Philippines Constitution PDF

1. WHAT IS CONSTITUTION? ​ According to Judge Thomas Cooley the Constitution is a body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the powers of sovereignty are habitually exercised. – General Definition ​ According to Justice Malcolm, with particular referen...

1. WHAT IS CONSTITUTION? ​ According to Judge Thomas Cooley the Constitution is a body of rules and maxims in accordance with which the powers of sovereignty are habitually exercised. – General Definition ​ According to Justice Malcolm, with particular reference to the Constitution of the Philippines, it may be defined as that written instrument by which the fundamental powers of the government are established, limited, and defined and by which these powers are distributed among the several departments or branches for their safe and distributed exercise for the benefit of the people. President Blockpenk signed an Executive Order abolishing the Office of the Ombudsman. As a lawyer, Atty. Utlum challenged the constitutionality of the same. If you are the Judge, are you going to rule against the constitutionality of the EO, or do otherwise? Why? -​ Yes, I am going to rule against the constitutionality of the EO. The Constitution is the basic and paramount law to which all other laws must conform and to which all persons, including the highest officials of the land, must defer. The Office of the Ombudsman is a constitutional office. Neither the Congress nor the President can enact a legal issuance that can defeat such provision in the Constitution. The Philippines suffered wide-spread economic damages, high inflation rates, surging oil prices, unemployment rate, among others, due to the Pandemic. On the brink of an economic collapse, the Office of the President entered into a contract of sale with China, selling one island in Batanes. Atty. Jungkuk argued before the Supreme Court that the same runs contrary to the Constitution because the island is part of the territory of the Philippine and is outside the commerce of man, hence cannot be subject of a sale. Further, Article XII prohibits 100% ownership of the lands of the Public Domain by aliens. The Office of the President countered that while Atty. Jungkuk is correct, the Philippines badly needs funds, otherwise we will be like Sri Lanka. It argued that the intention of the Office is good. China also argued that the Philippines should honor its contract. Is the Office of the President correct? -​ No, the Office of the President is incorrect. The Constitution must ever remain supreme. No act shall be valid, however noble its intentions, if it conflicts with the Constitution. Right or wrong, the Constitution must be upheld as long as it has not been changed by the sovereign people. The island is part of the territory of the Philippine and outside the commerce of man, hence cannot be subject of a sale. Further, Article XII prohibits 100% ownership of the lands of the Public Domain by aliens. 4.​ What makes the Constitution the supreme law of the land? -​ Because unlike an ordinary law, the Constitution is from the direct act of the people. In such case that there is an inconsistent law, executive issuance, administrative actions, or contract with the Constitution, the latter shall remain Supreme. 5. The plebiscite to ratify the 1987 Constitution was held on February 2, 1987 but the result came out only of February 11, 1987. Atty. Wuyungwu argued that it cannot take effect on February 2, 1987 because it is impossible to ascertain the result, hence, it should take effect after the result of the plebiscite came out. Is she correct? Why or why not? -​ No, Atty. Wuyungwu is not correct. February 11, 1987 result of the plebiscite shall not be the basis of the effectivity of the 1987 Constitution. It shall be on February 2, 1987 when the direct action of people is reflected through their actual voting in a plebiscite. (De Leon v. Esguerra) 6.​ What is the nature and purpose or function of constitution? (1)​ Serves as the supreme or fundamental law - A constitution is the charter creating the government. It has the status of a supreme or fundamental law as it speaks for the entire people from whom it derives its claim to obedience. It is binding on all individual citizens and all organs of the government. It is the law to which all other laws must conform and in accordance with which all private rights must be determined and all public authority administered. It is the test of the legality of all governmental actions, whether proceeding from the highest official or lowest functionary. (2)​ Establishes basic framework and underlying principles of government.- The purpose of a constitution is to prescribe the permanent framework of the system of government and to assign to the different departments or branches, their respective powers and duties, and to establish certain basic principles on which the government is founded. It is primarily designed to preserve and protect the rights of individuals against the arbitrary actions of those in authority. Its function is not to legislate in detail but to set limits on the otherwise unlimited power of the legislature I. Concept and Nature of State The State is a community of persons, more or less numerous, permanently occupying a fixed territory, and possessed of an independent government organized for political ends to which the great body of inhabitants render habitual obedience (Garner, 1910). State is a legal concept –its existence requires recognition from the international community of States. Nation, on the other hand, is a racial or ethnic concept. Nation being an anthropological entity is used to denote a group of people with shared characteristics Elements of the State PEOPLE -​ People refers simply to the inhabitants of the State -​ It is generally agreed that they must be numerous enough to be self-sufficing and to defend themselves and small enough to be easily administered and sustained. TERRITORY -​ Territory is the fixed portion of the surface of the earth inhabited by the people of the State -​ it must be neither too big as to be difficult to administer and defend nor too small as to be unable to provide for the needs of the population. Legally GOVERNMENT -​ Government is the agency or instrumentality through which the will of the State is formulated, expressed and realized SOVEREIGNTY  -​ Sovereignty is the supreme and uncontrollable power inherent in a State by which that State is governed (Garner, 1910). -​ Sovereignty may also be internal or external. -​ Internal sovereignty refers to the power of the State to control its domestic affairs -​ External sovereignty, which is the power of the State to direct its relations with other States, is also known as independence. -​ Sovereignty is permanent, exclusive, comprehensive, absolute, indivisible, inalienable and imprescriptible Inherent Powers of Government POLICE OF POWER - to promote and protect the general welfare; there must be reasonable subject and reasonable means POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN - appropriate private property for a public property with just compensation -​ There must be a taking -​ For the public use/purpose -​ Just compensation to be paid to the property owner -​ The just compensation should be based on the market value of the property TAXATION - impose or enforce persons, properties, or rights to raise revenues for the use and support for the government. 2. SEPARATION OF POWERS President Hunghit, realizing that the funds of the national treasury are nearly depleted, promulgated an Executive Order postponing the 2022 Barangay Election. Atty. Mocolentol challenged the same raising an argument that the President is acting beyond his power? Is he correct? Why? -​ Yes, he is correct. The cardinal postulate explains that the three branches must discharge their respective functions within the limits of authority conferred by the Constitution. Under the principle of separation of powers, neither Congress, the President, nor the Judiciary may encroach on field allocated to the other branches of the government (Cruz, 2014). The postponement of Barangay Elections is not within the powers of the Executive Branch. Hence, the act of President Hunghit violates the principle of separation of powers. CASE: IN RE: WENCESLAO LAURETA NO. L-68635 | MAY 14, 1987 CASE: THE SENATE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE VS. MAJADUCON G.R. NO. 136760 | JULY 29, 2003 CASE: LITO CORPUZ VS. PEOPLE G.R. NO. 180016 | APRIL 29, 2014 What is the systems of Checks and Balances? -​ The theory is that the ends of the government are better achieved through the exercise by its agencies of only the powers assigned to them, subject to reversal in proper cases by those constitutionally authorized. Department may resist encroachments upon its prerogatives or to rectify mistakes or excesses committed by the other departments. Give Examples of Checks by the President  -​ May veto or disapprove bills enacted by the Congress (Sec. 27:1) -​ Through pardoning power, he may modify or set aside the judgments of courts (Art. VII, Sec 19) Give Examples of Checks by the Legislature -​ May override the veto of the President (Sec. 27:1) -​ Reject certain appointments of the President (Art. VII, Sec. 16) -​ Revoke the proclamation of martial law or suspension of the writ of habeas corpus by the President (Art. VII, Sec. 18) -​ Amend or revoke the decision of the court by the enactment of a new law or by an amendment of the old -​ The power to impeach the President and members of the Supreme Court Give Examples of Checks by the Judiciary -​ As the final arbiter may declare legislative measures or executive acts unconstitutional (Art. VIII, Sec. 1) -​ Determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government. (Art. VIII, Sec. 1) LEGISLATIVE -​ The authority to make laws and to alter or repeal them. Upon assumption to the Presidency, PBabyM promulgated an Executive Order abolishing the Department of Transportation. Atty. Rianne argued that the President is not empowered by the Constitution to abolish the DOT. She argued that since the DOT was created by a special law enacted by the Congress, it is latter that is empowered to abolish the same. Is she correct? Why or why not? -​ Yes, Atty. Rianne is correct. -​ According to Section 1, Article VI, the legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum. -​ Since DOT was created by a special law enacted by the Congress, it is the latter that is empowered to abolish the same. Can the People of the Philippines exercise legislative power? -​ Yes -​ According to Section 1, Article VI, the legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum What is “initiative?” Initiative is an instrument of direct democracy whereby the citizens directly propose and legislate laws. As it is the citizens themselves who legislate the laws, direct legislation through initiative (alng with referendum) is considered as an exercise of original legislative power, as opposed to that of derivative legislative power which has been delegated by the sovereign people to legislative bodies such as the Congress. “Initiative" is the power of the people to propose amendments to the Constitution or to propose and enact legislations through an election called for the purpose. -​ There are three (3) systems of initiative, namely: -​ 1.​ Initiative on the Constitution which refers to a petition proposing amendments to the Constitution; -​ 2.​ Initiative on statutes which refers to a petition proposing to enact a national legislation; and  -​ 3.​ Initiative on local legislation which refers to a petition proposing to enact a regional, provincial, city, municipal, or barangay law, resolution or ordinance. Republic Act No. 6735 (1989) What is “referendum?” Referendum is the power of the electorate to approve or reject a legislation through an election called for the purpose. It may be of two (2) classes, namely: 1.​ 1.​ Referendum on statutes which refers to a petition to approve or reject an act or law, or part thereof, passed by Congress; and 2.​ 2.​ Referendum on local law which refers to a petition to approve or reject a law, resolution or ordinance enacted by regional assemblies and local legislative bodies. Republic Act No. 6735 (1989) REFERENDUM VS PLEBISCITE "Referendum" is the power of the electorate to approve or reject a legislation (national or local) through an election called for the purpose. On the other hand, “plebiscite” is the electoral process by which an initiative on the Constitution is approved or rejected by the people. “UNICAMERAL” AND “BICAMERAL” LEGISLATURE Unicameral legislature refers to the practice of having only one parliamentary or legislative chamber to perform legislative activities or functions like passing a budget, enacting laws, oversee the administration, discussing matters of national or international importance. Bicameral legislature refers to the lawmaking body of a country that has two separate houses, assemblies or chambers to perform legislative functions like enacting laws, passing the budget, etc. Its main objective is to represent people from all the sectors or societies of the country. Is there a limitation on the exercise of legislative powers? -​ Yes. 1.​ Substantive limitations 2.​ Procedural limitation What are the examples of substantive limitations on Legislative Power? Express: -​ Bill of Rights (1987 Constitution, Art. III) -​ On Appropriations [1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Secs. 25 and 29(1&2)] -​ On Taxation (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Secs. 28 and 29, par. 3) -​ On Constitutional appellate jurisdiction of SC (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 30) -​ No law granting a title of royalty or nobility shall be enacted (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 31)Z -​ No specific funds shall be appropriated or paid for use or benefit of any religion, sect, etc., except for priests, etc., assigned to AFP, penal institutions, etc. (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 29 Implied: -​ Prohibition against irrepealable laws -​ Non-delegation of powers Exception to Non-Delegation Doctrine: -​ Delegation to the President [1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 23(2) and Sec. 28(2)] -​ Delegation to the people (1987 Constitution, Art VI, Sec. 32) What are the examples of procedural limitations on Legislative Power? 1. Only one subject, to be stated in the title of the bill [1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 26(1)]. 2. Three (3) readings on separate days; printed copies of the bill in its final form to be distributed to its members 3 days before its passage, except if the President certifies to its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency; upon its last reading, no amendment shall be allowed and the vote thereon shall be taken immediately and the yeas and nays entered into the Journal [1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 2(2)]. 3. Appropriation bills, revenue bills, tariff bills, bills authorizing the increase of public debt, bills of local application and private bills shall originate exclusively in the House of Representatives. (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 24) Senator Rafraf proposed a bill that would increase the seat of the Senator from twenty-four (24) to fifty (50). Senator Arfarf countered and said that the proposal will run contrary to the Constitution. If you are the Senate President, will you support Senator Rafraf’s bill? No, I will not support the Bill. According to Section 2, Article VI, the Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators x x x. The Constitution fixed the number for the Senators at twenty-four. No law can supersede such provision. How are Senators elected? According to Section 2, Article VI, the Senate shall be composed of twenty-four Senators who shall be elected at large by the qualified voters of the Philippines, as may be provided by law. 19.​ What do you mean by at-large? It means that unlike district representatives, Senators are elected nationwide. One senatorial candidate is allegedly addicted to cocaine. To erase the doubts of the public and maintain honest and fair elections, the COMELEC issued Resolution No. 6486 which requires mandatory drug test for Senatorial Candidate. COMELEC argued that pursuant to the Constitution, they are in- charge in all election policies and regulation. Atty. Van-tugged argued that it is unconstitutional because drug testing is not a requirement to become a Senator. Is she correct? -​ Yes, Atty. Van-tugged is correct. -​ Pursuant to Section 3, Article VI, no person shall be a Senator unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, and, on the day of the election, is at least thirty-five years of age, able to read and write, a registered voter, and a resident of the Philippines for not less than two years immediately preceding the day of the election. -​ The qualifications are exclusive. COMELEC Resolution No. 6486 which requires mandatory drug test for Senatorial Candidate, because it imposes an additional qualification for candidates for senators. The Congress cannot enact a law prescribing qualifications for candidates for senator in addition to those laid down by the Constitution. (Social Justice Society v. DDB and PDEA) Senator Rubin won the election. A year after his assumption of office, he was granted an American citizenship. Atty. Mariel sought for the removal of Senator Rubin in the Senate Electoral Tribunal. Senator Rubin argued that the Constitution is clear that any person at the time of the election should be a natural-born Filipino. According to him, when he filed his COC, and at the time that he was elected and assumed office, he was a natural- born Filipino. He just lost his Filipino citizenship after a year. Is Senator Rubin correct? -​ No, Atty. Rubin is not correct. The five (5) requirements under Section 3, Article VI are not only exclusive but are also “continuing.” As long as a Senator seats as a Senator in his entire term, he must possess all these qualifications. Therefore, one incumbent Senator cannot change his citizenship during his tenure. If done so by the incumbent, the same shall be a ground for removal from office. Atty. Mike Ross recently passed the bar at the age of 34. He has been dreaming of becoming the youngest Senator, hence, he filed his COC before the COMELEC. The COMELEC denied her COC on the ground of failure to meet the age requirement. On her part, Atty. Mike Ross said that he will be celebrating her birthday a day before the election. Is the argument of Atty. Mike Ross correct? -​ Yes, the argument is correct. The age qualification is fixed at 35 and must be possessed on the day of the elections, that is, when the polls are opened and the votes are cast, not on the day of filing of COC or any other date thereafter. The 2022 polls have just been concluded. The winning senatorial candidates shall serve for how many years? -​ The term of office of the Senators shall be six years. (Article VI, Section 4) Atty. Lipad won the election on May 9, 2022. He was very eager to serve the country. On May 30, 2022, when the COMELEC proclaimed him as one of the winners, he immediately went to the Senate and participated in the plenary discussion. Senator Drolin instructed the Senate Sgt. at Arms to escort Atty. Lipad outside of the plenary hall, or otherwise he will move to cite the latter for direct contempt. Can Atty. Lipad participate in the plenary in the said date? -​ No. The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election. Angered by the action of Senator Drolin, when Atty. Lipad assumed office, his first bill proposed is to make the assumption of office from June 30 to June 1. Is the proposed bill constitutional? -​ Yes. The term of office of the Senators shall be six years and shall commence, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election. Senator Allen Feeter won his Senatorial bid twice in a row. His pet bill “10K Ayuda para sa lahat ng Pamilya” is yet to be enacted, so he wanted to run again for the third time. Atty. Harvey Specter filed for cancellation of the COC of Senator Jesusa. Can Senator Allen Feeter run for the third time? -​ No, Senator Allen Feeter cannot run for the third consecutive time. Section 4, Article VI (2) provides that “no Senator shall serve for more than two consecutive terms”. Would your answer be the same if on the second term of Senator Allen Feeter he only served for 3 months because had to focus on her family? -​ Yes, my answer will be the same. Section 4, Article VI (2) provides that “x x x. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected. Since he was disqualified to run for more than two consecutive terms, Sen. Allen Feeter waited for 3 years and filed COC again for the Senatorial post. Again, Atty. Harvey Specter filed for cancellation of the COC of Senator Allen Feeter. Can Senator Allen Feeter run for the third time? -​ Yes. What is prohibited by the Constitution is the service for more than two consecutive terms. It is just then clear that when it is not consecutive, it is allowed. -​ There is no clear mention and no case law that states that a Senator who have served two consecutive term may run again for the same office after a full (6) years, or just three (3) years. In practice, the latter is enough. Additionally, the opening of the new Congress becomes the basis of such number of years as it opens anew every three years What composes the House of Representatives? -​ The District Representative, and the Party-list representative. (Section 5, Article VI) How many District Representatives are allowed to be elected? -​ Section 5, Article VI provides that the House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law. How are District Representatives elected? -​ They shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area (Par. 1 Section 5, Article 6) What is the basis of the Congress in increasing the number of seats? -​ Section 5 (3) (4), Article VI, provides: -​ (3)​ Each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact, and adjacent territory. Each city with a population of at least two hundred fifty thousand, or each province, shall have at least one representative. -​ (4)​ Within three years following the return of every census, the Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative districts based on the standards provided in this section. What is the reason behind the requirement in paragraph 3 that each legislative district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact and adjacent territory? Or what is the evil sought to be avoided by this requirement? -​ It sought to prevent “Gerrymandering”, which allows formation of one legislative district out of separate territories for the purpose of favoring a candidate or a party. -​ It is not allowed because the Constitution provides that each district shall comprise, as far as practicable, contiguous, compact and adjacent territory. Congressman Buying is a member of Wonder pets fraternity. His brod s wanted him to propose a bill to add more seats in the current 250 in the Congress. He attached in his proposal a census conducted by PSA establishing the need to increase the seats. The minority floor leader challenged the proposed bill arguing that the Constitution fixed the number of seats at 250, hence cannot be increased. Is the minority floor leader correct? -​ No, the minority floor leader is not correct. Section 5, Article VI provides that the House of Representatives shall be composed of not more than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by law x x x. Supreme Court held in Tobias vs. Abalos that the present limit of 250 members is not absolute. The phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” indicates that composition of Congress may be increased if Congress itself so mandates through a legislative enactment—therefore increase is not unconstitutional. In the proposed bill authored by Congressman Buyinh, he wants the number of seats to be fixed at 300 based on the reapportionment, 10% of which will come from the party-list and 90% will be for the district representatives. Is the proposed bill valid? -​ No, it is not valid. -​ Section 5 (2), Article VI provides that the party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the total number of representatives x x x.The Constitution does not allow the increase or decrease of the said percentage through enactment of a law. APPORTIONMENT Apportionment is the determination of the number of representatives which a State, country, or other subdivision may send to a legislative body. It is the allocation of seats in a legislative body in proportion to the population; the drawing of voting district lines so as to equalize population and voting power. REAPPORTIONMENT Pursuant to paragraph 4, Section 5, Article 6: “within three years following the return of every census, the Congress shall make a reapportionment of legislative districts based on the standards provided in this section.” Reapportionment is the realignment or change in legislative districts brought about by change in legislative districts brought about by changes in population and mandated by the constitutional requirement of equality of representation. Qualifications for Party-list Representatives? Republic Act No. 7941, Section 9 provides for the following qualifications for Party-List representatives: 1.​ Natural-born citizen of the Philippines 2.​ At least 25 years of age on the day of elections 3.​ Able to read and write 4.​ Registered voter 5.​ Resident of the Philippines for not less than 1 year immediately preceding the day of election 6.​ A bona fide member of the party or organization which he seeks to represent for at least 90 days preceding the day of election For nominees of the youth sector: 1.​ Must be at least 25, but not more than 30 on the day of election. The Samahan ng mga Gwapong Magsasaka filed a protest before the COMELEC assailing the qualification of League of Professional Gamers. According to their lawyer, Atty. Analyst Quitting, the Constitution only allows marginalized sector to run for the party-list post. She argued that the League of Professional Gamers does not belong to the marginalized since the members are known to be rich and/or with stable livelihood and income. Is she correct? No, she is not correct. Section 5 (2), Article VI provides: -​ The party-list representatives shall constitute twenty per centum of the total number of representatives including those under the party list. For three consecutive terms after the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector. Atong Paglaum, Inc. v. COMELEC Section 5(2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution mandates that, during the first three consecutive terms of Congress after the ratification of the 1987 Constitution, "one-half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from the labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, youth, and such other sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector." This provision clearly shows again that the party-list system is not exclusively for sectoral parties for two obvious reasons. First, the other one-half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives would naturally be open to non- sectoral party-list representatives, clearly negating the idea that the party-list system is exclusively for sectoral parties representing the "marginalized and underrepresented." Second, the reservation of one-half of the party-list seats to sectoral parties applies only for the first "three consecutive terms after the ratification of this Constitution," clearly making the party-list system fully open after the end of the first three congressional terms. This means that, after this period, there will be no seats reserved for any class or type of party that qualifies under the three groups constituting the party-list system. Hence, the clear intent, express wording, and party-list structure ordained in Section 5(1) and (2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution cannot be disputed: the party-list system is not for sectoral parties only, but also for non-sectoral parties. THREE (3) KINDS OF PARTY-LIST Section 5. (1) x x x shall be elected through a party-list system of registered national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations. 1987 50 percent – sectoral groups 50 percent – open for all 1997 onwards 100 percent - open for all Dapat walang monopolyo ng mga sectoral How many seats in Congress does a party-list may acquire according to the votes percentage?  (Number of seats that is available to legislative districts/ 0.8) x 0.20 = No. of seats available for the party-list.) If 220 is the available seats to legislative district, then 55 seats should be available for the party-list. How many seats in Congress does a party-list may acquire according to the votes percentage? (Number of seats that is available to legislative districts/ 0.8) x 0.20 = No. of seats available for the party-list.) If 220 is the available seats to legislative district, then 55 seats should be available for the party-list. How do you now get the 55 seats? -​ Sec. 11 of RA 7941 BANAT v. COMELEC 1.​ The parties, organizations, and coalitions shall be ranked from the highest to the lowest based on the number of votes they garnered during the elections. 2.​ The parties, organizations, and coalitions receiving at least 2% of the total votes cast for the party-list system shall be entitled to one guaranteed seat each. 3.​ Those garnering sufficient number of votes, according to the ranking in paragraph 1, shall be entitled to additional seats in proportion to their total number of votes until all the additional seats are allocated. 4.​ Each party, organization, or coalition shall be entitled to not more than 3 seats. NOTE: In computing the additional seats, the guaranteed seats shall no longer be included because they have already been allocated at one seat each to every two-percenter. Thus, the remaining available seats for allocation as “additional seats” are the maximum seats reserved under the party-list system less the guaranteed seats. Fractional seats are disregarded in the absence of a provision in RA 7941 allowing for a rounding off of fractional seats. (BANAT v. COMELEC, Ibid.) 2% threshold as regards the allocation of additional seats is not valid anymore. The Court strikes down the 2% threshold only in relation to the distribution of the additional seats as found in the 2nd clause of Sec. 11(b) of RA 7941. The 2% threshold presents an unwarranted obstacle to the full implementation of Sec. 5(2), Art. VI of the Constitution and prevents the attainment of the “broadest possible representation of party, sectoral or group interests in the House of Representatives.” (BANAT v. COMELEC, Ibid.) NOTE: The 2% threshold is constitutional only insofar as the determination of the guaranteed seat is concerned. Congresswoman Seynab Tolentino won a congressional seat in 2013-2016, 2016-2019, 2019-2022. She plans to run again. Is she constitutionally allowed? -​ No, she is not allowed. Pursuant to SECTION 7, ARTICLE 6, “the Members of the House of Representatives shall be elected for a term of three years which shall begin, unless otherwise provided by law, at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following their election. -​ No member of the House of Representatives shall serve for more than three consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected. Senator Ganda is in a 10-year relationship with her boyfriend. She found out that the latter was having an illicit affair with her bestfriend. Aggrieved, Senator Ganda forced her boyfriend to eat Pancit Canton non-stop for seven (7) days. Her boyfriend then died of food poisoning. Senator Ganda was charged and convicted of Homicide with penalty of reclusion temporal or a duration of 12 years and 1 Senator Ganda refused to be arrested citing immunity from suit. Is she correct? -​ No, she is not correct. SECTION 11, Article 6 provides that, “A Senator or Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session. In this case, the penalty imposed against Senator Kristan is more than six (6) years. Hence, she cannot avail the immunity. Senator Sheldon invited Secretary Leonard in one Committee hearing. Due to the series of unfortunate events on his way to the Senate, Senator Sheldon arrived in a very bad mood. During the hearing, he uttered masasamang words against Sec. Leonard. Aggrieved, Sec. Leonard filed a Slander case against Senator Sheldon. Will the case prosper? -​ No, the case will not prosper. -​ SECTION 11, Article 6 provides that, x x x. "No member shall be questioned or held liable in any forum other than his respective Congressional body for any debate or speech in Congress or in any committee thereof." In this case, Sen. Sheldon can avail the privilege of speech and debate since he uttered the slanderous words during the Senate Committee hearing. What is the proper remedy for Sec. Sheldon? -​ Sec. Leonard may file a complaint to the ethics committee of the Senate. As part of the disciplinary power of Congress, each house may punish its members for disorderly behavior and, with concurrence of 2/3 of all its members, suspend, for not more than 60 days, or expel a member. (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 16, par. 3) Senator Jared discovered that there is massive red-tagging of lawyers and journalist by the Anti-Terror Council. He then passed a Resolution to inquire on the ATC functions and processes for possible amendment of law, or enactment of a new law. Atty. Luke, as the Head of ATC, objected when he was invited to attend arguing that the Senate is not allowed to summon her since it is not a judicial body neither a quasi-judicial body. Is the argument correct? -​ No, the argument is not correct. Pursuant to Section 21, “The Senate or the House of Representatives or any of its respective committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation in accordance with its duly published rules of procedure. The rights of persons appearing in, or affected by, such inquiries shall be respected.”