Skip to main content

Doctrines in Constitutional Construction

Interpretation and Construction of the 1987 Philippine Constitution

The interpretation of the 1987 Philippine Constitution follows well-settled principles derived from jurisprudence to ensure its meaning aligns with legal intent, clarity, and coherence.

Principles of Constitutional Construction

✔️ Verba Legis (Letter of the Law) 📌 Constitutional provisions must be interpreted based on their ordinary meaning, unless they involve technical legal terms.

✔️ Ratio legis est anima (Spirit of the Law) 📌 Constitutional provisions should be understood in accordance with the intent of its framers to preserve its original purpose.

✔️ Ut magis valeat quam pereat (Holistic Interpretation) 📌 The Constitution must be interpreted as a unified whole, ensuring each provision complements the others rather than conflicting.

✔️ De Castro Doctrine (Positioning Doctrine) 📌 Section 14, Section 15, and Section 16 of Article VII all concern presidential appointments within the Executive Department. 📌 The midnight appointment prohibition in Section 15 applies only to the Executive Department, not the Judiciary. 📌 The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) ensures no rushed or politically motivated appointments in the Judiciary.

Legal Precedents Supporting Constitutional Interpretation

📌 Francisco v. House of Representatives (GR No. 160261, Nov. 10, 2003) ✔ Established the importance of ordinary meaning, legislative intent, and holistic interpretation in constitutional construction.

📌 De Castro v. JBC (GR No. 191002, Mar. 17 & Apr. 20, 2010) ✔ Clarified that the presidential appointment prohibition applies solely to the Executive Department. ✔ Emphasized the JBC’s role in preventing politically motivated judicial appointments.

📌 Aytona Doctrine (Midnight Appointments) ✔ Midnight appointments, rushed and irregular, undermine stability and fairness in governance. ✔ The JBC's review process ensures that judicial selections do not suffer from such defects.

Conclusion

The principles governing constitutional interpretation ensure that the 1987 Philippine Constitution is read in its true spirit—protecting governance from misuse of appointments and preserving judicial integrity through the JBC’s structured nomination process. By following legal precedents, courts uphold the intended framework of the Constitution while preventing misinterpretations that could distort its purpose.

📌 For full case references, visit: .

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Mandamus and its Application in Judicial Proceedings

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy compelling a tribunal, corporation, board, or person to perform a duty expressly required by law . It applies when: 1️⃣ An entity unlawfully neglects the performance of a legal duty arising from an office or trust. 2️⃣ An entity unlawfully excludes another from a right or office to which they are entitled. 3️⃣ There is no other adequate or speedy legal remedy available. 📌 Relevant Case: De Leon v. Duterte (G.R. No. 252118, 2020) Essential Elements of a Mandamus Petition 📌 To successfully invoke mandamus, the petitioner must prove: ✔ Legal Right – The petitioner must demonstrate a clear legal right to compel the action. ✔ Correlative Obligation – The respondent must have a duty to respect that right . ✔ Violation by the Respondent – There must be an act or omission violating the petitioner’s right . ✔ Refusal to Comply – A failure to perform the duty , whether explicit or implied, triggers a cause of action. 📌 Relevant Case: Phi...
Read more

People vs. Jugueta, 788 SCRA 331, G.R. No. 202124 April 5, 2016

G.R. No. 202124. April 5, 2016. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. IRENEO JUGUETA, accused-appellant. PONENTE:  PERALTA, J.:  Synopsis: In Criminal Case No. 7702-G, Irenneo Jugueta was charged with Multiple Attempted Murder along with Gilbert Estores and Roger San Miguel. However, Roger San Miguel moved for reinvestigation of the case and was eventually dismissed, leaving Irenneo as the only defendant. The prosecution's witness, Norberto, testified that Irenneo and the two other men entered his family's nipa hut and fired shots, causing the death of one daughter and injury to another. Irenneo offered a defense of denial and alibi, but this was found to be weak by the trial court, which ruled that Irenneo conspired with the two other men to shoot the family of Norberto. The trial court's judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The main issue raised in the appeal was the inconsistencies in Norberto's testimony, but these were deemed to be trivial an...
Read more

Mendoza v. de Los Santos G.R. No. 176422 |March 20, 2013

Case Digest: Mendoza v. de Los Santos G.R. No. 176422 | March 20, 2013 Ponente: 📌 Topic: Applicability of Reserva Troncal – First cousins of the descendant/prepositus are fourth-degree relatives and cannot be considered reservees/reservatarios. Facts The disputed parcel of land was originally owned by Exequiel Mendoza, who inherited it from Placido and Dominga Mendoza through an oral partition. Upon Exequiel’s death, ownership was transferred to his spouse Leonor and their only daughter, Gregoria. After Leonor’s passing, Gregoria became the sole owner. Gregoria died intestate, and her aunt Victoria Pantaleon, Leonor’s sister, adjudicated the property to herself as the sole surviving heir. Petitioners (grandchildren of Placido and Dominga) argued that the property should have been reserved for them under Article 891 of the Civil Code on Reserva Troncal. They filed an action for Recovery of Possession, Cancellation of TCT, and Reconveyance, which the RTC granted. However, the Court of A...
Read more