[CONSTI] Judicial Review

Which constitutional provision is the basis for traditional judicial review

Sec. 4(2), Art. VIII: "All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty […]”

Which constitutional provision is the basis for the expanded certiorari jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

Second half of Sec. 1, Art. VIII: “And to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion […]”

When a law is unconstitutional, it is ___ (cite legal basis)

Void, per Marbury v. Madison

What are the 4 requisites of judicial review

1. Actual case or controversy

2. Legal standing (locus standi)

3. Raised at the earliest opportunity

4. Constitutionality as the lis mota (unavoidable main issue)

What does it mean for there to be an actual case or controversy

Actual conflict between legally demandable and enforceable rights

What are the two sub-requisites related to the “actual case or controversy” requisite

• Moot and academic

• Ripeness for adjudication

What does the Court have no authority over, in terms of the actual case or controversy requirement

• No authority to

  • Pass upon issues of constitutionality through advisory opinions

  • Resolve hypothetical constitutional problems

  • Resolve friendly suits collusively arranged between parties without real adverse interests

When does a case become moot

When a case ceases to present a justiciable controversy because of supervening events

What are the exceptions to the moot and academic requisite

• When there is a grave violation of the Constitution

• When the situation is of exception character; paramount public interest

• Requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, bar, and public

• Case is capable of repetition yet evading review

What if one of the issues in a case became moot and academic, but the rest didn’t… can you still decide on the merits of the rest of the issues?

What is your legal basis?

Yes, per Mendoza v. Pilipinas Shell

What is the legal basis for the two-fold aspect of the “ripeness for adjudication” sub-requisite?

De Borja v. PUMALU-MV

What is the two-fold aspect of the “ripeness for adjudication” requisite?

• Fitness for judicial decision

• Hardship to the parties entailed by withholding court consideration

What are the requirements for “fitness for judicial decision”?

• Issue should be purely legal

• Regulation subject to the case is a final agency action

What is the requirement for the “hardship to the parties entailed” aspect of ripeness?

That the effects of the regulation be felt in a concrete way

In administrative acts, how does ripeness manifest itself?

Compliance with the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies

What are the elements of locus standi

• Petitioner must have suffered injury (legal, economic, environmental)

• Injury must be traceable to the governmental act being challenged

• Injury must be redressable by the remedy being sought

(Southern Hemisphere v. ATC)

What is your legal basis for the elements of locus standi

Southern Hemisphere v. ATC

Define public suits

Entire class of suits involving public interest

If you file a public suit, is it necessary for the person filing it to attest very direct or personal injury?

No, basta violation of public right

What are the different capacities you can have in filing a public suit

• Legislator

• Taxpayer

• Concerned citizen

• Voter

As a legislator, can you only sue as an individual member of Congress?

No, you can also sue on behalf of all of Congress

When can a public suit as legislator prosper?

When the official action complained of infringes their prerogatives as legislators

When can a taxpayer suit prosper?

Elements, per Pascual v. Secretary of Public Works and Tan v. Macapagal

• Illegal disbursement or misapplication of public funds by a public officer

• Expenditure involves a public right that must be held

• Petitioner is a taxpayer with sufficient interest in preventing the unlawful expenditure

Does the Court have to entertain every taxpayer suit?

No, it has the discretion to decide whether or not to entertain one — even if all elements are met

When can you file a public suit as a concerned citizen

In cases involving public rights or the enforcement of a public duty

In filing private suits to the Supreme Court, you have to be a…

Real party in interest

What does it mean to be a real party in interest

To have a valid cause of action

What are determinants of transcendental importance

• Character of the funds or assets involved in the case

• Presence of a clear case of disregard of a constitutional or statutory prohibition by the public agency or instrumentality

• Lack of any other party with a more direct and specific interest in raising the questions

Define political questions (with legal basis)

• Questions which,

  • Under the Constitution

• Are to be decided

  • By the people in their sovereign capacity

  • Or in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislative or executive branch

(Tanada v. Cuenco)

Define grave abuse of discretion

• Capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment

• Equivalent to a lack of jurisdiction

• Patent and gross as to amount to

  • An evasion of positive duty

  • OR a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law

• Power is exercised “arbitrarily and despotically

(Sinon v. Civil Service Commission)

What are the requisites for issuing a writ of certiorari and/or prohibition under Rule 65

• Existence of an act or omission that constitutes grave abuse of discretion

• No appeal OR no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy

What is the Angara model?

• Direct recourse to the Supreme Court only if the issues involved are pure questions of law that fall within its original jurisdiction

• Judicial power includes the power to determine if ACTS (not just enactments) by other instrumentalities fall within the constitutionally prescribed boundaries of that body

What was transcendental importance only used for originally?

To relax rules on legal standing, but it’s been expanded to become an independent justification for direct recourse to the Supreme Court

What are exceptions to the doctrine of hierarchy of courts

• Genuine issues of constitutionality that must be addressed immediately

• Issues involved are of transcendental importance

• Cases of first impression

• Constitutional issues raised are better decided byt he Court

• Exigencies in certain situations

• Petition reviews the acts of a constitutional organ

• No other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy

• Questions dictate dby public welfare, public policy, interest of justice

Does the Supreme Court have original jurisdiction over petitions for declaratory relief?

No

What is the three important criteria for third-party suits?

What is your legal basis

• Litigant must have suffered an ‘injury-in-fact,’ thus giving him a ‘sufficient interest’ in the outcome

• Litigant must have a close relation to the third party

• There must be some hindrance to the third party’s ability to protect their interests

(White Light Corp v. City of Manila)

To institute a third-party suit, associations must…

What is your legal basis

• establish who thier members are

• establish that these members have duly authorized the association to represent them or sue on their behalf

• Its members were hindered from asserting their own interests personally

(Bayyo Association, Inc v. Tugade)

Traditionally, when can constitutionality issues be raised in criminal cases? What is your legal basis

At any time (People v. Vera)

Why is it ok to raise the issues on constitutionality any time in criminal cases

Because there’s no opportunity, really, at the start, since Courts don’t always require memorandums from the parties

Nowadays, there is an opportunity to raise the constiutionality earlier — how?

Filing a motion to quash, per Buella v. People

What are the two tests involved in the “raised at earliest opportunity” requisite?

• Horizontal test

• Vertical test

What is the horizontal test in “raised at earliest opportunity” requisites

Petitioner should have questioned the constitutionality of the issue if they were involved in an earlier case relating to the same issue

What is the vertical test in “raised at earliest opportunity” requisite

whether or not the petitioner questioned the constitutionality at the earliest opportunity in the timeline of proceedings of the same case

What is your legal basis for the horizontal and vertical tests of the “raised at earliest opportunity” requisite?

ANGKLA v. COMELEC

Why does the court want to avoid issues of constitutionality unless absolutely necessary?

Presumption of legality (Buella v. People)

What is the difference between petitions for declaratory relief and advisory opinions

They are both preemptive actions. However, petitions for declaratory relief are legally binding and based on an actual case where rights of a specific person need to be clarified

How do you invoke the expanded certiorari jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?

Through a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65

If you invoke the Supreme Court’s expanded certiorari jurisdiction, is it an original action or a mode of appeal

Original action

Is the Court’s expanded certiorari jurisdiction a direct recourse to the SC?

It can be, but not always

When can you say a body is exercising quasi-judicial agencies

What is your legal basis

• Receives evidence

• Determines facts

• Resolves controversies

(AMCOW v. GAMCO)

What is the Latin maxim for interpreting the Constitution as a whole

Ut magis valeat quam pereat

What is the Latin maxim for when if a word is vague, you have to look at the surrounding words and context

Noscitur a sociis

What are the four factors determining whether or not stare decisis should be followed

• Workability: W/N the rule has proved to be intolerable, defying practical workability

  • Is it easy to apply in Court?

• Reliance: W/N the rule is subject to a kind of reliance that would lead to a special hardship to the consequences of overruling and add inequity to the cost of repudiation

  • Have people come to depend/rely on the rule so much that changing it would drastically alter their lives

• Legal Developments: W/N related principles of law have developed such that the old rule is just an abandoned doctrine

• Changes in fact: W/N facts have so changed or been come to be seen differently

What is the enrolled bill rule?

What is your legal basis

Once a bill passes a legislative body and is signed into law, the courts assume that all rules of procedure in the enactment process were properly followed

Mabanag v. Lopez Vito

Are people’s organizations automatically given legal standing? Considering that there are constitutional provisions saying that they should be included in decision-making

Legal basis

No

Kilosbayan v. Morato