Judicial Department: A. Concepts

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 13

U.P.

LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

c. 10 days – Law providing for special


elections should be enacted
Judicial Power Judicial Review
d. 55 – 70 days – Elections should be held
within this period Where vested
e. 85 – 100 days – Canvassing by Congress
should be done within this period
Supreme Court Supreme Court
b. Vacancy in the Office of the Vice Lower Courts Lower Courts
President Definition

Sec. 9, Art. VII. The President shall Duty to settle actual Power of the courts
nominate a Vice-President from among the controversies to test the validity of
members of the Senate and the House of involving rights which executive and
Representatives who shall assume office are legally legislative acts in
upon confirmation by a majority vote of all the demandable and light of their
members of both houses of Congress voting enforceable, and to conformity with the
separately. determine whether or Constitution [Angara
not there has been a v. Electoral
grave abuse of Commission, G.R.
discretion amounting No. L-45081 (1936)]
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT to lack or excess of
jurisdiction on the
part of any branch or
instrumentality of the
A. CONCEPTS government [Sec.
1(2), Art. VIII,
Constitution]

1. Judicial Power Requisites for exercise

Judicial power includes the duty of the courts Jurisdiction — Power Acting on cases
to: to decide and hear a within the court's
a. Settle actual controversies involving rights case and execute a subject matter
which are legally demandable and decision thereof jurisdiction:
enforceable; and (1) There must be an
b. To determine whether or not there has actual case or
been a grave abuse of discretion controversy;
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction (2) The person
on the part of any branch or instrumentality challenging the act
of the Government. must have locus
standi;
The second clause effectively limits the (3) The question of
doctrine of “political question” [See Francisco constitutionality must
v. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 160261 be raised at the
(2003)]. earliest opportunity;
and
Vested in: (a) Supreme Court and (b) such (4) The issue of
lower courts as may be established by law. constitutionality must
be the very lis mota
of the case.
2. Judicial Review

Page 86 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

v. Energy Regulatory Commission, G.R. No.


Judicial Supremacy 174697 (2010)].
When the judiciary mediates to allocate
constitutional boundaries, it does not assert May be set aside by the court as a mere
any superiority over the other departments; it procedural technicality in view of paramount
does not in reality nullify or invalidate an act of public interest or transcendental importance of
the legislature, but only asserts the solemn and the issues involved [Kilosbayan v. Guingona
sacred obligation assigned to it by the G.R. No. 113375 (1994); Tatad v. DOE, G.R.
Constitution to determine conflicting claims of No. 114222 (1995); Mamba v. Lara, G.R. No.
authority under the Constitution and to 165109 (2009)].
establish for the parties in an actual
controversy the rights which that instrument Forms of locus standi
secures and guarantees to them. [Angara v.
Electoral Commission, G.R. No. L-45081 Taxpayers, voters, concerned citizens, and
(1936)]. legislators may be accorded locus standi or
standing to sue, provided that the following
a. Requisites requirements are met:
1. the cases involve constitutional issues;
i. Actual case or controversy 2. for taxpayers, there must be a claim of
illegal disbursement of public funds or that
This means that there must be a genuine the tax measure is unconstitutional;
conflict of legal rights and interests which can 3. for voters, there must be a showing of
be resolved through judicial determination obvious interest in the validity of the
[John Hay v. Lim, G.R. No. 119775 (2003)]. election law in question;
4. for concerned citizens, there must be a
This precludes the courts from entertaining the showing that the issues raised are of
following: transcendental importance which must be
1. Request for an advisory opinion [Guingona settled early; and
v. CA, G.R. No. 125532 (1998)]; 5. for legislators, there must be a claim that
2. Cases that are or have become moot and the official action complained of infringes
academic, i.e. cease to present a justiciable upon their prerogatives as legislators.
controversy due to supervening events [David
v. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396 Ordinary citizens are also recognized to have
(2006)]. locus standi in the following circumstances: (i)
when a public right is involved, such as the right
to information and (ii) as expressly provided in
Article VII, Section 18 of the 1987 Constitution
granting recognizing the suit filed by any citizen
challenging the sufficiency of the factual basis
Legal standing or locus standi refers to a of the proclamation of martial law or the
party’s personal and substantial interest in a suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
case, arising from the direct injury it has corpus or the extension thereof.
sustained or will sustain as a result of the
challenged governmental action. Legal Special Rules on Standing (Requisites):
standing calls for more than just a generalized
grievance. The term “interest” means a Taxpayer
material interest, an interest in an issue 1. Appropriation;
affected by the governmental action, as 2. Disbursement
distinguished from mere interest in the
question involved, or a mere incidental interest. Citizen
The general requirement is also referred to as 1. Transcendental importance;
the direct and substantial injury test. [CREBA 2. Public right; OR

Page 87 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

3. Sec. 18, Art. VII (on the sufficiency of the failure to raise the constitutional question
factual basis for martial law or suspension before the NLRC is not fatal to the case [See
of the privilege of the writ of Habeas Serrano v. Gallant Maritime Services, G.R. No.
Corpus) 167614, (2009)].

Voter
Right of suffrage is involved
The decision on the constitutional question
Legislator must be determinative of the case itself. Its
1. Authorized; constitutionality must be "the cause of the suit
2. Affects legislative prerogatives (i.e. a or action.”
derivative suit)
The constitutionality of an act of the legislature
Third-Party Standing will not be determined by the courts unless that
1. Litigants must have injury in-fact; question is properly raised and is necessary to
2. Litigants must have close relation to the the determination of the case; i.e., the issue of
third-party; and constitutionality must be the very lis mota
3. There is an existing hindrance to the third presented.
party’s ability to protect its own interest
[White Light Corp. v. City of Manila, G.R. b. Operative Fact Doctrine
No. 122846 (2009)]
The doctrine is applicable when a declaration
Enforcement of Environmental Laws of unconstitutionality will impose an undue
1. Any Filipino citizen; burden on those who have relied on the invalid
2. In representation of others, including law, but it can never be invoked to validate as
minors or generations yet unborn [Resident a constitutional, an unconstitutional act
Marine Mammals of the Protected [Municipality of Malabang v. Benito, G.R. No.
Seascape Tanon Strait v. Reyes, G.R. No. L-28113 (1969)].
180771 (2015)]
General Rule: The interpretation (or
Note: Despite its lack of interest, an declaration) of unconstitutionality is retroactive
association has the legal personality to file in that it applies from the law’s effectivity.
a suit and represent its members if the
outcome of the case will affect their vital Exception: Operative Fact Doctrine
interests. Similarly, an organization has the Subsequent declaration of unconstitutionality
standing to assert the concern of its does not nullify all acts exercised in line with
constituents [Bayan Muna v. Mendoza, [the law]. [Municipality of Malabang v. Benito,
G.R. No. 190431 (2017)]. G.R. No. L-28113, (1969)].

Note: Only projects, activities, and programs


that can no longer be undone and whose
beneficiaries relied in good faith on the
Exceptions unconstitutional activity’s validity are objects of
1. In criminal cases, at the discretion of the the Operative Fact Doctrine. The doctrine
court; cannot be applied to the co-authors and co-
2. In civil cases, if necessary for the actors of an unconstitutional act [Araullo v.
determination of the case itself; and Aquino III, G.R. No. 209287 (2014)].
3. When the jurisdiction of the court is involved.
Moot Questions
Note: The reckoning point is the first competent A case becomes moot and academic when
court. The question must be raised at the first there is no more actual controversy between
court with judicial review powers. Hence, the the parties or no useful purpose can be served

Page 88 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

in passing upon the merits [Quino v. 1935 Constitution prescribes the methods or
COMELEC, G.R. No. 197466 (2012)] procedures for its amendment; the question of
WON the revised constitution has been validly
When a case is moot, it becomes non- ratified in accordance with Article XV is not only
justiciable [Pormento v Estrada, G.R. No. subject to judicial inquiry, but is the duty of the
191988 (2010)]. Court to decide such question. However, on
deciding WON the proposed Constitution was
Ripeness of the controversy in force, the Court did not give a ruling on this
The suit must be raised not too early that it is matter granted that it was a political question.
conjectural or anticipatory, nor too late that it
becomes moot. In 2016, the SC ruled that President Duterte's
decision to have the remains of Marcos
General Rule: Courts will not decide questions interred at the Libingan Ng Mga Bayani
that have become moot and academic. (LNMB) involves a political question that is not
a justiciable controversy. The president
Exception: decided a question of policy based on his
Courts will still decide if: wisdom that it shall promote national healing
and forgiveness. There being no taint of grave
abuse in the exercise of such discretion, his
decision on that political question is outside the
ambit of judicial review [Ocampo v. Enriquez,
G.R. No. 225973 (2016)].

c. Political Question Doctrine

The term “political question” refers to: (1)


matters to be exercised by the people in their
primary political capacity; or (2) those
specifically delegated to some other
department or particular office of the
government, with discretionary power to act. It
is concerned with issues dependent upon the
wisdom, not legality, of a particular measure
[Tañada v. Cuenco, G.R. No. L-10520 (1957)].
In recent years, the Court has set aside this
doctrine and assumed jurisdiction whenever it
found constitutionally-imposed limits on the
exercise of powers conferred upon the
Legislative and Executive branches
[BERNAS].

Note: In Javellana v. Executive Secretary [L-


36142 (1973)], the Court ruled that the issue
of validity of the proclamation is a justiciable
question considering that Article XV of the

Page 89 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

Court that a case before it does or does not


B. JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE have administrative implications [Caoibes
AND AUTONOMY v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 132177 (2001)].
8. The members of the SC and all lower
courts have security of tenure, which
1. The SC is a constitutional body. It cannot
cannot be undermined by a law
be abolished nor may its membership or
reorganizing the judiciary. [Sec. 2, Art. VIII]
the manner of its meetings be changed by
mere legislation. [Sec. 4 (1), Art. VIII]
9. They shall not be designated to any agency
performing quasi-judicial or administrative
2. The members of the judiciary are not
functions. [Sec. 12, Art. VIII]
subject to confirmation by the CA. [Sec. 9,
Art. VIII]
Administrative functions are those that
involve regulation of conduct of individuals
3. The members of the SC may not be
or promulgation of rules to carry out
removed from office except by
legislative policy. Judges should render
impeachment. [Sec. 2, Art. XI]
assistance to a provincial committee of
justice (which is under DOJ supervision)
4. The SC may not be deprived of its
only when it is reasonably incidental to their
minimum original and appellate jurisdiction
duties [In Re: Manzano, A.M. No. 88-7-
as prescribed in Sec. 5, Art. VIII of the
1861-RTC, (1988)].
Constitution. [Sec. 2, Art. VIII]
10. The salaries of judges may not be reduced
5. The appellate jurisdiction of the SC may during their continuance in office. [Sec. 10,
not be increased by law without its advice Art. VIII]
and concurrence. [Sec. 30, Art. VI; Fabian
v. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742 (1988)] 11. The judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy.
[Sec. 3, Art. VIII]
6. The SC has administrative supervision
over all lower courts and their personnel. Fiscal autonomy means freedom from
[Sec. 6, Art. VIII] outside control.
The rule prohibiting the institution of As envisioned in the Constitution, the fiscal
disbarment proceedings against an autonomy enjoyed by the Judiciary xxx
impeachable officer who is required by the contemplates a guarantee of full flexibility
Constitution to be a member of the bar as to allocate and utilize their resources with
a qualification in office, applies only during the wisdom and dispatch that their needs
his or her tenure and does not create require [Bengzon v. Drilon, G.R. No.
immunity from liability for possibly criminal 103524 (1992)].
acts or for alleged violations of the Code of
Judicial Conduct or other supposed It recognizes the power and authority to
violations. [In Re: Biraogo, A.M. No. 09-2- levy, assess and collect fees, fix rates of
19-SC (2009)]. compensation not exceeding the highest
rates authorized by law for compensation
7. The SC has exclusive power to discipline and pay plans of the government and
judges of lower courts. [Sec. 11, Art. VIII] allocate and disburse such sums as may
be provided by law or prescribed by them
The Ombudsman is duty bound to refer to in the course of the discharge of their
the SC all cases against judges and court functions [In re: Clarifying and
personnel, so the SC can determine first Strengthening the Organizational Structure
whether an administrative aspect is and Set-up of the Philippine Judicial
involved. The Ombudsman cannot bind the Academy, A.M. No. 01-1-04-SC (2006)].

Page 90 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

Chavez v. COMELEC: Judicial review shall


The provision in the Charter of the GSIS, involve only those resulting in grave abuse of
i.e., Section 39 of RA No. 8291, which discretion by virtue of an agency’s quasi-
exempts it from “all taxes, assessments, judicial powers, and not those arising from its
fees, charges or duties of all kinds,” cannot administrative functions [G.R. No. 105323
operate to exempt it from the payment of (1992)]
legal fees. Unlike the 1935 and 1973
Constitutions, which empowered Congress 2. The issue is a political question.
to repeal, alter or supplement the rules of Even when all requisites for justiciability have
the Supreme Court concerning pleading, been met, judicial review will not be exercised
practice and procedure, the 1987 when the issue involves a political question.
Constitution removed this power from
Congress. Hence, the Supreme Court now But see Francisco v. House of
has the sole authority to promulgate rules Representatives, G.R. No. 160261 (2004): At
concerning pleading, practice and the same time, the Court has the duty to
procedure in all courts [GSIS v. Caballero determine whether or not there has been grave
G.R. No. 158090 (2010)]. abuse of discretion by any instrumentality of
government under its expanded judicial review
12. The SC alone may initiate rules of court. powers. This allowed the SC to interfere in a
[Sec. 5 (5), Art. VIII] traditionally purely political process, i.e.
impeachment, when questions on compliance
The separation of powers among the three with Constitutional processes were involved.
co-equal branches of our government has
erected an impregnable wall that keeps the Guidelines for determining whether or not
power to promulgate rules of pleading, a question is political [Baker v. Carr (369 US
practice and procedure within the sole 186), as cited in Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos.
province of the Supreme Court. The other 146710-15 (2001)]:
branches trespass upon this prerogative if 1. There is a textually demonstrable
they enact laws or issue orders that constitutional commitment of the issue to a
effectively repeal, alter or modify any of the political department;
procedural rules promulgated by the 2. Lack of judicially discoverable and
Supreme Court. [Estipona Jr. v. Lobrigo, manageable standards for resolving it;
G.R. No. 226679 (2017)]. 3. The impossibility of deciding without an initial
policy determination of a kind clearly for
13. Only the SC may order the temporary detail nonjudicial discretion;
of judges. [Sec. 5(3), Art. VIII] 4. Impossibility of a court’s undertaking
independent resolution without expressing lack
14. The SC can appoint all officials and of the respect due coordinate branches of
employees of the judiciary. [Sec. 5(6), Art. government;
VIII] 5. An unusual need for unquestioning
adherence to a political decision already made;
Judicial Restraint 6. Potentiality of embarrassment from
The judiciary will not interfere with its co-equal multifarious pronouncements by various
branches when: departments on one question.
1. There is no showing of grave abuse of
discretion.

PPA v. Court of Appeals: If there is no showing


of grave abuse of discretion on the part of a
branch or instrumentality of the government,
the court will decline exercising its power of
judicial review [G.R. No. 115786-87 (1996)].

Page 91 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

experience [Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. No.


C. APPOINTMENTS TO 100113 (1991)].
THE JUDICIARY Note: In the case of judges of the lower courts,
the Congress may prescribe other
qualifications. [Sec. 7(2), Art. VIII]
1. Qualifications of Members of
the Judiciary Disqualification from Other Positions or
Offices
Justices RTC Judge MTC/MCTC
of the SC (Sec. 15, Judge (Sec. Sec. 12, Art. VIII. The Members of the
and the B.P. 129) 26, B.P. 129) Supreme Court and of other courts
Collegiate established by law shall not be designated to
Courts any agency performing quasi-judicial or
Citizenship administrative functions.

Natural-born citizen
The SC and its members should not and
Age cannot be required to exercise any power or to
perform any trust or to assume any duty not
At least 40 At least 35 At least 30 pertaining to or connected with the
years of years of age years of age administering of judicial functions [Meralco v.
age Pasay Transportation Co., G.R. No. L-37838
Experience (1932)].
15 years or Has been Has been
more as a engaged for engaged for 2. Judicial and Bar Council
judge of a at least 10 at least 5
lower court years in the years in the a. Composition
OR has practice of practice of
been law OR has law OR has Ex-officio members [Sec. 8(1), Art. VIII]
engaged in held public held public
the office in the office in the
practice of PH requiring PH requiring
law in the admission to admission to
PH for the the practice the practice Regular members [Sec. 8(1), Art. VIII]
same of law as an of law as an
period indispensable indispensable
requisite requisite
Tenure [Sec. 11, Art. VIII]
Hold office during good behavior until they Secretary ex-officio [Sec. 8(3), Art. VIII,
reach the age of 70 OR become Const.]: Clerk of Court of the SC, who shall
incapacitated to discharge their duties keep a record of its proceedings; not a member
Qualifications [Sec. 7(3), Art. VIII] of the JBC.
Person of proven competence, integrity,
probity, and independence In the absence of the Chief Justice because of
his impeachment, the most Senior Justice of
Note: “Practice of law” is not confined to the Supreme Court, who is not an applicant for
litigation. It means any activity in and out of Chief Justice, should participate in the
court, which requires the application of law, deliberations for the selection of nominees for
legal procedure, knowledge, training and the said vacant post and preside over the
proceedings, pursuant to Section 12 of
Republic Act No. 296, or the Judiciary Act of

Page 92 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

1948 [Famela Dulay v. Judicial and Bar The supervisory authority of the Court over the
Council, G.R. No. 202143 (2012)]. JBC covers the overseeing of compliance with
its rules [Jardeleza v. Judicial and Bar Council,
Appointment, Tenure, Salary of JBC G.R. No. 213181 (2014)].
Members
Ex-officio members: the position in the Council Supervisory power, when contrasted with
is good only while the person is the occupant control, is the power of mere oversight over an
of the office. inferior body; it does not include any restraining
authority over such body. [Aguinaldo v. Aquino,
Only ONE representative from Congress: G.R. No. 224302 (2016)].
Former practices of giving ½ vote or 1 full vote
each for the Chairmen of the House and Procedure of Appointment
Senate Committees on Justice is invalid. Any
The JBC shall submit a list of three (3)
member of Congress, whether from the upper
nominees for every vacancy to the President
or lower house, is constitutionally empowered
[Sec. 9, Art. VIII]
to represent the entire Congress.

The framers intended the JBC to be composed
Any vacancy in the Supreme Court shall be
of 7 members only. Intent is for each co-equal
filed within ninety (90) days from the
branch of government to have one
occurrence thereof [Sec. 4(1), Art. VIII]
representative. There is no dichotomy between
the Senate and HOR when Congress interacts
For lower courts, the President shall issue
with other branches. The lone representative
the appointment within ninety (90) days from
from Congress is entitled to one full vote
the submission by the JBC of such list [Sec.
[Chavez v. JBC, G.R. No. 202242 (2012)].
9, Art. VIII]
Regular Members [Sec. 8(2), Art. VIII]: The
regular members shall be appointed by the Note: The prohibition against midnight
President with the consent of the Commission appointments does not apply to the judiciary
on Appointments. [See De Castro v. JBC, G.R. No. 191002
(2010)].
The term of the regular members is 4 years.
But the term of those initially appointed shall be
staggered in the following way so as to create
continuity in the council: D. THE SUPREME COURT

1. Composition

b. Powers a. Chief Justice and 14 Associate Justices


b. May sit en banc or in divisions of three, five,
or seven members
Primary Function: Recommend appointees to
c. Vacancy shall be filled within 90 days from
the judiciary; may exercise such other
the occurrence thereof
functions and duties as the SC may assign to
d. Strict Composition: There is but one
it. [Sec. 8(5), Art. VIII]
Supreme Court whose membership
appointments are permanent [Vargas v.
Note: Judges may not be appointed in any
Rilloraza, G.R No. L-1612 (1948)]
acting or temporary capacity as this would
undermine the independence of the judiciary.
How many divisions can it have?
Supervisory authority of SC over JBC

Page 93 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

2 divisions 7 members

3 divisions 5 members

5 divisions 3 members

En banc Requirements and Procedures in Divisions

Note: They have full discretion on the number


of divisions. Right now, they sit in 3 Divisions.

En Banc and Division Cases


En banc: Cases decided with the concurrence
of a majority of the Members who actually took
part in the deliberations and voted.

Instances when the SC Sits En Banc

The SC En Banc is not an appellate court vis-


à-vis its Divisions. The only constraint is that
any doctrine or principle of law laid down by the
Court, either rendered en banc or in division,
may be overturned or reversed only by the
Court sitting en banc [PUP v. Firestone
Ceramics, G.R. No. 143513 (2001)].

There is but one Supreme Court of the


Philippine Islands. It is the jurisdiction of this
Supreme Court, which cannot be diminished.
The Supreme Court remains a unit
notwithstanding it works in divisions. Although
it may have two divisions, it is but a single
court. Actions considered in any one of these
divisions and decisions rendered therein are, in
effect, by the same Tribunal. The two divisions
of this court are not to be considered as two
separate and distinct courts but as divisions of
one and the same court [US v. Limsiongco, G.
R. No. 16217 (1920)].

Page 94 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

2. Powers and Functions minimum requirements. The JBC may


determine or add more qualifications when
Procedural Rule-Making such policies are necessary and incidental to
the function conferred in the Constitution
Sec. 5, Art. VIII. The Supreme Court shall [Villanueva v. JBC, G.R. No. 211833 (2015)].
have the following powers: […]
Period for Deciding Cases [Sec. 15(1), Art.
Promulgate rules concerning the protection VIII]
and enforcement of constitutional rights,
pleading, practice, and procedure in all Supreme Lower Other Lower
courts, the admission to the practice of law, Court Collegiate Courts
the integrated bar, and legal assistance to Courts
the under-privileged.
24 months 12 months, 3 months,
unless unless
The 1987 Constitution took away the power of reduced by reduced by
Congress to repeal, alter, or supplement rules the SC the SC
concerning pleading, practice and procedure.
The power to promulgate rules of pleading,
practice and procedure is no longer shared by
the Court with Congress, more so with the Notes:
Executive [Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, a. Period counted from date of submission.
G.R. No. 132601 (1999)]. b. Case deemed submitted upon filing of the
last pleading, brief or memorandum required
by the Rules or the court [Sec. 15(2), Art. VIII].
Limitations
Upon expiration of the period, the Chief Justice
or presiding judge shall issue a certification
stating why the decision or resolution has not
been rendered within the period [Sec. 15(3),
Art. VIII].

This provision is merely directory and failure to


Administrative Supervision Over Lower
decide on time would not deprive the
Courts
corresponding courts of jurisdiction or render
Administrative Powers of the Supreme Court
their decisions invalid [De Roma v. CA, G.R.
No. L-46903 (1987)].

The failure to decide cases within the 90-day


period required by law constitutes a ground for
administrative liability against the defaulting
judge. [People v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 143702
(2001)].

The Sandiganbayan, while of the same level as


the Court of Appeals, functions as a trial court.
Therefore, the period for deciding cases which
applies to the Sandiganbayan is the three (3)
month period, not the twelve (12) month period
[In Re: Problems of Delays in Cases before the
Sandiganbayan, A. M. No. 00-8-05- SC
Note: The qualifications of judges of lower (2001)].
courts as stated by the Constitution are

Page 95 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

Original and Appellate Jurisdiction


Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and
determine a case [US v. Limsiongco, G. R. No.
16217 (1920)]. Note: A party who has not appealed from a
decision may not obtain any affirmative relief
Original Jurisdiction [Sec. 5(1), Art. VIII] from the appellate court other than what he had
a. Cases affecting ambassadors, other public obtained from the lower court, if any, whose
ministers and consuls decision is brought up on appeal [Daabay v.
b. Petition for certiorari Coca-Cola Bottlers, G.R. No. 199890 (2013)].
c. Petition for prohibition
d. Petition for mandamus Doctrine of judicial stability or non-
e. Petition for quo warranto interference: No court can interfere by
f. Petition for habeas corpus injunction with the judgments or orders of
another court of concurrent jurisdiction having
Note: Original jurisdiction also extends to writs the power to grant the relief sought by
of amparo, habeas data, and the injunction. The rationale for the rule is founded
environmental writ of kalikasan. on the concept of jurisdiction: a court that
acquires jurisdiction over the case and renders
The Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to judgment therein has jurisdiction over its
issue writs of certiorari (as well as prohibition, judgment, to the exclusion of all other
mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus and coordinate courts, for its execution and over all
injunction) is not exclusive. Its jurisdiction is its incidents, and to control, in furtherance of
concurrent with the CA, and with the RTC in justice, the conduct of ministerial officers acting
proper cases [Cruz v. Judge Gingoyon, G.R. in connection with this judgment [United Alloy
No. 170404 (2011)]. Philippines v. UCPB, G.R. No. 179257 (2015)].

Appellate Jurisdiction [Sec. 5(2), Art. VIII]: on Finality of Judgments: A decision that has
appeal or certiorari (as the Rules of Court acquired finality becomes immutable and
provide), SC may review, revise, reverse, unalterable and may no longer be modified in
modify, or affirm final judgments and orders of any respect even if the modification is meant to
lower courts in: correct erroneous conclusions of fact or law
and whether it was made by the court that
rendered it or by the highest court of the land
[Genato v. Viola, G.R. No. 169706 (2010)].

Exceptions
a. The correction of clerical errors;
b. Nunc pro tunc entries which cause no
prejudice to any party;
c. Void judgments;
d. Whenever circumstances transpire after
the finality of the decision rendering its
execution unjust and inequitable.

Note: “Finality of Judgment” means that while


the court loses jurisdiction to amend, alter, and
modify the decision, it does not lose its power
over the case with respect to enforcement and
execution. The Court can suspend the
enforcement of a sentence. Presidential
reprieve does not preclude Court control over
the enforcement of decisions after finality. This

Page 96 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

is in the Court’s exercise of its judicial power


[Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. Additional Rules:
132601 (1999)].

Judicial Privilege: A form of deliberative


process privilege; Court records which are pre-
decisional and deliberative in nature are thus
protected and cannot be the subject of a
subpoena.

A document is pre-decisional if it precedes, in


temporal sequence, the decision to which it
relates.

A material is deliberative on the other hand, if it


reflects the give-and-take of the consultative
process. The key question is whether
disclosure of the information would discourage
candid discussion within the agency.

Judicial Privilege is an exception to the general


rule of transparency as regards access to court
records. Court deliberations are traditionally
considered privileged communication.

SUMMARY OF RULES
The following are privileged documents or
communications, and are not subject to Requirements for Decisions and
disclosure: Resolutions
Sec. 13, Art. VIII. The conclusions of the
Supreme Court in any case submitted to it for
decision en banc or in division shall be
reached in consultation before the case is
assigned to a Member for the writing of the
opinion of the Court. A certification to this
effect signed by the Chief Justice shall be
issued and a copy thereof attached to the
record of the case and served upon the
parties. Any Member who took no part, or
dissented, or abstained from a decision or
resolution must state the reason therefor.
The same requirements shall be observed
by all lower collegiate courts.

Sec. 14, Art. VIII. No decision shall be


rendered by any court without expressing
therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the
law on which it is based.

Page 97 of 439
U.P. LAW BOC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I POLITICAL LAW

No petition for review or motion for


reconsideration of a decision of the court
shall be refused due course or denied
without stating the legal basis therefor.

A "Resolution" is not a "Decision" within the


meaning of Sec. 14 of Art. VIII. This mandate
applies only in cases "submitted for decision,"
i.e., given due course and after the filing of
Briefs or Memoranda and/or other pleadings,
as the case may be. It does not apply to an
Order or Resolution refusing due course to a
Petition for Certiorari [Nunal v. COA, G.R. No.
78648 (1989)].

CONSTITUTIONAL Promotional Appointment of Commissioner


to Chairman
COMMISSIONS Sec. 1(2), Article IX-D of the Constitution does
not prohibit a promotional appointment from
commissioner to chairman as long as:

The grant of a constitutional commission’s


rulemaking power is untouchable by Congress,
absent a constitutional amendment or revision.

The laws that the Commission interprets and


enforces fall within the prerogative of
Congress. As an administrative agency, its
quasi-legislative power is subject to the same
limitations applicable to other administrative
bodies [Trade and Investment Development
Corporation of the Philippines v. Civil Service Jurisprudence on Sec. 1(2), Art. IX-D
Commission, G.R. No. 182249 (2013)].

A. CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARDS TO
ENSURE INDEPENDENCE OF
COMMISSIONS

Page 98 of 439

You might also like