Article VI: Legislative Department

Article VI: The Legislative Department

Section Section 1: The legislat legislative ive power power shall shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines whi which shal shalll cons consis istt of a Sena Senate te and a House House of Represen Representati tatives, ves, except to the exte ex tent nt rese reserv rved ed to the the peop people le by the the provision on initiative and referendum. Bicameral Body - The Jones Law called for a bicameral Cong Congres ress, s, but but the the 1935 1935 and and 1973 1973 Cons Consti titu tuti tion ons s both both originally called for a unicameral Congress. However, the 1935 1935 Consti Constitut tution ion was later amende amended d to provid provide e for a bicameral legislature. The arguments for a unicameral body as contemplated in the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions are: •

simplicity of organization resulting in economy and efficiency

•

facility in pinpointing responsibility for legislation

•

avoidance of duplication

•

strengthening of the legislature in relation to the executive.

This debate resurfaced resurfaced in the deliberations deliberations for the 1987 Constitution. A bicameral legislature was adopted, by a vote of 23-22, because: •

•

•

an uppe upperr hous house e has has the the capa capaci city ty to look look at proble problems ms from a nation national al perspe perspecti ctive, ve, and this this nation national al perspe perspecti ctive ve serves serves as a check check on the parochial tendency of a body elected by districts a bicameral legislature allows for a more careful study of legislation bicameralism is less vulnerable to attempts by the executive at manipulation

Nature of Legislative Power Legislative power is the authority to make laws and to alter and repeal them. It is a derivative and vested power given to the the legi legisl slat atur ure e by the the Cons Consti titu tuti tion on.. Accor Accordi ding ng to American jurisprudence, “the Constitution fixes limits to the exercise of legislative authority, and prescribes the limits within it must move. This also provides the basis for nondelega delegabil bility ity and the prohib prohibiti ition on agains againstt the passag passage e of irrepealable laws. Unlike Unlike the United States Constitu Constitution, tion, the 1987 (like the 1935 1935 and 1973 1973 Consti Constitut tution ions) s) gives gives a grant grant of plenar plenary y legislative power to the Philippine legislature. This means that “any power, deemed to be legislative by usage and tradition, is necessarily possessed by Congress, unless the organic act has lodged it elsewhere.”

Separation of Powers A basic corollary corollary of the presidential presidential system of government government is the princi principle ple of separa separatio tion n of powers powers.. Separat Separation ion of powe powers rs mean means s that that legi legisl slat atio ion n belo belong ngs s to Cong Congre ress ss,,

execut execution ion to the execut executive, ive, and settle settlemen mentt of judic judicial ial controversies to the judiciary. This principle is an implicit limitation on legislative power. However, the separation is not absolu absolute te becaus because e it allows allows for checks checks and balances balances becaus because e no one departme department nt is able able to act without without the cooperation cooperation of at least one of the other departme departments. nts. The purpose of these checks and balances is to avoid power being concentrated in one department. The danger in the concen concentra tratio tion n of power power was realized realized in the dark days days of martial law.

Limits on Legislative Power Legislative power is subject to substantive limitations which circumscribe both the exercise of the power itself and the allowable subjects of legislation. The substantive limitations are are chie chiefl fly y found found in the the Bill Bill of Righ Rights ts,, and and there there exis existt procedural procedural limitations limitations prescribing prescribing the manner manner of passing passing bills and the forms that these bills should take.

Initiative and Referendum Referendum In republican constitutional theory, the original legislative power belongs to the people who, through the Constitution, confer confer deriva derivativ tive e legisl legislati ative ve power power on the legisl legislatu ature. re. Howe Howeve ver, r, unde underr the the 1987 1987 Cons Consti titu tuti tion on,, the the gran grantt of legi legisl slat ativ ive e powe powerr to Cong Congre ress ss is not not excl exclus usiv ive. e. The The Constitu Constitution tion provides for initiativ initiative e and referendum as a direct means for the people to create law. The power of initiative and referendum is thus the power of the people directly to propose and enact laws or approve or reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the Congress or local legislative body. The purpose of the provisions for init initia iati tive ve and and refe refere rend ndum um (Sec (Secti tion ons s 1 and and 32) 32) is to institutionalize People Power. The The operat operation ionali alizat zation ion of initia initiativ tive e and referen referendum dum has been been left left by the Consti Constitut tution ion to Congre Congress. ss. Althou Although gh the legislative power of Congress is plenary, the scope of the legislative power that is given to the people by initiative and referendum is limited to whatever exceptions that Congress may impose.

Legislative Powers of Marcos and Aquino The The 1973 1973 Cons Consti titu tuti tion on prov provid ided ed for for two two conc concur urren rentt legisl legislati ative ve agenci agencies: es: the Batasa Batasang ng Pamban Pambansa sa and the Presid President ent.. The legisl legislati ative ve power power of the Batasa Batasan n was ordinary, while the legislative power of the President was extraordina extraordinary. ry. The extraordin extraordinarine ariness ss of the President' President's s power, however, did not lie solely in that it was a tool for coping with emergency; it also lay in the distinct advantage it gave to the Presiden Presidentt over the legislatu legislature. re. It not only enabled him to supply for the legislature when the latter, in the judgment of the President, "fail[ed] or [was] unable to act on any matter" that may need immediate action, but it also also enable enabled d the Presid President ent to undo undo what what the legisl legislatu ature re might have done not to his satisfaction. Moreover, he could legislate, or repeal or amend old legislation unhampered by any need for debate debate or three three readin readings gs or by the other other formal limitations that are imposed on the legislative body. Immediately after the February 1986 revolution, President Corazon C. Aquino assumed revolutionary legislative power and, and, on March March 25, 1986, issued issued Procla Proclamat mation ion No. 3, the Provisional Freedom Constitution, whose Article I, Section 3, abolis abolished hed the Batasa Batasang ng Pamban Pambansa sa and whose whose Articl Article e II, Section 1, vested legislative power in the President "[u]ntil a legis egisllatur ature e is elec electted and and con convene vened d unde underr a new Constitution." Section 6 of the 1987 Transitory Transitory Provisions in turn said: "The incumbent President [Corazon Aquino] shall

Constitutional Law I: Block E 2015 Reviewer | Article VI: Legislative Department | KS antos. 

1

continue to exercise legislative powers until the first Congress is convened." Thus the only difference between the scope of the legislative powers of President Aquino and that of President Marcos was that, whereas Mr. Marcos exercised the power concurrently first with the interim Batasang Pambansa and subsequently with the regular Batasang Pambansa, President Aquino exercised it alone. She lost it on July 26, 1987. But she lost it with a bang signing a batch of forty-two legislative acts on the eve of the convening of the First Congress.

Non-delegability of Legislative Power There are three theories that advance the non-delegability of legislative power: 1.

Separation of Powers keeps the responsibility for the creation of statutes to the legislative branch

2.

Due Process – the process by which the powers are separated and safeguarded demand that legislation come from the legislative

3.

Delegata potestas non potest delegari, which means that which has been delegated to you cannot be further delegated by you

Since the Constitution gave to Congress alone the power to make law, means that no other body or branch of government can make laws. The controlling legal maxim is the maxim of agency, delegata potestas non potest delegari. However, in spite of this principle, numerous statutes have been passed conferring legislative power to administrative agencies, authorizing them to exercise regulatory powers. This is justified by two theories: the first theory, a dvanced in 1825, is that a non-legislative body may be authorized to “fill in the gaps” of a statute. The other theory, is that Congress may pass contingent legislation, which leaves to another body the business of the fact necessary to bring the law into actual operation. As a result, the function performed by the administrative agency becomes administrative in nature. In order to ensure that the function of the administrative agency is not law-making power, the statute making the delegation must: be compete in itself – it must set forth therein the policy to be carried out or implemented by the delegated agency, and fix a standard – the limits of which are sufficiently determinate or determinable, to which the delegate must conform in the performance of his functions. Since rules and regulations promulgated by administrative agencies pursuant to the valid delegating statute have the force of law, jurisprudence tells us that their violation may be punished as a penal offense as long as these conditions are met: •

the violation must have been made criminal by the delegating statute

•

the penalty must be provided by the statute itself

•

the regulation must be published.

Furthermore, legislative power is delegated to local government by constitutional tradition (as defined as a practice that has existed since time immemorial). Congress

may, by law, grant the President powers necessary to carry out declared national policy in times of war or other national emergency. Congress may also, by law, subject to limitiations that it may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts.

Other Exceptions to Non-delegability Local governments may be allowed to legislate on purely local matters. On the local level, the principle of separation of powers does not apply strictly between the executive and the law-making body. Hence, the local law-making agency may be given executive functions. When what is given is an executive power, the rules applicable to the empowerment of administrative agencies also becomes applicable to the local law-making body. There are two other exceptions given to the President, one in times of war and national emergency, where the President has the powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy, and where the President is delegated to fix tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties and imposts.

Section 2. The Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be elected at large by the qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law. The number of senators is pegged at twenty four because the drafters envisioned a small Senate which was supposed to ensure that the quality of the people elected to the Senate remained at a high standard.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines and, on the day of the election, is at least thirty-five years of age, able to read and write, a registered voter, and a resident of the Philippines for not less than two years immediately preceding the day of the election. The residence requirement is satisfied if one is domiciled in the Philippines, even though not physically present within the two-year period, and the age qualification must be possessed on the day the votes are cast and not on the day of the proclamation.

Section 4. The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election. No Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term of which he was elected. The term of office of Senators is six years, and unless otherwise provided by law, commences at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election. The term


2

follows that found in the 1935 Constitution. There is a two consecutive term limit. A Senator can run again three years after the expiration of his second term.

Section 5. (1) The House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law, who shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area in accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants, and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio, and those who, as provided by law, shall be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations. (2) The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the total number of representatives including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms after the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector. (3) Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact, and adjacent territory. Each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand, or each province, shall have at least one representative.

Membership Membership of the House of Representative is fixed at 250, BUT may be raised form time-to-time by statute following the clause “unless otherwise fixed by law.” Raising the membership of the House may be do by reapportionment Reapportionment results in the creation of new districts or through the creation of new provinces. This must be done by Congress within 3 years after the return of the census in order to ensure that proportional representation is preserved. Reason— Sec 5 (3): Reapportionment merits/creates (1) legislative body. •

•

•

Each province is entitled to at least one district or The creation of new provinces since 1 province entitled to 1 district or The creation of new cities

CASE: Tobias v. Abalos / Mariano, Jr. V. COMELEC San Juan & Mandaluyong being recognized as separate legislative districts. The incidental effect of converting a municipality of a congressional district into a city large enough to have its own legislative district is the splitting of a district into two (2). Moreover, this incidental effect is deemed implicitly contained in the title announcing the creation of the new city thus satisfying the requirement that the content if the bill be announced in the title.

CASE: Montejo v. COMELEC Imbalances in the remaining legislative districts of the mother provinces cannot be corrected by the COMELEC as it has no authority to do so. Correction of the imbalance must await the enactment of a reapportionment law.

Apportionment

(4) Within three years following the return of every census, the Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative districts based on the standards provided in this section.

Rules in dividing provinces, cities and the Metropolitan Manila Areas Sec 5 (1): Apportionment in accordance with their number of inhabitants and on the basis of a uniform and progressive ratio

I. Kinds of Representatives District representatives—elected by districts Sec 5(1) CASE: Macias v. COMELEC The underlying principle behind this rule of apportionment is the concept of equality of representation, which is the basic principle of republicanism. Party Representatives (Permanent Proportional Regime)— elected by party-list system Sec 5(1)/ RA 7941

Sec 5(2): “Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact and adjacent territory” (Prohibits gerrymandering—creation of representative districts out of separate portions of territory in orer to favor a candidate.” Sec 5 (3): Each city or province with a population of at least 250,000 is entitled to have at least one representative. EXCEPTION to PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION RULE: A province is always entitled to one representative no matter what its population size.

Sectoral Representative (Temporary Regime)—extinct; lasted only for three consecutive terms after the ratification of the Constitution. Sec 5(2)

SEC 5(4): Reapportionment of legislative districts within 3 years following the return of the census.

II. House Apportionment

Allows for correction of imbalances in representation due to the increase in population.

Membership/Reapportionment/


3

CASE: Tobias v. Abalos (see notes on Reapportionment)

•

CASE: Sema vs. COMELEC: Only Congress can create provinces and cities because their creation necessarily includes the creation of legislative districts, which is a power solely exercised by Congress.

•

III. Party-list System (RA 7941) •

Party-list seats= 20% of total number of representatives including those under the party list

Consti Commisisons meant to reserve 25 seats for the marginalized sectors for the 1st 3 terms after the ratification of the Constitution only. However, SC still ruled that all 50 seats are reserved for the marginalized sector and not just for 3 consecutive terms but forever and that partylist nominees “must represent marginalized and underrepresented sectors.”--- departure form the Constitution and RA 7941

CASE: Banat v. COMELEC •

•

•

2% threshold representation

requirement

to

qualify

for •

3-limit seat Additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes.

•

CASE: Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC •

•

•

•

Inviolable parameters of RA7941 (1) 20% allocation (2) 2% threshold to qualify (3) 3-limit seat (4) proportional representation. Questioned the constitutionality of threshold and 3-limit seat requirement

the

20% prescription is merely a maximum limit to the number of party-list representatives but the maximum need not be filled.

2% threshold is to ensure that only parties, coalitions, and organizations having a sufficient number of constituents deserving for representation were actually represented in Congress.

•

•

•

•

•

•

et.

al V. COMELEC

SC ruled that associations are not allowed to participate indiscriminately in the part-list system. Participation is limited to parties or organizations representing the “marginalized and underprivileged. SC laid down guidelines for COMELEC to apply in deciding which organizations are qualified. Parties and organizations must represent the marginalized and underrepresented sector Political parties may join provided that they fit the aforementioned requirement. Nominees must requirement.

comply

with

the

The application of the 2% threshold in relation to the distribution of the additional seats was strike down because such application would not allow all the seats for the party-list to be filled. It also discussed that political parties are allowed to run under the party-list system provided that they field sectoral candidates.

2%

According to Art6 Sec 5, Congress is vested with the broad power to define and prescribe the mechanics of the party-list system of representation.

CASE: Ang Bagong Bayani, (CONTROVERSIAL)

•

Revisited the (4) inviolable parameters of RA7941, but made special attention to mathematical interpretation of the term “proportional representation”

qualitative

SC saw the party-list system not as a proportional system of representation designed to strengthen demoncracy but a “sectoral representation” meant to promote social justice, which is contrary to the intent of the Constitutional Commissioners.

Section 6. No person shall be a Member of the House of Representatives unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines and, on the day of the election, is at least twenty-five years of age, able to read and write, and, except the party-list representatives, a registered voter in the district in which he shall be elected, and a resident thereof for a period of not less than one year immediately preceding the day of the election. Require ments f or Representatives: •

•

•

Distric t/

Party-list/

Se ctoral

Natural-Born Citizens Citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship (Art 4 Sec 2) Those born before January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority (Art 4 Sec1 (3))

CASE: Bengzon v. Cruz: Natural born citizens who lose their citizenship by naturalization in another country, but is latter repatriated recovers natural-born citizen status •

At least 25 years old on the day of elections

•

Able to read and write

•

•

A registered voter in the district where he is to be elected (except for patry-list representatives as they do not represent a district) A resident thereof for a period of not less than one year immediately preceding the day of elections.

Residence—a place of a bode, whether permanent or temporary Constitutional Law I: Block E 2015 Reviewer | Article VI: Legislative Department | KS antos. 

4

Domicile—a permanent residence to which one, when absent, has the intention to return.

The case involves Sec. 67, Art. 9 of the Omnibus Election Code, BP881. Rep. Dimaporo challenged the law as it unconstitutionally shortens his term.

CASE: Gallego vs. Verra •

•

•

•

•

It is the intent of the law in fixing a residence qualification is to exclude a stranger or newcomer, unacquainted with the conditions and needs of the community and not identified with the latter, from an elective office to serve the community.

The court held that the statutory provision is consonant with the constitutional edict that public officials must serve with utmost loyalty and not trifle with the mandate which they have received from the people. The law did not shorten Dimaporo’s term; it merely shortened his tenure.

In order to acquire domicile by choice the following must concur:

CASE: Farinas et. al. Vs. Executive Secretary

Residence or bodily presence in the new locality

Superseded Dimaporo by virtue of the Fair E lection Law.

An intention to remain there indefinitely (animus manendi)

National elective office does not terminate his tenure by the mere fact of having filed for candidacy to a position different from what he is holding.

An interntion to abandon the voluntarily (animus non reverendi)

Counted from June 13th next following their election

old

domicile

CASE: Romualdez-Marcos v. COMELEC If a person retains his domicile of origin, then the one-year period is irrelevant because by legal fiction, wherever he may be, he is a resident of his domicile of origin.When Ferdinand Marcos died, Imelda’s domicile reverts back to domicile of origin. Thus, she is qualified to run in Leyte.

CASE: Aquino v. COMELEC SC viewed that wither domicile or residence would suffice provided that the one year physical presence is satisfied.

CASE: Domino v. COMELEC A bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a new one and definite acts which correspond with the purpose. There must be animus manendi coupled with animus non reverendi.

CASE: Social Justice Society v. Dangerous Drugs Board The requirements of Sec. 6 are exclusive; Congress cannot add anything to it. Mandatory drug testing for national officials is unconstitutional.

Section 7. The Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term of three years which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election. No member of the House of Representatives shall serve for more than three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected. Term of Representatives: 3 year term

CASE: Dimaporo v. Mitra

NOTE: Starting date may be changed by law. Reason for the term of Representatives: To facilitate synchronization with the 6-year term of the President, VicePresident and Senators.

Section 8. Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular election of the Senators and the Members of the House of Representatives shall be held on the second Monday of May. Elections for Senators and House of Representatives shall be held on the second Monday of May.

CASE: Codilla v. De Venecia In a democracy, the first self-evident principle is that he who has been rejected by the people cannot represent the people. Also, the enforcement of the sovereign will of the people is not subject to the discretion of any official of the land. Rep. Codilla clearly won the district representative position, thus he is entitled to be sworn into office and his name be registered in the Roll of Members of the House of Representatives.

Section 9. In case of vacancy in the Senate or in the House of Representatives, a special election may be called to fill such vacancy in the manner prescribed by law, but the Senator or Member of the House of Representatives thus elected shall serve only for the unexpired term. Filling Vacancies Service for the unexpired terms shall be counted as one term for the purpose of counting the number of allowable successive terms. Special elections is not mandatory and the date as to its execution is not prescribed under law. Senators: Special elections for a seat could wait until the next triennial election of Senators.


5

CASE: Tolentino v. COMELEC The case involves Teofisto Guingona’s vacant sea t in Senate when he got appointed. COMELEC failed to give notice of the time of the special elections, but did not negate the calling of such election. The right and duty to hold the election emanate from the statute and not from any call for the election by some authority and the law thus charges voters with the knowledge of the same time and place of the election. Thus, the elections is still valid despite COMELEC’s failure to give notice of the time of special election

Section 10. The salaries of Senators and Members of the House of Representatives shall be determined by law. No increase in said compensation shall take effect until after the expiration of the full term of all the Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives approving such increase. •

Annual Salary as fixed by Sec. 17 Art 18, but subject to change by law

debate in the congress committee thereof.

or

in

any

1. Privilege from arrest 1.

-which was found in the sec. 15 art. 8 of 1935 consti, was the same parliamentary immunity from arrest enjoyed by the members of the parliament of england and by members of the United States Congress.

2.

-do not include immunity from arrest arising from an act or omission punishable by law. It covers only immunity from civil arrests.

3.

-one who has been convicted does not enjoy immunity from arrest. e.g. a Congressman who has been convicted of rape

2. Parliamentary freedom of speech and debate 1935- sec. 15 art. 6 - for any speech or debate in Congress, the senators and members of the house of representatives shall not be questioned in any other place. purpose: to enable and encourage a representative of the public to discharge his public trust with firmness and success for it is indispensably ncessary that he should enjoy the fullest liberty of speech and that he should be protected from the resentment of every one, however powerful, to whom the exercise of that liberty may occasion offense.

•

Members of Congress- P204,000

•

Senators- P240,000

•

Limitations to Salary increase and benefits

-1935 provision was a copy of the speech and debate clause of art. 1 sec 6 of the US consti

No increase shall be take effect until after the expiration of the full term of ALL Members of the House and Senate approving such increase.

-1987 & 1973- slight modification of the traditional phraseology but it has preserved the traditional limit and scope of the immunity.

•

CASE: PHILCONSA v. Mathay From 1935 & 1973 Constitution which placed a legal bar to the legislators yielding to the temptation of increasing their wages. The retirement benefits of legislators shall be based on the salary in effect during his term and not on the increased salary of the subsequent term.

1. it is a guarantee of immunity from answerability before an outside forum but not from answerability to the disciplinary authority of Congress itself. 2.to come under the guarantee the speech or debate must be one made in the Congress or in any committee thereof.

Brewster v. US - senator not protected by the speech and debate clause for solicitation and acceptance of a bribe in return for his vote on a legislative question.

Allowances No Legal limit to allowances. Only Moral Limit—Records and books of account of Congress shall be open to the public in accordance with the law and that such books will be audited by the Commission on Audit which shall itemize the expenditures of each member. Office and necessary travel allowances not included in the salary.

Sec 11. A Senator or member of the house of representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the congress is in session. No member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any speech or

Sec 12. All members of the senate and the house of representatives shall, upon assumption of office, make a full disclosure of their financial and business interests. They shall notify the house concerned of a potential conflict of interest that may arise from the filing of a proposed legislation of which they are authors. 1. Financial and business interests •

•

-sets down a policy of full disclosure of the financial and business affairs of a legislator -put the house on notice about any potential conflict of interest that may arise from the filing of a proposed legislation of which they are the


6

authors. This enables the house to examine the arguments he might present with a sharper eye and in the context of his personal interest. •

-the adva nc e disclosure would crea te a presumption in favor of the legislator concerned should he later be charged by his colleagues with conflcit of interest.

Sec 13. No Senator or members of the house of representatives may hold any other office or employment in the government, or any subdivision, agenyc, or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries, during his term without forfeiting his seat. Neither shall he be appointed to any office which may have been created or the emoluments thereof increased during the term for which he was elected. 1. Disqualifications •

•

•

-the prohibited offices include membership in the board of regents, board of trustees, board of directors of state universities and colleges. since the prohibition is only during his term, a legislator is not prevented from accepting an appointment. However, if he chooses to accept another office, he automatically forfeits his seat in Congress. the disqualification in the second sentence, however, applies for the duration of the six year term even if he resigns from Congress before the end of his term.

1935 & 1973: 2 conditions must concur: 1.

the office must be civil

2.

such office must have been cre ate d or its emoluments increased while he was a member of the legislature

1987: the office need not be a civil one, it could be a military office.

Sec 14. No Seantor or member of the house of representatives may personally appear as counsel before any court of justice or before the electoral tribunal, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be interested financially in any contract with, or in any franchise or special privilege granted by the government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary, during his term of office. He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the

government for his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office.

1. Prohibitions; lawyer legislators •

•

•

-intended to prevent members of Congress from taking advantage, pecuniary or otherwise, of their position in their dealings with the courts, or in their business operations, or in their dealings with any government agency or corporation. -a lawyer-legislator may not personally appear as counsel before any court of justice. This prohibition cannot be circumvented under the guise of appearing "in intervention" in one's behalf. from the conclusion of the SC (Puyat v. De Guzman) one may infer that a legislator may appear in person if in fact he is a genuine party in the case.

2. Prohibitions: conflict of interests. •

•

•

-legislators are also prohibited from being "directly or indirectly interested financially in any contract with, or in any franchise or special privilege granted by the government, or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary, during his term of office". they cannot be m embers of the board o f corporations with contract with government. such would be at least indirect financial interest. -legislator cannot intervene in any matter before any office of the government for his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office. the prohibited pecuniary benefit could be direct or indirect and thus would cover pecuniary benefit for relatives.

Sec 15. The Congress shall convene once every year on the fourth Monday of July for its regular session, unless a different date is fixed by law, and shall continue to be in session for such number of days as it may determine until thirty days before the opening of its next regular session, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. The president may call a special session at any time. 1. Sessions of Congress 1935: lasts only for 100 days ; special session: limited to thirty days 1973, sec 15: may last for as long as Congress wishes but only until thirty days before the opening of its next regular session, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. Howevery, the president may call congress to a special session at anytime; special session: no fixed limit. can last as long as the congress wants


7

May the president limit the subjects which may be considered during a special session called by him?

rules to determine the legality of the acts of Senate. (involved internal matters).

1935: the president could - sec 9 art. 6 said that pres. could call a special session to consider general legislation or only such subjects as he may designate.

2. A quorum to do business

1987: "The president may call a special session at any time." The language is not exclusive. The pres. is given the power to call a session and to specify subjects he wants considered, but it does not empower him to prohibit consideration of other subjects.

Section 16. (1) The Senate shall elect its President and the House of Representatives its Speaker, by a majority vote of all its respective Members. Each House shall choose such other officers as it may deem necessary. (2) A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum to do business, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day and may compel the attendance of absent Members in such manner, and under such penalties, as such House may provide. (3) Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all its Members, suspend or expel a Member. A penalty of suspension, when imposed, shall not exceed sixty days. (4) Each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such parts as may, in its judgment, affect national security; and the yeas and nays on any question shall, at the request of one-fifth of the Members present, be entered in the Journal. Each House shall also keep a Record of its proceedings. (5) Neither House during the sessions of the Congress shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting. 1. Officers of Congress -the only officers prescribed by the consti are the president of teh senate and the speaker of the house of representatives -each house, however, may decide to have other officers to be chosen within the control of eac h house SC refused to intervene in Santiago v. Guingona because of absense of constitutional or statutory guidelines or specific

US house of rep: sec 16 only members voting on a proposition were counted for the purposes of determining the quorum 1890: speacker Reed ruled that all members present, whether voting or not, should be counted. This ruling became Rule XV of the house and the U.S. supreme court upheld the rule saying that,since the consti did not prescribe the method for determining the presence of a majority, the house was competent to prescribe any method which shall be reasonably certain to ascertain the fact. - the base for computing the majority of the legislative body for the purpose of determining the existence of a quorum should normally be the total membership of the body. In Avelino v. Cuenco, the base used was 23, when the total number of senate was 24. this was because the 24th senator was abroad.

3. Internal rules and discipline inherent in legislative body: power of internal regulation and discipline •

•

•

1935, Art 6 sec 10 : each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the consent of 2/3 of all its Members, expel a member. 1973: modified the above rules by prescribing a number of votes needed to impose a suspension and by limiting suspension to sixty days 1987: follows 1973

-on matters affecting only internal operation le gisla ture, the legislature's f ormulation implementation of its rules is beyond the reach courts. When, however, the legislative rule affects rights, the courts cannot altogether be excluded Smith)

of

the and of the private (US v.

4. Journals, Record: publicity and probative value; "enrolled bill" rule. -the duty to keep a journal has a dual purpose: (1) to insure publicity to the proceedings of the legislature, and a correspondent responsibility of the members of their respective constituents (2) to provide proof of what actually transpired in the legislature. 1935: congress could impose secrecy at its discretion 1973 & 1987: exempt from publication only such matters as may, in each House's judgment, affect national security. -what gives conclusive weight to journal, when balanced side by side with extraneous evidence, is the fact that it is an official act of legislature. enrolled billed doctrine- the signing of a bill by the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate and the certification by the secretaries of both Houses of Congress


8

that such bill was passed are conclusive of its due enactment (Arroyo v. De Venecia)

passes to the Electoral Tribunal of either the House or the Senate.

5. Recess

3. Independence of the Electoral Tribunals

-both Houses may hold session practically all year round.

•

- go on compulsory recess thirty days before the opening of the next regular session -each house may also adjourn for a voluntary recess but neither may adjourn, without the consent of the other for more than 3 days nor to any place than that in which the 2 house shall be sitting.

•

•

Sec 17. The Senate and the house of representatives shall each have an electoral tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective members. Each electoral tribunal shall be composed of nine members, three of whom shall be justices of the Supreme Court to be designated by the Chief Justice, and the remaining six shall be members of the Senate or the house of representatives, as the case may be, who shall be chosen on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties and the parties or organizations registered under the partylist system represented therein. The senior justice in the electoral tribunal shall be its Chairman. 1. Composition -mixture of members of Congress and of the Supreme Court

2. Jurisdiction of the Electoral Tribunals. -original provision in sec 7 par. 5 of the Act of the United States Congress of July 1, 1902 - "the assembly shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its members.

•

-although six members of the electoral tribunals are m embers o f Congr ess, the tribuna ls themselves are not part of either House of Congress. they are independent constitutional creations which have power to create their own rules and are not under the supervision or control of Congress. -electoral are independent of the COMELEC hence governed by the tribunal's own rules but they have not jurisdictio n over pr e-pro clamation controversies which come under the jurisdiction of the COMELEC -ET decisions are not subject to appeal to the SC. However, SC is not totally excluded. Under Art 8 sec 1, judicial power includes the authority to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government.

Section 18. There shall be a Commission on Appointments consisting of the President of the Senate, as ex officio Chairman, twelve Senators, and twelve Members of the House of Representatives, elected by each House on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties or organizations registered under the party-list system represented therein. The Chairman of the Commission shall not vote, except in case of a tie. The Commission shall act on all appointments submitted to it within thirty session days of the Congress from their submission. The Commission shall rule by a majority vote of all the Members. Composition

-the provision was taken from sec 5 Art 1 of the consti of US providing that "each house shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members." -the Act of the US Congress of Aug 29, 1916 sec 18 par. 1, modified the provision to read : "that senate and house of rep, respectively, shall be the SOLE judges of the elections, returns and qualifications of their elective members." This exclusive grant of jurisdiction at once effectively barred either House from interference with the judgment of the other House and also completely removed the subject matter from the jurisdiction of the courts in language that was full, clear, and complete.

-

The Senate chairman

President

-

12 Senators^

-

12 Members of Representatives^

the

–

House

ex-officio

of

the

^elected by each house on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties and parties and organizations registered under the party list system therein Cases:

Coseteng vs. Mitra, Jr. -under the 1987 consti, COMELEC decides who the winner is in the election.

Coseteng- only member of KAIBA political party ISSUE: Can she be entitled to one of the 12 seats?

-in election contest, the jurisdiction of the COMELEC ends once a candidate has been proclaimed and has taken his oath of office as a Member of Congress. Jurisdiction then

HELD: No


9

RATIO: HOR-202 members, 1 seat for CA must have 16.8 members in the HOR or 8.4% of the total membership. KAIBA was short of required number even if she had the support if members not belonging to her party.

such powers and functions as are herein conferred upon it. •

Guingona, Jr. Vs. Gonzales •

Senatorial elections o f 1992 y ielded 1 5 LDP senators, 5 NPC, 3 LAKAS, 1 LP-PDPLaban

•

•

•

•

Proportional Representation: 7.5 LDP, 2.5 NPC, 1.5 LAKAS, .5 LP-PDP-Laban The Senate rounded up LDP and LP PDP Laban while NPC and LAKAS were not rounded up.

ISSUE: Is this constitutional? HELD: No RATIO: Deprived the other parties of their representation (NPC and LAKAS). 11 members only during that time. 12 is nor mandatory. Daza vs. Singson

Shall be constituted within 30 days after the Senate and HOR shall have been organized with the election of the President and the Speaker. Commission on Appointments -may meet only while the congress is in session, at the call of its chairman or a majority of its

Members Consent to or confirm the nominations pursuant to Section 16, Article 7

Section 20. The records and books of accounts of the Congress shall be preserved and be open to the public in accordance with law, and such books shall be audited by the Commission on Audit which shall publish annually an itemized list of amounts paid to and expenses incurred for each Member.

The composition is proportional to the size of the political parties and organizations in the congress, periodic reorganization may be necessary in order to reflect changes in the proportion within congress. It is understood that these changes in party affiliation are permanent and not merely temporary.

•

Open to the public in accordance with the law

•

Audited by the Commission on Audit

•

COA- published an a nnually itemized l ist of amounts paid and expenses incurred by each member

Nature •

Legislative check on the appointing authority of the president

•

Independent of congress – Cunanan vs. Tan

•

Powers emanate directly from the Constitution

•

Functions are purely executive in Nature

•

Can promulgate its own rules

•

•

•

Supreme court cannot pass upon the correctness of the interpretation placed by the Commission of its own rules Shall act on all appointments submitted it within 30 session days of the congress from the submission Ad interim appointments not acted upon are deemed passed under Sec 16, Art 7.

Section 19. The Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments shall be constituted within thirty days after the Senate and the House of Representatives shall have been organized with the election of the President and the Speaker. The Commission on Appointments shall meet only while the Congress is in session, at the call of its Chairman or a majority of all its Members, to discharge

Section 21. The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure. The rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected. Power of inquiry—with process to enforce it—is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function. A legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect of change. (Aurnault vs. Nazareno)

Limitations of Legislative Investigation •

•

•

It must be in aid of legislation In accordance with the duly published rules of procedure The rights of the person appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected

•

Bill of rights

•

Right against self-incrimination

•

Unreasonable searches and seizures

•

Right to demand


10

•

•

No person shall be punished for contumacy as a witness unless his testimony is required in a matter into which legislature or any of its committees has jurisdiction to inquire.

•

•

•

•

•

•

Not necessary that every question must be material to a proposed legislation Materiality of the question is determined if germane to subject of inquiry and not by its indirect relation to any proposed or possible legislation

•

Investigations can also be conducted by Congress Committees

•

Punishment ceases when House of Representatives reaches final adjournment. This power may be looked into by the Supreme Court by virtue of Sec 1, Article 8.

CASES:

Bengzon Jr. vs. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee •

•

•

•

Enable the department heads to be heard by the legislature and thereby achieve cooperation between the executive and legislative departments Appearance of department heads is not mandatory but directory. Own initiative or upon the request of the house. It will be done as the rules of each house prescribe. President may or may not consent the appearance of the department head. He may require the appearance be in executive session. Congress may refuse the initiative taken by the department secretary.

Section 23. (1) The Congress, by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses in joint session assembled, voting separately, shall have the sole power to declare the existence of a state of war.

Not in aid of legislation Speech of Senator Enrile contained no suggestion of contemplated legislation but merely pointed out whether the relatives of President Aquino, particularly Mr. Ricardo Lopa, violated the law. Petitioners had been charged in Sandiganbayan for the same transaction, appearance might prejudice their case

Osmena Jr. vs. Pendatun •

•

Oversight functions of congress. Intended to enable congress to determine how laws it has passed are being implemented.

Congress has suspended the operation of a House rule which could have protected Congressman Osmena Parliamentary rules may be waived or disregarded by the legislative body—when private rights are not affected

Section 22. The heads of departments may upon their own initiative, with the consent of the President, or upon the request of either House, as the rules of each House shall provide, appear before and be heard by such House on any matter pertaining to their departments. Written questions shall be submitted to the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives at least three days before their scheduled appearance. Interpellations shall not be limited to written questions, but may cover matters related thereto. When the security of the State or the public interest so requires and the President so states in writing, the appearance shall be conducted in executive session.

(2) In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may, by law, authorize the President, for a limited period and subject to such restrictions as it may prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy. Unless sooner withdrawn by resolution of the Congress, such powers shall cease upon the next adjournment thereof. •

•

•

•

Congress has the sole power to declare the existence of a state of war – renouncing aggressive war Section 2, Article 2. By a vote of 2/3 of both houses in joint session assembled, voting separately. Does not prohibit the waging of defensive war even in the absence of a declaration of war or a declaration of the existence of a state of war Actual power to make war is an executive power-sword of war Congress may authorize the President to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy.

Limits of the emergency powers •

For a limited period

Withdrawn by a resolution – does not need approval of the president •

o

Or, next adjournment of congress

Subject to restrictions as congress may provide o

Section 24. All appropriation, revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of public debt, bills of local application, and


11

private bills shall originate exclusively in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments. •

•

•

•

•

•

Bills that originates from the HOR: Appropriation Bill –to set aside a sum of money public use Revenue or Tariff Bills –for raising revenues Bills of local application –reach is limited to specific localities, such as creation of a town Private bill –affect a private person, such as granting citizenship to a foreigner Presumed that district representatives are closer to the pulse of the people than senators are and are therefore better in the position to determine both the extent of the legal burden they are capable of bearing and the benefits that they need.

Tolentino vs. Secretary of Finance •

•

-involves RA 7716 or the Value Added Tax Law -After the House version was sent to the Senate, the Senate introduced a substitute bill which apparently it had prepared in anticipation of the House bill. Later the President certified to the urgency of passing the Senate version of the bill. After the 2 versions had gone to the Conference Committee, the House approved the Conference Committee report which for all practical purposes was the senate bill.

ISSUE: was there a violation of the rule on origination? HELD: No.

appropriations for other departments and agencies. (4) A special appropriations bill shall specify the purpose for which it is intended, and shall be supported by funds actually available as certified by the National Treasurer, or to be raised by a corresponding revenue proposed therein. (5) No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations. (6) Discretionary funds appropriated for particular officials shall be disbursed only for public purposes to be supported by appropriate vouchers and subject to such guidelines as may be prescribed by law. (7) If, by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall have failed to pass the general appropriations bill for the ensuing fiscal year, the general appropriations law for the preceding fiscal year shall be deemed reenacted and shall remain in force and effect until the general appropriations bill is passed by the Congress.

RATIO: Bill must originate from the House; but the law itself which is the product of the total bicameral legislative process originates not just from the House but from both Senate and House.

No money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation made by law is a limit not on the power of Congress but on the disbursing authority of the executive department

Section 25. (1) The Congress may not increase the appropriations recommended by the President for the operation of the Government as specified in the budget. The form, content, and manner of preparation of the budget shall be prescribed by law.

Limitations: Sec 24 – shall originate from HOR but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments Sec 25 •

(2) No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the general appropriations bill unless it relates specifically to some particular appropriation therein. Any such provision or enactment shall be limited in its operation to the appropriation to which it relates. (3) The procedure in approving appropriations for the Congress shall strictly follow the procedure for approving

•

The Congress may not increase appropriations recommended by the President for the operation of the Government as specified in the budget the congress may not clutter the general appropriations law with provisions not specifically related to some particular item of appropriation, and every such provision shall be limited in its operation to the appropriation item to which it relates

Garcia vs. Mata •

provision on the reversion of reserved officers into active duty which was inserted in the Appropriation Act of 1956-1957 was found to be unrelated to any


12

provision in the appropriation bill and therefore unconstitutional •

•

•

•

•

concept of riders may not adopt a procedure for approving appropriations for itself different from the procedure for other appropriations special appropriation bills must specify the purpose for which they are intended and must be supported by funds certified as available by the National Treasurer. If funds are not actually available, a corresponding revenue proposal must be provided.

(2) No bill passed by either House shall become a law unless it has passed three readings on separate days, and printed copies thereof in its final form have been distributed to its Members three days before its passage, except when the President certifies to the necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency. Upon the last reading of a bill, no amendment thereto shall be allowed, and the vote thereon shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the yeas and nays entered in the Journal.

limited discretion to authorize transfer of funds

•

-President, Senate President, Speaker, Chief Justice may be authorize to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from the savings in other items of their respective appropriations

•

•

Demetria vs. Alba •

-PD 1177 •

•

-empowered the president to indiscriminately transfer funds without regard as to whether or not the funds to be transferred are actually savings in the item from which they are to be taken

•

-law is unconstitutional

•

-corrected by RA 6670

•

•

discretionary funds are appropriated for particular officials shall be disbursed only for public purposes to be supported by appropriate vouchers and subject to such guidelines as may be provided by law

•

Alalayan vs. National Power Corporation

•

•

proper ty;

cannot cripple the operation of government by its failure or refusal to pass a General Appropriations Bill; automatic re-enactment of the GAB of the preceding year

•

•

Garcia vs. Mata

•

Section 26. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in the title thereof.

Tan v. Del Rosario, Jr. Lidasan vs. COMELEC – was not sufficient to cover the barrios outside of Lanao del Norte

Why?

Prohibits the expenditure of public money for religious purposes

General Appropriations law must be based on the budget prepared by the President

Tobias vs. Abalos

•

Sec 29

Sec 22 of Article 7

Philippine Judges Association v. Prado

Philconsa vs. Gimenez

•

•

Tio vs. Videogram Regulatory Board

•

•

•

Sufficient compliance: Title expresses the general subject and all the provisions of the statute are germane to that general subject. Nature, scope and consequences of the proposed laws and its operation.

Cordero vs. Cabatuando

•

•

Giving the constitutional requirement a liberal interpretation (Sumulong vs. Comelec)

•

•

appropriation of money to construct feeder roads to be c onstructe d on private appropriation set on private purpose

It should not cripple or impede proper legislation.

See the following cases:

Pascual vs. Secretary of Public Works •

Every bill shall embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in the title thereof is mandatory and not directory. Compliance with it is essential to the validity of the legislation.

•

To prevent hodge podge or log-rolling legislation To prevent surprise or fraud upon the legislature by means of provisions in bills of which the titles gave no information and which might therefore be overlooked and carelessly and unintentionally adopted To fairly appraise the people through such publication of legislative proceedings made

PASSAGE OF THE BILL •

3 readings on 3 separate days. Printed copies of the bill in its final form should be distributed 3 days before its passage except when the President certifies to the necessity of its immediate enactment.


13

•

The certification by the president is to dispense from the requirement that the readings be on separate days and that the bill be printed in its final form and distributed there days before third reading (Tolentino vs. Secretary of Finance)

Section 27. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the President. If he approves the same, he shall sign it; otherwise, he shall veto it and return the same with his objections to the House where it originated, which shall enter the objections at large in its Journal and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds of all the Members of such House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of all the Members of that House, it shall become a law. In all such cases, the votes of each House shall be determined by yeas or nays, and the names of the Members voting for or against shall be entered in its Journal. The President shall communicate his veto of any bill to the House where it originated within thirty days after the date of receipt thereof; otherwise, it shall become a law as if he had signed it. (2) The President shall have the power to veto any particular item or items in an appropriation, revenue, or tariff bill, but the veto shall not affect the item or items to which he does not object. Section 27. (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the President. •

•

•

- 2 steps for a bill to become a law. •

•

•

•

•

It must be approved by Congress. The legislative action requires of Congress is a positive act-so not enactment of law by legislative inaction (Miller v. Mardo) It must be approved by the President. Approval by the President may be by positive act/ inaction. If the Pres. doesnt act on the bill within 30 days after the receipt of the bill, the bill automatically becomes law. final approval of a bill doesn’t make it immediately effective. Laws only become effective publication. (Tanada v. Tuvera)

In all such cases, the votes of each House shall be determined by yeas or nays, and the names of the Members voting for or against shall be entered in its Journal. The President shall communicate his veto of any bill to the House where it originated within thirty days after the date of receipt thereof; otherwise, it shall become a law as if he had signed it.

(2) The President shall have the power to veto any particular item or items in an appropriation, revenue, or tariff bill, but the veto shall not affect the item or items to which he does not object.

Passage of Bills

adequate

Conference Committees • bicameral system bills are independently processed by both House of Congress. • It is not unusual that the final version approved by 1 House differs from what has been approved by the other. • Conference committee = consists of members nominated from both Houses.

It is an extra-constitutional creation of the Congress whose function is to propose to Congress ways of reconciling conflicting provisions found in the Senate version and in the House version of a bill. •

performs a necessary function in a bicameral system, BUT should NOT perform functions that Congress itself may not do. •

their proposals need the confirmation by both Houses. •

If he approves the same, he shall sign it; otherwise, he shall veto it and return the same with his objections to the House where it originated, which shall enter the objections at large in its Journal and proceed to reconsider it. If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds of all the Members of such House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of all the Members of that House, it shall become a law.

after

• Extent of its power = (Tolentino v. Sec of Finance) The Court had the opportunity to delve into what conference committees may do. The petitioners contended that the consolidation of the House and Senate bills made by the conference committee contained provisions which neither the Senate bill/House bill had. The Court’s answer: In the US, conference co mmittees could be held in executive sessions and amendments germane to the purpose of the bill be introduced even if these weren’t in the original bill. BUT the court didn’t bother to check whether perhaps the US practice was based on a constitutional context different from ours. Petitioners also contended that the changes were made in a secret meeting of the conference committee. Justice Mendoza replied: nothing unusual to this. Often the only way to reach agreement on conflicting provisions is to meet behind close doors, with only the conferees present. The Court papered everything under the enrolled bill rule Note: the Consti commands the state to adopt and carry out a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions


14

involving public interest. Bill of Rights guarantees the right of all citizens to info on matters of public concern.

Veto Power and Item-veto •

•

Bill vetoed by the Pres. may still become a law= 2/3 of all members of such House shall agree to pass the bill. + approval of the other House by vote of 2/3 of all its members.

answer to that is Art 6, sec 25(7). This doctrine by the court is an alternative preventive measure.

Executive impoundment •

•

•

•

•

•

General rule: Pres can only veto entire bill, not allowed to veto separate items.

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Exception: appropriation, revenue and tariff billshe can item-veto. Appropriation bill= purpose is to set apart a certain amt from the public revenue for a specific purpose. Revenue bill= intended to levy taxes. Tariff bill= imposes duties/ imposts whether for revenue/ regulation.

Note: (Bengzon v. Drilon) invalidated President’s veto. The case involved the Gen. Appropriation Act of 1992. The law appropriated 500M php for “general fund adjustment for operational and special requirements as indicated hereunder”. President vetoed the use of the fund for the adjustment of the pension of justices. Court said that it wasn’t a veto of an item, since the item was the whole 500M, what the Pres. Vetoed was the method of meeting unavoidable obligations or the manner of using the 500M. •

Impundment = refusal of the President to spend funds already allocated by Congress for a specific purpose.

Their yeas/ nays will be recorded in its Journal. •

•

another way exercise executive veto.

Essence of item-veto: President may veto distinct and severable parts. (Phil Constitution Assoc. v. Enriquez) The court invalidated the veto of a restriction on the use of funds for road maintenance and purchase of medicine since the veto didn’t include a veto of the appropriated funds themselves. Invalid veto has no effect. It is as if the President didn’t act on the bill at all. The bill becomes a law by executive inaction (Bolinao Electronics v. Valencia)

No provision in the Consti for the subject. (Phil. Consti. Assoc. v. Enriquez) the amount appropriated by Congress for compensation and separation benefits of CAFGU’s members had a provision attached “ it shall be used for the compensation of CAFGU including the payment of their separation benefit not exceeding 1 year subsistence allowance for the 11, 000 members to be deactivated on 1994” President didn’t veto the provision but said in his veto message that the implementation of the provision is subject to his prior approval. Challengers of the veto contended that the provision already required for the deactivation of the members such that the President had no choice but to implement it. President justified his impoundment on the basis of his duty as Commander-in-Chief to desist from implementing a law which would prejudice public interest.

Court refrained from passing judgme nt on the constitutionality of impoundment. It just said that the provision should be in a separate bill.

Requirement of the “yeas and nay” of the Members: (Arroyo v. De Venecia) •

upon the last and 3rd reading of a bill

•

request of 1/5 of the members present

•

in repassing a bill over the veto o f the President.

Section 28. (1) The rule of taxation shall be uniform and equitable. The Congress shall evolve a progressive system of taxation.

New doctrine of “inappropriate provisions” (Gonzales v. Macaraig, Jr.) doctrine says that a provision that is constitutionally inappropriate for an appropriation bill may be singled out for veto even if it is not an appropriation or revenue item. President may veto riders. In this case, President was allowed to veto an attempt by indirection to amend the Presidential decree authorizing automatic appropriation of funds for servicing foreign debts. (Phil Consti Assoc v. Enriquez) Court reiterated that the President possesses the power to veto a provision in an appropriation bill even if it is not an item but is a rider. Intent behind the doctrine- from (Henry v. Edwards) to prevent the legislature from forcing the President to veto the entire appropriation law thereby paralyzing the gov. But the our Consti’s

(2) The Congress may, by law, authorize the President to fix within specified limits, and subject to such limitations and restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts within the framework of the national development program of the Government. (3) Charitable institutions, churches and parsonages or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and improvements, actually, directly, and exclusively used for religious, charitable, or educational purposes shall be exempt from taxation.


15

(4) No law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress. Power of taxation: Scope and Purpose Purpose of the power to tax: 1.

raise revenue

2.

instrument of national and economic and social policy

3.

used as an instrument for the extermination of undesirable activities and enterprises. It involves the power to destroy

4.

tool for regulation

5.

power to keep alive. The foundation for the imposition of tariffs deisgned for the encouragement and protection of locally produced goods against competition of imports (Hampton and Co. v. US)

General limit: •

exists for the general welfare

•

limitation: exercised only for a public purpose

•

an attribute of sovereignty

•

strongest of all of the powers of the gov.

•

Section 30. No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as provided in this Constitution without its advice and concurrence. Section 31. No law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted. Section 32. The Congress shall, as early as possible, provide for a system of initiative and referendum, and the exceptions therefrom, whereby the people can directly propose and enact laws or approve or reject any act or law or part thereof passed by the Congress or local legislative body after the registration of a petition therefor signed by at least ten per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters thereof.

adversely affecting as it does property rights, both due process and equal protection clauses of the Consti may properly be invoked to invalidate in appropriate cases a revenue measure

Section 29. (1) No money shall be paid out of the Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation made by law. (2) No public money or property shall be appropriated, applied, paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher, or dignitary as such, except when such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal institution, or government orphanage or leprosarium. (3) All money collected on any tax levied for a special purpose shall be treated as a special fund and paid out for such purpose only. If the purpose for which a special fund was created has been fulfilled or abandoned, the balance, if any, shall be transferred to the general funds of the Government.


16

Article VI: Legislative Department

Recommend Documents