SECTION 5.

Before they enter on the execution of their office, the President, the Vice-
MODULE 5 President, or the Acting President shall take the following oath or affirmation:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully and conscientiously fulfill my duties as
President (or Vice-President or Acting President) of the Philippines, preserve and defend its
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
Constitution, execute its laws, do justice to every man, and consecrate myself to the service of
the Nation. So help me God.” (In case of affirmation, last sentence will be omitted.)
ARTICLE VII
Executive Department
SECTION 6. The President shall have an official residence. The salaries of the President and
Vice-President shall be determined by law and shall not be decreased during their tenure. No
SECTION 1. The executive power shall be vested in the President of the Philippines.
increase in said compensation shall take effect until after the expiration of the term of the
incumbent during which such increase was approved. They shall not receive during their
SECTION 2. No person may be elected President unless he is a natural-born citizen of the tenure any other emolument from the Government or any other source.
Philippines, a registered voter, able to read and write, at least forty years of age on the day of
the election, and a resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately preceding such SECTION 7. The President-elect and the Vice-President-elect shall assume office at the
election.
beginning of their terms.
SECTION 3. There shall be a Vice-President who shall have the same qualifications and term If the President-elect fails to qualify, the Vice-President-elect shall act as President until the
of office and be elected with and in the same manner as the President. He may be removed
President-elect shall have qualified.
from office in the same manner as the President. If a President shall not have been chosen, the Vice-President-elect shall act as President until a
The Vice-President may be appointed as a Member of the Cabinet. Such appointment requires
President shall have been chosen and qualified.
no confirmation.
If at the beginning of the term of the President, the President-elect shall have died or shall
SECTION 4. The President and the Vice-President shall be elected by direct vote of the people
have become permanently disabled, the Vice-President-elect shall become President.
for a term of six years which shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the Where no President and Vice-President shall have been chosen or shall have qualified, or
day of the election and shall end at noon of the same date six years thereafter. The President
where both shall have died or become permanently disabled, the President of the Senate or, in
shall not be eligible for any reelection. No person who has succeeded as President and has case of his inability, the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall act as President until a
served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any President or a Vice-President shall have been chosen and qualified.
time.
The Congress shall, by law, provide for the manner in which one who is to act as President
shall be selected until a President or a Vice-President shall have qualified, in case of death,
No Vice-President shall serve for more than two consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of permanent disability, or inability of the officials mentioned in the next preceding paragraph.
the office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the continuity of
the service for the full term for which he was elected. SECTION 8. In case of death, permanent disability, removal from office, or resignation of the
Unless otherwise provided by law, the regular election for President and Vice-President shall
President, the Vice-President shall become the President to serve the unexpired term. In case
be held on the second Monday of May. of death, permanent disability, removal from office, or resignation of both the President and
Vice-President, the President of the Senate or, in case of his inability, the Speaker of the
The returns of every election for President and Vice-President, duly certified by the board of
House of Representatives, shall then act as President until the President or Vice-President shall
canvassers of each province or city, shall be transmitted to the Congress, directed to the have been elected and qualified.
President of the Senate. Upon receipt of the certificates of canvass, the President of the Senate
shall, not later than thirty days after the day of the election, open all certificates in the presence The Congress shall, by law, provide who shall serve as President in case of death, permanent
of the Senate and the House of Representatives in joint public session, and the Congress, upon disability, or resignation of the Acting President. He shall serve until the President or the Vice-
determination of the authenticity and due execution thereof in the manner provided by law,
President shall have been elected and qualified, and be subject to the same restrictions of
canvass the votes. powers and disqualifications as the Acting President.
The person having the highest number of votes shall be proclaimed elected, but in case two or
more shall have an equal and highest number of votes, one of them shall forthwith be chosen SECTION 9. Whenever there is a vacancy in the Office of the Vice-President during the term
by the vote of a majority of all the Members of both Houses of the Congress, voting for which he was elected, the President shall nominate a Vice-President from among the
separately.
Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives who shall assume office upon
confirmation by a majority vote of all the Members of both Houses of the Congress, voting
The Congress shall promulgate its rules for the canvassing of the certificates.
separately.
The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the
election, returns, and qualifications of the President or Vice- President, and may promulgate SECTION 10. The Congress shall, at ten o’clock in the morning of the third day after the
its rules for the purpose.
vacancy in the offices of the President and Vice-President occurs, convene in accordance with
its rules without need of a call and within seven days enact a law calling for a special election
to elect a President and a Vice-President to be held not earlier than forty-five days nor later or heads of bureaus or offices, including government-owned or controlled corporations and
than sixty days from the time of such call. The bill calling such special election shall be their subsidiaries.
deemed certified under paragraph 2, Section 26, Article VI of this Constitution and shall
become law upon its approval on third reading by the Congress. Appropriations for the special SECTION 14. Appointments extended by an Acting President shall remain effective, unless
election shall be charged against any current appropriations and shall be exempt from the revoked by the elected President within ninety days from his assumption or reassumption of
requirements of paragraph 4, Section 25, Article VI of this Constitution. The convening of the office.
Congress cannot be suspended nor the special election postponed. No special election shall be
called if the vacancy occurs within eighteen months before the date of the next presidential SECTION 15. Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the
election. end of his term, a President or Acting President shall not make appointments, except
temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will
SECTION 11. Whenever the President transmits to the President of the Senate and the Speaker prejudice public service or endanger public safety.
of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the
powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the SECTION 16. The President shall nominate and, with the consent of the Commission on
contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice-President as Acting Appointments, appoint the heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other public
President. ministers and consuls, or officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval
captain, and other officers whose appointments are vested in him in this Constitution. He shall
Whenever a majority of all the Members of the Cabinet transmit to the President of the Senate also appoint all other officers of the Government whose appointments are not otherwise
and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President provided for by law, and those whom he may be authorized by law to appoint. The Congress
is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice-President shall immediately may, by law, vest the appointment of other officers lower in rank in the President alone, in the
assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President. courts, or in the heads of departments, agencies, commissions, or boards.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of The President shall have the power to make appointments during the recess of the Congress,
the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall reassume whether voluntary or compulsory, but such appointments shall be effective only until after
the powers and duties of his office. Meanwhile, should a majority of all the Members of the disapproval by the Commission on Appointments or until the next adjournment of the
Cabinet transmit within five days to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the Congress.
House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the
powers and duties of his office, the Congress shall decide the issue. For that purpose, the SECTION 17. The President shall have control of all the executive departments, bureaus, and
Congress shall convene, if it is not in session, within forty-eight hours, in accordance with its offices. He shall ensure that the laws be faithfully executed.
rules and without need of call.
SECTION 18. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of
If the Congress, within ten days after receipt of the last written declaration, or, if not in the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to
session, within twelve days after it is required to assemble, determines by a two-thirds vote of prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion,
both Houses, voting separately, that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties when the public safety requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the
of his office, the Vice-President shall act as the President; otherwise, the President shall privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial
continue exercising the powers and duties of his office. law. Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a report in person or in
SECTION 12. In case of serious illness of the President, the public shall be informed of the writing to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its
state of his health. The Members of the Cabinet in charge of national security and foreign Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which
relations and the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, shall not be denied revocation shall not be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the
access to the President during such illness. Congress may, in the same manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be
determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires
SECTION 13. The President, Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, and their deputies it.
or assistants shall not, unless otherwise provided in this Constitution, hold any other office or
employment during their tenure. They shall not, during said tenure, directly or indirectly, The Congress, if not in session, shall, within twenty-four hours following such proclamation
practice any other profession, participate in any business, or be financially interested in any or suspension, convene in accordance with its rules without any need of a call.
contract with, or in any franchise, or special privilege granted by the Government or any The Supreme Court may review, in an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the
subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled sufficiency of the factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the
corporations or their subsidiaries. They shall strictly avoid conflict of interest in the conduct of privilege of the writ or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its decision thereon within
their office. thirty days from its filing.
The spouse and relatives by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth civil degree of the A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, nor supplant the
President shall not during his tenure be appointed as members of the Constitutional functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies, nor authorize the conferment of
Commissions, or the Office of the Ombudsman, or as Secretaries, Undersecretaries, chairmen
jurisdiction on military courts and agencies over civilians where civil courts are able to
function, nor automatically suspend the privilege of the writ.
The suspension of the privilege of the writ shall apply only to persons judicially charged for
rebellion or offenses inherent in or directly connected with the invasion.
During the suspension of the privilege of the writ, any person thus arrested or detained shall be
judicially charged within three days, otherwise he shall be released.
SECTION 19. Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in this Constitution,
the President may grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures,
after conviction by final judgment.
He shall also have the power to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all the
Members of the Congress.
SECTION 20. The President may contract or guarantee foreign loans on behalf of the
Republic of the Philippines with the prior concurrence of the Monetary Board, and subject to
such limitations as may be provided by law. The Monetary Board shall, within thirty days
from the end of every quarter of the calendar year, submit to the Congress a complete report of
its decisions on applications for loans to be contracted or guaranteed by the Government or
government-owned and controlled corporations which would have the effect of increasing the
foreign debt, and containing other matters as may be provided by law.
SECTION 21. No treaty or international agreement shall be valid and effective unless
concurred in by at least two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.
SECTION 22. The President shall submit to the Congress within thirty days from the opening
of every regular session, as the basis of the general appropriations bill, a budget of
expenditures and sources of financing, including receipts from existing and proposed revenue
measures.
SECTION 23. The President shall address the Congress at the opening of its regular session.
He may also appear before it at any other time.
Text
 MARCOS v V
MANGLAPUS MANGLAPUS
MANGLAPUS ii. Section 6 – liberty of abode, non-impairment of right to travel
G.R. No. 88211 | September 15, 1989 except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public
health, as may be provided by the law
PETITIONERS: Ferdinand Marcos, Imelda Marcos, Ferdinand Marcos, Jr., Imee b. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
Manotoc, Tomas Manotoc, Gregorio Araneta, Pacifico Marcos, Nicanor Yniguez and i. Right to Freedom of movement and resident within borders
Philippine Constitution Association (PHILCONSA) ii. Right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to
RESPONDENTS: Hon. Raul Manglapus, Catalino Macaraig, Sedfrey Ordonez, Miriam his country
Defensor-Santiago, Fidel Ramos, Renato De Villa c. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
i. Article 12, no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to
Former President Marcos, on his deathbed wished to return to the Philippines to die. The enter his own country.
Marcoses then made a request to be allowed to return to the Philippines, a request which Pres. ii. Article 12
Aquino denied. Thus, petitioners filed this case claiming that Former President Marcos has the 1. Right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose
right to return as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights as well as under international law. his own residence
Petitioners further claim that the President has no power to impair the liberty of abode of the 2. Right to "be free to leave any country, including his
Marcoses. own... which rights may be restricted by such laws as
"are necessary to protect national security, public
The Court ruled that the President has such power. The powers granted to the President are not order, public health or morals or enter own country" of
limited to those powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution. The Constitution itself which one cannot be "arbitrarily deprived."
provides that the execution of the laws is only one of the power of the President. Corollarlily, 5. Respondents on the other hand claim that the ban against the Marcoses’ return is due
the powers of the President cannot be said to be limited only to the specific powers to national security and public safety.
enumerated in the Constitution. In other words, executive power is more than the sum of 6. Note: This case is unique. It should not create a precedent, for the case of a dictator
specific powers so enumerated. forced out of office and into exile after causing twenty years of political, economic
and social havoc in the country and who within the short space of three years seeks
In this case, the problem to the President is one of balancing the general welfare and the to return, is in a class by itself.
common good against the exercise of rights of certain individuals. The power involved is the W/N it is a political question - NO, it was a legal issue involving scope of
President’s residual power to protect the general welfare of the people. It is founded on the ISSUES: power of the executive
duty of the President, as steward of the people. 1. W/N in the exercise of the powers granted by the Constitution, the President may
prohibit the Marcoses from returning to the PH – YES
Note, the resolution of the problem is made difficult because the persons (Marcoses) who seek 2. W/N what was involved was merely the right to travel – NO
to return to the country are the deposed dictator and his family. The constitutional guarantees
they invoke are neither absolute nor inflexible. For the exercise of even the preferred freedoms RULING: WHEREFORE, and it being our well-considered opinion that the President did not
of speech and of expression, although couched in absolute terms, admits of limits and must be act arbitrarily or with grave abuse of discretion in determining that the return of former
adjusted to the requirements of equally important public interests. Hence, the President can President Marcos and his family at the present time and under present circumstances poses a
deny their request to return to the Philippines. serious threat to national interest and welfare and in prohibiting their return to the Philippines,
the instant petition is hereby DISMISSED.
DOCTRINE: Residual Power whatever power inherent in the government that is
neither legislative nor judicial has to be executive RATIO:
1. The President’s powers are not confined to those specifically stated in the
FACTS: People Power: febuary 22-25, 1986 Constitution. The President has residual powers which refers to powers not
1. After EDSA 1 and Cory’s rise to power, she was met with problems. These include belonging to the legislative or judiciary.
Honasan’s coup attempt, the takeover of Channel 7 by Marcos loyalists, the Manila a. The Constitution provided in Article 7, Sec. 1 that "the executive power
Hotel Coup, and the communist insurgency. shall be vested in the President of the Philippines." However, it did not
2. As Marcos was in his deathbed, he wished to return to the Philippines to die. define executive power. But it did give an enumeration of powers
However, Cory was firm in deciding to bar his family’s return. exercised by the President as stated in Article 7, Sec. 14-23:
3. Thus, petitioners filed this case claiming that Former President Marcos has the right i. The power of control over all executive departments, bureaus,
to return as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, as well as under international law. and offices
Petitioners further claim that the President has no power to impair the liberty of ii. The power to execute the laws
abode of the Marcose iii. The appointing power
4. The Marcoses’ case is founded on the following: iv. The powers under the commander-in-chief clause
a. Philippine Bill of Rights v. The power to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, the
i. Section 1 – Equal Protection Clause power to grant amnesty with the concurrence of Congress
vi. The power to contract or guarantee foreign loans
 vii. The power to enter into treaties or international agreements they relate to a conflict between executive action and the exercise of a
viii. The power to submit the budget to Congress, and the power to protected right. The issue before the Court is novel and without precedent
address Congress in Philippine, and even in American jurisprudence.
Residual Power: b. This enumeration of powers, however, does not mean that these are the d. Consequently, resolution by the Court of the well-debated issue of whether
only powers allowed to be exercised by the President. It has been or not there can be limitations on the right to travel in the absence of
advanced that whatever power inherent in the government that is neither legislation to that effect is rendered unnecessary. An appropriate case for
legislative nor judicial has to be executive. its resolution will have to be awaited.
c. As stated in Article 2, Sections 4 and 5 of the Constitution, service and
protection of the people, the maintenance of peace and order, the Chief Justice Fernando, concurring.
protection of life, liberty and property, and the promotion of the general Presidential powers and prerogatives are not fixed but fluctuate. They are not derived solely
welfare are essentially ideals to guide governmental action. from a particular constitutional clause or article or from an express statutory grant. Their limits
i. Thus, in the exercise of her president functions, the President are likely to depend on the imperatives of events and contemporary imponderables rather than
shall consider these principles. on abstract theories of law.
ii. Faced with the problem of whether or not the time is right to
allow the Marcoses to return to the Philippines, the President is, Justice Gutierrez Jr, dissenting.
under the Constitution, constrained to consider these basic The dissenting opinion focused more on the right to return and whether or not the question
principles in arriving at a decision. More than that, having sworn involved was a political question.
to defend and uphold the Constitution, the President has the
obligation under the Constitution to protect the people, promote Justice Cruz, dissenting.
their welfare and advance the national interest. Justice Cruz stated that in holding that the President of the Philippines has residual powers in
iii. The resolution of the problem becomes difficult because the addition to the specific powers granted by the Constitution, the Court is taking a great leap
persons who seek to return to the country are the deposed backward and reinstating the discredited doctrine announced in Planas v. Gil (67 Phil. 62).
dictator and his family. The constitutional guarantees they This does not square with the announced policy of the Constitutional Commission, which was
invoke are neither absolute nor inflexible. precisely to limit rather than expand presidential powers, as a reaction to the excesses of the
iv. Hence, to the President, the problem is one of balancing the past dictatorship. Its up to the Congress
general welfare and the common good against the exercise of
rights of certain individuals. The power involved is the Justice Paras, dissenting.
President's residual power to protect the general welfare of the Justice Paras voted to allow the Marcoses’ return based on human compassion.
people. It is founded on the duty of the President, as steward of
the people. Justice Padilla, dissenting.
d. This case calls for the exercise of the President's powers as protector of the There was no discussion on residual powers.
peace.
i. The power of the President to keep the peace is not limited Justice Sarmiento, dissenting.
merely to exercising the commander-in-chief powers in times of Justice Sarmiento stated that although the Chief Executive may exercise powers not expressly
emergency or to leading the State against external and internal found in the Constitution, it is by implication that such powers must yield to the Bill of Right
threats to its existence. The President is not only clothed with There’s not law yet passed by the Congress to apply exceptions in the travel
extraordinary powers in times of emergency, but is also tasked
with attending to the day-to-day problems of maintaining peace
and order and ensuring domestic tranquility in times when no
foreign foe appears on the horizon.
2. No the individual right involved is not the right to travel from the Philippines to Right to travel is different from right to return and liberty of abode
other countries or within the Philippines. Essentially, the right involved is the right
to return to one’s country, a totally distinct right under international law,
independent from, although related to, the right to travel
a. The UDHR and ICCPR treat the right to freedom of movement and abode
within the territory of a state, right to leave a country and right to enter
one’s country as 3 different concepts
b. The right to return to one’s country is distinct and separate from the right
to travel and enjoys a different protection under the ICCPR.
c. The ruling in the cases Kent and Haig, which refer to the issuance of
passports for the purpose of effectively exercising the right to travel, are
not determinative of this case and are only tangentially material insofar as
 MARCOS V. MANGLAPUS [MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION] the basis for the decision to bar their return when she called President
G.R. No. 88211 | Oct. 27, 1989 Aquino "illegal," claiming that it is Mr. Marcos, not Mrs. Aquino, who is
the "legal" President of the Philippines, and declared that the matter
PETITIONERS: Ferdinand E. Marcos, Imelda R. Marcos, Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr., "should be brought to all the courts of the world."
Irene M. Araneta, Imee Manotoc, Tomas Manotoc, Gregorio Araneta, Pacifico E. c. It is reiterated that the President has residual powers which are implied
Marcos, Nicanor Y iguez and Philippine Constitution Association, represented by its from the grant of executive power and which are necessary for her to
President, Conrado F. Estrella comply with her duties under the Constitution. The powers of the
RESPONDENTS: Honorable Raul Manglapus, Catalino Macaraig, Sedfrey Ordo ez, President are not limited to what are expressly enumerated in the article on
Miriam Defensor Santiago, Fidel Ramos, Renato De Villa, in their capacity as Secretary the Executive Department and in scattered provisions of the Constitution.
of Foreign Affairs, Executive Secretary, Secretary of Justice, Immigration This is so, notwithstanding the avowed intent of the members of the
Commissioner, Secretary of National Defense and Chief of Staff, respectively Constitutional Commission of 1986 to limit the powers of the President as
a reaction to the abuses under the regime of Mr. Marcos, for the result was
After the events of the previous case, Marcos died in Honolulu, Hawaii. Petitioners requested a limitation of specific power of the President, particularly those relating
that Marcos’ remains be returned to the Philippines, which President Cory Aquino denied. The to the commander-in-chief clause, but not a diminution of the general
issue in this case is whether or not the President has the power to bar a Filipino from his own grant of executive power.
country. The Supreme Court ruled in the affirmative. President Cory has to power to bar d. Myers v. US accepted Hamilton's proposition, concluding that the federal
Marcos from his own country (especially since his supporters were considered a threat to the executive, unlike the Congress, could exercise power from sources not
society) because it comes under her unstated residual powers. Basically, any power that does enumerated, so long as not forbidden by the constitutional text: the
not belong to the Legislative or Judiciary or any power that is not written in the constitution executive power was given in general terms, strengthened by specific
will be considered as the President’s residual power. terms where emphasis was regarded as appropriate, and was limited by
direct expressions where limitation was needed.”
DOCTRINE: The President, upon whom executive power is vested, has unstated residual e. A recognition of the President's implied or residual powers is tantamount
powers which are implied from the grant of executive power and which are necessary for her to setting the stage for another dictatorship. Despite petitioners' strained
to comply with her duties under the Constitution. The powers of the President are not limited analogy, the residual powers of the President under the Constitution
to what are expressly enumerated in the article on the Executive Department and in scattered should not be confused with the power of the President under the 1973
provisions of the Constitution. Constitution to legislate pursuant to Amendment No. 6 which provides:
Whenever in the judgment of the President (Prime Minister), there exists a
FACTS: grave emergency or a threat or imminence thereof, or whenever the
1. The Sept. 15 Decision dismissed the petition by a vote of eight (8) to seven (7), after interim Batasang Pambansa or the regular National Assembly fails or is
finding that the President did not act arbitrarily or with grave abuse of discretion in unable to act adequately on any matter for any reason that in his judgment
determining that the return of Marcos and his family poses a threat to the national requires immediate action, he may, in order to meet the exigency, issue the
interest and welfare of the country. In the interregnum between the Sept. 15 necessary decrees, orders, or letters of instruction, which shall form part of
Decision and this Oct. 27 Resolution, Marcos died on Sept. 28, 1989 in Honolulu, the law of the land.
Hawaii. President Aquino denied the request for the return of Marcos’ remains. f. There is no similarity between the residual powers of the President under
the 1987 Constitution and the power of the President under the 1973
ISSUE: Constitution pursuant to Amendment No. 6. First of all, Amendment No. 6
1. W/N the President has the power to bar a Filipino from his own country – Yes refers to an express grant of power. It is not implied. Then, Amendment
2. W/N she had exercised it arbitrarily – No No. 6 refers to a grant to the President of the specific power of legislation.
2. No, the President did not act with grave abuse of discretion. Among the duties of the
RULING: CCORDINGLY, the Court resolved to DENY the Motion for Reconsideration for President under the Constitution, in compliance with his (or her) oath of office, is to
lack of merit." Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Paras, Feliciano, Padilla, Bidin and Sarmiento, JJ., protect and promote the interest and welfare of the people. Her decision to bar the
maintained their dissent. See separate dissenting opinions. return of the Marcoses and subsequently, the remains of Mr. Marcos at the present
time and under present circumstances is in compliance with this bounden duty. In
RATIO: the absence of a clear showing that she had acted with arbitrariness or with grave
1. Yes, the President can bar Marcos’s return. abuse of discretion in arriving at this decision, the Court will not enjoin the
a. The death of Mr. Marcos, although it may be viewed as a supervening implementation of this decision.
event, has not changed the factual scenario under which the Court's
decision was rendered.
b. The threats to the government, to which the return of the Marcoses has
been viewed to provide a catalytic effect, have not been shown to have
ceased. On the contrary, instead of erasing fears as to the destabilization
that will be caused by the return of the Marcoses, Mrs. Marcos reinforced
Justice Paras, dissenting. a. Carpio advances the view that RA 6975 emasculated the National Police
He has four points in his dissent: Commission by limiting its power “to administrative control” over the
1. Marcos, although already dead, still has rights. Philippine National Police (PNP), thus, “control” remained with the DILG
2. The alleged threats to national security have remained unproved and unpersuasive. under whom both the National Police Commission and the PNP were
Actually, more trouble may be expected if the remains are not allowed to be brought placed.
back in the Philippines. i. That in manifest derogation of the power of control of the
3. Reconciliation can proceed at a much faster pace if the petition for the return is NAPOLCOM over the PNP, RA 6975 vested the power to
granted. Granting the petition may mean softening the hearts of the oppositionists; choose the PNP Provincial Director and the Chiefs of Police in
paving the way for a united citizenry. the Governors and Mayors, respectively.
4. Granting the petition would show the world an act of mercy. b. That Sec. 12 of RA 6975 constitutes an encroachment upon,
interferences with, and an abdication (failure to fulfill function) by the
Justice Padilla, dissenting. President of executive control and commander-in-chief powers
He believes that the Constitution and all its guarantees shall apply to all Filipinos – whether c. The creation of the “Special Oversight Committee” in Sec. 84, especially
dictator or pauper, learned or ignorant, religious or agnostic as long as he is a Filipino. Hence, the inclusion therein of some legislators as members is an unconstitutional
the argument that Marcos was a former dictator is irrelevant to barring him from returning to encroachmen pon and a dimin ion of, he Presiden s po er of
the country. control over all executive departments, bureaus and offices
Justice Sarmiento, dissenting. History of Philippine’s police force and the reason for Sec. 6, Art. XVI, 1987 Constitution
He stated that “residual” powers of the President cannot be seen in the Constitution and is just 1. The structure – basically, police was under the military
mere word game. He reiterated that the right to return to the Philippines can be only be 2. Commonwealth period – Philippine Constabulary (PC)
restricted by court order or by law. If it was intended that such right can be restricted by the a. PC is the nucleus of Philippine Ground Force (PGF) or what is now the
president, then the fundamental law should have stated so. AFP
i. PC was made part of the PGF but its administrative, supervisory
Carpio v Executive Secretary and directional control was handled by the then DILG
G.R. No. 96409 | February 14, 1992 b. After the war, PC remained as the National Police under the Department
of National Defense (DND), as a major service component of the AFP
Petitioner Carpio assails the constitutionality of RA 6975 which established the PNP and 3. Integration Act of 1975 created the Integrated National Police (INP)
placed it under the DILG. Carpio mainly argues that the Act derogated the power of control of a. Partially civilian
the NAPOLCOM over the PNP by vesting different powers in the local officials. The SC b. INP was under the Office of the President, with the PC as the nucleus, and
upheld the constitutionality of the act and clarified that there is no usurpation of the power of the local police forces as the civilian components
control as the local executives merely act as representatives of the NAPOLCOM. c. PC-INP was headed by the PC Chief who, as concurrent Director-General
of the INP, exercised command functions over the INP
DOCTRINE: The President’s power of control is directly exercised by him over the members d. The National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) exercised administrative
of the Cabinet who, in turn, and by his authority, control the bureaus and other offices under control
their respective jurisdictions in the executive department. e. The local executives exercised operational supervision and direction over
the INP units assigned within their respective localities.
The President, as Commander-in-Chief, is not a member of the Armed Forces. He remains a Result of the structure after Integration Act
civilian whose duties under the Commander-in-Chief provision represent only a part of the 1. The set-up whereby the INP was placed under the command of the military
organic duties imposed upon him. All his other functions are clearly civil in nature. His component, which is the PC, severely eroded he INP ci ilian charac er and the
position as a civilian Commander-in-Chief is consistent with, and a testament to, the multiplicity in the governance of the PC-INP resulted in inefficient police service.
constitutional principle that “civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military.” (Art. 2. The integration of the national police forces with the PC also resulted in inequities
II, Sec. 3, 1987 Constitution) since the military component had superior benefits and privileges
3. Hence, the goal of the Constitutional Commission of 1986 was to remove the
FACTS: modern police from the military.
1. Pursuant to Sec 6, Art. XVI, 1987 Constitution, Congress passed RA 6975 entited an a. The Commission made a postulate that the military cannot occupy any
“Act Establishing the Philippine National Police under a Reorganized Department of civil service position.
the Interior and Local Government, and for other purposes". 4. As a result, the “one police force, national in scope, and civilian in character”
a. It was approved by President Corazon Aquino on December 13, 1990 and provision was set in Sec. 6, Art. XVI, 1987 Constitution
took effect 15 days after publication (Jan. 1, 1991)
2. Petitioner Carpio, as citizen, taxpayer, and member of the Philippine Bar sworn to ISSUE: W/O the president abdicated its control power over the PNP and NPC by virtue RA
defend the Constitution, filed the present petition seeking the declaration of the 6976 - NO
unconstitutionality of the said RA. The following are his arguments:
RATIO: 3. PNP is civilian in nature, as a civilian agency, it
1. No, RA 6975 is not unconstitutional and it does not abdicate the President’s control properly comes within and is subject to the exercise by
power over the PNP and NPC President has the power to the President of the power of executive control
a. President has control of all executive departments, bureaus, and offices. 4. Court also held that the president as the Commande-
set aside and decision of
This presidential power of control over the executive branch of in-Chief is not a member of the AFP. Him remains a
government extends over all executive officers from Cabinet Secretary to the subordinates civilian whose duties represent only organic duties
the lowliest clerk. upon him
b. Equally well accepted, as a corollary rule to the control powers of the a. All it’s functions are civilian in nature
President, is the “Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency”. As the b. This is in line with the idea of civilian
President cannot be expected to exercise his control powers all at the same supremacy (civilians are supreme over the
time and in person, he will have to delegate some of them to his Cabinet military)
members. iii. On the “Special Oversight Committee” that supplants
c. Under this doctrine, which recognizes the establishment of a single President’s power over executive departments, bureaus and
executive, “all executive and administrative organizations are adjuncts of offices
the Executive Department, the heads of the various executive departments 1. It is merely an ad hoc body or transitory body for
are assistants and agents of the Chief Executive, and, except in cases planning the transfer/merger and absorption into the
where the Chief Executive is required by the Constitution or law to act in DILG of the involved agencies
person on the exigencies of the situation demand that he act personally, the 2. As an ad hoc body, it does not encroach the power of
multifarious executive and administrative functions of the Chief Executive control which belongs to the President
are performed by and through the executive departments, and the acts of 3. No executive, bureau or office is placed under the
the Secretaries of such departments, performed and promulgated in the control or authority of the committee
regular course of business, are, unless disapproved or reprobated by the 4. These are also independent Constitution Commissions
Chief Executive presumptively the acts of the Chief Executive.” like the CSC, Commission on Audit, and COMELEC
d. Thus, and in short, “the President’s power of control is directly exercised which are not under the control of the President.
by him over the members of the Cabinet who, in turn, and by his authority, 5. NAPOLCOM is different from this agencies, it is not
control the bureaus and other offices under their respective jurisdictions in independent
the executive department.” 6. The commission is not the same with the independent
e. Additionally, the circumstance that the NAPOLCOM and the PNP are bodies which are not under the President
placed under the reorganized DILG is merely an administrative
realignment that would bolster a system of coordination and cooperation
among the citizenry, local executives and the integrated law enforcement
agencies and public safety agencies created under the assailed Act, the
funding of the PNP being in large part subsidized by the national
government.
f. On the contentions of Carpio
i. Weakening of NAPOLCOM’s powers “to administrative
control” over the PNP; that letting local officials chose the PNP
officials undermines the power of the president.
1. President has control over the executive departments,
bureaus, and offices
2. RA 9676 merely delegates the President’s power to
the Secretary of the DILG
3. The control is still within the President because the
Secretary of the DILG is merely her alter ego.
ii. That Sec 12 of RA 695 encroaches upon the President’s
executive control as the commander-in-chief of the AFP
1. Sec 12 enforces the proposition that the national police
does not fall under the Commander-in-Chief
2. The police force is not integrated in the military and
not part of the AFP
 REASON UNDER RA 6975: DEMILITARIZE POLICE
> Commonwealth period -
Philippine Constabulary as nucleus of Philippine Ground Force (Armed Forces of the philippines now)
-67
Philippine Ground Force (now AFP) Basically: Police (PC) under military
o
DILG
Philippine Constabulary (PC)
Administrative, supervisory and directional control
> After the war - PC remained as National Police under Department of National Defense (still under AFP)
> Integration Act of 1975 - Created the integrated national Police. (INP) ->
Basically INP (Civilized) was placed under Philippine Constabulary (military)
Basically PC-INP party militarized
Office of the President
oNAPOLCOM Integrated National Police (INP) to Headed by Philippine Constabulary Chief
(Director General of INP)
Military headed the INP
Administrative, supervisory and directional control
Philippine Constabulary as
nucleus of INP thus (PC-INP)
Result of Integration act:
- INP was placed under the command of the military
- This eroded the INP’s civilian character and
- Multiplicity in the governance of the PC-INP resulted in inefficient police service
- Integration of INP into PC resulted in inequities because the military had superior benefits and privilege over the police
- Goal of 1986 Constitutional Comission is to remove modern police from military -> military cannot occupy civil service position
- As a result: “one police force, national in scope, civlian in chracter) was set in a provision in Sec 6, Art XVI
> RA 6975: aim is to Civilize Police. (PNP)
Office of the President
Department of Interior and Local Government
o NAPOLCOM Philippine National Police Armed Forces of the Philippines
Military in Nature
Administrative, supervisory and directional control Civilian in Nature
(external threat)
(internal order)
Civil Service Commission
now controls entrance examination
 FACTS:
LAGMAN V. MEDIALDEA 1. On May 23, 2017, President Rodrigo Roa Duterte issued Proclamation No. 216
G.R.NOS.231658, 231771 & 231774 | JULY 4, 2017 declaring a state of martial law and suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus in the whole of Mindanao.
PETITIONERS: Representatives Edcel C. Lagman, Tomasito S. Villarin, Gary C. 2. On May 25, 2017, in accordance with the timeline set by Section 18, Article VII of
Alejano, Emmanuel A. Billones, and Teddy Brawner Baguilat, Jr. the Constitution, the President submitted to Congress a written Report on the factual
RESPONDENTS: Hon. Salvador C. Medialdea, Executive Secretary; Hon. Delfin N. basis of Proclamation No. 216.
Lorenzana, Secretary of the Department of National Defense and Martial Law 3. The Report said that Mindanao has been the hotbed of violent extremism and a
Administrator; and Gen. Eduardo Ano, Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the brewing of rebellion for decades, i.e., the Zamboanga siege, the Davao bombing, the
Philippines and Martial Law Implementor Mamasapano carnage, and the bombings in Cotabato, Sultan Kudarat, Sulu, and
Basilan, among others.
On May 23, 2017, President Rodrigo Roa Duterte issued Proclamation No. 216 declaring a a. Two groups have figured prominently, namely, Abu Sayaff Group (ASG)
state of martial law and suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the whole of and the ISIS-backed Maute Group. The President explained that there was
Mindanao. The Report said that Mindanao has been the hotbed of violent extremism and a a government operation on May 23, 2017 to capture the two groups.
brewing of rebellion for decades. Several recent events have led the President to conclude that However, it escalated into open hostility against the government and acts
such acts clearly showed intent to remove Marawi City, and eventually the rest of Mindanao, of violence were directed towards civilians and control of major social,
from its allegiance to the Government, and to deprive the President of his power and authority. economic and political foundations of Marawi City were undertaken.
Different petitions were filed seeking the nullification of Proclamation No. 216: Lagman, b. The Maute Group and ASG assaulted the BJMP and burned the Marawi
Cullamat and Mohamad Petitions. The main issue in this case is whether or not Proclamation Police Station, and facilitated the escape of inmates. The groups also set
No. 216 has sufficient factual bases. The Court held in the affirmative and declared such up road blockades and checkpoints. They also burned churches and
proclamation as constitutional. schools, prevented Maranaos from leaving their homes, forced young male
Muslims to join their groups, and cut the vital lines for transportation and
More specifically for each issue presented, the Court held that first, the jurisdiction of the power
Court under Sec. 18, par. 3, Art. VII is sui generis. Second, President Duterte is only required 4. Based on these events, the President concludes that these acts clearly showed intent
to determine if there is probable cause that rebellion has been committed or is actually being to remove Marawi City, and eventually the rest of Mindanao, from its allegiance to
committed. He is not required to obtain a recommendation from the Sec. of National Defense. the Government, and to deprive the President of his power and authority. The ASG
He must act swiftly and given the situation and rely on the intelligence report given to him. and Maute group also brought undue constraints to the military and government
Third, constitutional framers intended that the judicial power to review is independent from personnel, in the performance of their duties and functions. Further, the occupation
congressional action to revoke. Fourth, the parameters for determining the sufficiency of of Marawi City is considered strategic due to its location, the network and alliance
factual basis were all present in this case. Fifth, in respect to the doctrine of separation of building activities among terrorist groups, local criminals, and lawless armed men,
powers, the power of judicial review does not extend to calibrating the President’s decision on for the absolute control over Mindanao.
which extraordinary power to avail. Sixth, “other rebel groups” cannot be considered as vague 5. After the submission of the Report and the briefings conducted by the Executive
when taken in context with accompanying words. The operational parameters of Proclamation Department, the Senate expressed full support in P.S. Resolution No. 388, saying
No. 216 cannot be the subject of judicial review because it is only a tool for the that Proclamation No. 216 is constitutional.
implementation of the proclamation. Seventh, terrorism and rebellion are not mutually 6. The LAGMAN PETITION:
exclusive. They have different elements. The constitutional requirements stated are enough to a. There is no sufficient factual basis for the declaration of martial law and
declare Martial Law. Eighth, Proclamation 55 (Declaration of a State of National Emergency suspension of the writ of habeas corpus since there is no rebellion or
on account of lawless violence in Mindanao) is not affected by the ruling of these cases. General RuleL invasion in Marawi City or in any part of Mindanao.
President Duterte may exercise the power to call out the Armed Forces independently of the You should have a standing i. The acts of terrorism in Mindanao do not constitute rebellion
power to declare martial law and the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas - although Lagman peitioned since there is no proof that its purpose is to remove Mindanao or
corpus. any part thereof from allegiance to the Philippines.
as a Lawmaker,
ii. The flying of the ISIS flag is mere propaganda.
DOCTRINE: Under Section 18 of Article VII, the President as Commander-in-Chief is Court considered him iii. The Maute group is a mere private army, using Vera Files with
bestowed with three extraordinary powers: calling out the Armed Forces, suspending the as petitioning as a citizen Joseph Franco as the basis, wherein it was mentioned there that
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, and declaring martial law. The latter two only to be Maute is more of a clan’s private militia latching into the IS
exercised in the event of actual invasion or rebellion, and public safety requires it. brand theatrically to inflate perceived capability.
The extraordinary powers bestowed on the President in Article VII are different from what is iv. Further, Gen. Salvador Mison, Jr. himself admitted that the
contemplated in Section 23 of Article VI. It is clear that the aforementioned powers were armed conflict in Marawi was initiated by the government in
expressly given to the President without the need for any law and under Section 18, the only order to capture Hapilon. Therefore, Maute group’s objective
role Congress plays in the exercise of the said powers is to revoke it if they find that there is was merely to shield Hapilon, not to lay siege on Marawi.
no need for it. Any other special power to be exercised by the President at times of war or
other national emergencies under Section 23 must be through law.
 b. Thus, there is only a threat of rebellion, which is akin to “imminent veracity of the reports. Further, as the President is the sole Commander-in-
danger” of rebellion, which is no longer a valid ground for the declaration Chief, there is no need for recommendation from the Defense Secretary.
of martial law. d. With regard to the false reports cited in the Report, the OSG opines that
c. The Report contained false and hyperbolic accounts, which claimed the petitioners failed to refute the facts since they merely asserted using
attacks on a hospital, a bank, and two schools. However, based on reports other news articles which are “hearsay evidence, twice removed” and thus
on the interview of the people from those places, the places remained inadmissible and without probative values
intact and were not ransacked at all. ISSUES:
d. The attack in Lanao del Sur, the Mamasapano carnage, the Davao market 1. W/N the petitions constitute an "appropriate proceeding" covered by Article VII,
bombing has long been resolved before the conflict in Marawi City. 18(3), for judicial review when a declaration of martial law or the suspension of the
e. The President acted alone and did not consult the military establishment or privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is promulgated – Yes
any ranking official. 2. Whether or not the power of the Court to review the sufficiency of the factual basis
f. Lastly, it was shown that the military was successful in pre-empting the of proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of
ASG and the Maute Group’s plan. There was absence of any hostile plan habeas corpus is under Article VII, Section 18(3) is independent of the actions taken
by the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, and the number of those allied with by Congress is - Yes
ISIS was undetermined. Therefore, there are only a meager number of 3. Whether or not the judicial power to review the sufficiency of factual basis of the
foreign fighters who can lend support to the Maute group. declaration of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
7. The CULAMMAT PETITION: 4 days after Lagman corpus extends to the calibration of the President's decision of which among his
a. The rebellion only relates to events happening in Marawi and not in the graduated powers he will avail of in a given situation – No
entire region of Minadanao 4. Whether or not the recommendation of the Defense Secretary is a condition for the
b. The alleged capability of the Maute group and other rebel groups to sow declaration or martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
terror and cause death and damage does not rise to the level of rebellion corpus – No
sufficient to declare martial law in the whole of Mindanao 5. Whether or not the scope of the power to review of the Court is limited only to
c. Further, the phrase “other rebel group” is vague since the Proclamation determining the sufficiency of factual basis for such proclamation – Yes
was unable to identify the groups. 6. Whether or not probable cause is an allowable standard of proof – Yes
8. MOHAMMAD PETITION 7. Whether or not there is sufficient factual basis for declaring martial law and the
a. It posits that martial law is a measure of last resort, and should be invoked suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus over Mindanao - Yes
by the President only after exhaustion of less severe remedies 8. Whether or not the contention of petitioners regarding the falsity of the facts
i. First, the power to call out the armed forces reported by the President is in order – No
ii. Second, the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas Whether or not the declaration of martial law over the whole of Mindanao is proper
corpus – Yes
iii. And finally, the power to declare martial law
b. According to the petition, he factual situation in Marawi is not so grave as RULING: WHEREFORE, the Court FINDS sufficient factual bases for the issuance of
to require martial law. It proposes that the rebellion or invasion must be so proclamation No. 216 and DECLARE it as CONSTITUTIONAL. Accordingly, the
grave and is compelled by the needs of public safety, which is not yet consolidated Petitions are hereby DISMISSED
present in Mindanao. The conclusions of the President’s Report that the
Maute group intends to establish an Islamic State, and deprive powers, are RATIO:
conclusions without substantiation. 1. Yes, the petitions constitute an appropriate proceeding.
c. It insists that the Court look into the wisdom of the President’s actions and a. Article VII, Section 18(3) provides that the Supreme Court may review, in
not just the presence of arbitrariness. It also asks the Court to compel the an appropriate proceeding filed by any citizen, the sufficiency of the
respondents (Executive Department, AFP, DND) to divulge relevant factual basis of the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the
information to prove the sufficiency of the factual basis. privilege of the writ or the extension thereof, and must promulgate its
9. CONSOLIDATED COMMENT decision thereon within thirty days from its filing.
a. The OSG contents that the Court should use arbitrariness, not correctness, b. In an appropria e proceeding does not refer to a petition for certiorari,
as the stan dard for reviewing the sufficiency of factual basis. because the standard of which is whether there is grave abuse of discretion
b. The OSG maintains that the burden lies with the petitioners to prove that amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any government
the Proclamation is bereft of actual basis, since governmental actions are official or entity.
presumed to be valid and constitutional. It also argues that the sufficiency 2. Yes, the power of the Court to review can be exercised independently from the
of the factual basis should be examined not based on the facts discovered power of revocation of Congress.
after the decision. It should only be based on the information and data a. he Court may nullify the proclamation in an appropriate proceeding filed
available to him at the time of determination. by any citizen on the ground of lack of sufficient factual basis.
c. The OSG also asserts that the President could validly rely on intelligence b. On the other hand, Congress may revoke the proclamation or suspension,
reports coming from the AFP, and that he cannot personally determine the which the President cannot set aside.
 c. The Court considers only the information and data available to the 4. No, the President does not need prior recommendation from the Secretary of
President prior to or at the time of the declaration; it is not allowed to National Defense before a declaration of Martial Law can be made
"undertake an independent investigation beyond the pleadings." a. A plain reading of Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution shows that
d. On the other hand, Congress may take into consideration not only data the President's power to declare martial law is not subject to any condition
available prior to, but likewise events supervening the declaration. except for the requirements of actual invasion or rebellion and that public
e. The Court does not look into the absolute correctness of the factual basis safety requires it. The Constitution only bestows the prerogative to
Congress can extend: while, Congress has the prerogative to probe the facts and scrutinize their exercise any of the emergency powers to the President as Commander-in-
majority voting jointly
accuracy. Chief.
f. The Court's review power is passive; it is only initiated by the filing of a 5. Yes, the review power of the Supreme Court is limited to the sufficiency of the
petition "in an appropriate proceeding" by a citizen. On the other hand, factual basis of the declaration of martial law.
Congress' review mechanism is automatic in the sense that it may be a. The case of Lansang, being decided under the 1935 Constitution, focused
activated by Congress itself at any time after the proclamation or on the test of arbitrariness. This is no longer applicable.
President just needs
suspension was made. b. The 1987 Constitution provides only for judicial review of the sufficiency
3. No, the Court’s review does not extend to the determination of which power the Probable Cause of the factual bases. Section 18, Article VII limits the scope of judicial
President should have exercised at such particular time. - Facts available review to the "sufficiency of the factual basis" test.
Habeas Corpus: a. The President has the following extraordinary powers: at that time c. The Court does not need to verify whether the correctness of the facts but
is a court order i. Calling out the armed forces - Using common only their sufficiency.
demanding that a ii. Suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus sense d. The determination of the Court as to whether there is sufficient
public official (such iii. Declaring martial law as a layman factual basis for the exercise of such, must be based only on facts or
as a warden) deliver b. These powers may be resorted to only under specified conditions. As information known by or available to the President at the time he
an imprisoned
- Arriving to
Commander-in-Chief, the president’s powers are broad enough to include conclusion made the declaration or suspension.
individual to the
court and show a
his prerogative to address exigencies or threats that endanger the that more likely or e. These facts or information are found in the proclamation and the Report
valid reason for that government, and the very integrity of the State. f. submitted by him to Congress. As to what facts must be stated in the
not there is a
person's detention. c. The power to initially decide which among the said extraordinary powers proclamation and the written Report is up to the President. As
is best to use in a given situation belongs to the President. It would be rebellion taking Commander-in-Chief, he has sole discretion to determine what to include
- Suspending it highly impractical to require the concurrence of the Congress before a place and what not to include in the proclamation and the written Report taking
during ML only declaration of a martial law be promulgated. into account the urgency of the situation as well as national security. He
applies in cases d. In emergency situations, there is a need to act and decide fast. Among the cannot be forced to divulge intelligence reports and confidential
of rebellion three extraordinary powers, the calling out power is the most benign and information that may prejudice the operations and the safety of the
Public safety:
involves ordinary police action. The President may resort to this military. In determining the sufficiency of the factual basis of the
extraordinary power whenever it becomes necessary to prevent or
Acts that damage declaration and/or the suspension, the Court should look into the full
suppress lawless violence, invasion, or rebellion. the public complement or totality of the factual basis, and not piecemeal or
e. The extraordinary powers of suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas individually.
corpus and/or declaring martial law may be exercised in the presence of 6. Yes, probable cause is a sufficient standard. In determining the existence of
actual invasion or rebellion, and public safety requires it. rebellion, the President only needs to to be convinced that there is probable cause or
SAFEGUARDS: f. The 1987 Constitution provides certain limits in the exercise of these evidence showing that more likely than not a rebellion was committed or is being
powers, namely: committed.
i. A period of sixty days as limit 7. Yes, there is indeed factual basis for the declaration and suspension of writ of habeas
ii. Review and possible revocation by Congress corpus.
iii. Review and possible nullification by the Supreme Court. a. Article VII, Section 18 sets the parameters for determining the sufficiency
g. A state of martial law does not suspend the operation of the Constitution, of the factual basis for the declaration of martial law and/or the suspension
nor supplant the functioning of the civil courts or legislative assemblies. of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus:
During martial law, the President may have the powers of a commanding i. Actual invasion or rebellion
general in a theatre of war. In actual war when there is fighting in an area, ii. Public safety requires the exercise of such power.
the President as the commanding general has the authority to issue orders b. Without the concurrence of the two conditions, the President's declaration
which have the effect of law but strictly in a theater of war, not in the of martial law and/or suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas
situation we had during the period of martial law under President Marcos. corpus must be struck down.
During that time, the President may order:
i. Arrests and seizures without judicial warrants c. As provided during the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission,
ii. Ban on public assemblies rebellion could only refer to rebellion as defined under Article 134 of the
iii. Takeover of news media and agencies and press censorship Revised Penal Code. Based on the provision, for rebellion to exist, the
iv. Issuance of Presidential Decrees. following elements must be present:
 i. There shall be: SEPARATE OPINIONS
1. public uprising and
2. taking arms against the Government Justice Perlas-Bernabe, separate.
ii. The purpose of the uprising or movement is either:
1. To remove from the allegiance to the Government or 1. She classified an appropriate proceeding as a sui generis proceeding that is
its laws: exclusively peculiar to the SC’s special jurisdiction to review the factual basis of a
a. The territory of the Philippines or any part martial law declaration.
thereof or a. A petition based on Section 18, Article VII is not an appeal to review
b. Any body of land, naval, or other armed errors committed by a lower court; neither is it a special civil action for it
forces is in fact, attributed as a type of "proceeding." There is no cause of action
2. To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, wholly or in this type of proceeding, as it is only intended to determine the
partially, of any of their powers and prerogatives sufficiency of the factual basis of a proclamation
d. The purpose of judicial review is not the determination of accuracy or 2. Sufficient factual basis shall be construed in its generic sense.
veracity of the facts upon which the President anchored his declaration of a. "Sufficient" commonly means "adequate"; it may also mean "enough to
martial law or suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus; meet the needs of a situation or a proposed end." Logically, the "end" to be
rather, only the sufficiency of the factual basis as to convince the President established in a petition under Section 18, Article VII is the factual basis
that there is probable cause that rebellion exists. of a proclamation of martial law.
e. In the context of urgency, much leeway and flexibility should be accorded Justice Bersamin, concurring.
the President. As such, he is not expected to completely validate all the 1. The right to proclaim, apply and exercise martial law is one of the rights of
information he received before declaring martial law or suspending the sovereignty, and is as essential to the existence of a nation as the right to declare and
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. Through the facts available to him, carry on war. It’s lodged on the President because among the three branches, it is the
he deduced that there was indeed an actual rebellion taking place. After President, as Chief Executive and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, who has
all, what the President needs to satisfy is only the standard of probable the ability and competence and the means to make the timely and decisive response.
cause for a valid declaration of martial law As compared to the Congress which is bicameral and giving them the power will be
f. and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. cumbersome.
8. The contention that the factual basis was based on false reports hence cannot be a 2. However, Justice Bersamin suggests that in the future the burden of evidence may
proper basis for the declaration must fail be shifted to the government when the petitioning citizen has incorporated or stated
a. The Court is not concerned about absolute correctness, accuracy, or in the petition t hose of the factual bases that he or she admits, and those that he or
precision of the facts because to do so would unduly tie the hands of the she denies because he holds them to be false or fabricated, or inadequate to justify
President in responding to an urgent situation. Notably, the argument of the proclamation, specifying the reasons for the denial or for holding such factual
Lagman were derived solely from unverified news articles on the internet, bases as false, fabricated or inadequate.
with neither the authors nor the sources shown to have affirmed the
contents thereof. As the Court has consistently ruled, news articles are Justice Caguioa, dissenting.
hearsay evidence and are thus without any probative value. 1. The Executive must be able to present substantial evidence tending to show both
9. Marawi lies in the heart of Mindanao. It is where the Kilometer Zero marker in requirements. Substantial evidence is more than a mere scintilla of evidence. To
Mindanao is found, making it the point of reference of all roads in Mindanao. Assoc. Justice Caguioa, the requirement of "sufficiency" in a Section 18 proceeding
Moreover, considering the widespread atrocities in Mindanao and the linkages is analogous to the "substantial evidence" standard in administrative fact- finding.
established among rebel groups, the armed uprising that was initially staged in The presumption of regularity or constitutionality cannot be relied upon.
Marawi cannot be said to be confined only to Marawi. The Court cannot take the 1. There was insufficient showing that the requirements of public safety necessitated
battle of Marawi in isolation. the declaration of Martial Law over the entire Mindanao.
a. Hence, there is reasonable ground to believe that Marawi is only the a. First, there is insufficient showing that there was actual rebellion outside
staging point of the rebellion, both for symbolic and strategic reasons. of Marawi City.
Marawi may not be the target but the whole of Mindanao. As a crime b. Second, even without a showing that normative acts of rebellion are being
without predetermined bounds, the President has reasonable basis to committed in other areas of Mindanao, the standard of public safety
believe that it is necessary to declare martial law and suspend the privilege requires a demonstration that these areas are so intimately or inextricably
of the writ of habeas corpus for the whole of Mindanao. connected to the armed public uprising in order for them to be included in
the scope of martial law. Otherwise, the situation in these areas merely
constitute an "imminent threat" of rebellion which does not justify the
declaration of martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ in
said areas
Justice Carpio, dissenting. Justice Jardeleza, separate.
1. Burden of proof to show the sufficiency of the factual basis of the declaration of 1. The standard of reasonableness requires the Court to exercise caution in evaluating
martial law is on the government, not on the petitioners as argued by the OSG. the factual assertions of the executive department, but it does not create a
a. Being sui generis, the “appropriate proceeding” places the burden of proof presumption against matters coming from their side.
on the Government. The Government must be the one to justify the resort 2. The assessment made by the executive is not incompatible with the local and foreign
to extraordinary powers that are subject to the extraordinary review media reports and publicly available research papers and understandably, the
mechanisms under the Constitution, since it is the Government which has information provided to the Court is not perfect and given the 30-day period
the intelligence reports. imposed by the Constitution, there is no enough time to vet it to the point of
b. The Constitution empowers the Court to review the sufficiency of the conclusiveness.
factual basis of the proclamation. This power includes: 3. The role of the Court is to determine whether or not, on the basis of the matters
i. To make a finding of fact on the presence or absence of actual presented, there is a threat to the public safety, which by the facts given – there is.
rebellion or invasion, and
ii. To determine whether public safety requires the declaration of Justice Leonen, dissenting.
martial law or suspension of the privilege of the writ. 1. For him, what is happening in Mindanao is not an act of rebellion. Rather, it is an act
iii. However, if the President merely exercises his calling out of terrorism.
power, this is reviewable by the Court under the expanded a. They try to sow fear by committing murder, mutilation, arson, and use and
certiorari power (in short, SC can still review but different possession of illegal firearms, ammunition, and explosives among others.
proceeding and they will look into grave abuse of discretion b. They also try to magnify our fears.
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction). c. They do these not to control the government but to slow down the advance
c. President Duterte claimed that this declaration of martial law will be no of government forces and facilitate their escape. Thus, one of the
different than the one declared by President Marcos. This should, and will requirements for the declaration of martial law, which is the existence of a
be, taken seriously by the Court. rebellion or invasion, is absent.
i. The review power of the Court and the Legislature serves as a 2. If these terrorists are treated as rebels, they become a political group. We have
checking mechanism to prevent the recurrence of martial law of acknowledged that if rebels are able to capture the government, their rebellion, no
Marcos. matter how brutal, will be justified. Also, they will be given rights under the
d. The President says he declared martial law over Mindanao to prevent a International Humanitarian Law. Martial law gives a false sense of security.
spillover of the happenings in Marawi City, the capital of Lanao del Sur, 3. The issuances expand the scope of martial law.
because it is smack in the center of Mindanao and if not controlled, a. General Order No. 1 expands martial law to all acts of lawless violence
rebellion will spread. throughout Mindanao, even if unrelated to the ongoing hostilities in
i. This is an open admission of the President that there is no Marawi.
rebellion in other parts of Mindanao, therefore the declaration of b. It also expands the issuance to not only rebellion, but also to any other
martial law and the suspension of the privilege of the writ over kind of lawless violence.
the entire Mindanao is unconstitutional. c. Proclamation No. 216 hides its real intent. It said, “dismantle the NPA,
Justice Leonardo-De Castro, concurring. other terror-linked private armed groups, illegal drug syndicates, peace
1. To construe the existence of rebellion in the strict sense employed in the Revised spoilers and other lawless armed groups.”
Penal Code to limit martial law to places where there are actual armed uprising will Justice Martires, separate.
hamper the President from exercising his constitutional authority with foreseeable He reiterated what the other concurring justices have said.
dire consequences to national security and at great peril to public safety.
2. The ponencia was correct in upholding the factual bases relied upon by the President Justice Peralta, concurring.
- facts which are sourced from the entire intelligence-gathering machinery of the 1. Consistent with the nature of rebellion as a continuing crime and crime without
government itself and presented in utmost detail personally to the Members of this borders, the rebellion being perpetrated by the ISIS-linked rebel groups is not
Court in closed session. limited to the acts committed in Marawi City.
3. The AFP Intelligence Report, entitled "Timeline of ASG and Maute Collaboration" 2. More importantly, the ISIS-linked rebel groups have a common goal of taking
discloses that as early as April 18, 2017, Abdullah Maute had dispatched his control of Mindanao from the government for the purpose of establishing the region
followers to the cities of Marawi, Iligan, and Cagayan de Oro to conduct bornbing as a wilayah. This political purpose, coupled with the rising of arms publicly against
operations, camapping, and "liquidation" of AFP and PNP personnel in the said the government, constitutes the crime of rebellion and encompasses territories even
areas. These circumstances clearly indicate a concerted effort of, formerly separate outside Marawi City, endangering the safety of the public not only in said City but
armed groups now united under an ISIS flag to essentially undertake a rebellion in the entire Mindanao.
the Mindanao region. 3. The validity of the declaration in the whole Mindanao is further bolstered by the fact
that rebellion has no “predetermined bounds.” In People v. Lovedioro, the OSG
raised that the gravamen of the crime of rebellion is an armed public uprising against
the government and by its very nature, rebellion is essentially a crime of masses or
 multitudes involving crowd action, which cannot be confined a priori within and necessity tests are satisfied. The Court cannot be defending vigorously its
predetermined bounds. review power at the beginning, with respect to the sufficiency-of- factual basis
question, then be in default when required to address the questions of necessity,
Justice Reyes, concurring. proportionality, and coverage. Such luxury is not allowed this Court by express
He just reiterated the main points of the main opinion. directive of the Constitution.
Justice Mendoza, concurring.
1. The Court cannot just enjoin the implementation of martial law. It can only do so if
the sufficiency of the factual bases for such declaration cannot be proven in an
appropriate proceeding. In this case, different events caused the declaration. There is
no specific definition as to what martial law is. Thus, the president has a broad
power, but there are constitutional safeguards to balance this.
Justice Velasco Jr., concurring.
He just reiterated the main points of the main opinion.
Justice Tijam, concurring.
He just reiterated the main points of the main opinion
Chief Justice Sereno, dissenting.
1. President Duterte was unable to lay down sufficient factual basis to declare martial
law and suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in the entire islands group
of Mindanao. Rather, the proclamation is valid only in the entire province of Lanao
del Sur (of which Marawi is part), and in the provinces of Maguindanao and Sulu.
2. Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana and General Eduardo Ano’s statements both
provided that hundreds of violent incidents have wracked Mindanao. However, a
large majority of them are unrelated to the alleged ISIS-inspired rebellion. All
claims of violence and networkinxxg in the President’s report refer solely to those
perpetrated by the Maute Group and its claimed ally, the Abu Sayyaf.
3. Under the Philippine Constitution, martial law is not justifiable by the presence of
violence alone. The unconstitutionality of Proclamation No. 216 arises not simply
because there is no violence in the other parts of Mindanao, rather, because in these
parts the requisites for a valid declaration of martial law have not been proven.
4. Note, that she has already expressed my agreement with the ponencia that the
President has established the sufficiency of the factual basis for the declaration of
martial law and suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in Marawi
City.
a. Assuming the statement of General Ano to be true, I believe that there is
sufficient factual basis for the declaration of martial law and suspension of
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in three provinces, including the
one where Marawi City is situated.
5. Contrary to the thinking of the ponencia, it is possible and feasible to define the
territorial boundaries of martial law. Section 18, Article VII provides that the
President can place the entire country "or any part thereof' under martial law. For
example, if the province is the largest administrative unit for law enforcement that
covers the area of actual conflict, then that unit can be used.
6. When the Court makes a determination on the area coverage of martial law in
accordance with the necessity of public safety test, the Court does not substitute its
wisdom for that of the President, nor its expertise (actually, non-expertise) in
military strategy or technical matters for that of the military's. The Court has to rely
on the allegations put forward by the President and his subalterns and on that basis
apply a trial judge's reasonable mind and common sense on whether the sufficiency