[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
72 views1 page

Constitutional Law Insights

This document discusses several legal concepts related to interpreting and applying the Philippine constitution: 1) Treaties have the status of law in the Philippines. Only Congress can enact, amend, and repeal laws. The president's role is to faithfully execute laws but cannot abrogate them. 2) The living tree doctrine from Canadian law holds that constitutions should be interpreted in the context of societal changes over time rather than based solely on original intent. 3) The doctrine of avoidance says courts should avoid ruling on constitutional issues if possible and resolve cases based on other legal grounds like statutes.

Uploaded by

cris baligod
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
72 views1 page

Constitutional Law Insights

This document discusses several legal concepts related to interpreting and applying the Philippine constitution: 1) Treaties have the status of law in the Philippines. Only Congress can enact, amend, and repeal laws. The president's role is to faithfully execute laws but cannot abrogate them. 2) The living tree doctrine from Canadian law holds that constitutions should be interpreted in the context of societal changes over time rather than based solely on original intent. 3) The doctrine of avoidance says courts should avoid ruling on constitutional issues if possible and resolve cases based on other legal grounds like statutes.

Uploaded by

cris baligod
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Whats the status of Treaty? (Saguisag case) Treaty has the status of a law.

Who can make laws and abrogate laws? Congress


Can the President abrogate laws? Article VII, 17. Faithful execution clause. When there is a law there is
only one duty of the President and that is to faithfully execute it. No matter whether he disagreed, as
long as the law stands, he has only one duty but to execute it.
Only the Congress can enact, amend and repeal a law.
IRR has the force and effect of law but it’s not a law. EO also.
3. ut magis valeat quam pereat – we don’t interpret the provision of the constitution isolatedly, we have
to relate other provision of the constitution. (De Castro vs JBC)
*judges being appointed during the election ban*
In the Villanueva case ano ginawa ng SC dun? The SC uninanimously nullify that appointment. The
prohibition under Article 7 also applies for the appointment of to the Judiciary.
In Villanueva case, according to them it’s a stray ruling.
Modify*Abandon – interpret the provision of the constitution; relate that; and not isolatedly.
Ginawa tayong tanga nung De Castro vs JBC
Reason: San nakalagay election ban? Article 7.
San nakalagay ung sa JBC? Article 8.
Ang mandatory duty given to the JBC is different from prohibiting the Pres from appointing one during
the ban.
The Villanueva ruling, stands.
If the decision of the SC is wrong we call it jurisprudence. (HAHA)
WHATS THE LIVING TREE DOCTRINE?
The living tree doctrine has been deeply entrenched into Canadian constitutional law since the
seminal constitutional case of Edwards v Canada (Attorney General) also widely known as
the Persons Case wherein Viscount Sankey stated in the 1929 decision: "The British North America
Act planted in Canada [is] a living tree capable of growth and expansion within its natural limits." This
is known as the Doctrine of Progressive Interpretation. This means that the Constitution cannot be
interpreted in the same way as an ordinary statute. Rather, it must be read within the context of
society to ensure that it adapts and reflects changes. If constitutional interpretation adheres to
the Framer's Intent and remains rooted in the past, the Constitution would not be reflective of society
and eventually fall into disuse.
*Essential Parts of the Constitution*
3,4,5,12
Constitution of Liberty – strictly against the State. Yield infavor of the accused.
Constitution of Government. How to interpret? – Liberal construction in favor of sovereignty.
What is the Doctrine of Avoidance?
Constitutional Avoidance is the principal that, if possible, the Supreme Court should
avoid ruling on constitutional issues, and resolve the cases before them on other
(usually statutory) grounds.  In practice, what this often means is that if the
Supreme Court is faced with two possible interpretations of a statute, one of which
is plainly constitutional, and the other of which is of questionable constitutionality,
the court will interpret the statute as having the plainly constitutional meaning, to
avoid the hard constitutional questions that would come with the other
interpretation.  
Separation of Powers?
Prosecutor – no probable cause
DOJ – my probable cause
The finding of probable cause is tainted with grave abuse of discretion …
Will the court intervene with the exercise of the discretion by the DOJ?
Where is the liberal construction?
It must be “grave” abuse of discretion and not merely abuse of discretion for the Court to intervene.
(Art VIII, 2)
Finding a probable cause, is it valid exercise of the police power of the State? Yes it is.
If you are the court, makikialam kaba jan?
Gabo vs People.
It is an error of judgment not jurisdiction which the State can interfere that amount to grave abuse of
discretion.

You might also like