POLITICAL LAW

DOCTRINES AND PRINCIPLES DEFINITION

In Political Law: It is an act done by the political
departments of the government and not subject to
judicial review.
In International Law: It means that every sovereign
Act of State Doctrine
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.
The waters, around between and connecting
different islands of the Archipelago, regardless of
their breadth or dimensions, form part of the
internal waters of the Philippines. (Article I, 2nd
Sentence). Integration of a group of islands to the
sea and their oneness so that together they can
constitute one unit, one country, and one state. An
imaginary single baseline is drawn around the
Archipelagic Doctrine
islands by joining appropriate points of the
outermost islands of the archipelago with straight
lines and all islands and waters enclosed within the
baseline form part of the territory.
Purpose:
[1] Territorial Integrity,
[2] National Security,
[3] Economic Reasons.
Prohibition against transfer of appropriations,
however the following may, by law, be authorized to
augment any item in the general appropriations
law for their respective offices from
savings in other items of their respective
Augmentation appropriations:
1. President
2. Senate President
3. Speaker of the HoR
4. Chief Justice
5. Heads of Constitutional Commissions.
The doctrine where the Philippines adheres to
Auto-limitation principles of international law as a limitation to the
exercise of its sovereignty.
Claim of executive privilege is subject to balancing
against other interest. In other words, confidentiality
in executive privilege is not absolutely protected by
the Constitution. Neither the doctrine of separation
Balancing of Interest of powers, nor the need for confidentiality of high-
level communications, without more, can sustain an
absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of
immunity from judicial process under all
circumstances. A claim of executive privilege does
 not guard against a possible disclosure of a crime or
wrongdoing.
Under this theory the “wall of separation” is meant
to protect the church from the State. It believes that
with respect to governmental actions,
Benevolent Neutrality Theory accommodation of religion may be allowed, not to
promote the government’s
favored form of religion, but to allow individuals and
groups to exercise their religion without hindrance.
Instances when powers are not confined exclusively
Blending of Powers within one department but are assigned to or shared
by several departments.
This allows one department to resist encroachments
upon its prerogative or to rectify mistakes or
excesses committed by the other departments. The
first and safest criterion to determine whether a
given power has been validly exercised by a
particular department is whether or not the power
has been constitutionally conferred upon the
Checks and Balances
department claiming its exercise—since the
conferment is usually done expressly. However, even
in the absence of express conferment, the exercise of
the power may be justified under the doctrine of
necessary implication. The grant of express power
carried with it all other powers that may be
reasonably inferred from it.
The civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over
Civilian Supremacy
the military.
Superior officer is liable for acts of subordinate
when:
1. he negligently or willfully employs or retains unfit
or incompetent subordinates;
2. he negligently or willfully fails to require
subordinate to conform to prescribed regulations;
Command Responsibility
3. he negligently or carelessly oversees business of
office as to furnish subordinate an opportunity for
default;
4. he directed or authorized or cooperated in the
wrong;
5. law makes himself expressly liable.
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
Constitutional Supremacy Doctrine for private purposes, is null and void and without
any force or effect. Thus, since the Constitution is
the fundamental, paramount and supreme law of the
nation, it is deemed written in every statute and
contract.
A person having more than one nationality shall be
Effective Nationality
treated as if he had only one—either the nationality
 of the country in which he is habitually and
principally resident or the nationality of the country
with which, in the circumstances, he appears to be
most closely connected (Frivaldo vs. Comelec)
Discovery alone is not enough. Mere discovery gives
only an inchoate right to the discoverer. For title to
Effective Occupation finally vest, discovery must be followed by effective
occupation in a reasonable time and attestation of
the same.
The enrolled bill is conclusive upon the courts not
only as regards the provisions thereof but also its
Enrolled Bill
due enactment in observance of the principle of
separation of powers.
Dealing or not dealing with the government
established through a political upheaval is not a
Estrada Doctrine
judgment on the legitimacy of the said government
(Mexican Minister Genaro Estrada).
In the Philippine setting, it is the immunity from suit
of the incumbent President. It was ruled that
Executive Immunity “incumbent Presidents are immune from suit or from
being brought to court during the period of their
incumbency and tenure” but not beyond.
The ECD basically provides that the normal
procedures and rules of court in the admissibility of
evidence may be disregarded in exigent
Exigent Circumstances Doctrine
circumstances like when there is a coup d’etat. The
rationale is the same as with PSC, that is to protect
public safety or national security.
Fair commentaries on matters of public interest are
privileged and constitute a valid defense in an action
for libel or slander. It means that while in general
every discreditable imputation publicly made is
deemed false, because every man is presumed
innocent until his guilt is judicially proved, and every
false imputation is deemed malicious, nevertheless,
when the discreditable imputation is directed against
Fair Comment a public person in his public capacity, it is not
necessarily actionable. In order that such
discreditable imputation to a public official may be
actionable, it must either be a false allegation of fact
or a comment based on a false supposition. If the
comment is an expression of opinion, based on
established facts, it is immaterial that the opinion
happens to be mistaken, as long as it might
reasonably inferred from the facts.
It was held that despite the fact that “our present
Constitution enshrines free enterprise as a policy”, it
nevertheless reserves to the Government the power
Free Enterprise
to intervene whenever necessary to promote the
general welfare. Free enterprise does not call for
removal of ‘protective regulations’. It must be clearly
 explained and proven by competent evidence just
exactly how such protective regulation would result
in the restraint of trade.
Grotius Doctrine of Immemorial Speaks of uninterrupted possession going beyond
Prescription memory.
Requisites:
a. Pursuit commences from internal waters,
territorial sea or contiguous zone of pursuing state.
b. Continuous and unabated.
Hot Pursuit Doctrine
c. Conducted by warship, military aircraft or
government ships, authorized for the purpose.
d. Ceases as soon as the ship being pursued enters
the territorial sea of its own, or of a third state.
The exercise of the right of suffrage and
Implied Election participation in election exercise constitute a
positive act of election of Philippine citizenship.
A provision that is constitutionally inappropriate for
an appropriation bill may be singled out for veto
even if it is not an appropriation or revenue “item.”
Reason for the Doctrine:
Inappropriate Provision
The intent behind the doctrine is to prevent the
legislature from forcing the government to veto an
entire appropriation law thereby paralyzing
government.
The rules of international law form part of the law of
the land and no legislative action is required to make
them applicable to a country. The Philippines follows
this doctrine, because Section 2 Article II of the
constitution states that the Philippines adopts the
Incorporation Doctrine
generally accepted principles of international law as
part of the law of the land. However, the doctrine
dictates that rules of international law are given
equal standing with, and are not superior to, national
legislative enactments.
An individual may be compelled to retain his original
nationality although he has already renounced it
Indelible Allegiance
under the laws of another state whose nationality he
has acquired.
The Supreme Court in granting the petition ruled
that the children had the legal standing to file the
case based on the concept of “intergenerational
responsibility.” Their right to a healthy environment
carried with it an obligation to preserve that
Inter-generational Responsibility environment for the succeeding generations. In this,
the Court recognized legal standing to sue on behalf
of future generations. Also, the Court said, the law
on non-impairment of contracts must give way to the
exercise of the police power of the state in the
interest of public welfare.
Judicial power is the authority to settle justiciable
Judicial Power
controversies or disputes involving rights that are
 enforceable and demandable before the courts of
justice or the redress of wrongs for violations of such
rights. Vested in the Supreme Court and such lower
courts as may be established by law. Since the courts
are given ‘judicial power’ and nothing more, courts
may neither attempt to assume or be compelled to
perform non-judicial functions. They may not be
charged with administrative functions except when
reasonably incidental to the fulfillment of their
duties.
The power of the judiciary to annul the acts of either
the legislative or the executive branches of
Judicial Supremacy
government, or of both, when not conformable to the
fundamental law.
The State is acting in its sovereign governmental
Jure Imperii
capacity.
The State entered into a contract in its commercial or
Jure Gestionis proprietary capacity. The State descended to the
level of a private entity.
Implies a given right, legally demandable and
enforceable, an act or omission that violates such
Justiciable Question
right, and a remedy granted and sanctioned by law
for said breach of right.
No member shall be questioned or held liable in any
forum other than his/her respective Congressional
Legislative Privilege
body for any debate or speech in Congress or in any
committee thereof.
In states where the constitution is the highest law of
the land, both statutes and treaties may be
Lex Posterior Derogate Priori
invalidated if they are in conflict with the
constitution.
Where there is a bridge over a boundary river, the
Middle of the Bridge Doctrine
boundary line is the middle or center of the bridge.
Rights available during custodial investigation or in-
custody interrogation of an accused person, which
has been defined as any questioning initiated by law
enforcement officers after a person has been taken
into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of
action in any significant way.
Miranda Doctrine The rule begins to operate as soon as the
investigation ceases to be a general inquiry into an
unsolved crime and direction is then aimed upon a
particular suspect who has been taken into custody
and to whom the police would then direct
interrogatory questions which tend to elicit
incriminating statements.
Grant of an express power carries with it all other
Necessary Implication
powers that may be reasonably inferred from it.
When does a law impair the obligation of contracts:
Non-impairment of Contracts Clause 1) If it changes the terms and conditions of a legal
contract either as to the time or mode of
 performance.
2) If it imposes new conditions or dispenses with
those expressed.
3) If it authorizes for its satisfaction something
different from that provided in its terms.
A mere change in PROCEDURAL REMEDIES which
does not change the substance of the contract, and
which still leaves an efficacious remedy for
enforcement does NOT impair the obligation of
contracts.
A valid exercise of police power is superior to
obligation of contracts.
A public officer who under the Constitution is
required to be a member of the Philippine Bar as a
qualification for the office held by him cannot be
charged with disbarment during his incumbency. He
cannot be charged criminally before the
Sandiganbayan, or are other court, with any offense
which carries with it the penalty of removal from
Official Immunity from Liabilities
office. Members of the Supreme Court are removed
only by impeachment. They are not entitled to
immunity from liability. They must first be removed,
via the constitutional route of impeachment, and
then only may he be held liable either criminally or
administratively (including disbarment), for any
wrong.
The doctrine of operative fact, as an exception to the
general rule, only applies as a matter of equity and
fair play. It nullifies the effects of an
unconstitutional law by recognizing that the
existence of a statute prior to a determination of
unconstitutionality is an operative fact and may have
consequences which cannot always be ignored. The
past cannot always be erased by a new judicial
Operative Fact
declaration.
The doctrine is applicable when a declaration of
unconstitutionality will impose an undue burden on
those who have relied on the invalid law. Thus, it
was applied to a criminal case when a declaration of
unconstitutionality would put the accused in double
jeopardy or would put in limbo the acts done by a
municipality in reliance upon a law creating it.
Even though the government’s purposes are
legitimate and substantial, they cannot be pursued by
Overbreadth Doctrine means that broadly stiffle fundamental personal
liberties, when the end can be more narrowly
achieved.
Treaties must be observed in good faith. If necessary,
the State concerned must even modify its national
Pacta Sunt Servanda
legislation and constitution to make them conform to
the treaty to avoid international embarrassment.
 The government as guardian of the rights of the
Parens Patriae people may initiate legal actions for and in behalf of
particular individual.
In public international law, the principle that one
sovereign power cannot exercise jurisdiction over
Soverign Equality of States (Par In
another sovereign power. It is the basis of the act of
Parem Non Habet Imperium)
state doctrine and sovereign immunity.
Unduly vex the peace of nation.
The objects within the sight of an officer who has a
right to be in a position to have that view are subject
to seizure and may be presented as evidence (open to
Plain View Doctrine
the eye and hand). Finds application only when the
incriminating nature of the object is in the “plain
view” of the police officer.
Any confession or admission obtained in violation of
this section shall be inadmissible in evidence against
Poisonous Tree Doctrine him (the accused). Therefore, any evidence obtained
by virtue of an illegally obtained confession is also
inadmissible, being the fruit of a poisonous tree.
One the resolution of which has been vested by the
Constitution exclusively in either the people, in the
exercise of their sovereign capacity, or in which full
discretionary authority has been delegated to a co-
equal branch of the Government. Thus, while courts
Political Question
can determine questions of legality with respect to
governmental action, they cannot review government
policy and the wisdom thereof, for these questions
have been vested by the Constitution in the Executive
and Legislative Departments.
Plebiscite may be held on the same day as regular
election, provided the people are sufficiently
informed of the amendments to be voted upon, to
conscientiously deliberate thereon, to express their
will in a genuine manner. Submission of piece-meal
Proper Submission amendments is unconstitutional. All the amendments
must be submitted for ratification at one plebiscite
only. The people have to be given a proper frame of
reference in arriving at their decision. They have no
idea yet of what the rest of the amended constitution
would be.
This is about the Symbolic function of the court. It
means that the court would not decide on matters
which are considered political questions. This focus
on the necessity of resolving Judicial Review.
Purposeful Hesitation Furthermore, in questions of constitutionality,
Supreme Court will not rule right away because the
Supreme Court assumes that the Law passed the two
departments already, thus, it went through process
of determining its constitutionality
Acts of the Secretaries of Executive departments
Qualified Political Agency/Alter-ego
when performed and promulgated in the regular
 course of business or unless disapproved or
presumptively the acts of the Chief Executive.
A contracting state’s obligations under a treaty
terminates when a vital or fundamental change or
Rebus Sic Stantibus circumstance occurs, thus allowing a state to
unilaterally withdraw from a treaty, because of the
disappearance of the foundation upon which it rests.
All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals,
coal, petroleum and other minerals oils, all forces of
potential energy, fisheries, forests, or timber,
Regalian Doctrine wildlife, flora, and fauna and natural resources
belong to the State. With the exception of
agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall
not be alienated. (Sec. 2 Art XII)
It's founded on the principle that a final judgment of
a competent court is conclusive and final unless new
material evidence becomes available. In other words,
litigating parties are not allowed to raise the same
issue in future courts.
Res Judicata 1. The former judgment must be final;
2. It must have been rendered by a court having
jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties;
3. It must be a judgment on the merits; and
4. There must be identity of parties, subject matter
and cause of action.
When a State enters into a contract, it does not
follow that there is an implied consent to sue. It
must take into account whether the state entered in
Restrictive State Immunity
jus imperii (sovereign acts) where suit will not lie
but not where jus gestionis (proprietary acts) is
involved.
1. This determines the point at which courts may
review administrative action.
2. Application:
[a] when the interest of the plaintiff is subjected to
or imminently threatened with substantial injury.
Ripeness for Review Doctrine [b] if the statute is self-executory.
[c] when a party is immediately confronted with the
problem of complying or violating a statute and there
is a risk of criminal penalties.
[d] when plaintiff is harmed by the vagueness of the
statute.
Expressed in sec. 6, Art II of the Constitution which
states that “The separation of Church and State shall
Separation of Church and State be inviolable” and reinforced by the Non-
establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause
contained in sec. 5, Art. III of the Bill of Rights.
This principle operated as an implicit limitation on
legislative powers as on the two other powers. In
Separation of Powers
essence, separation of powers means the legislation
belongs to Congress, execution to the executive,
 settlement of legal controversies to the judiciary.
Each is prevented from invading the domain of the
others.
For each House of Congress to pass a bill, only the
Shifting Majority votes of the majority of those present in the session,
there being a quorum, is required.
The State cannot be sued without its consent.
The State may not be sued without its consent. (Sec
State Immunity 3, Art XVI) There can be no legal right as against the
authority that makes the laws on which the right
depends.
Private property is supposed to be held by the
Stewardship Doctrine individual only as a trustee for the people in general,
who are its real owners.
Precludes recognition of any government established
Stimson Doctrine
as a result of external aggression.
Power of administrative agency to promulgate rules
Subordinate Legislation Doctrine and regulations on matters of their own
specialization.
Prosecution for another offense if subsequent
development changes the character of the first
indictment under which he may have already been
charged or convicted. Conviction of accused shall not
bar another prosecution for an offense which
necessarily includes the offense originally charged
when:
Supervening Event
1. Graver offense developed due to supervening facts
arising from the same act or omission;
2. Facts constituting graver offense arose or
discovered only after filing of former complaint or
information; and
3. Plea of guilty to lesser offense was made without
the consent of prosecutor or offended party.
The importance of taxation is due to the unavoidable
obligation of the government to protect the people
and extend them benefits in the form of public
Symbiotic Relation Doctrine projects and services, and in return, the citizens have
the reciprocal duty of sharing the expenses to be
incurred in carrying such obligation through the
payment of taxes.
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
Transformation
body and so transformed into municipal law. Only
when so transformed will they become binding upon
the State as part of its municipal law.
For boundary rivers, in the absence of an agreement
Thalweg Doctrine between the riparian states, the boundary line is laid
on the middle of the main navigable channel.
The constitutionality of a statute cannot, in every
Theory of Relative Constitutionality
instance, be determined by a mere comparison of its
 provisions with applicable provisions of the
Constitution, since the statute may be
constitutionally valid as applied to one set of facts
and invalid in its application to another. A statute
valid at one time may become void at another time
because of altered circumstances. Thus, if a statute
in its practical operation becomes arbitrary or
confiscatory, its validity, even though affirmed by a
former adjudication, is open to inquiry and
investigation in the light of changed conditions.
Recognition shall not be extended to any government
established by revolution or internal violence until
Wilson Doctrine
the freely elected representatives of the people have
organized a constitutional government.
Precludes recognition of government established by
revolution, civil war, coup d’etat or other forms of
internal violence until freely elected representatives
Wilson/Tobar Doctrine
of the people have organized a constitutional
government (US President Woodrow Wilson and
Ecuadorian FM).
Is that a crime charged includes crime proved,
convict of crime proved. Also applies when crime
Variance Doctrine
proved includes crime charged, convict of crime
charged.

Freedom of Speech
Void-For-Vagueness Doctrine An act is vague when it lacks
comprehensible standards that men of
common intelligence must necessarily guess
at its common meaning and differ as to its
application.

Comparison with Overbreadth Doctrine

The Overbreadth Doctrine decrees that "a
governmental purpose may not be achieved
by means which sweep unnecessarily
broadly and thereby invade the area of
protected freedoms." [Southern Hemisphere,
supra]

General rule: Void-for-vagueness and

overbreadth are inapplicable to penal
statutes. (Rationale: statutes have a general
in terrorem effect, which is to discourage
citizens from committing the prohibited
acts.)

Exception: Said doctrines apply to penal

statutes when
 (1) The statute is challenged as applied; or


(2) The statute involves free speech
(Rationale: Statute may be facially
challenged in order to counter the “chilling
effect” of the same.)
Facial Challenge A challenge to a statute in court, in which
the plaintiff alleges that the legislation is
always, and under all circumstances,
unconstitutional, and therefore void.

NOTE: Facial challenge to a statute is

allowed only when it operates in the area of
freedom of expression. Invalidation of the
statute on its face, rather than as applied, is
permitted in the interest of preventing a
chilling effect on freedom of expression.
(Separate opinion of Justice Mendoza in
Cruz v. Secretary of Environment and
Natural Resources, GR. 135385, Dec. 6,
2000)
Captive-Audience Doctrine When a listener cannot, as a practical
matter, escape from intrusive speech, the
speech can be restricted. It recognizes that a
listener has a right not to be exposed to an
unwanted message in circumstances in
which the communication cannot be
avoided. A regulation based on the captive-
audience doctrine is in the guise of
censorship, which undertakes selectively to
shield the public from some kinds of speech
on the ground that they are more offensive
than others.

Such selective restrictions have been upheld

only when the speaker intrudes on the
privacy of the home or the degree of
captivity makes it either impossible or
impractical for the unwilling viewer or
auditor to avoid exposure. Thus, a
government regulation based on the captive-
audience doctrine may not be justified if the
supposed “captive audience” may avoid
exposure to the otherwise intrusive speech.
Dangerous Tendency Doctrine Limitations on speech are permissible once a
rational connection has been established
between the speech restrained and the
danger contemplated.
Freedom of Expression
Doctrine of Fair Comment General Rule: Every discreditable public
imputation is false because every man is
 presumed innocent, thus, every false
imputation is deemed malicious, hence,
actionable.

XPN: When the discreditable imputation is

directed against a public person in his public
capacity, such is not necessarily actionable.

NOTE: For it to be actionable, it must be

shown that either there is a false allegation
of fact or comment based on a false
supposition.

XPN to the XPN: If the comment is an

expression of opinion, based on established
facts; it is immaterial whether the opinion
happens to be mistaken, as long as it might
reasonably be inferred from facts. (Borjal v.
CA, G.R. No. 126466, Jan. 14, 1999)

Freedom of Religion
Benevolent Neutrality Doctrine It protects religious realities, tradition, and
established practice with a flexible reading
of the principle of separation of church and
state
Doctrine of Accommodation It allows the government to take religion
into account when creating government
policies to allow people to exercise their
religion without hindrance. The effect they
want to achieve is to remove a burden on
one’s exercise. The government may take
religion into account to exempt, when
possible, from generally applicable
governmental regulation individuals whose
religious beliefs and practices would be
infringed, or to crate without state
involvement, an atmosphere in which
voluntary religious exercise may flourish.
Valid Warrantless Search
Plain View Doctrine Things seized are within plain view of a
searching party.

An object is in “plain view” if the object

itself is plainly exposed to sight. Where the
seized object is inside a closed package, the
object is not in plain view and, therefore,
cannot be seized without a warrant.
However, if the package proclaims its
 contents, whether by its distinctive
configuration, its transparency, or if its
contents are obvious to an observer, then
the content are in plain view, and may be
seized.
Requisites:
(1) Prior valid intrusion based on valid
warrantless arrest in which the police are
legally present in the pursuit of their official
duties;
(2) Evidence was inadvertently
discovered by the police who had the right
to be where they are;
(3) Evidence must be immediately
apparent; and
(4) “Plain view” justified mere seizure of
evidence without further search [People v.
Aruta]
Rights of the Suspect
Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine Once the primary source (the tree) is shown
to have been unlawfully obtained, any
secondary or derivative evidence (the fruit)
derived from it is also inadmissible.

NOTE: The rule is based on the principle

that evidence illegally obtained by the State
should not be used to gain other evidence,
because the originally illegally obtained
evidence taints all evidence subsequently
obtained.
Variance Doctrine In spite of the difference between the crime
that was charged and that which was
eventually proved, the accused may still be
convicted of whatever offense that was
proved even if not specifically set out in the
information provided it is necessarily
included in the crime charged.
Doctrine of Supervening Event The accused may still be prosecuted for
another offense if a subsequent development
changes the character of the first indictment
under which he may have already been
charged or convicted.