University of Iloilo

COLLEGE OF LAW

Suggested Areas of Concentration

In Constitutional Law for
2007 BAR Exams

By: Atty. REX M. ALOBBA, Ll. B. (U.I.)

VOX LEGIS-FILIAE FRASORITY

-o0o-

I. Citizenship
Legal Concept—Article IV, Constitution
A. Who are citizens (Section 1)
1. Citizens at the time of the adoption of the Constitution
2. Whose fathers or mothers are citizens
3. Born before 1/17/73, elect Phil. Citizenship
4. Naturalized

B. Natural Born
1. Two (2) kinds
-those born as citizens because father or mother are citizens
-born before 1/17/73 of Filipino mothers and elect Phil. Citizenship

2. Election of Phil. Citizenship

Co vs. Electoral Tribunal
-Election of Philippine citizenship applies to both those who elect
under the 1935 and 1973 Constitution.
-Election may be thru formal or informal process, e.g. suffrage,
participation in election.

3. Positions requiring natural born status

GEN. RULE—Positions in gov’t. created by the Const.
1. President
2. Vice-President
3. Members of Congress
4. Justices of SC and collegiate courts
5. Ombudsman and his deputies
6. Members of Constitutional Commissions
7. Central Monetary Authority
8. Members of the CHR

C. Modes of Acquiring Citizenship

1. By Operation of Law
a. Treaty of Paris—April 11, 1899
b. Philippine Bill of 1902 defined citizens as the inhabitants of the
Philippines residing therein who were subjects of Spain on April
11, 1899 continuing to reside therein as well as their children born
subsequent thereto.

-peninsulares were given 18 months to choose Filipino or Spanish

citizenship.
-This is the law applied in the FPJ disqualification case.

2. By judicial declaration applying the jus soli principle

a. Court decisions granting citizenship to persons born before April
11, 1899 (Treaty of Paris) where Jus Soli was applied.
 VOX LEGIS-FILIAE FRASORITY
POLITICAL LAW 2007

b. In 1957, Supreme Court declared that jus sanguinis applies to

determine citizenship
c. “Caram Rule” those who elected to public office before the
1935 Constitution. Does not apply to appointive positions.

3. By naturalization under Commonwealth Act 473.

D. Jurisprudence

LABO vs COMELEC
Caasi vs. Court of Appeals- application for immigration and “green
Card” considered permanent abandonment of residence.
Malonzo vs Manzano- those with dual citizenship cannot run for
Local elective position (Sec. 40 (d), Local Gov. Code

II. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY

A. Legal Concept- Art XVI, Sec. 3

B. Application
1. A suit is against the sate, regardless of who us named defendant, if it
produces adverse consequences to the public treasury in terms of
disbursement of public funds and loss of government property.
- there is a need to come up with new appropriation or budget to
satisfy the claims alleged in the complaint.
a. Not a suit against the state if the suit is to compel a public
officer to perform ministerial duty to make payments pursuant
to a duly-approved appropriation for the purpose.
b. Not a suit, if public officer is sued in private capacity for lack
of authority or acted in excess of authority.
2. Express Consent to be sued must be granted to the plaintiff thru an existing
general or special law.
3. Implied consent may be deduced from principles of equity.
- contract
- taking of private property without following expropriation procedure
- filing of complaint by the sate, opening itself to counterclaims

III. FIVE (5) PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT

A. Legal Concept – Articles II, Sec. 1 to 5

1. Republicanism and Sovereignty of the People

a) Features- government of laws and not of men
- periodic of election
- separation of powers/checks and balance
- irrepealable laws cannot be passed
- principle of accountability
2. Adherence to international law
a) Incorporation Theory/Clause- means that the Philippines, without
need of a statute, international law principles become part of its
body of laws.
b) Some general principles of international law
1. Rules of land warfare
2. Pacta sunt servanda
3. No transfer of property ownership during belligerent
occupation
4. Exemption from criminal jurisdiction of troops allowed to
operate in a foreign country
5. Host state is duly bound to protect the premises of foreign
states

Page | 2
 VOX LEGIS-FILIAE FRASORITY
POLITICAL LAW 2007

6. Diplomatic Immunity
3 Government as the Protector of the People
4.Supremacy of Civilian Authority
5.Separation of Church and State
Aglipay vs. Ruiz

IV. LEGISLATIVE INQUIRIES

A. Legal Concept- Art. VI Sec. 21 and 23
B. Application
1. Inquiries in aid of Legislation
a) Bengzon vs. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee -Congress was
restrained to conduct inquiry sating among others that no
legislation was apparently being contemplated in connection with
the investigation
b) Arnault vs. Nazareno
Investigations should be liberally construed to involve a pending or
existing legislation
2. Question Hour
a) Applies to Heads Department on their own initiative with consent of
the President or upon request of either house who appear on any
matter pertaining to their departments
3. Senate vs. Ermita (April 2006)
In a unanimous vote, the Supreme Court upheld the right of Congress
to compel the appearance of executive officials in congressional inquiries in
aid of legislation by partially voiding Executive Order No. 464, which required
presidential clearance before such officials can appear.
If the matter involves national security or public interest requires it,
hearing shall be conducted in executive session.

V. PARTY LIST SYSTEM

Legal Concept – Art VI, Sec 1
Republic Act 7941

A. Qualification- regional, national and sectoral parties of coaltions of organizations

representing the marginalized and underrepresented sectors who lack well defined
political constituencies
B. Some Disqualifications
1. Religious sect/organizations
2. Foreign organizations or those receiving foreign support
3. Cease to exist for at least one (1) year prior to election
4. Fails to participate in last two (2) elections or fails to obtain at least 2% in
the last two (2) elections from the constituency in which it has registered
C. NUMBER OF SEATS
Those who receive at least 2% of the total votes cast fro the party list system
shall be entitled to one (1) seat. Those garnering more than 2% of the votes
shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes.
Panganiban Formula: additional seats shall be based on the percentage
using the votes cast for the highest party list group
and not on the total votes cast.
D. BANTAY R.A. 7941 vs. COMELEC
Supreme Court ordered the COMELEC to disclose and release the names of
nominees of accredited party list

Page | 3
 VOX LEGIS-FILIAE FRASORITY
POLITICAL LAW 2007

VI. AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION

Jurisprudence:
Lambino vs. COMELEC (October 2006)
The Court upheld the decision of the COMELEC and denied the people’s
initiative to change the constitution, stressing that the constitution only allows
amendments thru a people’s initiative and not an entire revision which may be
done only through a constituent assembly or a constitutional convention.

VII. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION/ PUBLIC ASSEMBLY ACT 1985

Jurisprudence:
Bayan vs. Ermita (April 2006)
The Supreme Court declared the Calibrated Preemptive Response (CPR)
policy regarding rallies as null and void as it upheld regulations on the right to
rally, including the permit requirement under the Public Assembly Act, BP 880.

VIII. COMMANDER IN CHIEF POWERS

Articles VII, Section 18
1. Military Court Martial and the Right to Bail
The right to bail applies only to criminal proceedings in Judicial bodies. It
is not available in military court martial proceedings which are in the
nature of administrative disciplinary proceedings under the authority of
the president as commander-in-chief.
2. Presidential Proclamation 1017 (David vs. Arroyo) which was a call by
the President for the AFP to suppress lawless violence does not confer
additional powers to the president to issue decrees, enforce obedience or
enforce standards on the media.
The Supreme Court also ruled that Article XII, Sec. 17 of the Constitution
does not authorize the President cannot take over private property or utility
affected with public interest in the absence of a legislation.

IX. DISTINGUISH a WRIT OF AMPARO from other Writs issued by the Courts

Writs issued by the Courts

Writ of Amparo is an encompassing writ issued by the Court for the protection of
all constitutional rights of persons. (Life, liberty, property, travel, etc.)
Writ of Habeas Corpus
- liberty
Writ of Possession/Execution
- property

Page | 4