Consti Cases (no Facts)
2
Gonzales v. COMELEC, supra Doctrine of Proper Submission Held: We take the view that the words "submitted to the people for their ratification", if construed in the light of the nature of the Constitution— a fundamental charter that is legislation direct from the people, an— expression of their sovereign will— is that it can only be amended by the people expressing themselves according to the procedure ordained by the Constitution. Therefore, amendments must be fairly laid before the people for their blessing or spurning. The people are not to be mere rubber stamps. They are not to vote blindly. They must be afforded ample opportunity to mull over the original provisions compare them with the proposed amendments, and try to reach a conclusion as the dictates of their conscience suggest, free from the incubus of extraneous or possibly in insidious influences. We believe, the word "submitted" can only mean that the government, within its maximum capabilities, should strain every effort to inform very citizen of the provisions to be amended, and the proposed amendments and the meaning, nature and effects thereof. In Re Subido 35 SCRA 1 (1970) Held: Government officials and employees are not absolutely barred from becoming candidates for the office of Delegate to the Constitutional Convention, the only condition being that when they do so they should relinquish their positions; that this condition is imposed for reasons of public interest, among the most important of which are, first, that there are certain government offices which afford their occupants many built-in advantages not available to others and which may be used or abused to enhance their own candidacies, contrary to the very spirit of the equal protection clause invoked by the petitioners; and second, that to allow government officials and employees to campaign for the Convention and, if elected, to sit as Delegates therein without vacating their positions would be clearly detrimental to the government and to the public at large, which would thereby be deprived of their services for the unpredictable length of time that the Convention may last, without such positions being filled through new appointments, resulting in disruption of public service. Imbong v. COMELEC, 35 SCRA 28 G.R. No. L-32432 September 11, 1970 Defensor-Santiago v. Commission on Elections G.R. No. 127325, March 19, 1997 Held: It is "national initiative," if what is proposed to be adopted or enacted is a national law, or a law which only Congress can pass. It is "local initiative" if what is proposed to be adopted or enacted is a law, ordinance, or resolution which only the legislative bodies of the governments of the autonomous regions, provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays can pass. PIRMA v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 129745, September 23, 1997 Lambino v. Commission on Elections G.R. No. 174153 & G.R. No. 174299, October 25, 2006 Held: The essence of amendments "directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition" is that
Transcript of Consti Cases (no Facts)
Gonzales v. COMELEC, supra Doctrine of Proper SubmissionHeld: We take the view that the words "submitted to the people for their ratification", if construed in the lightof the nature of the Constitution— a fundamental charter that is legislation direct from the people, an—expression of their sovereign will— is that it can only be amended by the people expressing themselvesaccording to the procedure ordained by the Constitution. Therefore, amendments must be fairly laid before thepeople for their blessing or spurning. The people are not to be mere rubber stamps. They are not to vote blindly.They must be afforded ample opportunity to mull over the original provisions compare them with the proposedamendments, and try to reach a conclusion as the dictates of their conscience suggest, free from the incubus ofextraneous or possibly in insidious influences. We believe, the word "submitted" can only mean that thegovernment, within its maximum capabilities, should strain every effort to inform very citizen of the provisionsto be amended, and the proposed amendments and the meaning, nature and effects thereof.
In Re Subido35 SCRA 1 (1970)Held: Government officials and employees are not absolutely barred from becoming candidates for the office ofDelegate to the Constitutional Convention, the only condition being that when they do so they should relinquishtheir positions; that this condition is imposed for reasons of public interest, among the most important of whichare, first, that there are certain government offices which afford their occupants many built-in advantages notavailable to others and which may be used or abused to enhance their own candidacies, contrary to the veryspirit of the equal protection clause invoked by the petitioners; and second, that to allow government officialsand employees to campaign for the Convention and, if elected, to sit as Delegates therein without vacating theirpositions would be clearly detrimental to the government and to the public at large, which would thereby bedeprived of their services for the unpredictable length of time that the Convention may last, without suchpositions being filled through new appointments, resulting in disruption of public service.Imbong v. COMELEC, 35 SCRA 28 G.R. No. L-32432 September 11, 1970
Defensor-Santiago v. Commission on ElectionsG.R. No. 127325, March 19, 1997Held: It is "national initiative," if what is proposed to be adopted or enacted is a national law, or a law whichonly Congress can pass. It is "local initiative" if what is proposed to be adopted or enacted is a law, ordinance, orresolution which only the legislative bodies of the governments of the autonomous regions, provinces, cities,municipalities, and barangays can pass.PIRMA v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 129745, September 23, 1997
Lambino v. Commission on ElectionsG.R. No. 174153 & G.R. No. 174299, October 25, 2006Held: The essence of amendments "directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition" is thatthe entire proposal on its face is a petition by the people. This means two essential elements must be present.First, the people must author and thus sign the entire proposal. No agent or representative can sign on theirbehalf. Second, as an initiative upon a petition, the proposal must be embodied in a petition.These essential elements are present only if the full text of the proposed amendments is first shown to thepeople who express their assent by signing such complete proposal in a petition. Thus, an amendment is"directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition" only if the people sign on a petition thatcontains the full text of the proposed amendments.The full text of the proposed amendments may be either written on the face of the petition, or attached to it. Ifso attached, the petition must state the fact of such attachment. This is an assurance that every one of theseveral millions of signatories to the petition had seen the full text of the proposed amendments before signing.Otherwise, it is physically impossible, given the time constraint, to prove that every one of the millions ofsignatories had seen the full text of the proposed amendments before signing.43Id. at §4; Valid ratification of amendments or revisions under §1 by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite held notearlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the approval of such amendment or revision; Valid ratification ofamendments under §2 by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninetydays after the certification by the Commission on Elections of the sufficiency of the petitionSection 4.Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution under Section 1 hereof shall be valid when ratifiedby a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor laterthan 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 aplebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the certificationby the Commission on Elections of the sufficiency of the petition.
Planas v. Commission on ElectionsG.R. No. L-35925 January 22, 1973Held: The Convention was legally free to postulate any amendment it may deem fit to propose— save perhapswhat is or may be inconsistent with what is now known, particularly in international law, as Jus Cogens— notonly because the Convention exercised sovereign powers delegated thereto by the people— although insofaronly as the determination of the proposals to be made and formulated by said body is concerned— but, also,because said proposals cannot be valid as part of our Fundamental Law unless and until "approved by themajority of the votes cast at an election at which" " said proposals "are submitted to the people for theirratification," as provided in Section 1 of Art. XV of the 1935 Constitution.
