court. The principles laid Speech is not limited to vocal communication. “[C]onduct
down in this decision will likely influence the discourse of is treated as a form of speech sometimes referred to as
freedom of speech in the future, especially in the context of ‘symbolic speech[,]’” such that “‘when ‘speech’ and
elections. The right to suffrage not only includes the right ‘nonspeech’ elements are combined in the same course of
to vote for one’s chosen candidate, but also the right to conduct,’ the ‘communicative element’ of the conduct may
vocalize that choice to the public in general, in the hope of be ‘sufficient to bring into play the [right to freedom of
influencing their votes. It may be said that in an election expression].’” The right to freedom of expression, thus,
year, the right to vote necessarily includes the right to free applies to the entire continuum of speech from utterances
speech and expression. The protection of these made to conduct enacted, and even to inaction itself as a
fundamental constitutional rights, therefore, allows for the symbolic manner of communication.
immediate resort to this court.
Same; Same; Speech that promotes dialogue on public
Same; Same; This case concerns the right of petitioners, affairs, or airs out grievances and political discontent,
who are noncandidates, to post the tarpaulin in their should be protected and encouraged.—Proponents of the
private property, as an exercise of their right of free political theory on “deliberative democracy” submit that
expression.—The present petition does not involve a “substantial, open, [and] ethical dialogue is a critical, and
dispute between the rich and poor, or the powerful and indeed defining, feature of a good polity.” This theory may
weak, on their equal opportunities for media coverage of be considered broad, but it definitely “includes [a]
candidates and their right to freedom of expression. This collective decision-making with the participation of all
case concerns the right of petitioners, who are who will be affected by the decision.” It anchors on the
noncandidates, to post the tarpaulin in their private principle that the cornerstone of every democracy is that
property, as an exercise of their right of free expression. sovereignty resides in the people. To ensure order in
Despite the invocation of the political question doctrine by running the state’s affairs, sovereign powers were
respondents, this court is not proscribed from deciding on delegated and individuals would be elected or nominated
the merits of this case. in key government positions to represent the people. On
this note, the theory on deliberative democracy may
Constitutional Law; Freedom of Expression; In this case, evolve to the right of the people to make government
the tarpaulin contains speech on a matter of public accountable. Necessarily, this includes the right of the
concern, that is, a statement of either appreciation or people to criticize acts made pursuant to governmental
criticism on votes made in the passing of the Reproductive functions. Speech that promotes dialogue on public affairs,
Health Law (RH Law). Thus, petitioners invoke their right or airs out grievances and political discontent, should thus
to freedom of expression.—True, there is no mention be protected and encouraged.
whether election campaign is limited only to the
candidates and political parties themselves. The focus of Same; Same; The Supreme Court (SC) has held free speech
the definition is that the act must be “designed to promote and other intellectual freedoms as “highly ranked in our
the election or defeat of a particular candidate or scheme of constitutional values.” These rights enjoy
candidates to a public office.” In this case, the tarpaulin precedence and primacy.—Petitioners invoke their
contains speech on a matter of public concern, that is, a “constitutional right to communicate their opinions, views
statement of either appreciation or criticism on votes and beliefs about issues and candidates.” They argue that
made in the passing of the RH Law. Thus, petitioners the tarpaulin was their statement of approval and
invoke their right to freedom of expression. appreciation of the named public officials’ act of voting
against the RH Law, and their criticism toward those who
Same; Same; The right to freedom of expression applies to voted in its favor. It was “part of their advocacy campaign
the entire continuum of speech from utterances made to against the RH Law,” which was not paid for by any
conduct enacted, and even to inaction itself as a symbolic candidate or political party. Thus, “the questioned orders
manner of communication.—Communication exists when which . . . effectively restrain[ed] and curtail[ed] [their]
“(1) a speaker, seeking to signal others, uses conventional freedom of expression should be declared unconstitutional
actions because he or she reasonably believes that such and void.” This court has held free speech and other
actions will be taken by the audience in the manner intellectual freedoms as “highly ranked in our scheme of
intended; and (2) the audience so takes the actions.” “[I]n constitutional values.” These rights enjoy precedence and
communicative action[,] the hearer may respond to the primacy. In Philippine Blooming Mills Employees
claims by . . . either accepting the speech act’s claims or Organization v. Philippine Blooming Mills Co., Inc., 51
SCRA 189 (1973), this court discussed the preferred Same; Same; Clear and Present Danger Rule; Content-
position occupied by freedom of expression: Property and based regulation bears a heavy presumption of invalidity,
property rights can be lost thru prescription; but human and this court has used the clear and present danger rule
rights are imprescriptible. If human rights are as measure.—Size limitations during elections hit at a core
extinguished by the passage of time, then the Bill of Rights part of expression. The content of the tarpaulin is not
is a useless attempt to limit the power of government and easily divorced from the size of its medium. Content-based
ceases to be an efficacious shield against the tyranny of regulation bears a heavy presumption of invalidity, and
officials, of majorities, of the influential and powerful, and this court has used the clear and present danger rule as
of oligarchs — political, economic or otherwise. In the measure. Thus, in Chavez v. Gonzales, 545 SCRA 441
hierarchy of civil liberties, the rights of free expression and (2008): A content-based regulation, however, bears a
of assembly occupy a preferred position as they are heavy presumption of invalidity and is measured against
essential to the preservation and vitality of our civil and the clear and present danger rule. The latter will pass
political institutions; and such priority “gives these constitutional muster only if justified by a compelling
liberties the sanctity and the sanction not permitting reason, and the restrictions imposed are neither
dubious intrusions.” overbroad nor vague. (Citations omitted) Under this rule,
“the evil consequences sought to be prevented must be
Same; Same; “Political Speech” and “Commercial Speech,” substantive, ‘extremely serious and the degree of
Distinguished.—We distinguish between political and imminence extremely high.’” “Only when the challenged
commercial speech. Political speech refers to speech “both act has overcome the clear and present danger rule will it
intended and received as a contribution to public pass constitutional muster, with the government having
deliberation about some issue,” “foster[ing] informed and the burden of overcoming the presumed
civic-minded deliberation.” On the other hand, commercial unconstitutionality.”
speech has been defined as speech that does “no more than
propose a commercial transaction.” The expression Same; Same; Same; Even with the clear and present danger
resulting from the content of the tarpaulin is, however, test, respondents failed to justify the regulation. There is
definitely political speech. no compelling and substantial state interest endangered
by the posting of the tarpaulin as to justify curtailment of
Same; Same; Election Propaganda; While the tarpaulin the right of freedom of expression.—Even with the clear
may influence the success or failure of the named and present danger test, respondents failed to justify the
candidates and political parties, this does not necessarily regulation. There is no compelling and substantial state
mean it is election propaganda.—While the tarpaulin may interest endangered by the posting of the tarpaulin as to
influence the success or failure of the named candidates justify curtailment of the right of freedom of expression.
and political parties, this does not necessarily mean it is There is no reason for the state to minimize the right of
election propaganda. The tarpaulin was not paid for or noncandidate petitioners to post the tarpaulin in their
posted “in return for consideration” by any candidate, private property. The size of the tarpaulin does not affect
political party, or party list group. anyone else’s constitutional rights.

Same; Same; Speech with political consequences is at the Same; Same; “Content-Based Restraint” and “Content-
core of the freedom of expression and must be protected Neutral Regulation,” Distinguished.—Content-based
by the Supreme Court (SC).—Speech with political restraint or censorship refers to restrictions “based on the
consequences is at the core of the freedom of expression subject matter of the utterance or speech.” In contrast,
and must be protected by this court. Justice Brion pointed content-neutral regulation includes controls merely on the
out that freedom of expression “is not the god of rights to incidents of the speech such as time, place, or manner of
which all other rights and even government protection of the speech.
state interest must bow.” The right to freedom of Same; Freedom of Expression; Limiting the maximum size
expression is indeed not absolute. Even some forms of of the tarpaulin would render ineffective petitioners’
protected speech are still subject to some restrictions. The message and violate their right to exercise freedom of
degree of restriction may depend on whether the expression.—In this case, the size regulation is not
regulation is content-based or content-neutral. Content- unrelated to the suppression of speech. Limiting the
based regulations can either be based on the viewpoint of maximum size of the tarpaulin would render ineffective
the speaker or the subject of the expression. petitioners’ message and violate their right to exercise
freedom of expression. The COMELEC’s act of requiring the
removal of the tarpaulin has the effect of dissuading
expressions with political consequences. These should be there are dominant political actors who, through authority,
encouraged, more so when exercised to make more power, resources, identity, or status, have capabilities that
meaningful the equally important right to suffrage. may drown out the messages of others. This is especially
true in a developing or emerging economy that is part of
Same; Same; The guarantee of freedom of expression to the majoritarian world like ours.
individuals without any relationship to any political
candidate should not be held hostage by the possibility of Same; Same; Regulation of speech in the context of
abuse by those seeking to be elected.—The guarantee of electoral campaigns made by candidates or the members
freedom of expression to individuals without any of their political parties or their political parties may be
relationship to any political candidate should not be held regulated as to time, place, and manner.—Clearly,
hostage by the possibility of abuse by those seeking to be regulation of speech in the context of electoral campaigns
elected. It is true that there can be underhanded, covert, or made by candidates or the members of their political
illicit dealings so as to hide the candidate’s real levels of parties or their political parties may be regulated as to
expenditures. However, labelling all expressions of private time, place, and manner. This is the effect of our rulings in
parties that tend to have an effect on the debate in the Osmeña v. COMELEC, 288 SCRA 447 (1998) and National
elections as election paraphernalia would be too broad a Press Club v. COMELEC, 207 SCRA 1 (1992). Regulation of
remedy that can stifle genuine speech like in this case. speech in the context of electoral campaigns made by
Instead, to address this evil, better and more effective persons who are not candidates or who do not speak as
enforcement will be the least restrictive means to the members of a political party which are, taken as a whole,
fundamental freedom. principally advocacies of a social issue that the public must
consider during elections is unconstitutional. Such
Same; Same; Satire; Words and Phrases; Satire is a regulation is inconsistent with the guarantee of according
“literary form that employs such devices as sarcasm, irony the fullest possible range of opinions coming from the
and ridicule to deride prevailing vices or follies,” and this electorate including those that can catalyze candid,
may target any individual or group in society, private and uninhibited, and robust debate in the criteria for the choice
government alike.—The twin tarpaulins consist of satire of of a candidate.
political parties. Satire is a “literary form that employs
such devices as sarcasm, irony and ridicule to deride Same; Same; Regulation of election paraphernalia will still
prevailing vices or follies,” and this may target any be constitutionally valid if it reaches into speech of
individual or group in society, private and government persons who are not candidates or who do not speak as
alike. It seeks to effectively communicate a greater members of a political party if they are not candidates,
purpose, often used for “political and social criticism” only if what is regulated is declarative speech that, taken
“because it tears down facades, deflates stuffed shirts, and as a whole, has for its principal object the endorsement of
unmasks hypocrisy. . . . Nothing is more thoroughly a candidate only; The regulation must only be with respect
democratic than to have the high-and-mighty lampooned to the time, place, and manner of the rendition of the
and spoofed.” Northrop Frye, well-known in this literary message.—Regulation of election paraphernalia will still
field, claimed that satire had two defining features: “one is be constitutionally valid if it reaches into speech of
wit or humor founded on fantasy or a sense of the persons who are not candidates or who do not speak as
grotesque and absurd, the other is an object of attack.” members of a political party if they are not candidates,
Thus, satire frequently uses exaggeration, analogy, and only if what is regulated is declarative speech that, taken
other rhetorical devices. as a whole, has for its principal object the endorsement of
a candidate only. The regulation (a) should be provided by
Same; Same; In an equality-based approach, “politically law, (b) reasonable, (c) narrowly tailored to meet the
disadvantaged speech prevails over regulation[,] but objective of enhancing the opportunity of all candidates to
regulation promoting political equality prevails over be heard and considering the primacy of the guarantee of
speech.”—In an equality-based approach, “politically free expression, and (d) demonstrably the least restrictive
disadvantaged speech prevails over regulation[,] but means to achieve that object. The regulation must only be
regulation promoting political equality prevails over with respect to the time, place, and manner of the
speech.” This view allows the government leeway to rendition of the message. In no situation may the speech
redistribute or equalize ‘speaking power,’ such as be prohibited or censored on the basis of its content. For
protecting, even implicitly subsidizing, unpopular or this purpose, it will not matter whether the speech is made
dissenting voices often systematically subdued within with or on private property.
society’s ideological ladder. This view acknowledges that
Same; Same; Right to Property; Other than the right to by the United Nations General Assembly and the Security
freedom of expression and the meaningful exercise of the Council. The Court may not include more than one national
right to suffrage, the present case also involves one’s right of the same State.
to property.—Other than the right to freedom of
Term of Office: In order to ensure a measure of
expression and the meaningful exercise of the right to continuity, one third of the Court is elected every three
suffrage, the present case also involves one’s right to years. Judges are eligible for re-election.
property.
Vacancy: Should a judge die or resign during his or her
Same; Same; Same; Freedom of expression can be term of office, a special election is held as soon as possible
intimately related with the right to property.—Freedom of to choose a judge to fill the unexpired part of the term.
expression can be intimately related with the right to
International Criminal Court (ICC)
property. There may be no expression when there is no
place where the expression may be made. COMELEC’s Independent judicial institution
infringement upon petitioners’ property rights as in the Created by the treaty known as Rome Statute
present case also reaches out to infringement on their Power to try and punish individuals for the most serious
fundamental right to speech. crimes of international concern, to include the following:
1. Genocide
Same; Same; This caricature, though not agreeable to 2. Crimes against humanity
some, is still protected speech.—The tarpaulin in question 3. Crimes of aggression, and
may be viewed as producing a caricature of those who are
4. War crimes
running for public office. Their message may be construed
Pimentel, Jr., v. Office of the Executive Secretary, 462 SCRA
generalizations of very complex individuals and party list 622, 6 July 2005: submission of the Rome Statute to the
organizations. They are classified into black and white: as Senate
belonging to “Team Patay” or “Team Buhay.” But this
caricature, though not agreeable to some, is still protected
speech. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

4. JURISDICTION OF ICC & ICJ Hearing; Procedural requirements: Re: Letter of U.P.
Law Faculty, A.M. No.10-10-4-SC, 2011: Administrative
proceedings do not require trial type hearing. A decision
The Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice
may be formulated based on the written submissions of
(ICJ)
(a) by the conclusion between them of a special agreement the parties to the case. The essence of due process in
(b) by virtue of a jurisdictional clause...; or administrative proceedings merely requires prior notice
(c) through the reciprocal effect of declarations… and the opportunity to be heard.

Composition, Term of Office, Voting Rules and The right to counsel, while desirable, is not mandatory in
Inhibitions of Judges administrative proceedings. (Cudia v. PMA Supt. et al.)
 The ICJ is composed of 15 judges.
However, a party may invoke the right to counsel if a
 ICJ Voting Rules
 Rule for Inhibition of Judges criminal liability may attach in the course of the hearing.
 Nicaragua Case (1986 ICJ Report 14) (Carbonel v. CSC)

The International Court of Justice Under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, the courts must
defer to the competent administrative agency. The court
Primary Role of the ICJ: The Court’s role is to settle, in has to await the termination of the administrative
accordance with international law, legal disputes
proceedings before a party may be allowed to seek judicial
submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on
legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations relief.
organs and specialized agencies.
The Court decides disputes between countries, based on The doctrine of res judicata applies only to judicial or
the voluntary participation of the States concerned. If a quasi-judicial proceedings, and not to the exercise of
State agrees to participate in a proceeding, it is obligated administrative powers. Administrative powers refer to
to comply with the Court’s decision.
those purely administrative in nature, as opposed to
Composition: The International Court of Justice is administrative proceedings that take on a quasi-judicial
composed of 15 judges elected to nine-year terms of office character [adjudication].
 process is the denial of the opportunity to be heard (Flores
Due process must be observed in all administrative v. Montemayor, G.R. No. 170146, June 6, 2011).
proceedings.
 Types of due process: substantive and procedural Effect of non-observance of notice and hearing
due process As a rule, it will invalidate the administrative proceedings.
 Right to hearing may be waived due to active A failure to comply with the requirements may result in a
participation or voluntary appearance in the failure to acquire jurisdiction.
conduct of hearings.
 Legal basis to invoke due process: constitutional NOTE: Right to notice may be waived.
and statutory laws
 Elements of due process: notice and hearing Necessity of Notice and Hearing
 Due process must also be observed in academic A hearing may take place after the deprivation occurs.
proceedings (Cudia v. PMA Supt. et al. and Viveres What the law prohibits is not the absence of previous
and Suzara v. STC-Cebu) notice but the absolute absence thereof and the lack of
 The rights of due process in administrative cases opportunity to be heard.
have been laid down in Ang Tibay v. CIR
NOTE: There has been no denial of due process if any
Nature of administrative proceedings irregularity in the premature issuance of the assailed
It is summary in nature. decision has been remedied by an order giving the
petitions the right to participate in the hearing of the MR.
Inapplicability of technical rules of procedure and The opportunity granted by, technically, allowing
evidence in administrative proceedings petitioners to finally be able to file their comment in the
The technical rules of procedure and of evidence case, resolves the procedural irregularity previously
prevailing in courts of law and equity are not controlling in inflicted upon petitioners(Nasecore v. ERC, G.R. No. 190795,
administrative proceedings to free administrative boards July 6, 2011).
or agencies from the compulsion of technical rules so that
the mere admission of matter which would be deemed Exceptions to the requirement of notice and hearing
incompetent in judicial proceedings would not invalidate 1. Urgency of immediate action;
an administrative order. 2. Tentativeness of administrative action;
Cardinal requirements of due process in 3. Grant or revocation of licenses or permits to operate
administrative proceedings (1994 Bar) certain businesses affecting public order or morals;
1. Right to a hearing which includes the right to present 4. Summary abatement of nuisance per se which affects
one’s case and submit evidence in support thereof; safety of persons or property;
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented; 5. Preventive suspension of public officer or employee
3. The decision must be supported by evidence; facing administrative charges;
4. Such evidence must be substantial; 6. Cancellation of a passport of a person sought for
5. The decision must be rendered on the evidence criminal prosecution;
presented at the hearing or at least contained in the 7. Summary proceedings of distraint and levy upon
record, and disclosed to the parties affected; property of a delinquent taxpayer;
6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its 8. Replacement of a temporary or acting appointee; and
own independent consideration of the law and facts of the 9. Right was previously offered but not claimed.
controversy in arriving at a decision;
7. The board or body should render decision in such a Inapplicability of the right to counsel in administrative
manner that parties can know the various issues involved inquiries
and the reasons for the decision rendered (Ang Tibay v. The right to counsel which may not be waived, unless in
CIR, G.R. No. L-46496, February 27, 1940). writing and in the presence of counsel, as recognized by
the Constitution, is a right of a suspect in a custodial
NOTE: The essence of due process in administrative investigation. It is not an absolute right and may, thus, be
proceedings is the opportunity to explain one’s side or invoked or rejected in criminal proceeding and, with more
seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling complained reason, in an administrative inquiry(Lumiqued v. Exevea,
of. As long as the parties are given the opportunity to be G.R No. 117565, November 18, 1997).
heard before judgment is rendered, the demands of due
process are sufficiently met. What is offensive to due
Quantum of proof required in administrative
proceedings
Substantial evidence – that amount of relevant evidence
that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion.

OPINION QUESTION (10 POINTS)