I.

GENERAL possession - possession and occupation that is open,

a. POLITICAL LAW DEFINED continuous, exclusive, and notorious since June 12,
b. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW DEFINED 1945, or earlier - the land cannot be considered ipso jure
c. CONSTITUTION DEFINED converted to private property even upon the subsequent
II. BACK GROUND OF THE PRESENT declaration of it as alienable and disposable.
CONSTITUTION Prescription never began to run against the State, such
a. THE FEBRUARY 1986 REVOLUTION AND that the land has remained ineligible for registration
THE PROCLAMATION OF THE under Section 14(1) of the Property Registration Decree.
PROVISIONAL CONSTITUTION Likewise, the land continues to be ineligible for land
b. ADOPTION AND EFFECTIVITY OF THE registration under Section 14(2) of the Property
PRESENT CONSTITUTION Registration Decree unless Congress enacts a law or
III. JUDICIAL ELABORATION OF THE the President issues a proclamation declaring the land
CONSTITUTION as no longer intended for public service or for the
a. CONSTRUCTION development of the national wealth.
b. THEORY OF JUDICIAL REVIEW

SEPARATION OF POWER Classifications of land ownership (Section 48 in relation

Angara v. Electoral Commission
Metrobank v. Tobias
Re: COA Opinion
CSC v. Ramoneda-Pita
Garcia v. Drilon
Heirs of Malabanan v. Republic
Facts:
Heirs of Malabanan claiming that their land formed part
of the alienable and disposable land of the public
domain, and that he and his predecessors-in-interest
had been in open, continuous, uninterrupted, public and
adverse possession and occupation of the land for more
than 30 years, thereby entitling him to the judicial
confirmation of his title.
RTC: Ruled in their favor
Application for registration and thus places
under the operation of Act 141, Act 496 and/or
P.D. 1529, otherwise known as Property
Registration Law
CA: Reversed
Denied the petition because Malabanan failed to
establish by sufficient evidence possession and
occupation of the property on his part and on the
part of his predecessors-in interest since June
12, 1945, or earlier.
Invocation of Property Registration Decree: an
applicant is entitled to registration only when the
land subject of the application had been
declared alienable and disposable since June
12, 1945 or earlier.
SC: Denied
Petitioners failed to present sufficient evidence to
establish that they and their predecessors-in-interest had
been in possession of the land since June 12, 1945.
Without satisfying the requisite character and period of
to Article 12)
The land does not need to be patrimonial (land
of the state that is not reserved for
development/public use) alienable and
disposable (IF you possessed it before or earlier
June 12, 1945), you can own it the moment it
was declared alienable.
o Prescription: Land can be acquired through
lapse of time, it should not only be alienable and
disposable, but also patrimonial.
Prescription:
o 10 years if with good faith
o 30 years if with bad faith in the possession of the
land.
Judicial Review
It is not the duty of the court answer why it is
difficult to avail the land (as contested by the
petitioners), the courts duty is to interpret the
law. Only the congress can amend the law.
PRESUMPTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY
Laws are presumed to be constitutional
Burden of Proof for Unconstitutionality:
The person alleging against the constitutionality
Perez v. People
Facts: Zenon Perez worked municipal treasurer of
Tubigon, Bohol, then during the audit they discovered
that there was a shortage of P72, 784.57 this happened
in 1988. And then he was able to restitute it but a case
against malversation was already filed, a criminal case
against someone who is accountable for the funds and
he misappropriates the money.
Years of sentence is based on the amount of money you
had malversed. The court sentenced for an reclusion
temporal.

The petitioner questioned the penalty, since RPC was

enacted around 1930 where the money is not of the
same value (archaic laws). He further argues that such
punishment is cruel and unusual, a violation of Bill of
Rights.

The court said, he is wrong and it is again a presumption

on the constitutionality given to laws. Why is there a
presumption? Because it is presumed that the legislative
intent is to make valid, sensible and just law, the one
which operates to further to the fact of specific purpose
of the law. It is presumed that the legislature has acted
within its constitutional law powers, therefore he reacts
to the constitutionality of the law, the one challenging
has the burden of proof to show the unconstitutionality of
the law. He was not able to prove that the decision of the
lower court is unconstitutional.

Take note of the presumption, its not easy to have a law

declared unconstitutional because of the presumption.

c. CONDITIONS FOR THE EXERCISE OF

JUDICIAL REVIEW
d. FUNCTIONS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:
Checking, Legitimating, and Symbolic
e. ALL COURTS CAN EXERCISE JUDICIAL
REVIEW
f. EFFECTS OF DECLARATION OF
UNCONSTITUTIONALITY
g. POLITICAL QUESTION VS. JUSTICIABLE
QUESTION
IV. THE PHILIPPINES AS A STATE
a. STATED DEFINED-ELEMENTS
b. TERRITORY- ARCHIPELAGO CONCEPT
c. PEOPLE
d. SOVEREIGNTY
e. GOVERNMENT