Part III

Question 1

What is Article XVII of the 1987 Constitution? Cite all the provisions.

Answer 1

Art XVII of the 1987 Constitution
Section 1. Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be proposed by:
The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members; or
A constitutional convention.

Section 2. Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition of at least twelve per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters therein. No amendment under this section shall be authorized within five years following the ratification of this Constitution nor oftener than once every five years thereafter.
The Congress shall provide for the implementation of the exercise of this right.

Section 3. The Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of all its Members, call a constitutional convention, or by a majority vote of all its Members, submit to the electorate the question of calling such a convention.

Section 4.Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution under Section 1 hereof shall be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the approval of such amendment or revision.
Any amendment under Section 2 hereof shall be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the certification by the Commission on Elections of the sufficiency of the petition.

Question 2

Amendment vs Revision

Answer 2

Amendment → change or modification of a stature by addition, deletion, or alteration; the statute survives in its amended form; does not touch basic fundamental principles of the Constitution

Revision → change that alters the basic principles involved

Question 3

What are the 2 forms of amendment?

Answer 3

The amendment of statute is affected by the enactment of an amendatory act or modifying or altering some provisions of the statute either expressly or impliedly

Express → contain clear and direct language that explicitly states the law, rights, duties, or prohibitions. There is no need for interpretation or inference because the statute plainly outlines what it intends to regulate or enforce.

Implied → those where the meaning, rights, or obligations are not explicitly stated but can be reasonably inferred from the language or the purpose of the statute; courts or legal authorities must interpret the law’s intent based on its context or underlying principles

Question 4

How is an amendment constructed?

Answer 4

→ A statute and its amendment should be read together as a whole

The amendment to a section of an act should be read in connection with other sections as if all had been enacted in the same statute

→ The amendment becomes a part of the original statute as if it had always been contained therein

→ The provisions of the original act which are not affected by the amendment and those portions of the section amended which are repealed in the amendment remain in force, while those parts of the section amended which are omitted in the amendment are deemed repealed.

Question 5

Operation of Amendments and its exceptions

Answer 5

General Rule: Prospective
The general rule is that an amendatory act operates prospectively.

Exception: Express Provision on Retroactivity
An amendment will not be construed as having a retroactive effect, UNLESS retroactive effect is necessarily implied from the language used

Exception to the exception: When Vested Rights are Impaired
An amendment will not be construed retroactively, even though it so provides, if to do so will impair vested rights or the obligations of contract

Question 6

Effect of Jurisdiction of Courts

Answer 6

The jurisdiction of a court to try cases is determined by the law in force at the time the action is instituted.

In the absence of a clear legislative intent to the contrary, a subsequent statute amending a prior act with the effect of divesting the court of jurisdiction may not be construed to operate to oust jurisdiction that has already attached under the prior law.

Where a court originally obtains and exercises jurisdiction pursuant to an existing law, such jurisdiction will not be overturned and impaired by the subsequent amendment of the law, unless express prohibitory words or words of similar import are used.

Question 7

Effect of Nullity of Prior or Amendatory Act

Answer 7

Where a statute which has been amended is invalid, nothing in effect has been amended.

Where the amendatory act is declared unconstitutional, it is as if the amendment did not exist, and the original statute before the attempted amendment remains unaffected and in force.

Question 8

Revision vs Codification

Answer 8

Revision pertains to the process of revising, updating, or modifying existing laws without necessarily organizing them into a comprehensive code. It involves changes made to specific laws to ensure they remain relevant and effective.

Codification refers to the process of organizing and consolidating related laws into a unified and systematic legal code. This code aims to provide a comprehensive and organized reference for specific areas of law.

Question 9

How should the different provisions of the code be construed?

Answer 9

They should be read and construed together and should not be read as a series of disconnected articles or provisions

Question 10

Who has the authority to revise or codify laws?

Answer 10

The legislature sometimes enacts revised or codified statutes, especially in fields or subjects in which the legislature has passed various laws.

Question 11

Construction: Harmonize the Different Provisions of the Revised Statute or Code

Answer 11

In the revision or codification of laws, the presumption is that its author has maintained a consistent philosophy or position. The rule is that a code is enacted as a single, comprehensive statute, and is to be considered as such and not as a series of disconnected articles or provisions. However, where there is an irreconcilable conflict between parts of a revised statute or a code, that which is best in accord with the general plan or, in the absence of circumstances upon which to base a choice, that which is later in physical position, being the latest expression of legislative will, will prevail.

Question 12

Effect of Omission of Provisions of Old Laws

Answer 12

All parts and provisions of the old laws that are omitted in the revised statute or code are deemed repealed unless the statute or code provides otherwise, expressly or impliedly.

Question 13

What is the general rule for the omission of provisions of old laws?

Answer 13

What is omitted is deemed repealed

Question 14

What are the two types of repeal?

Answer 14

Express Repeal → a new law specifically mentions another law and repeals it.

Implied Repeal → it is not specific; not clear; no label

Question 15

Requisites to a Repeal

Answer 15

There is an old law and a new law
Both laws cover the same subject matter
The new law is repugnant or incompatible with the old law

Question 16

Exception to the Rule: Revised Statute Provides Otherwise

Answer 16

The exception arises when the revised statute explicitly states or implies that certain provisions of the old laws are preserved or continue to have legal effect, despite not being restated in the revised statute

Question 17

Effect of Change in Phraseology

Answer 17

In the revision or codification of statutes, neither an alteration in phraseology nor the omission or addition of words in the later statute shall be held necessarily to alter the construction of the former acts. Words which do not materially affect the sense will be omitted from the statute as incorporated in the revised statute or code, or that some general idea will be expressed in brief phrases.

Question 18

Civil Code Provision on Repeals

Answer 18

Art. 7. Laws are repealed only by subsequent ones, and their violation or non-observance shall not be excused by disuse, or custom or practice to the contrary.

When the courts declared a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the former shall be void and the latter shall govern.

Question 19

Repeal vs Amendments

Answer 19

Repeal → abandon, terminate, nullify or invalidate;
This refers to the abrogation of a part or the total act or law

Repealing Act → an act that revokes or terminates another statute or law, expressly or impliedly

Amendments → change, modify or alter the original law or statutes
This refers to changes in the portion of an act or law

Amendatory Act → an act that makes an addition to the original law or it operates to change it

Question 20

What is the general rule on repeals?

Answer 20

Article 4 (CIVIL CODE) Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided.

Question 21

What are the two forms of repeal?

Answer 21

Express
→ Express or declared repeal means that the repeal is contained in a special provision of a subsequent new law
→ The statute expressly mentions that an earlier law will no longer be applicable, and thus would be inoperative. The Legislature doesn’t need to use any particular words or phrases, but it must make its intention to repeal the statute in question clear

Implied
→ Implied or tacit repeal takes place when the provisions of the subsequent law are incompatible or inconsistent with those of an earlier law
→ based on presumption or inference. The doctrine of implied repeal is based on the Latin maxim “leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant”, which means that the later laws shall abrogate the earlier laws that are contrary or in conflict with the subsequent laws.

Question 22

Presumption against Implied Repeal

Answer 22

Repeals of statutes by implication is not favored. The presumption is against inconsistency or repugnancy and, accordingly, against implied repeal.

The legislature should be presumed to have known the existing laws on the subject and not have enacted conflicting statutes.

Question 23

Categories of Implied Repeal

Answer 23

Irreconcilable inconsistency between two laws with similar subject matter
Later law covers whole subject of earlier law AND is clearly intended as a substitute
Nature of repealing clause: predicated on substantial (irreconcilable) conflict between prior and later laws

Question 24

If there is irreconcilable inconsistency of two laws, which law prevails?

Answer 24

It is settled that between a general law and a special law, the latter prevails. For a special law reveals the legislative intent more clearly than a general law does. Verily, the special law should be deemed an exception to the general law.

Question 25

How about in Earlier special Law vs Later General Law Effect?

Answer 25

Generalia Specialibus non Derogant (Later General Law Does not Repeal Earlier Special Law) It is a well-settled rule in statutory construction that a subsequent general law does not repeal a prior special law on the same subject unless it clearly appears that the legislature has intended by the latter general act to modify or repeal the earlier special law [Gaerlan vs. Catubig, G.R. No. L-23964]. Generalia Specialibus non derogant (a general law does not nullify a specific or special law. This is so even if the provisions of the general law are sufficiently comprehensive to include what was set forth in the special act.

Question 26

How do you harmonize two laws? What are the exceptions?

Answer 26

Generally, Earlier special Law is deemed an exception to the Later General Law Exceptions: Later general enactment intended to cover the whole subject and to repeal the all-prior laws inconsistent therewith Earlier special law establishes a general rule; later general law creates specific rule - Manifest intention of the legislature to repeal the earlier specific law

Question 27

Earlier General Law vs Later Special Law

Answer 27

Effect: later special law deemed an exception to earlier general law

Question 28

What are the 5 effects of repeals?

Answer 28

1. On when repealed law is rendered inoperative: Date repealing takes effect 2. On Jurisdiction already acquired by Courts: Not lost by subsequent repeal or expiration of the law giving the jurisdiction 3. On Contracts previously had under the repealed law 4. On Taxes assessed under the repealed law 5. On Municipal Offices under the Old Charte of an LGU

Question 29

Explain the first effect. On when repealed law is rendered inoperative: Date repealing takes effect

Answer 29

When a statute is repealed, it becomes inactive from the date the repealing act takes effect. The repeal, however, does not declare the repealed statute invalid from its inception. The repealed law remains in the statute book, governing the subject matter it addresses. Unless otherwise specified, the repealed statute retains its legal force and continues to affect actions related to its subject matter that occurred before the repeal.

Question 30

Explain the second effect. On Jurisdiction already acquired by Courts: Not lost by subsequent repeal or expiration of the law giving the jurisdiction

Answer 30

Jurisdiction to hear and decide cases is determined by the law in force at the time an action is filed. Once a court or tribunal has acquired jurisdiction over a case, neither the repeal nor the expiration of the law affects its authority to proceed and make a final decision on the pending case, unless the repealing statute expressly provides otherwise. This rule also applies to decisions made under the old law and does not render them void But the COURTS are to use the prevailing law of the merits of the case: When a court is tasked with making a legal decision in a case, it must base its judgment on the laws and legal principles that are currently in effect and are applicable to the specific issue at hand. In other words, the court should consider and apply the laws that are "prevailing" or in force at the time when the case is being heard This principle is fundamental to the legal system and ensures that the legal system remains current and consistent. It prevents courts from applying outdated or superseded laws to a case and ensures that the most recent laws and legal precedents are taken into account when making a ruling. This practice aligns with the notion that the law evolves over time to reflect changing societal norms, needs, and values Using the prevailing law in the disposition of a case ensures that the court's decisions are based on the most up-to-date legal standards, promoting fairness, consistency, and justice in the legal system. It also acknowledges that the law is a dynamic and evolving entity that adapts to the everchanging legal landscape.

Question 31

What is the exception to the second effect?

Answer 31

Exception: Where Vested Rights are Impaired The repeal of a statute does not diminish or harm rights that were obtained and became legally established under that statute before its repeal. Unless there is no other feasible interpretation, statutes should not be interpreted in a way that affects rights that had already vested under the previous law or requires the dismissal of legal actions initiated to enforce those rights. Generally, rights that are acquired and vested during the existence of a statute continue to exist after its repeal. When a new statute incorporates provisions from an old statute, even if it formally repeals the old statute at the time of enactment, rights of action established by the old statute remain intact. This rule is consistent with the constitutional prohibition on the state interfering with vested rights or contract obligations through the enactment or repeal of laws, except when exercising its legitimate police power

Question 32

Explain the third effect. On Contracts previously had under the repealed law

Answer 32

Where a contract is entered into by the parties on the basis of the law then obtaining, the repeal or amendment of said law will not affect terms of the contract, nor impair the right of the parties thereunder. The rule applies even if one of the contracting parties is the government When two parties enter into a contract based on the laws in effect at the time of the contract, any subsequent repeal or amendment of those laws will generally not impact the terms and rights established within the contract. This principle applies even when one of the contracting parties is the government.

Question 33

Explain the fourth effect. On Taxes assessed under the repealed law

Answer 33

The repeal of a tax law does not preclude the collection of taxes assessed under the old law before its repeal, unless the repealing statute provides otherwise. It has been held that the rule of favoring a prospective construction of statutes is applicable to statutes which repeal tax laws, where such statute is not made retroactive, a tax assessed before the repeal is collectible afterwards according to the law in force when the assessment or levy was made. The general principle is that the repeal of a tax law does not automatically eliminate the obligation to pay taxes that were assessed under the old law. The tax assessments made under the old law remain collectible unless the new law expressly states otherwise. This principle ensures continuity and legal certainty in the collection of taxes assessed before changes in tax legislation.

Question 34

Explain the fifth effect. On Municipal Offices under the Old Charte of an LGU

Answer 34

In the absence of a provision to the contrary, the superseding of the old charter by a new one has the effect of abolishing the offices under the old charter. The general rule is that the repeal of a charter destroys all offices under it, and puts an end to the functions of the incumbents. Thus, the conversion of a municipality into a city by the passage of a charter or a statute to that effect has the effect of abolishing all municipal offices then existing under the old municipality, save those excepted in the charter itself. When a new municipal charter is enacted, the general rule is that it abolishes the offices and positions created under the old charter. The functions of the officials holding those positions come to an end unless the new charter explicitly preserves or continues certain offices from the old charter. This principle ensures that the local government structure aligns with the provisions of the new charter and any changes in the municipality's status or organization.

Question 35

Effect of Repeal or Declaration of Unconstitutionality of Repealing Law

Answer 35

When a law which expressly repeals a prior law is itself repealed, the law first repealed shall not be thereby revived unless expressly so provided. Thus, the express repeal of BP Blg 395, which repealed Sec. 1 of PD No 666 declassifying the ship building and ship repair industry as a public utility, by EO No. 226 did not revive Sec. 1 of PD No 666, as said executive order did not provide otherwise. Where a repealing statute is declared unconstitutional, it will have no effect of repealing the former statute. The former or old statute continues to remain in force.

Question 36

Concept of Irrepealable Law

Answer 36

The concept of an "irrepealable law" refers to a legal provision or statute that, by its nature or by design, cannot be revoked, annulled, or repealed by a subsequent law or legislative action. In essence, it is a law that is intended to remain in force indefinitely and cannot be easily or casually undone. An irrepealable law is a legal provision, often found in constitutional documents, that is intended to be permanent and immune to easy repeal. It is used to safeguard fundamental rights, democratic principles, and the core elements of a legal system, making it difficult to alter or eliminate these protections.