1 / 27

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. Constitutional Law I Silliman University College of Law. JUDICIAL POWER. The duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable

honorato-valenzuela
Download Presentation

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT Constitutional Law I Silliman University College of Law

  2. JUDICIAL POWER The duty of the courts of justice to • settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable • To determine whether or not there has been grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of government.

  3. CHARACTERISTIC • DEFENSIVE • There can be no occasion for the exercise of judicial power unless real parties come to court for the settlement of an actual controversy and unless the controversy is such that it can be settled in a manner that binds the parties by the application of existing laws.

  4. TO WHAT EXTENT? • Until the execution of a sentence • See Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice • “the power to control the execution of its decision is an essential aspect of jurisdiction” • “the most important part of litigation, whether civil or criminal, is the process of evaluation of decisions where supervening events may change the circumstance of the parties and compel courts to intervene and adjust the rights of the litigants to prevent unfairness.”

  5. GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION • POLITICAL QUESTIONS beyond this sphere • Means such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment and is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction • Abuse must be patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law or to act at all in contemplation of law

  6. Advisory Opinions • Discouraged • Decision must contain only decisions relevant to the question that is for decision • Judges should refrain from expressing irrelevant opinions in their decisions which may only reflect unfavorably upon their competence and the propriety of their judicial actuation

  7. Declaratory Relief • An action by which a persons interested under a deed, will, contract or other written instrument to determine any question of construction or validity arising under the instrument and for a determination of his rights or duties thereunder. • See requirements at page 924 of Bernas text

  8. JURISDICTION • Right to define and apportion belongs to Congress except Section 5 cases • ORIGINAL SC JURISDICTION affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls, petitions for certiorari, mandamus, quo warranto and habeas corpus • EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION in constitutionality cases, legality of tax, jurisdiction of a lower court, criminal cases of reclusion perpetua or higher, appeals on questions of fact and law

  9. Assignment of judges of lower courts • Order change of venue or place of trial • Promulgate rules regarding practice of law, procedure, legal assistance and rules of special courts • Appoint all officials and employees of the judiciary • NOTE • NO LAW SHALL BE PASSED INCREASING THE APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT WITHOUT ITS ADVICE AND CONCURRENCE.

  10. READ Lopez vs. Roxas (17 SCRA 756) and Vargas vs. Rilloraza (80 Phil. 297) Compare the decisions

  11. COMPOSITION

  12. HOW DOES THE SUPREME COURT DECIDE EN BANC • MAJORITY DECISION of all members who took part in the deliberation • Constitutionality issues DIVISIONS OF 3, 5 OR 7 • MAJORITY of members who took part in deliberations and with concurrence of at least 3 • When vote not obtained? EN BANC

  13. CASES HEARD EN BANC • Constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement or law • Constitutionality of a presidential decree, proclamation, order, ordinance and other regualtions • Cases heard by a division when vote is not obtained • Cases where SC modifies or reverses a doctrine or principle of law previously laid down en banc or in division • Administrative cases for dismissal of a judge of the lower court • Election contests for President and Vice President

  14. ReadFORTICH VS. CORONAG.R. No. 131457 (August 19, 1999) What does “decision en bank when vote of a division is not obtained” mean?

  15. JUDICIAL REVIEWMarbury vs. Madison • Recite the Case • How is judicial review defined there? • SUPERIORITY OF THE CONSTITUTION • REQUISITES • 1. actual case or controversy • 2. question is ripe for adjudication • 3. party bringing the suit has locus standi • 4. raised at the earliest opportuned time (People vs. Vera addition)

  16. See Cases • Oposa vs. Factoran • Kilosbayan vs. Guingona (232 SCRA 110) • Bayan vs. Zamora (G.R. No. 138570 Oct 10, 2000) (VFA Challenge) • Lim vs. Arroyo (G.R. No. 151445, April 11, 2002) (Balikatan exercises) • Gonzales vs. Macaraig, 191 SCRA 452 (legal standing of Senate)

  17. TAXPAYER’S SUITPascual vs. Secretary, 110 Phil 331) • Sufficient interest in preventing the illegal expenditure of money raised by taxation • Sustain a direct injury as a result of the enforcement of the questioned statute • NOTE • In taxpayer’s suits, the SC has open discretion to entertain it or not • Action challenged must be the exercise of the spending or taxing power of Congress

  18. POLITICAL QUESTIONS • WHAT IS IT? Baker vs. Carr • A textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a political department • Lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it • Potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements of various departments on one question • Impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination or without expressing lack of respect to coordinate branches

  19. Can inferior courts exercise the power of judicial review? • OF COURSE • Judicial Review is Judicial Power

  20. IMPORTANT ISSUES • Bar Flunkers Act (R. A, 972) • In Re Cunanan, 94 Phils 534 • Integration of the Bar • In Re Integration to the Bar, 49 SCRA 22 • In Re Edillon, 84 SCRA 554

  21. Qualification for SC Justice • Natural-born citizen • Member of the Phil Bar • At least 40 years of age • 15 years of more a judge or engaged in the practice of law • WHAT IS PRACTICE OF LAW • See Cayetano vs. Monsod

  22. JUDICIAL AND BAR COUNCIL • Chief Justice (ex-officio chair) • Secretary of Justice • Representative of Congress (ex-officio) • Representative of IBP (4 years) • Professor of Law (3 years) • Retired Member of SC (2 years) • Representative of Private Sector (1 year) APPOINTED BY THE PRESIDENT

  23. Principal function Recommends appointees to the Judiciary

  24. APPOINTMENT • Of SC Justices and lower court judges • From a list of 3 recomendees from the JBC • No confirmation needed • Lower court • Issued within 90 days from submission of list

  25. SALARY FIXED BY LAW DURING THEIR TENURE, NOT INCREASE

  26. TERM On good behavior, until 70 years of age

  27. DISCIPLINE Supreme Court en banc Can be dismissed by majority vote of those who took part in deliberations

More Related