Legal Principles and Court Procedures Quiz

The public's right to access information held by the government, but it has limitations to protect privacy and confidentiality.

The principle that court proceedings and records should be accessible to the public, with some exceptions for confidentiality.

Documents protected from disclosure due to confidentiality concerns, like court deliberations or internal discussions.

Documents and communications related to the decision-making process, such as notes, drafts, and internal debates.

Information acquired by justices during their official duties remains confidential, even after they leave office.

The principle of mutual respect and courtesy between different branches of government, allowing exemptions from mandatory processes.

Privileges belong to the Supreme Court as an institution, not to individual justices in their personal capacity.

Litigants have the right to access case information, such as the outcome of a case raffle.

The legal right of a party to bring a lawsuit or initiate a legal proceeding in court. A party must demonstrate a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of the case to have standing.

A writ of certiorari is a legal order issued by a higher court to a lower court, demanding the records of a case for review. It's a mechanism to ensure that lower courts are applying the law correctly.

A writ of prohibition is a legal order issued by a higher court to a lower court, stopping the lower court from proceeding in a case. It's used to prevent a lower court from exceeding its jurisdiction.

A franchise is a legal authorization granted by a government to an individual or company to operate a specific business, like a tollway.

Contracts between the government and private entities allowing them to operate toll roads. These agreements outline the terms of operation, including toll rates and fees.

A government body responsible for regulating toll rates and overseeing the operation of toll roads. They ensure that toll rates are fair and that private companies are operating within legal bounds.

A formal, competitive process where government projects, like toll road contracts, are awarded to the best qualified and most competitive bidder.

When a branch of government, like the executive branch, acts outside its powers and takes on functions belonging to the legislative branch, like granting franchises.

The principle that judges are free from external influences and pressures in their decision-making.

The Supreme Court's exclusive authority to oversee and manage the internal affairs and personnel of all courts.

The Ombudsman investigates complaints about any public officer or employee, including judges, but their authority is limited in cases involving judges.

Complaints against judges and court personnel must be referred to the Supreme Court for determination of administrative aspects.

Criminal complaints against judges are investigated by the Ombudsman, but they must be referred to the Supreme Court for administrative review.

The Supreme Court has the final say on administrative matters involving judges and court personnel.

Any aspect of a complaint against a judge or court personnel that relates to their official duties as a judge or court employee.

The Ombudsman must send cases against judges and court personnel to the Supreme Court for administrative review.

A legal proceeding that challenges the right of a person to hold public office, often questioning if they were properly appointed or elected.

A formal process of removing an official from office for misconduct or abuse of power. It involves a specific set of charges and a trial.

An elected official who can be removed from office through impeachment. In the Philippines, this includes high-ranking officials like the President.

No, an impeachable officer can also be removed through a quo warranto petition, which challenges their right to hold office.

Quo warranto specifically addresses issues with the appointment or election of an official, questioning their initial qualifications or if they were legally chosen for the position.

Impeachment focuses on actions committed while in office, while quo warranto targets the initial validity of the appointment or election.

Quo warranto prevents unqualified or ineligible officials from holding office, and ensures that those who don't meet the criteria can't stay in their positions.

It prevents absurd situations where someone remains in office despite not being properly appointed or having the necessary qualifications, upholding the principle that public office is a public trust.

The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) is composed of 7 members: Chief Justice (Chair), Secretary of Justice, Representative from Congress, Representative from Integrated Bar, Professor of Law, Retired Supreme Court Justice, and Representative from the private sector.

Originally, Congress representatives had half a vote each. Later, JBC decided to give each Congress representative a full vote, leading to controversies.

The President must fill SC vacancies within 90 days of the occurrence of the vacancy. The JBC submits a list of nominees to the President before the occurrence of the vacancy for timely appointment.

Submitting the list of nominees to the President before the vacancy occurs is a routine task required by the JBC.

A mandamus order compels the JBC to perform its duty. However, this order is not applicable if the JBC has not delayed in submitting the list due to the vacancy not yet happening.

The JBC is mandated to ensure the timely appointment of new SC justices by submitting the nominees list to the President before the vacancies occur.

The President has a constitutional responsibility to fill SC vacancies within 90 days of their occurrence.

The JBC's role is focused on selecting and recommending nominees for judicial positions, unlike the Court of Appeals, which adjudicates legal disputes.

The Constitution mandates the President to fill a Supreme Court vacancy within 90 days. This ensures the court's complete functionality and prevents prolonged delays in decision making.

The Constitution uses the word 'shall' in Article VIII, Section 4(1) regarding Supreme Court vacancies, indicating a mandatory obligation and leaving no room for discretionary delay.

The Constitution's framers established the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) to prevent midnight appointments and political influences on judicial appointments. The JBC's thorough screening process ensures a fair and independent selection of judges.

The Constitution's prohibition on presidential appointments during election periods applies solely to the Executive Department. This is evident from the fact that only Articles VII Sec. 14-16 refer to appointments within the Executive Department, not the Judiciary.

The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) was established to ensure a transparent and impartial selection process for judicial appointments, removing the influence of any individual president.

The Constitution safeguards the independence of the Judiciary by preventing political influence on its appointments. Limiting political pressure on judicial appointments ensures that the Judiciary operates impartially and delivers justice without bias.

The Constitution does not explicitly acknowledge the role of an Acting Chief Justice. It clearly intends for a Chief Justice to be appointed promptly, highlighting the importance of immediate leadership for the Supreme Court.

Section 12 of the Judiciary Act 1948 provides for an Acting Chief Justice in rare situations where the new Chief Justice is not yet appointed or the incumbent Chief Justice is unable to perform their duties. However, this section cannot be used to circumvent the Constitution's clear intent for prompt appointment of a Chief Justice.