Category Archives: Elections & Constitutional Law

Church and State: the Religious Clauses in the Philippine Constitution

3 Replies | Related posts at the end of article

In a 2003 case, Supreme Court Justice Reynato Puno extensively discussed the history, nature and jurisprudence on religious clauses in the Philippine Constitution. The defense in that case invoked the religious freedom under Article III, Section 5 of the Constitution, which reads: “No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.”

Continue reading →

Abortion and Contraception in the Philippines

1 Reply | Related posts at the end of article

Abortion, which is legal in the United States, was on center stage a few months back. The controversy stemmed from the rulings of three appeals courts that declared the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 as unconstitutional. The United States Supreme Court agreed to review the declaration of unconstitutionality of said law.

Continue reading →

Arrests and the Miranda Rights

7 Replies | Related posts at the end of article

You always see it on TV and the movies. The police, after cornering the suspect, bellows out: “Freeze a**hole! You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law.” This lump of rights, plus the right to counsel and sans the “freeze”, is called the Miranda rights.

Continue reading →

Boy Scouts: Homosexuality and the Right of Expression

Leave a reply | Related posts at the end of article

Gay groups had been, and still is, complaining about gay discrimination in our country. This is a sensitive matter, specially if we consider admission of gays into traditional institutions like the military, the church and the boy scouts (Boy Scout of the Philippines). Let  focus on the boys scouts, primarily because there already a decided U.S. case on this matter.

Continue reading →

Lambino, et al. vs. COMELEC (G.R. No. 174153, 25 October 2006) – Digest

8 Replies | Related posts at the end of article

On 15 February 2006, the group of Raul Lambino and Erico Aumentado (“Lambino Group”) commenced gathering signatures for an initiative petition to change the 1987 Constitution. On 25 August 2006, the Lambino Group filed a petition with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to hold a plebiscite that will ratify their initiative petition under Section 5(b) and (c) and Section 7 of Republic Act No. 6735 or the Initiative and Referendum Act. The proposed changes under the petition will shift the present Bicameral-Presidential system to a Unicameral-Parliamentary form of government.

Continue reading →

The Office of the Ombudsman, Mandated as Protector of the People

1 Reply | Related posts at the end of article

Today, 2 October 2006, the Ombudsman absolved all respondents involved in the Mega Pacific controversy of all administrative and criminal liabilities. To recall, the Supreme Court threatened to cite the Ombudsman in contempt for its delay in determining the criminal liability, if any, of the public officials (COMELEC) involved in the bungled automation of the 2004 elections (Information Technology Foundation of the Philippines [ITF] vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 159139 [2004]). The Ombudsman, in the person of the Honorable Ma. Merceditas N. Gutierrez, is now the subject of scathing public criticisms.

Continue reading →

Philippine Constitution (1987): Full Text

Preamble
Article I. National Territory
Article II. Declaration of Principles and State Policies
Article III. Bill of Rights
Article IV. Citizenship
Article V. Suffrage
Article VI. The Legislative Department
Article VII.The Executive Department
Article VIII.The Judicial Department
Article IX. Constitutional Commissions
Article X. Local Government
Article XI. Accountability of Public Officers
Article XII. National Economy and Patrimony
Article XIII.Social Justice and Human Rights
Article XIV. Education, Science & Technology, Arts, Culture & Sports
Article XV.The Family
Article XVI. General Provisions
Article XVII. Amendments and Revisions
Article XVIII. Transitory Provisions
Continue reading →

Primer on Separation of Powers, Inquiry in Aid of Legislation

7 Replies | Related posts at the end of article

There are three branches of the government — legislative, executive and judicial. Each department of the government has exclusive cognizance of the matters within its jurisdiction, and is supreme within its own sphere. But it does not follow from the fact that the three powers are to be kept separate and distinct that the Constitution intended them to be absolutely unrestrained and independent of each other. The Constitution has provided for an elaborate system of checks and balances to secure coordination in the workings of the various departments of the government.

Continue reading →