1

MODULE 10
VI. Judicial Department
a. Judicial Power
Requisites of Judicial Power

Case: Santiago, Jr. vs. Bautista, 32 SCRA 188 (1970)

b. Power of Congress Over the Judiciary

Case: Fabian vs. Desierto, G.R. No. 129742, September 16,

1998

c. Fiscal Autonomy of the Judiciary

Constitutional Safeguards Ensuring Independence of
Judiciary

Principle of Inter-Departmental Courtesy

Case: In Re: Production of Court Records
and Documents and the Attendance of
Court Officials and Employees, etc.
dated January 19 and 25, 2012, - SCRA
February 14, 2012

d. Composition of the Supreme Court

1. En Banc
2. Division Cases

Case: Arturo de Castro vs. JBC, G.R. No. 191002,

March 17, 2000

e. Powers of the Supreme Court

Rule Making Power
Writ of Amparo
Writ of Habeas Data
Case: Vivares vs. St. Theresa’s College,
G.R. No. 202666, September
29, 2014
Writ of Kalikasan
Case: Oposa vs. Factoran, G.R. No.
101083, July 30, 1993
Writ of Continuing Mandamus
Case: MMDA vs. Concerned Residents
of Manila Bay, G.R. No. 171947-48,
December 18, 2008

f. Administrative Powers, Section 5(3) to (6), Sections 6 and

11, Article VIII
 2

g. Qualifications of Justices, Lower Collegiate and Non-

Collegiate Lower Courts

h. Salaries, Tenure and Removal

Cases: (1) Re: Allegations Made Under Oath Against
Associate Justice Gregory Ong,
A.M. No. SB-14-21-J, 9/23/14
(2) Republic of the Philippines,
represented by Solicitor General Jose
C. Calida vs. Maria Lourdes P.A.
Sereno, G.R. No. 237428, May 11, 2018

i. Judicial and Bar Council

1. The Judicial and Bar Council
(i) Composition
(ii) Powers and Functions
(iii) Rationale behind Creation
Case: Francis Jardeleza vs. Maria Lourdes Sereno,
G.R. No. 213181, August 19, 2014

j. Presidential Electoral Tribunal – Art. VII, Section 4

THE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

Judicial Power
The power of courts of justice (1) to settle actual controversies
involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable and (2)
to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch
or instrumentality of the Government.

Requisites of Judicial Review

(1) there must be an actual case or controversy calling for the exercise of
judicial power;

(2) the person challenging the act must have the standing to question the
validity of the subject act or issuance; otherwise stated, he must have a
personal and substantial interest in the case such that he has sustained, or
will sustain, direct injury as a result of its enforcement; (locus standi)

(3) the question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest

opportunity; and

(4) the issue of constitutionality must be the very lis mota of the case.
 3

Role of the legislature in the judicial process

Although judicial power is vested in the judiciary, the proper exercise of

such power requires prior legislative action: (1) defining such enforceable and
demandable rights and (2) prescribing remedies for violations of such rights; and
(3) determining the court with jurisdiction to hear and decide controversies or
disputes arising from legal rights.

The courts cannot exercise judicial power when there is no applicable

law

CASE: SANTIAGO, JR. VS. BAUTISTA, G.R. No. L-25024 March 30, 1970

Power of Congress over the judicial system

Congress has the power to create new courts and to apportion jurisdiction
among various courts.
Limitation: Congress may not impair the independence of the judiciary.

CASE: FABIAN VS. DESIERTO, G.R. NO. 129742, SEPTEMBER 16, 1998

Art. VI, Sec. 30, 1987 Constitution

“No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court as provided in this Constitution without its advice and
concurrence.”

Fiscal Autonomy of the Judiciary

Appropriations for the judiciary may not be reduced by the legislature below
the amount appropriated for the previous year and after approval, shall be
automatically and regularly released. Fiscal autonomy is granted to the Supreme
Court in order to strengthen its independence.

CASE: IN THE MATTER OF: SAVE THE SUPREME COURT’S JUDICIAL

INDEPENDENCE AND FISCAL AUTONOMY MOVEMENT VS.
ABOLITION OF JDF AND REDUCTION OF FISCAL AUTONOMY, UDK
15143, JANUARY 21, 2015
A.M. NO. 09-8-6-SC AUGUST 26, 2014 RE: REQUEST FOR SALN AND
PDS OR CVS OF JUSTICES
Constitutional Safeguards that Guarantee the Independence of the
Judiciary
1. The members of the judiciary have security of tenure;
2. The members of the Supreme Court can only be removed by impeachment;
3. The Supreme Court is a constitutional body, hence, it may not be abolished by
the legislature;
4. The Supreme Court has administrative supervision over all other courts;
 4

5. The Supreme Court has the exclusive power to discipline judges/justices of

inferior courts;
6. The Supreme Court may not be deprived of minimum original and appellate
jurisdiction. Appellate jurisdiction may not be increased without its advice and
concurrence;
7. The members of the judiciary may not be designated to any agency performing
quasi-judicial or administrative functions;
8. The judiciary enjoys fiscal autonomy;
9. The Supreme Court alone may initiate Rules of Court;
10. The Supreme Court alone may order temporary detail of judges;
11. The Supreme Court can appoint all officials and employees of the judiciary.
12. Salaries of judges may not be reduced.

Principle of Judicial Hierarchy of Courts – In the observance of this

principle, petitions for the issuance of extraordinary writs against first level
(inferior) courts should be filed with the Regional Trial Court, and those against
the latter, with the Court of Appeals. A direct invocation of the Supreme Court’s
original jurisdiction to issue these writs should be allowed only when there
are special and important reasons therefore, clearly and specifically set
out in the petition. (Constancio, Bulalacao, Oriental Mindoro vs. Mayor Enrilo
Villas, et al, G.R. No. 187256, February 23, 2011)

Doctrine of Judicial Stability – No court can interfere by

injunction with the judgments or orders of another court of
concurrent jurisdiction having the power to grant the relief sought by
the injunction. (Atty. Tomas Ong Cabili vs. Judge Rasad G. Balindong, A.M. No.
RTJ-10-2225, September 6, 2011)

Powers of the Supreme Court

Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court Auxiliary Administrative Powers of

Over Cases the Supreme Court
Original Jurisdiction Section 5(3). Assign temporarily
Section 5(1). The Supreme Court judges of the lower courts to
shall have the power to exercise other stations as public interest
original jurisdiction over cases may require. Such temporary
affecting ambassadors, other assignment shall not exceed six
public ministers and consuls, and months without the consent of the
over petitions for certiorari, judge concerned.
prohibition, mandamus, quo
warranto, and habeas corpus. Section 5(4). Order a change of
venue or place of trial to avoid
Appellate Jurisdiction miscarriage of justice.
Section 5(2). The Supreme Court
shall have the power to review, revise, Section 5(5). Promulgate rules
reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or concerning the protection and
 5

certiorari as the law or the Rules of enforcement of constitutional

Court may provide, final judgments rights, pleading, practice, and
and orders of lower courts in: procedure in all courts, the
a. All cases in which the admission to the practice of law,
constitutionality or the Integrated Bar, and legal
validity of any treaty, assistance to the
international or underprivileged. Such rules shall
executive agreement, provide a simplified and inexpensive
law, presidential decree, procedure for the speedy disposition
proclamation, order, of cases, shall be uniform for all courts
instruction, ordinance, of the same grade, and shall not
or regulation is in diminish, increase, or modify
question. substantive rights. Rules of procedure
b. All cases involving the of special courts and quasi-judicial
legality of any tax, bodies shall remain effective unless
impost, assessment, or disapproved by the Supreme Court.
toll, or any penalty
imposed in relation thereto. Section 5(6). Appoint all officials
c. All cases in which the and employees of the Judiciary in
jurisdiction of any lower accordance with the Civil Service Law.
court is in issue.
d. All criminal cases in which the Section 6. The Supreme Court shall
penalty imposed is reclusion have administrative supervision
perpetua or higher. over all courts and the personnel
thereof.

Effect of a statute declared unconstitutional

2 Schools of Thought
1. Orthodox View – an unconstitutional act, whether legislative or executive, is
not a law, confers no rights, imposes no duties and affords no
protection.
2. Second View – the Supreme Court simply ignores statutes deemed
unconstitutional. It does not strike the statute from the statute books;
it does not repeal, supersede revoke or annul the statute.

Requisites for declaration of partial unconstitutionality

1. That the legislature is willing to retain the valid portion even if the rest is
declared illegal; and
2. That the valid portions can stand independently as a separate statute.

Principle of Inter-Departmental Courtesy

In Re: Production of Court Records and Documents and the

Attendance of Court Officials and Employees as Witnesses under the
Subpoena of February 10, 2012 and the Various Letters for the
 6

Impeachment Prosecution Panel dated January 19 and 25, 2012, -

SCRA February 14, 2012 (Impeachment of Former CJ Renato Corona)

Writ of Amparo
It is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and
security has been violated or is threatened with violation by an ulawful act of
omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity.

Enforced Disappearance of Persons

It means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the
authorization, support or acquiescence of a State or a political organization,
followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give
information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of
removing them from the protection fo the law for a prolonged period of time.

Writ of Habeas Data

It is a remedy available to any person whose right to privacy in life, liberty
or security is violated or threatened by an unlawful act or omission of a public
official or employee, or of a private individual or entity engaged in the gathering,
collecting or storing of data or information regarding the person, family, home
and correspondence of the aggrieved party.

The Power of the Congress under Section 2, Article VIII

To define, prescribe and apportion the jurisdiction of the various courts
The Congress has the power to create new courts but subject to the
following limitations:
1. The power may not deprive the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over
cases enumerated in Section 5;
2. No law shall be passed reorganizing the judiciary when it undermines
the security of tenure of its members.

Power of Judicial Review or Judicial Supremacy

It is the assertion of the solemn and sacred obligation assigned to the
Judiciary by the Constitution to determine conflicting claims of authority under
the Constitution and to establish for the parties in an actual controversy the right
which that instrument secures and guarantees them.

Requisites of Judicial Review

No constitution question will be heard and decided by our courts unless the
following requisites are complied with:
1. There must be an actual case or controversy.
2. The question of constitutionality must be raised by the proper party;
3. The constitutional question must be raised at the earliest opportunity; and
4. The decision of the constitutional question must be necessary to the
determination of the case itself (lis mota).
 7

Cases which shall be heard en banc by the Supreme Court under the 1987
Constitution – majority of the members who actually took part in the deliberation
1. All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty,
international agreement, executive agreement and law;
2. All other cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be
heard en banc;
3. All cases involving the constitutionality, application or operation
of: Presidential Decrees, Proclamations, Orders, Instructions,
Ordinances, and other Regulations.

Votes needed for cases or matter heard by a division

Cases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with the
concurrence of a majority of the members who actually took part in the
deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, and in no case, without
the concurrence of at least three of such Members. When the required number is
not obtained, the case shall be decided en banc; Provided, that no doctrine or
principle of law laid down by the court in a decision rendered en banc or in
division may be modified or reversed except by the court sitting en banc.

Composition of the Supreme Court

Congress cannot increase or decrease the composition of the Supreme

Court. 15 Justices = 1 Chief Justice and 14 Associate Justices.
The Court is free to create divisions of three, five or seven. The purpose of
allowing up to five divisions within one Court is to enable the Court to disposes of
cases more speedily.

CASE: ARTURO DE CASTRO VS. JBC, G.R. NO. 191002, MARCH 17, 2010

Cases that must be heard en banc

1. all cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or
executive agreement, or law;
2. all cases which under the Rules of Court may be required to be heard en
banc;
3. all cases involving the constitutionality, application or operation of
presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions, ordinances
and other regulations;
4. cases heard by a division when the required majority in the decision is
not obtained;
5. cases where the Supreme Court modifies or reverses a doctrine or
principle of law previously laid down either en banc or in division;
6. administrative cases involving the discipline or dismissal of judges of
lower courts;
7. election contest for President or Vice-President

Votes required in en banc cases and in division

 8

For en banc, concurrence of a majority of the members who actually took

part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon. Thus, since
the quorum of the Supreme Court is 8, the votes of at least 5 are needed are and
enough, even if it is a question of constitutionality. For cases heard in division,
concurrence of a majority of the members who actually took part in the
deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, and IN NO CASE
without the concurrence of at least 3 such members. When the required number
is not obtained, the case shall be decided en banc.

CASE: VIVARES VS. ST. THERESA’S COLLEGE, G.R. NO. 202666, SEPTEMBER 29,
2014];

CASE: OPOSA VS. FACTORAN, G.R. No. 101083; July 30 1993

METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. CONCERNED

RESIDENTS OF MANILA BAY, G.R. No. 171947-48, December 18, 2008

Administrative Power of the Supreme Court

Classification of the powers of the Supreme Court
1. Judicial powers
2. Auxiliary administrative powers

Bar Integration
Integration of the Philippine Bar means the official unification of the entire
lawyer population of the Philippines. This requires membership and financial
support of every attorney as conditions sine qua non to the practice of law and
the retention of his name in the Roll of Attorneys of the Supreme Court.

Qualifications of Justices, lower collegiate and non-collegiate lower courts

Supreme Court
Natural born citizen of the Philippines, at least 40 years of age, have been
for 15 years or more a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the
Philippines and a person of proven competence, integrity, probity and
independence.

Lower collegiate court (Court of Appeals, Court of Tax Appeals,

Sandiganbayan)
Natural born citizen of the Philippines, member of the Philippine Bar,
possessing the other qualifications prescribed by Congress and must be a person of
proven competence, integrity, probity and independence.

Non-collegiate lower courts

 9

Citizens of the Philippines, members of the Philippine Bar, possessing other

qualifications prescribed by Congress, and persons of proven competence, integrity,
probity and independence.

Congress may not alter the qualifications of Members of the Supreme

Court and the constitutional qualifications of other members of the Judiciary.
But Congress may alter the statutory qualifications of judges and justices of
lower courts.

Judicial and Bar Council – has the principal function of recommending

appointees to the Judiciary.

Composition of JBC-7 members only

1. Ex-officio members: Chief Justice as Chairman; the Secretary of Justice
and a representative of Congress-3
2. Regular members: A representative of the IBP, a professor of law, a
retired justice of the Supreme Court and a representative of the
private sectors

The regular members shall be appointed by the President for a term of four
years, with the consent of the Commission on Appointments.

Powers/Functions:
The principal function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary.

Rationale behind the creation of JBC:

To eliminate politics from the appointment of judges and justices. Thus,
appointments to the Judiciary do not have to go through a political Commission on
Appointments.

Appointments of the Supreme Court and Judges

Appointed by the President from a list of at least three nominees prepared by

the Judicial and Bar Council for every vacancy. Such appointments need no
confirmation. For the lower court, the President shall issue the appointments within
90 days from the submission of the list.

Case: FRANCIS JARDELEZA VS. MARIA LOURDES SERENO, G.R. No. 213181,
August 19, 2014

Tenure of Justices and Judges

Supreme Court Justices may be removed only by impeachment. For Judges,

they shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of 70 or become
incapacitated to discharge duties of their office.
 10

The Supreme Court en banc shall have the power to discipline judges of lower
courts, or order their dismissal by a vote of a majority of the members who actually
took part in the deliberations on the issues and voted thereon.

CASE: REPUBLIC of the PHILIPPINES, represented by SOLICITOR

GENERAL JOSE C. CALIDA v. MARIA LOURDES P.A. SERENO, G.R.
No. 237428, May 11, 2018 [J. Tijam, En Banc]

Requirements on decisions and petitions

A decision must express clearly and distinctly the facts and law on which it is
based. Resolutions disposing of petitions fall under the constitutional provision that
no petition for review shall be refused due course without stating the legal basis
therefore. Minute resolutions need not be signed by the members of the Court who
took part in the deliberations of a case nor do they require the certification of the
Chief Justice.

Purpose
To inform the person reading the decision, and especially the parties, of how
it was reached by the court after consideration of the pertinent facts and
examination of the applicable laws. There are various reasons for this: (1) to assure
the parties that the judge studied the case; (2) to give the losing party opportunity
to analyze the decision and possibly appeal or, alternatively, convince the losing
party to accept the decision in good grace; (3) to enrich the body of case law,
especially if the decision is from the Supreme Court.

Exceptions:
1. Court orders which resolve incidental matters only.
2. Minute resolutions in the following cases:
a. In cases which are “patently without merit,” where the issues are factual in
nature; where the decision appealed from is supported by substantial evidence and
is in accord with the facts of the case and applicable laws;
b. In cases where it is clear from the records that the petitions were filed
mrerely to forestall the early execution of judgment and for non-compliance with the
rules.

3. In administrative cases where the isseus raised therein have been previously duly
considered and passed upon.

Periods for Decision

All cases must be decided from date of submission within:
24 months – Supreme Court; 12 months – lower collegiate courts; and 3
months-all other lower courts, unless in the two latter cases, the period is reduced
by the Supreme Court. (CASE: DIZON VS. JUDGE LOPEZ, A.M. NO. RTJ-96-1338,
SEPTMBER 5, 1997.
 11

V.