Political Law - Article II PDF

Preview

Summary

summary of article 2 of 1987 philippine constitution. it includes jurisprudence....

Description

Page |1

ARTICLE II – FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES Section 1. The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them. Sections 1-6 are the principles. These principles are binding and become obligatory upon ratification of the 1987 Constitution. Sections 7-28 are the policies. These policies are not binding but mere guidelines for the State to act upon. Generally, Article 2 is a non-self-executing provision with the exception provided for under Secs. 15,16 and 28. According to the SC in the case of Tanada vs. Tuvera, Art. 2 of the 1987 Constitution is regarded as the general creed of the nation. These are just guidelines for the congress in enacting laws and the courts in interpreting laws of the constitution. The essential features of a democratic and republican state are representation and renovation. Under the concept of renovation, it does not allow permanent legislation as well as permanent governmental acts. These governmental acts are subject to changes by future government officers. Manifestations of representation and renovation: - Ours is a rule of law and not of men. - Accountability of public officers - Rule of majority - Bill of rights - Separation of powers Ways of extending international law as part of our legal system: 1. Incorporation - the international law is part of the domestic law upon constitutional declaration. 2. Transformation - international law is transformed to a domestic law through a constitutional mechanism such as local legislation. Generally accepted principles of international law automatically become part of the law of the land through incorporation. Norms which are binding and recognized by all civilized nations. Aspects of generally accepted principles of international law are: 1. International customary rules 2. General principles of law recognized by civilized nations Villavicencio vs. Lukban [G.R. No. 14639, March 25, 1919] Case (Doctrine) Compilation Estareja Alvin Jedd U.

Political Law Review Atty. Adonis V. Gabriel

Page |2

Ours is a rule of law and not of men. Even though the intention of the Mayor is commendable, the means employed is unlawful because it violated the rights of the women and there is no express authority to undertake such act. Alien prostitutes can be expelled from the Philippines in conformity with an act of Congress. The Governor-General can order the eviction of undesirable aliens after a hearing from the Islands. One can search in vain for any law, order, or regulation, which even hints at the right of the Mayor of the City of Manila or the Chief of Police of that City to force citizens of the Philippine Islands, and these women despite their being in a sense, lepers of society are nevertheless not chattels but Philippine citizens protected by the same constitutional guarantees as other citizens. Law defines power. The law is the only supreme power in our system of government, and every man who by accepting office participates in its functions is only the more strongly bound to submit to that supremacy, and to observe the limitations which gives itself and imposes upon the exercise of the authority which it gives.

Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations. Poe-Llamanzares vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 221697, March 8, 2016 Consistent with this law is the Philippines' ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. This treaty has the effect of law and requires the domestic protection of children's rights to immediate registration and nationality after birth, against statelessness, and against discrimination based on their birth status. The Philippines also ratified the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This treaty, which has the effect of law, also requires that children have access to immediate registration and nationality, and defends them against discrimination. Government -- including the judiciary -- is obligated to abide by these treaties in accordance with the Constitution and with our international obligations captured in the maxim pacta sunt servanda. Kuroda vs. Jalandoni [G.R. No. L-2662, March 26, 1949] Even if the Philippine is not a signatory, international conventions deal with generally accepted principles of international law, they are deemed to be part of the law of the land under the doctrine of incorporation. In accordance with the generally accepted principles of international law of the present day, including the Hague Convention, the Geneva Convention and significant precedents of international jurisprudence established by the United Nations, all those persons, military or Case (Doctrine) Compilation Estareja Alvin Jedd U.

Political Law Review Atty. Adonis V. Gabriel

Page |3

civilian, who have been guilty of planning, preparing or waging a war of aggression and of the commission of crimes and offenses consequential and incidental thereto, in violation of the laws and customs of war, of humanity and civilization, are held accountable therefor. Consequently, in the promulgation and enforcement of Executive Order No. 68, the President of the Philippines has acted in conformity with the generally accepted principles and policies of international law which are part of our Constitution. The Philippines can adopt the rules and regulations laid down on the Hague and Geneva Conventions notwithstanding that it is not a signatory thereto. It embodied generally accepted principles of international law binding upon all states. Agustin vs. Edu [G.R. No. L49112, February 2, 1979] Legislative enactment is not necessary in order to authorize the issuance of LOI prescribing the use of triangular reflectorized early warning devices. This is also an illustration of generally accepted principles of international law (pacta sunt servanda). Ichong vs. Hernandez [G.R. No. L-7995, May 31, 1957] As a rule, the municipal law shall prevail over international law. Police power cannot be invalidated by a treaty. The Retail Trade Nationalization Law is not unconstitutional because it was passed in the exercise of the police power which cannot be bargained away through the medium of a treaty. The law in question was enacted to remedy a real actual threat and danger to national economy posed by alien dominance and control of the retail business and free citizens and country from such dominance and control; that the enactment clearly falls within the scope of the police power of the State, thru which and by which it protects its own personality and insures its security and future. If the conflict is presented to international courts, the international law will prevail. If the conflict is presented before the municipal courts, the municipal law will prevail. Gonzales vs. Hechanova [G.R. No. L-21897, October 22, 1963] Municipal law was upheld over international law on the basis of the doctrine of separation of powers under the rule-making powers of the Supreme Court. In this case, the contracts adverted to are NOT treaties. Doctrine of Lex Posterior Derogat Priori means the more recent law shall supersede the later law. A later law repeals an earlier law. In Re: Garcia [2 SCRA 984, August 15, 1961] If there is conflict between a treaty and the Rules of court promulgated by the SC the latter will prevail. Case (Doctrine) Compilation Estareja Alvin Jedd U.

Political Law Review Atty. Adonis V. Gabriel

Page |4

In this case, the court did not follow the hierarchy of laws because it is founded under the Constitution itself. The provisions of the treaty cannot be invoked by the applicant for it was intended to govern Filipino citizens desiring to practice their profession in Spain and Spanish citizens desiring to practice their profession in the Philippines. The petitioner is a Filipino citizen and is therefore subject to the laws of his own country. The treaty could not have been intended to modify the laws and regulations governing admission to the practice of law in the Philippines for the reason that the executive department may not encroach upon the constitutional prerogative of the Supreme Court to promulgate rules for admission to the practice of law in the Philippines. Section 3. Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory. Section 4. The prime duty of the Government is to serve and protect the people. The Government may call upon the people to defend the State and, in the fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by law, to render personal military or civil service. People vs. Lagman [G.R. No. 45892, July 13, 1938] In this case, the SC did not sustain the invocation of religion freedom in order to be exempt from National Defense Act because it is provided that all citizen may be called upon to defend the state. To leave

the organization of an army to the will of the citizens would be to make this duty of the government excusable should there be no sufficient men who volunteer to enlist therein. Civilian Authority is at all times supreme over the military. - Commander in chief clause under Art. 7 Section 18 - The requirement that the AFP members are duty bound to defend the constitution under Sec. 5 Art. 16 Compulsory Military Service is Constitutional - “The National Defense Law, in so far as it establishes compulsory military service, does not go against this constitutional provision but is, on the contrary, in faithful compliance therewith. The duty of the Government to defend the State cannot be performed except through an army. To leave the organization of an army to the will of the citizens would be to make this duty of the Government excusable should there be no sufficient men who volunteer to enlist therein. Does compulsory military service require presence of war? No. As held in this case, what justifies compulsory military service is the defense of the State, whether actual or whether in preparation to make it more effective, in case of need. To make the army effective, people will render civil service. Case (Doctrine) Compilation Estareja Alvin Jedd U.

Political Law Review Atty. Adonis V. Gabriel

Page |5

Section 6. The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable. Aglipay vs. Ruiz [G.R. No. 45459, March 13, 1937] There is no violation of the principle of the separation of church and state. The issuance and sale of the stamps in question may be said to be linked with an event of a religious character, but the resulting propaganda, if any, received by the Catholic Church, was not the aim and purpose of the government. The idea behind the issuance of the postage stamps was to attract tourists to our country and not primarily the religious event. Religion is a profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to his creator. Does separation of Church and State deny influence of religion on human affairs? “No. Religious freedom, however, as a constitutional mandate is not inhibition of profound reverence for religion and is not a denial of its influence in human affairs. Religion as a profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to his Creator is recognized. And, in so far as it instills into the minds the purest principles of morality, its influence is deeply felt and highly appreciated.” Reason for Separation “The prohibition herein expressed is a direct corollary of the principle of separation of church and state. Without the necessity of adverting to the historical background of this principle in our country, it is sufficient to say that our history, not to speak of the history of mankind, has taught us that the union of church and state is prejudicial to both, for occasions might arise when the state will use the church, and the church the state, as a weapon in the furtherance of their respective ends and aims. It is almost trite to say now that in this country we enjoy both religious and civil freedom. All the officers of the Government, from the highest to the lowest, in taking their oath to support and defend the Constitution, bind themselves to recognize and respect the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom, with its inherent limitations and recognized implications. It should be stated that what is guaranteed by our Constitution is religious liberty, not mere religious toleration. Garces vs. Estenzo [G.R. No. L-53487, May 25, 1981] No freedom of religion clause in the Constitution violated. The questioned resolutions do not directly or indirectly establish any religion, nor abridge religious liberty, nor was appropriate public money or property for the benefit of any sect, priest or clergyman for the image purchased with private funds and not with tax money. The image was purchased in connection with the celebration of the barrio fiesta and not for the purpose of favoring any religion nor interfering with religious matters or beliefs of the barrio residents. Any activity intended to facilitate the worship of the patron saint (such as the acquisition) is not illegal. Practically, the image was placed in a layman’s custody so that it could easily be made available to any family desiring to borrow the image in connection with prayers and novena. Case (Doctrine) Compilation Estareja Alvin Jedd U.

Political Law Review Atty. Adonis V. Gabriel

Page |6

It was the council’s funds that were used to buy the image; therefore, it is their property. Right of the determination of custody is their right, and even if they decided to give it to the Church, there is no violation of the Constitution, since private funds were used. Not every government activity which involves the expenditure of public funds and which has some religious tint is violative of the constitutional provisions regarding separation of church and state, freedom of worship and banning the use of public money or property. Taruc vs. De la Cruz [G.R. No. 144801, March 10, 2005] The SC hold the Church and the State to be separate and distinct from each other. "Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s and to God what is God’s." Upon the examination of the decisions, it will be readily apparent that cases involving questions relative to ecclesiastical rights have always received the profoundest attention from the courts, not only because of their inherent interest, but because of the far-reaching effects of the decisions in human society. [However,] courts have learned the lesson of conservatism in dealing with such matters, it having been found that, in a form of government where the complete separation of civil and ecclesiastical authority is insisted upon, the civil courts must not allow themselves to intrude unduly in matters of an ecclesiastical nature. The SC agree with the Court of Appeals that the expulsion/excommunication of members of a religious institution/organization is a matter best left to the discretion of the officials, and the laws and canons, of said institution/organization The amendments of the constitution, restatement of articles of religion and abandonment of faith or abjuration alleged by appellant, having to do with faith, practice, doctrine, form of worship, ecclesiastical law, custom and rule of a church and having reference to the power of excluding from the church those allegedly unworthy of membership, are unquestionably ecclesiastical matters which are outside the province of the civil courts Estrada vs. Escritor [A.M. No. P-02-1651, June 22, 2006] In this case, a system of belief may be considered as religion as long as four elements are present: 1. Belief in God or at least some parallel belief that occupies a central place in the believer’s life 2. It must involve a moral code transcending individual belief 3. There must be a demonstrable sincerity 4. There must be some associational ties The Union will be destructive to both institutions. The wall of separation is intended to preserve the integrity and dignity of these two great institutions. Because when together, one may use the influences of the other to further their respective interest. Separationist wall of separation: a. Strict separationist - where there is an absolute impregnable wall of separation between the church and the state; Case (Doctrine) Compilation Estareja Alvin Jedd U.

Political Law Review Atty. Adonis V. Gabriel

Page |7

b. Strict neutrality - all governmental acts are applicable without discrimination hence religion cannot be a basis of exemption. Benevolent neutrality wall of Separation: a. Mandatory benevolent neutrality – absolute accommodation based on religious freedom b. Permissive benevolent neutrality – based on some policies (e.g. victoriano vs elezano workers association) Under the Jefersonian concept, the separation is intended to protect the state from the church. The church is a more powerful institution in as much as there should be a wall to protect the state from the encroachment of the church. In benevolent neutrality, the status of the institution was reversed. The church is the subordinate institution that’s why there should be a wall to protect the weaker one from the stronger one. Also known as the wall of accommodation. Benevolent Neutrality wall of separation is consistent with our constitution. In determining the propriety of the extra marital arrangement, secular or governmental standard is used. What applies to one religion must apply to all. In determining whether religious practice is exempted from the coverage of a general law, we have to answer the three questions under the compelling interest test. If we answer the three in the affirmative, the mandatory governmental act should be applied to the religious arrangement. -

Whether the statute or governmental act created a burden over a religious practice or freedom; Is there a sufficient compelling state interest involved Did the government in achieving its compelling interest used the least intrusive means so that the religious freedom is not encroached to achieve the governmental interest.

In order to impose the mandatory law, the three questions must be answered yes. In determining the validity of the use of public funds or property for some religious activity, the test to be applied is the lemon test as discussed in this case. What is this test? 1. Does it inhibit or support religion 2. There must be some secular legislative purpose 3. The act should not foster excessive entanglement with religion

Section 10. The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national development.

Case (Doctrine) Compilation Estareja Alvin Jedd U.

Political Law Review Atty. Adonis V. Gabriel

Page |8

Concepts of Social Justice Calalang vs. Williams [G.R. No. 47800, December 2, 1940] Public Law - Social justice is "neither communism, nor despotism, nor atomism, nor anarchy," but the humanization of laws and the equalization of social and economic forces by the State so that justice in its rational and objectively secular conception may at least be approximated. Social justice means the promotion of the welfare of all the people, the adoption by the Government of measures calculated to insure economic stability of all the component elements of society, through the maintenance of a proper economic and social equilibrium in the interrelations of the members of the community, constitutionally, through the adoption of measures legally justifiable, or extraconstitutionally, through the exercise of powers underlying the existence of all governments on the time-honored principle of salus populi est suprema lex. Social justice, therefore, must be founded on the recognition of the necessity of interdependence among diverse units of a society and of the protection that should be equally and evenly extended to a...