POLITICAL/CONSTITUTIONAL LAW DOCTRINES

1. Doctrine of Constitutional Supremacy

Under this doctrine, if a law or contract violates any norm of the Constitution, that law or
contract, whether promulgated by the legislative or by the executive branch or entered into by
private persons for private purposes, is null and void and without any force and effect. Since the
Constitution is the fundamental, paramount and supreme law of the nation, it is deemed written
in every statute and contract. (Manila Prince Hotel v GSIS, G.R. No. 122156, February 3, 1997

2. Presidential vs. Parliamentary vs. Federal Government

That in a presidential government, there is separation of executive and legislative powers (the
first is lodged in the President, while the second is vested in Congress); while in a parliamentary
government, there is fusion of both executive and legislative powers in Parliament, although the
actual exercise of the executive powers is vested in a Prime Minister who is chosen by, and
accountable to, Parliament. iii) Unitary vs. federal government. A unitary government is a single,
centralized government, exercising powers over both the internal and external affairs of the
State; while a federal government consists of autonomous state (local) government units
merged into a single State, with the national government exercising a limited degree of power
over the domestic affairs but generally full direction of the external affairs of the State.

3. Act of State
Act of State doctrine. Every sovereign state is bound to respect the independence of every other
state, and the courts of one country will not sit in judgment on the acts of the government of
another, done within its territory. Redress of grievances by reason of such acts must be obtained
through the means open to be availed of by sovereign powers as between themselves [Underhill
v. Hernandez, 168 U.S. 250].

4. Archipelago/Archipelagic Doctrine
Archipelago Doctrine: “The waters around, between and connecting the islands of the
archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the
Philippines” [2nd sentence, Sec. 1, Art II i) This articulates the archipelagic doctrine of national
territory, based on the principle that an archipelago, which consists of a number of islands
separated by bodies of water, should be treated as one integral unit.

5. Right of Innocent Passage

Innocent passage is navigation through the territorial sea of a State for the purpose of traversing
that sea without entering internal waters, or of proceeding to internal waters, or making for the
high seas from internal waters, as long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or
security of the coastal State. Arrival under stress, or involuntary entrance, may be due to lack of
 provisions, unseaworthiness of the vessel, inclement weather, or other case of force majeure,
such as pursuit by pirates.

6. Theory of Auto Limitation

It is the doctrine where a state adheres to principles of international law as a
limitation/restriction to the exercise of its sovereignty

7. Imperium vs. Dominium

Dominium refers to the capacity to own or acquire property, including lands held by the State in
its proprietary capacity; while Imperium is the authority possessed by the State embraced in the
concept of sovereignty.

8. Doctrine of Parens Patriae

Doctrine of Parens Patriae. Literally, parent of the people. As such, the Government may act as
guardian of the rights of people who may be disadvantaged or suffering from some disability or
misfortune. See Government of the Philippine Islands v. Monte de Piedad, 35 SCRA 738;
Cabanas v. Pilapil, 58 SCRA 94.

9. Principle of Jus Postliminium

Postliminium It imports the reinstatement of the authority of the displaced government once
control of the enemy is lost over the territory affected Is that in which persons or things taken
by the enemy are restored to the former state on coming actually into the power of the nation
to which they belong.

Where the territory of one belligerent State is occupied by the enemy during war, the legitimate
government is ousted from authority. When the belligerent occupation ceases to be effective,
the authority of the legitimate government is automatically restored, together with all its laws,
by virtue of the jus postliminium.

10. Concept of Jura Regalia vs. Concept of Native Title

Under the concept of jura regalia, private title to land must be traced to some grant, express or
implied, from the Spanish Crown or its successors, the American Colonial government, and
thereafter, the Philippine Republic. Title to land must emanate from some source for it cannot
be issue forth from nowhere. Jura regalia simply means that the State is the original proprietor
of all lands and, as such, is the general source of all private titles. (p. 3, Agcaoili,

Native title refers to pre-conquest rights to lands and domains which, as far back as memory
reaches, have been held under a claim of private ownership by ICCs/IPs, have been public lands
and are thus indisputably presumed to have been held that way since before the Spanish
Conquest. [Sec. 3(l), Chapter II, RA 8371]
11. Royal Prerogative of Dishonesty
There can be no legal right against the authority which makes the law on which the right
depends [Republic v. Villasor, 54 SCRA 83], However, it may be sued if it gives consent, whether
express or implied. The doctrine is also known as the Royal Prerogative of Dishonesty.

12. Decentralization of Power vs. Decentralization of Administration

Decentralization of administration

There is decentralization of administration when the central government delegates

administrative powers to political subdivisions in order to broaden the base of government
power and in the process make local governments ‘more responsive and more accountable’ and
ensure their fullest development as self-reliant communities and make them more effective
partners in the pursuit of national development and social progress.’

Decentralization of power

On the other hand, decentralization of power “involves as abdication of political power in favor
of local government units declared to be autonomous. This is termed as devolution. (The Local
Government Code Revisited 2011 Ed., p. 8, Aquilino Pimentel, Jr.)

13. Principle of Separation of Powers

The principle essentially means that legislation belongs to Congress, execution to the Executive
and settlement of legal controversies to the Judiciary. Each is prevented from invading the
domain of the others. (Senate Blue Ribbon Committee v. Majaducon, G.R. No. 136760, July 29,
2003)

14. Principle of Blending of Powers

Principle of Blending of Powers Refers to an instance when powers are not confined exclusively
within one department but are assigned to or shared by several departments

15. Principle of Checks and Balances

Principle of Checks and Balances Allows one department to resist encroachments upon its
prerogatives or to rectify mistakes or excesses committed by the other departments.

16. Doctrine of Necessary Implication

Exercise of the power may be justified in the absence of an express conferment because the
grant of express power carried with it all other powers that may be reasonably inferred from it.
 Doctrine of necessary implication, i.e. that the grant of an express power carries with it all other
powers that may be reasonably inferred from it

17. Political vs. Justiciable Questions

JUSTICIABLE: Imply a given right legally demandable and enforceable, an act or omission
violative of such right, and a remedy granted and sanctioned by law for said breach of right.

Political: Questions which involve the policy or the wisdom of the law or act, or the morality or
efficacy of the same. Generally it cannot be inquired by the courts. Further, these are questions
which under the Constitution: a. are decided by the people in their sovereign capacity; and b.
where full discretionary authority has been delegated by the Constitution either to the executive
or legislative department

18. Power of Subordinate Legislation

Power of administrative agency to promulgate rules and regulations on matters within their own
specialization

19. Doctrine of Incorporation vs. Doctrine of Transformation

Doctrine of Incorporation

It means that the rules of international law form part of the law of the land and no further
legislative action is needed to make such rules applicable in the domestic sphere. The doctrine
of incorporation is applied whenever municipal tribunals (or local courts) are confronted with
situations in which there appears to be a conflict between a rule of international law and the
provisions of the Constitution or statute of the local state. Efforts should first be exerted to
harmonize them, so as to give effect to both since it is to be presumed that municipal law was
enacted with proper regard for the generally accepted principles of international law in
observance of the Incorporation Clause in Section 2, Article II of the Constitution.

Doctrine of Transformation

It provides that the generally accepted rules of international law are not per se binding upon the
state but must first be embodied in legislation enacted by the lawmaking body and so
transformed into municipal law.

20. Welfare State Concept

A welfare state is one in which the government provides pensions,

medical care, education and unemployment benefits to the people. It
 was originally a strategy to form a middle way between communism
and laissez-faire capitalism. Well, laissez-faire capitalism is certainly
encouraged in these neo liberal economic days —free markets reign
everywhere and at the cost of everybody, to transfer money from
consumers straight to the pockets of the shareholders. Prices are set on
what the market will pay rather than on any basis related to the actual
cost of production.

21. Principle of Non-Delegability of Legislative Power

GR: What has been delegated cannot be delegated. It is based upon the ethical principle that
such delegated power constitutes not only as a right, but also as a duty to be performed by the
delegate through the instrumentality of his own judgment and not through the intervening mind
of another. A further delegation of such power, unless permitted by the sovereign power, would
constitute a negation of this duty in violation of the trust reposed in the delegate. (Cruz, supra at
160) XPNS: 1.) Delegations to the People at large; (a)R.A. 6735 – The Initiative and Referendum
Act as authorized by the constitutional mandate for the creation of a system of legislation by
initiative and referendum (b)A plebiscite is required in the creation, division, merger, abolition
of province, city, municipality, or barangay or the substantial alteration of its boundar

22. Enrolled Bill Theory

An enrolled bill is one duly introduced and finally passed by both Houses, authenticated by the
proper officers of each, and approved by the President. The enrolled bill is conclusive upon the
courts as regards the tenor of the measure passed by Congress and approved by the President.
Court is bound under the doctrine of separation of powers by the contents of a duly
authenticated measure of the legislature [Mabanag v. Lopez Vito, 78 Phil 1; Arroyo v. De
Venecia, G.R. No. 127255, August 14, 1997], If a mistake was made in the printing of the bill
before it was certified by Congress and approved by the President, the remedy is amendment or
corrective legislation, not a judicial decree [Casco (Phil) Chemical Co. v. Gimenez, 7 SCRA 347].

23. Pocket Veto vs. Partial Veto

Instances of pocket veto (2010 Bar)

1. When the President fails to act on a bill; and

2. When the reason he does not return the bill to the Congress is that Congress is not in session.
Pocket veto is NOT applicable in the Philippines because inaction by the President for 30 days
never produces a veto even if Congress is in recess. The President must still act to veto the bill
and communicate his veto to Congress without need of returning the vetoed bill with his veto
message

Partial veto.
 As a rule, a partial veto is invalid. It is allowed only for particular items in an appropriation,
revenue or tariff bill [Sec. 27 (2), Art. VI]. See Bolinao Electronics Corporation v. Valencia, 11
SCRA 486. See also Gonzales v. Macaraig, 191 SCRA 452, on “item veto”. In Bengzon v. Drilon,
208 SCRA 133, the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional the veto made by President
Aquino of appropriations intended for the adjustment of pensions of retired justices [pursuant
to A.M. 91-8-225-CA] under R.A. 910, as amended by R.A. 1797, as this is not an item veto. The
President cannot veto part of an item in an appropriation bill while approving the remaining
portion of the item. Furthermore, the President cannot set aside a judgment of the Supreme
Court; neither can the veto power be exercised as a means of repealing R.A. 1797. The veto also
impairs the fiscal autonomy of the Judiciary, and deprives retired justices of the right to a
pension vested under R.A. 1797.

24. Legislative/Congressional Veto

iiib3) Legislative veto. A congressional veto is a means whereby the legislature can block or
modify administrative action taken under a statute. It is a form of legislative control in the
implementation of particular executive action. The form may either be negative, i.e., subjecting
the executive action to disapproval by Congress, or affirmative, i.e., requiring approval of the
executive action by Congress. A congressional veto is subject to serious questions involving the
principle of separation of powers. In Philippine Constitution Association v. Enriquez, 235 SCRA
506, on the issue of whether Special Provision No. 2 on the “Use of Funds” in the appropriation
for the modernization of the AFP, General Appropriations Act of 1994, which requires prior
approval of Congress for the release of the corresponding modernization funds, is
unconstitutional, the Supreme Court did not resolve the issue of legislative veto, but instead,
ruled that any provision blocking an administrative action in implementing a law or requiring
legislative approval for executive acts must be incorporated in a separate and substantive bill.
Thus, since Special Provision No. 2 is an “inappropriate” provision, the President properly vetoed
the same

25. Theory of Legal Impossibility

Q: Does the acceptance of an incompatible office pertain to its physical impossibility?

A: NO.The incompatibility contemplated is not the mere physical impossibility of one person’s
performing the duties of the two offices due to a lack of time or the inability to be in two places
at the same moment, but that which proceeds from the nature and relations of the two
positions to each other as to give rise to contrariety and antagonism should one person attempt
to faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of one toward the incumbent of the other.
(Canonizado v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 133132, February 15, 2001)

26. Forbidden Office

If the office was created or the emoluments thereof increased during the term for which he was elected
(1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 13)
[“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.”]. The ban against appointment to the office
created or'the emoluments thereof increased shall, however, last only for the duration of the term for
which the member of Congress was elected.