Article XI

ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS

Section 1 Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must, at all times, be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency; act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.

Section 1 is a general statement what a public office is, and a public office is a public trust. Then public officers and employees at all times are accountable to the people. It demands and commands on how our public officers and public employees must act.

A notion of public trust connotes accountability. This provision is designed to exact accountability from public officers. That is why it starts with the statement public office is a public trust.

The meaning of a “public office is a public trust” was given by Justice Malcolm in 1920 in the case of Cornejo vs Gabriel and he said that public office is a public trust means that the basic idea of government of the Philippines is that of a representative government where every officer accepts pursuant to the provisions of law and holds the office as a trust for the people whom he represents. That in a nutshell is what is meant by the term “public office is a public trust”.

In the article on the accountability of officers is where we find who impeachable officers are and likewise the grounds on which the officers can be impeached also what is meant by impeachment.

Section 2 The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.

In Section 2, it provides the officers that are impeachable. The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of. Impeachment is the first stage, and the trial is the second stage where he impeachable officer may be convicted.

Next to that will be the grounds for impeachment, “culpable violation of the constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, betrayal of public trust or other high crimes”. The idea of impeachment started as far back as to the 1935 constitution, in the 1973 constitution it was carried with an addition of a ground which is graft and corruption. In the 1987 constitution another ground is added which is betrayal of public trust.

The enumeration of impeachable officers is exclusive meaning to say that Congress cannot add more officers that may be impeachable. The provision is a constitutional provision and since the constitution has made the enumeration it is exclusive. No other officer may be impeached under this article. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.

We have already studied that corollary to the principle of judicial independence is the claim that courts must have a monopoly of the exercise of judicial functions. Such judicial monopoly is in fact ordained by the Constitution with only two exceptions. The first exception is the power of COMELEC and of the Electoral Tribunals to be the sole judges of election contest. Second is the power of impeachment of Congress.

Impeachment as called by the French is an act of “political justice”, it is of British origin. It is provided in the American Constitution and transplanted to the 1935 Philippine Constitution. The object of the impeachment process is not to punish in the sense of incarceration but only to remove person from office. Impeachment is a proceeding purely of political nature not so much to punish an offender as to secure the state against gross political misdemeanors. It touches neither his person nor his property but simply divests him on his political capacity. The removal and disqualification are the only punishment that can be imposed upon conviction on impeachment. Criminal and civil liability can follow after the officer has been removed by Impeachment. Prosecution after impeachment does not constitute prohibited double jeopardy.

A classic example of that is the impeachment of former Chief Justice Corona. It is a political proceeding. You can almost feel the members of the impeachment court making their judgments based on political grounds. It has nothing to do with proof beyond reasonable doubt, it is not like that. That is why if you would test the grounds for which Renato Corona was impeached and convicted by the senate against the grounds enumerated on the constitution you can barely find which one of the grounds for impeachment was he impeached except by saying betrayal of public trust. In the trial what was really pointed to be the mortal sin of Corona is when he lied about his Statement of Assets and Liabilities. Where he point out that after it was exposed, he was hiding so much. It would seem that the ground for which he was impeached and convicted would be betrayal of public trust.

Betrayal of public trust as a ground in impeachment is a “catch all” ground. The ground could be anything and after going through conviction and being removed from office Corona; the state can now proceed against him for his criminal liabilities, like for his instance they are now proceeding against him by his tax liability. Corona’s case is an example of impeachment proceedings in the Philippines. This was the first impeachment that went through trial and conviction.

In Erap’s case, there was a trial but no conviction. It was stopped because EDSA 2 happened. All the impeachment before them for Quirino, Marcos even Arroyo went through the filing of complaint but it was never brought to the Senate for trial. It was dismissed in the House of Representatives.

Prosecution after impeachment does not constitute prohibited double jeopardy. Corona cannot say that he is being placed under double jeopardy because of the criminal case against him after the impeachment trial and removal from office.

The quote “betrayal of public trust” is intended as a catch all phrase to cover any violation of the oath of office. It refers to all acts, even if not punishable by statute as penal offenses, which would render the officer unfit to continue in office. Example of betrayal of public trust are betrayals of public interest, inexcusable negligence of duty, tyrannical abuse of power , breach of official duty by malfeasance or misfeasance, cronyism, favoritism, obstruction of justice etc. to the prejudice of public interest in which tend to bring the office into dispute.

Graft and corruption and betrayal of public trust can be grounds for impeachment, their concrete manner of commission must be same severity as treason and bribery, offenses that strike at the very heart of the life of the nation, and this is the commentary of Bernas before the proceedings of Corona.

Now we test this commentary on what actually happened to Corona. Is it like that? Probably.

Section 3 (1) The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment.

Impeachment process has 2 stages. The filing of the impeachment complaint (this is the impeachment stage). When you say that Corona was impeached, he was impeached by the House of Representatives and was convicted by the senate. Gloria Arroyo, Ferdinand Marcos, Erap was impeached during her time, in the House of Representatives. This means that the impeachment process is merely the filing of the complaint against the respondent. After the impeachment process it goes to the Senate for the second stage which is the Trial Stage, then conviction.

(2) A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any Member of the House of Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution or endorsement by any Member thereof, which shall be included in the Order of Business within ten session days, and referred to the proper Committee within three session days thereafter. The Committee, after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its Members, shall submit its report to the House within sixty session days from such referral, together with the corresponding resolution. The resolution shall be calendared for consideration by the House within ten session days from receipt thereof.

The initiation of cases of impeachment is thru a verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by any Member of the House of the Representative or by a citizen, upon the resolution of endorsement of any Member of the House of the Representative. There is always a participation of a Member of the House of the Representative. It must be endorsed by a Member of the House of the Representative even if the complaint was filed by a citizen.

After the filing, it shall be included in the Order of Business within ten session days, and referred to the proper Committee within three session days thereafter. When we’re studying Article VI, how a bill becomes a law? We went through a process of filing a bill, and then it is included in the order of business. The bill is now read on the first reading then after the reading it is referred to a Committee, it is what it meant on this process. The impeachment complaint will go through the same process as to filing of a bill. It is filed on the docket, after filing it is now included on the Order of Business for the day. The order of Business is taken up on the session day and the impeachment complaint will be read like any other bill . It will also be referred like a bill to the appropriate committee.

The committee that will handle impeachment complaints will be the Committee on Justice of the House of Representatives. The constitution specifically provides for the number of days that an impeachment complaint must follow. 10 days in the order of business, referred to the proper Committee within three session days thereafter and then it is heard by the Committee. After that it will be approved by the Justice Committee and a committee report will be submitted to the House for Plenary Session.

There are also stages of the proceedings on the Committee Level:

One is that the Committee must have a finding as to whether or not the complaint is in due form . Is the formalities provided by law followed? Was it endorsed by a Member of the House of Representatives?

After finding a due form then the Committee will now make a finding of its substance. Does it have enough grounds provided in the constitution? Does it constitute culpable violation of the constitution? Then this will be deliberated by the members of the Justice committee. After the deliberations the members of the committee will have a finding whether the complaint is proper in substance. If it is proper in substance, it will be approved by the members of the committee by a majority vote of its members. After the approval of the committee it will now be brought to the plenary and will be scheduled in the plenary.

When the impeachment complaint lives the committee level, and they approved it, it will now be a resolution. That resolution will have the details of impeachment. It will state the findings of the committee, as to the impeachable offenses. Take note also that the committee shall have only have 60 session days to decide on the impeachment complaint.

(3) A vote of at least one-third of all the Members of the House shall be necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles of Impeachment of the Committee, or override its contrary resolution. The vote of each Member shall be recorded.

When the complaint is taken up on the plenary, a vote of at least one-third of all the Members of the House shall be necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles of Impeachment of the Committee, or override its contrary resolution. If the committee says NO and it is brought to the plenary, the members by a vote of one third may say it is impeachable. In which case the articles of impeachment are prepared and shall be sent to the Senate for trial.

(4) In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.

Number 4 means to say that if 30 members of the House filed the impeachment complaint, that itself already is an approval by the House of Representatives. This will now be brought to the Senate. The complaint itself will now constitute the articles of impeachment. It is as if the House of Rep has considered the impeachment complaint. There is no necessity for the House to discuss if the impeachment complaint is filed by 30 or more than of the Members of the House of Rep.

In the impeachment complaint of Corona, initially there were only a few but after it was discussed more than 30 members of the House of Rep signed the impeachment complaint, so it was not brought anymore to the plenary for discussion. It was brought directly to the senate because more than 30 had already signed but it would seem that in this there were a mix of number 3 and number 4.

Take note that in number 3, the impeachment complaint will go through the process of being deliberated upon the Committee and then brought to the plenary and then one third of the members of house of rep will vote for impeachment. It will be brought to the senate for trial.

In number 4, refers to a situation where on the onset one third of the members already signed the complaint in which case it is not deliberated upon anymore by the house of rep but it will be directly endorsed to the senate for trial.

I believe that is what happened to Corona, more so with the case of impeachment of Erap. In the beginning there were only a few members who signed the complaint. During the time of Estrada, hawak nya ang Congress. It was impossible to impeach Erap. Atty. Lara never thought that the House of Rep will impeach Erap because most of the Members of the House of Rep are with Erap. There is no way he could be impeached. It was entertained by the committee of justice but as the deliberation went along the number of protesters is now getting bigger. Then it is decided that the impeachment complaint will be brought to the Senate for a trial and kill it there.

The impeachment complaint of Erap is connected to Number 3 and Number 4. Noong sinabi ni Villar na there being one third of the Members of the House of Rep who have signed the impeachment complaint, the complaint is now endorsed to the Senate for trial which is wrong because provision number 4 which says that if more than one third signed the impeachment complaint it shall be directly endorsed to the Senate supposes the situation where it is initially pag file palang may trial na. hindi kagaya nung nangyari na nai-file muna then na deliberate and then nagkaron ng one third that is not the situation called for under number 4. Villar was wrong

when he endorsed the complaint to the Senate for trial on the ground for more than one third of the Members of the House of Rep signed the impeachment complaint.

The initiation as mentioned in Number 3 refers to the filing of impeachment complaint coupled with congress taking initial action on said complaint. The initial action is the referral of the complaint to the Committee on justice. So that is what it meant by initiation. Once an impeachment complaint went through the process of initiation there cannot be any second impeachment complaint.

(5) No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year.

(6) The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. When sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall preside, but shall not vote. No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.

When the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice will preside as in the case of Erap.

(7) Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office and disqualification to hold any office under the Republic of the Philippines, but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to prosecution, trial, and punishment, according to law.

(8) The Congress shall promulgate its rules on impeachment to effectively carry out the purpose of this section.

In the case of Merceditas Guttierez vs House of the Representatives the term promulgation, as used in Number 8 means to make known but not necessarily to publish in the official gazette or in newspaper of general circulation.

An important thing about the impeachment is that it is not an ordinary trial, what is sought to be discovered is not just the guilt or innocence of the Public Officer in the criminal sense but the Public Official’s worthiness of the solemn trust that has been conferred upon him.

At the onset when the evidence of the deposits of Corona was already coming out and the amount was staggering, at that point he was already damaged. So judging from the nature of in impeachment proceeding what is sought to be discovered is not the guilt but the worthiness of the Public Officer.

The penalty that the senate may impose shall be limited to removal from office.

Section 4 The present anti-graft court known as the Sandiganbayan shall continue to function and exercise its jurisdiction as now or hereafter may be provided by law.

The Sandiganbayan is a graft court that was created on the 1973 constitution, back then there was a Sandiganbayan and a Tanodbayan. Tanodbayan is the prosecutor, he investigats the graft cases, he files the graft cases to the Sandiganbayan. The Sandiganbayan is the one that tries it. That was the concept on the 1973 constitution.

Now under the 1987 Constitution, the Sandiganbayan shall continue to function and exercise its jurisdiction as a graft court, the constitution re-affirms the continuous existence of the Sandiganbayan.

Section 5 There is hereby created the independent Office of the Ombudsman, composed of the Ombudsman to be known as Tanodbayan, one overall Deputy and at least one Deputy each for Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. A separate Deputy for the military establishment may likewise be appointed.

Then under the 1987 Constitution, There is hereby created the independent Office of the Ombudsman, composed of the Ombudsman to be known as Tanodbayan but this is not the Tanodbayan under the 1973 constitution.

Section 6 The officials and employees of the Office of the Ombudsman, other than the Deputies, shall be appointed by the Ombudsman, according to the Civil Service Law.

Section 7 The existing Tanodbayan shall hereafter be known as the Office of the Special Prosecutor. It shall continue to function and exercise its powers as now or hereafter may be provided by law, except those conferred on the Office of the Ombudsman created under this Constitution.

The existing Tanodbayan under the 1987 constitution shall be known as the Office of the Special Prosecutor. The Sandiganbayan and the Tanodbayan was created under the 1973 Constitution. On the 1987 constitution the Sandiganbayan shall continue as a graft court and it created the office of the Ombudsman which is now known as the Tanodbayan. The tanodbayan on the 1973 Constitution was converted as the Special Prosecutor on the 1987 Constitution.

In the 1973 we have the Sandiganbayan and the prosecutor as the Tanodbayan. In 1987 we have the Sandiganbayan, the Ombudsman as the one who investigates graft cases and then we also have the Office of the Special Prosecutor which prosecutes the case on the Sandiganbayan. We now have a Court, one who investigates the cases and a prosecutor.

Generally, the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan is over public officers. However in case private individualsar charged as co-principals, accomplices or accessories with the public officers or employees, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees.

Question, does the sandigandayan have jurisdiction over private individuals? Yes. As a general rule no, but the exemption is when private individuals are charged as accomplices then yes.

Section 8 The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines, and at the time of their appointment, at least forty years old, of recognized probity and independence, and members of the Philippine Bar, and must not have been candidates for any elective office in the immediately preceding election. The Ombudsman must have, for ten years or more, been a judge or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.

Section 9 The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall be appointed by the President from a list of at least six nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council, and from a list of three nominees for every vacancy thereafter. Such appointments shall require no confirmation. All vacancies shall be filled within three months after they occur.

Section 10 The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall have the rank of Chairman and Members, respectively, of the Constitutional Commissions, and they shall receive the same salary which shall not be decreased during their term of office.

Section 11 The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall serve for a term of seven years without reappointment. They shall not be qualified to run for any office in the election immediately succeeding their cessation from office.

The complaint submitted to the Ombudsman has no prescribed form.

Section 12 The Ombudsman and his Deputies, as protectors of the people, shall act promptly on complaints filed in any form or manner against public officials or employees of the Government, or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations, and shall, in appropriate cases, notify the complainants of the action taken and the result thereof.

Section 13 The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the following powers, functions, and duties:

You will notice on the enumeration, it is investigatory and recommendatory. These are the functions of the Ombudsman on the 1987 Constitution.

(1) Investigate on its own, or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public official, employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient.

(2) Direct, upon complaint or at its own instance, any public official or employee of the Government, or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, as well as of any government-owned or controlled corporation with original charter, to perform and expedite any act or duty required by law, or to stop, prevent, and correct any abuse or impropriety in the performance of duties.

(3) Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public official or employee at fault, and recommend his removal, suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith.

Number 3 is the pinaka matapang among all of the functions of the Ombudsman. If these would be the basis for the power of the Ombudsman, it could have been impossible for the Ombudsman to remove Jefferson Soriano from office. Unfortunately for JeffSor, the Ombudsman act of 1989 was passed by Congress.

In the Ombudsman act of 1989, the Ombudsman was given more powers not mentioned in the Constitution. Is that constitutional? Can congress add powers of the Ombudsman not enumerated in the Constitution? YES, why? Because of Number 8.

(4) Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subject to such limitations as may be provided by law, to furnish it with copies of documents relating to contracts or transactions entered into by his office involving the disbursement or use of public funds or properties, and report any irregularity to the Commission on Audit for appropriate action.

(5) Request any government agency for assistance and information necessary in the discharge of its responsibilities, and to examine, if necessary, pertinent records and documents.

(6) Publicize matters covered by its investigation when circumstances so warrant and with due prudence.

(7) Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud, and corruption in the Government and make recommendations for their elimination and the observance of high standards of ethics and efficiency.

(8) Promulgate its rules of procedure and exercise such other powers or perform such functions or duties as may be provided by law.

Number 8 is the license of Congress to legislate additional powers for the Ombudsman. Now the Ombudsman is not only investigatory, it can now also remove officials administratively from office. That is the power contained in the Ombudsman Act of 1989.

RA 6770 or the Ombudsman Act of 1989 empowers the Ombudsman to conduct preliminary investigation and to directly undertake criminal prosecutions. The constitutional basis of this power is Article 11, Section 3, and Number 8. The legislature may validly empower the Ombudsman with prosecutorial powers. Just like in the case of Camanag vs. Guerrero. The ombudsman may conduct preliminary investigation on the impeachable officials.

As for the case of OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, Petitioner, vs. PRUDENCIO C. QUIMBO, COURT OF APPEALS, 20TH DIVISION, CEBU CITY, Respondents G.R. No. 173277 February 25, 2015. It is a reiteration of the case of Camanag vs. Guerrero, that the Ombudsman has the power to directly impose administrative penalties against public officials or employees, as to what happened to JeffSor.

The text in Article 11 Section 13 Number 3 merely indicates a recommendatory function; this does not direst congress of its plenary legislative power to vest ombudsman powers that are stated on the Constitutional provision.

Section 14 The Office of the Ombudsman shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Its approved annual appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released.

Section 15 The right of the State to recover properties unlawfully acquired by public officials or employees, from them or from their nominees or transferees, shall not be barred by prescription, laches, or estoppel.

Aside from the anti-graft and corrupt practices act there is an accompanying law that empowers the State to go after the properties of any government officials and the only formula that they will impose is the state will compute your salary and your properties is way beyond your means and if it is found that your properties and assets is much way beyond you salary then that law empowers the state to confiscate these properties. It is the companion law of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act.

Can the prosecution of a crime prescribe? The prosecution of the crime committed prescribes because that is the law. The power to run after properties that are unlawfully acquired must not prescribe.

Section 16 No loan, guaranty, or other form of financial accommodation for any business purpose may be granted, directly or indirectly, by any government-owned or controlled bank or financial institution to the President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Constitutional Commissions, the Ombudsman, or to any firm or entity in which they have controlling interest, during their tenure.

Section 17 A public officers or employee shall, upon assumption of office and as often thereafter as may be required by law, submit a declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities, and net worth. In the case of the President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional offices, and officers of the armed forces with general or flag rank, the declaration shall be disclosed to the public in the manner provided by law.

Section 18 Public officers and employees owe the State and this Constitution allegiance at all times and any public officer or employee who seeks to change his citizenship or acquire the status of an immigrant of another country during his tenure shall be dealt with by law.

ARTICLE XII

ARTICLE XIII

Article XIII

SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 1 The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good.

To this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and disposition of property and its increments.

If you look at Section 1 Article 13, it will look familiar because we met this literature before on the Paglaun case, about Party List System. In the Paglaun case, it describes the party list system as a social justice and that is exactly what the Section 1 is talking about. In all aspects, in all enactments of Congress must always be in the picture.

Section 1 of article 13 is related to Section 10 of Article 2 in the declarations of Principle. This is principally the embodiment of the principle that those who have less in life should have more in law. It commands a legal bias in favor of those who are underprivileged. Section 1 translates the social justice principle into a duty of the state to attend to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good. Since the goal embodied in the in the Command are to be achieved through legislation, the task is given to Congress.

In the 1935, 1973 constitution the focus is on the economic inequities, however in the 1987 constitution covers all phases of National Development with emphasis not just on socio-economic but likewise on political and cultural inequities. The solution on Political inequities will come on the provisions of the constitution such as the party list system. The declaration of principles against political dynasties and more chances of those who have less to participate on the political system, these are the solutions for political inequities. In the cultural sphere, you’ll find the provisions on the indigenous people on the constitution then you have on what was the basis for enacting the Indigenous People Rights Act.

Take note on what is embodied in section 1 you will find likewise in section 1 article 12, national patrimony. That also talks about equity for everyone.

Section 2 The promotion of social justice shall include the commitment to create economic opportunities based on freedom of initiative and self-reliance.

LABOR

Section 3 The State shall afford full protection to labor, local and overseas, organized and unorganized, and promote full employment and equality of employment opportunities for all.

These are the enumerations of rights on Labor. Section 3 of Article 13 elaborates on the provision in Article 2 by specifying who are protected by the constitution, what rights are guaranteed, and what positive meaning sures the state should take in order to enhance the welfare of labor.

It shall guarantee the rights of all workers to self-organization, collective bargaining and negotiations, and peaceful concerted activities, including the right to strike in accordance with law. They shall be entitled to security of tenure, humane conditions of work, and a living wage. They shall also participate in policy and decision-making processes affecting their rights and benefits as may be provided by law.

The State shall promote the principle of shared responsibility between workers and employers and the preferential use of voluntary modes in settling disputes, including conciliation, and shall enforce their mutual compliance therewith to foster industrial peace.

The third paragraph commands the principle of shared responsibility between workers and employers and the preferential use of voluntary modes in settling disputes.

The State shall regulate the relations between workers and employers, recognizing the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of production and the right of enterprises to reasonable returns to investments, and to expansion and growth.

AGRARIAN AND NATURAL RESOURCES REFORM

Section 4 The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded on the right of farmers and regular farmworkers who are landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. In determining retention limits, the State shall respect the right of small landowners. The State shall further provide incentives for voluntary land-sharing.

Section 4 is the basis of the enactment of the Agrarian Reform Act. It has been suggested like the power of eminent domain, the distributions of lands for purposes of land reform must have just compensation. In the deliberation of the Constitutional Commissions, it has been suggested that just compensation to be paid for land reform may be less than the market value because it is not strictly an exercise of the power of eminent domain but also the exercise of the police power of the state to promote social justice.

One of the conditions for distribution and exercise of the power of eminent domain is it must be of public purpose and must be for a just compensation. The distributions of lands under the land reform program are also lightened to exercise of eminent domain, land is taken for public use and distributed but there must be just compensation to the owner of the land but in the deliberations Bernas himself was very active in the suggestion and deliberation that the just compensation for lands that are distributed for land reform must not be like that on the distribution of lands in the exercise of eminent domain by the state because principally land reform is a social justice tool. So therefore, there was a suggestion that in the payment of just compensation it should be less but again the right of land owners. The rights of the land owners should be in the picture, you cannot just take away their lands. Land will be distributed to the farmers and get a compensation that is lower than the value of the property.

That was the conflict although the suggestion is there but the nearest solution to that would be that the state will shoulder the difference. Land is taken from the owner of the property for purposes of land reform it is for a public use like that of the eminent domain. In determining the just compensation it must not be borne alone from the farmer, it might be burdensome for the farmer. You will give the land for their livelihood, how will he pay for it? The nearest solution is that it must be borne by the state although there is no law which says or provides for the portion which must be paid by the state. It is merely a suggestion. Just compensation is less than that of the exercise of eminent domain.

Section 5 The State shall recognize the right of farmers, farmworkers, and landowners, as well as cooperatives, and other independent farmers’ organizations to participate in the planning, organization, and management of the program, and shall provide support to agriculture through appropriate technology and research, and adequate financial, production, marketing, and other support services.

Section 6 The State shall apply the principles of agrarian reform or stewardship, whenever applicable in accordance with law, in the disposition or utilization of other natural resources, including lands of the public domain under lease or concession suitable to agriculture, subject to prior rights, homestead rights of small settlers, and the rights of indigenous communities to their ancestral lands.

The State may resettle landless farmers and farmworkers in its own agricultural estates which shall be distributed to them in the manner provided by law.

Section 7 The State shall protect the rights of subsistence fishermen, especially of local communities, to the preferential use of the communal marine and fishing resources, both inland and offshore. It shall provide support to such fishermen through appropriate technology and research, adequate financial, production, and marketing assistance, and other services. The State shall also protect, develop, and conserve such resources. The protection shall extend to offshore fishing grounds of subsistence fishermen against foreign intrusion. Fishworkers shall receive a just share from their labor in the utilization of marine and fishing resources.

Section 8 The State shall provide incentives to landowners to invest the proceeds of the agrarian reform program to promote industrialization, employment creation, and privatization of public sector enterprises. Financial instruments used as payment for their lands shall be honored as equity in enterprises of their choice.

In section 8, you will find this provision discussed on the National economy and patrimony in section 1. The goals of the economy have something to do with industrialization. The formula of industrialization according to the article on National economy and patrimony is for the proceeds of the agrarian reform will be used for industrialization that is a stated formula. That is a provision which is found in section 8.

URBAN LAND REFORM AND HOUSING

Section 9 The State shall, by law, and for the common good, undertake, in cooperation with the private sector, a continuing program of urban land reform and housing which will make available at affordable cost, decent housing and basic services to underprivileged and homeless citizens in urban centers and resettlement areas. It shall also promote adequate employment opportunities to such citizens. In the implementation of such program the State shall respect the rights of small property owners.

Section 10 Urban or rural poor dwellers shall not be evicted nor their dwelling demolished, except in accordance with law and in a just and humane manner.

No resettlement of urban or rural dwellers shall be undertaken without adequate consultation with them and the communities where they are to be relocated.

HEALTH

Section 11 The State shall adopt an integrated and comprehensive approach to health development which shall endeavor to make essential goods, health and other social services available to all the people at affordable cost. There shall be priority for the needs of the underprivileged, sick, elderly, disabled, women, and children. The State shall endeavor to provide free medical care to paupers.

Section 12 The State shall establish and maintain an effective food and drug regulatory system and undertake appropriate health, manpower development, and research, responsive to the country’s health needs and problems.

Section 13 The State shall establish a special agency for disabled persons for their rehabilitation, self-development, and self-reliance, and their integration into the mainstream of society.

WOMEN

Section 14 The State shall protect working women by providing safe and healthful working conditions, taking into account their maternal functions, and such facilities and opportunities that will enhance their welfare and enable them to realize their full potential in the service of the nation.

ROLE AND RIGHTS OF PEOPLE’S ORGANIZATIONS

Section 15 The State shall respect the role of independent people’s organizations to enable the people to pursue and protect, within the democratic framework, their legitimate and collective interests and aspirations through peaceful and lawful means.

People’s organizations are bona fide associations of citizens with demonstrated capacity to promote the public interest and with identifiable leadership, membership, and structure.

It commands the state respect the role of independent people’s organization.

Section 16 The right of the people and their organizations to effective and reasonable participation at all levels of social, political, and economic decision-making shall not be abridged. The State shall, by law, facilitate the establishment of adequate consultation mechanisms.

HUMAN RIGHTS

Section 17 (1) There is hereby created an independent office called the Commission on Human Rights.

Human rights in general are the recognition on respect on human dignity. Human rights is inherent to all human beings, it is the rights you have simply because you are a human being. That is the general definition of human rights. The principle universality of human rights is the cover stone of the international human rights law, this principle was emphasized in the Declarations of Human Rights in the United Nations on 1948.

What is the status of the commission? Is it a Constitutional Office? The Human Rights Commission is a creation of the Constitution although it is not on the same level as the Constitutional Commissions.

(2) The Commission shall be composed of a Chairman and four Members who must be natural-born citizens of the Philippines and a majority of whom shall be members of the Bar. The term of office and other qualifications and disabilities of the Members of the Commission shall be provided by law.

(3) Until this Commission is constituted, the existing Presidential Committee on Human Rights shall continue to exercise its present functions and powers.

(4) The approved annual appropriations of the Commission shall be automatically and regularly released.

Section 18 The Commission on Human Rights shall have the following powers and functions:

You will notice that very much like the power and functions of the office of the Ombudsman on the constitution and the power of Human Rights on the Constitution is also investigatory.

What is the scope of the function of Human Rights Commission; it involves only civil and political rights. It does not involve economic and social rights. In essence the power of the commission is only investigatory and has not prosecutorial powers. If they have to prosecute as a result of their investigation they have to go to the Fiscal’s Office and file it there. On the basis of constitutional commission debates and in the basis of section 18 numbers 1, the commission can only protect civil and political rights as distinct from the less traditional social economic rights; this is the case of Simon vs. Human Rights Commission, the principal function of Human Rights Commission is investigatory and has no power to issue writ of injunction or restraining orders against violators of Human Rights.

Congress may provide for other cases violations on Human Rights that should fall within the authority of the Commission, taking into account its recommendations.

(1) Investigate, on its own or on complaint by any party, all forms of human rights violations involving civil and political rights;

(2) Adopt its operational guidelines and rules of procedure, and cite for contempt for violations thereof in accordance with the Rules of Court;

(3) Provide appropriate legal measures for the protection of human rights of all persons within the Philippines, as well as Filipinos residing abroad, and provide for preventive measures and legal aid services to the underprivileged whose human rights have been violated or need protection;

(4) Exercise visitorial powers over jails, prisons, or detention facilities;

(5) Establish a continuing program of research, education, and information to enhance respect for the primacy of human rights;

(6) Recommend to Congress effective measures to promote human rights and to provide for compensation to victims of violations of human rights, or their families;

(7) Monitor the Philippine Government’s compliance with international treaty obligations on human rights;

(8) Grant immunity from prosecution to any person whose testimony or whose possession of documents or other evidence is necessary or convenient to determine the truth in any investigation conducted by it or under its authority;

(9) Request the assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in the performance of its functions;

(10) Appoint its officers and employees in accordance with law; and

(11) Perform such other duties and functions as may be provided by law.

Section 19 The Congress may provide for other cases of violations of human rights that should fall within the authority of the Commission, taking into account its recommendations.

Article XII

NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY

Section 1 The goals of the national economy are a more equitable distribution of opportunities, income, and wealth; a sustained increase in the amount of goods and services produced by the nation for the benefit of the people; and an expanding productivity as the key to raising the quality of life for all, especially the underprivileged.

The State shall promote industrialization and full employment based on sound agricultural development and agrarian reform, through industries that make full and efficient use of human and natural resources, and which are competitive in both domestic and foreign markets. However, the State shall protect Filipino enterprises against unfair foreign competition and trade practices.

In the pursuit of these goals, all sectors of the economy and all regions of the country shall be given optimum opportunity to develop. Private enterprises, including corporations, cooperatives, and similar collective organizations, shall be encouraged to broaden the base of their ownership.

Section 1 of social justice and human rights maybe similar to section 1 of national economy and patrimony because section 1 it speaks of equity states the goals of national patrimony distribution of opportunities, income, and wealth. A sustained increase in the amount of goods and services produced by the nation for the benefit of the people, expanded productivity as the key in raising the quality of life for all specially the under privileged. Section 1 speaks of equity, so the social justice is in the section 1 of national patrimony also. Aside from the economic goals of the country it also involves equity and social justice.

Article 12 contains the national economic policy, kapag naririnig naten ung constitutional amendments eto ung gusto nilang I-ammend ung constitutional economic provisions. Gusto nilang dagdagan ng phrase ng as may be provided for by law.

Provisions in article 12 say the specific provisions that limits of participation of foreigners in investments in industries and it is stated that if the constitution says that corporations of which are owned by 60 percent by Filipino citizens hanggang dun nalang yon. Ung mga gustong mag amend ng economic provision of the constitution nato very much like that on what Belmonte had proposed na hindi natuloy, they want to add the phrase “as may be provided for by law” so that this venture of this industry and investment shall be limited to Filipino citizens or corporations which are owned by 60 percent by Filipino citizens as may be provided for by law.

If the phrase “as may be provided for by law” will be added, congress can come in to increase it.

Article 12 elaborates the Section 19 and 20 of Declaration of principles, that these are the pillars of the economic policy of the constitution. Section 19 commands the development of a self-reliant and independent national economy while Section 20 recognizes the indispensable role of the private sector.

Section 1 of article 12 expresses the general economic policies of the constitution.

It contains the 3 basic directions of economic policy:

First, it sets the dual goal of dynamic productivity and a more equitable distribution of what is produced. Second, it seeks complimentary between industrialization and agricultural development. Third, it is protective of things Filipino.

The dynamism of the economy is envisioned by this article is expressed in the words “ sustained increase in the amount of goods and services produced” and “expanding productivity” because of this the economic envisioned is dynamic. The equity goal is expressed in the words “a more equitable distribution of opportunities, income, and wealth” “for the benefit of the people especially the under-privileged” and to “broaden the base of ownership”. So if asked how that is expressed in the constitution. It is expressed in the words “ a more equitable distribution of opportunities, income, and wealth” “for the benefit of the people especially the under-privileged” and to “broaden the base of ownership”.

The first paragraph in Section 1 sets the three fold goals of the national economy. One is a more equitable distribution of opportunities, income, and wealth. Two is for the benefit of the people especially the under-privileged and lastly broaden the base of ownership.

Equity is given prominence as the first objective of the National Economic Development. The goal of reducing inequality is an explicit statement of the emerging concept in social philosophy as contained in the social justice and human rights article of this constitution. The preferential option of love for the poor and the underprivileged, the reference to the national product being for the benefit of the Filipino people tries to guarantee the national development efforts shall give priority to the needs of the local population rather than foreign consumers.

The economic policy promotes a balance between the industrialization and agricultural development. What is envisioned by the provisions not necessarily agriculturally related industrialization but rather industrialization that is the result of releasing locked up capital through agrarian reform?

Question, what is the suggested formula of the constitution in arriving industrialization? The suggested formula is to attain industrialization through the releasing locked up capital through agrarian reform. How is this done? Land is distributed to the farmers and landless with just compensation. The just compensation paid to the owner of the land. The constitution hopes shall be used for industrialization purposes.

That is why in the provision; it encourages the state to give incentives to land owners to receive just compensation for the lands that are subjected for reform.

The policy of protecting all things Filipino intent is to protect both the Filipino consumer and the Filipino Producer. The Filipino must be protected against a flood of low quality products. The Filipino producer in turn must be protected from unfair foreign competition and trade practices.

The goals of the economy are pursuit not just for the people and sectors of the economy but also among geographic regions of the country.

Section 2 All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State. With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be alienated. The exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources shall be under the full control and supervision of the State. The State may directly undertake such activities, or it may enter into co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens. Such agreements may be for a period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and under such terms and conditions as may be provided by

law. In cases of water rights for irrigation, water supply fisheries, or industrial uses other than the development of water power, beneficial use may be the measure and limit of the grant.

All natural resources enumerated in section 2 are owned by the state. This is founded on the concept of dominium; it embraces the theory of jura regalia which means ownership is vested in the state.

We now introduce the concept of dominium and imperium. Dominium is the capacity of the state to own or acquire property while imperium is the government authority possessed by the state expressed in the concept of sovereignty. Imperium is for governance and dominium is for ownership of property.

Section 2 is based on the doctrine of dominium which is also the basis of the principle of jura regalia also known as the regalia doctrine. This doctrine is known to mean that everything belongs to the state.

What is jura regalia? What is the constitutional basis of this doctrine? The answer is Section 2 article 12.

The State shall protect the nation’s marine wealth in its archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and exclusive economic zone, and reserve its use and enjoyment exclusively to Filipino citizens.

Second paragraph, the exception of agricultural lands and all other natural resources shall not b alienated, except agricultural lands. Agricultural lands may be alienated if it is declared as alienable and disposable. There is a category and it is the state that categorizes whether or not the agricultural lands are alienable and disposable.

The Congress may, by law, allow small-scale utilization of natural resources by Filipino citizens, as well as cooperative fish farming, with priority to subsistence fishermen and fishworkers in rivers, lakes, bays, and lagoons.

The President may enter into agreements with foreign-owned corporations involving either technical or financial assistance for large-scale exploration, development, and utilization of minerals, petroleum, and other mineral oils according to the general terms and conditions provided by law, based on real contributions to the economic growth and general welfare of the country. In such agreements, the State shall promote the development and use of local scientific and technical resources.

The President shall notify the Congress of every contract entered into in accordance with this provision, within thirty days from its execution.

Section 3 Lands of the public domain are classified into agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands and national parks. Agricultural lands of the public domain may be further classified by law according to the uses to which they may be devoted. Alienable lands of the public domain shall be limited to agricultural lands. Private corporations or associations may not hold such alienable lands of the public domain except by lease, for a period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and not to exceed one thousand hectares in area. Citizens of the Philippines may lease not more than five hundred hectares, or acquire not more than twelve hectares thereof, by purchase, homestead, or grant.

Taking into account the requirements of conservation, ecology, and development, and subject to the requirements of agrarian reform, the Congress shall determine, by law, the size of lands of the public domain which may be acquired, developed, held, or leased and the conditions therefor.

Section 4 The Congress shall, as soon as possible, determine, by law, the specific limits of forest lands and national parks, marking clearly their boundaries on the ground. Thereafter, such forest lands and national parks shall be conserved and may not be increased nor diminished, except by law. The Congress shall provide for such period as it may determine measures to prohibit logging in endangered forests and watershed areas.

Section 5 The State, subject to the provisions of this Constitution and national development policies and programs, shall protect the rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral lands to ensure their economic, social, and cultural well-being.

The Congress may provide for the applicability of customary laws governing property rights or relations in determining the ownership and extent of ancestral domain.

Section 6 The use of property bears a social function, and all economic agents shall contribute to the common good. Individuals and private groups, including corporations, cooperatives, and similar collective organizations, shall have the right to own, establish, and operate economic enterprises, subject to the duty of the State to promote distributive justice and to intervene when the common good so demands.

Section 7 Save in cases of hereditary succession, no private lands shall be transferred or conveyed except to individuals, corporations, or associations qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public domain.

Section 8 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 7 of this Article, a natural-born citizen of the Philippines who has lost his Philippine citizenship may be a transferee of private lands, subject to limitations provided by law.

Section 9. The Congress may establish an independent economic and planning agency headed by the President, which shall, after consultations with the appropriate public agencies, various private sectors, and local government units, recommend to Congress, and implement continuing integrated and coordinated programs and policies for national development.

Until the Congress provides otherwise, the National Economic and Development Authority shall function as the independent planning agency of the government.

Section 10 The Congress shall, upon recommendation of the economic and planning agency, when the national interest dictates, reserve to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens, or such higher percentage as Congress may prescribe, certain areas of investments. The Congress shall enact measures that will encourage the formation and operation of enterprises whose capital is wholly owned by Filipinos.

In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos.

The State shall regulate and exercise authority over foreign investments within its national jurisdiction and in accordance with its national goals and priorities.

Section 11 No franchise, certificate, or any other form of authorization for the operation of a public utility shall be granted except to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations organized under the laws of the Philippines, at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens; nor shall such franchise, certificate, or authorization be exclusive in character or for a longer period than fifty years. Neither shall any such franchise or right be granted except under the condition that it shall be subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by the Congress when the common good so requires. The State shall encourage equity participation in public utilities by the general public. The participation of foreign investors in the governing body of any public utility enterprise shall be limited to their proportionate share in its capital, and all the executive and managing officers of such corporation or association must be citizens of the Philippines.

Section 12 The State shall promote the preferential use of Filipino labor, domestic materials and locally produced goods, and adopt measures that help make them competitive.

Section 13 The State shall pursue a trade policy that serves the general welfare and utilizes all forms and arrangements of exchange on the basis of equality and reciprocity.

Section 14 The sustained development of a reservoir of national talents consisting of Filipino scientists, entrepreneurs, professionals, managers, high-level technical manpower and skilled workers and craftsmen in all fields shall be promoted by the State. The State shall encourage appropriate technology and regulate its transfer for the national benefit.

The practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens, save in cases prescribed by law.

Section 15 The Congress shall create an agency to promote the viability and growth of cooperatives as instruments for social justice and economic development.

Section 16 The Congress shall not, except by general law, provide for the formation, organization, or regulation of private corporations. Government-owned or controlled corporations may be created or established by special charters in the interest of the common good and subject to the test of economic viability.

Section 17 In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately-owned public utility or business affected with public interest.

Section 18 The State may, in the interest of national welfare or defense, establish and operate vital industries and, upon payment of just compensation, transfer to public ownership utilities and other private enterprises to be operated by the Government.

Section 19 The State shall regulate or prohibit monopolies when the public interest so requires. No combinations in restraint of trade or unfair competition shall be allowed.

Section 20 The Congress shall establish an independent central monetary authority, the members of whose governing board must be natural-born Filipino citizens, of known probity, integrity, and patriotism, the majority of whom shall come from the private sector. They shall also be subject to such other qualifications and disabilities as may be prescribed by law. The authority shall provide policy direction in the areas of money, banking, and credit. It shall have supervision over the operations of banks and exercise such regulatory powers as may be provided by law over the operations of finance companies and other institutions performing similar functions.

Until the Congress otherwise provides, the Central Bank of the Philippines operating under existing laws, shall function as the central monetary authority.

Section 21 Foreign loans may only be incurred in accordance with law and the regulation of the monetary authority. Information on foreign loans obtained or guaranteed by the Government shall be made available to the public.

Section 22 Acts which circumvent or negate any of the provisions of this Article shall be considered inimical to the national interest and subject to criminal and civil sanctions, as may be provided by law.