TAKE NOTE OF THE FOLLOWING!!!

Under the 1987 Constitution, may the salaries of the members of the judiciary be taxed without violating Section
10, Article VIII which would have the effect of decreasing the same?
No. This was the ruling in NITAFAN VS. COMMISSIONER, 152 SCRA 284 which abandoned the contrary rulings in
the cases of PERFECTO VS. MEER, 85 Phil. 552 and ENDENCIA VS. DAVID, 93 Phil. 696

Is there a law which would provide for the mechanism for the people to propose amendments to the Constitution
by people’s initiative?

While Congress had enacted RA 6735 purportedly to provide the mechanisms for the people’s exercise the power
to amend the Constitution by people’s initiative, the Supreme Court in MIRIAM DEFENSOR-SANTIAGO, et al. Vs.
COMELEC, G.R. No. 127325, March 19, 1997 & June 10, 1997, the Supreme Court held that RA 6735 is incomplete,
inadequate or wanting in essential terms and conditions insofar as initiative on amendments to the Constitution
is concerned. Its lacunae on this substantive matter are fatal and cannot be cured by “empowering” the
COMELEC to promulgate such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry the purposes of this act.

However, in LAMBINO VS. COMELEC, the Supreme Court on November 21, 2006, in the Minute Resolution of the
petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration, held that RA No. 6735 is adequate and complete for the purpose of
proposing amendments to the Constitution through people’s initiative by a vote of 10 members as per
Certification of the En Banc’s Clerk of Court.

Distinguish “Revision” from “amendment” of the Constitution.

“Revision” is the alterations of the different portions of the entire document [Constitution]. It may result in the
rewriting whether the whole constitution, or the greater portion of it, or perhaps some of its important provisions.
But whatever results the revision may produce, the factor that characterizes it as an act of revision is the original
intention and plan authorized to be carried out. That intention and plan must contemplate a consideration of all
the provisions of the Constitution to determine which one should be altered or suppressed or whether the whole
document should be replaced with an entirely new one.

“Amendment” of the Constitution, on the other hand, envisages a change or only a few specific provisions. The
intention of an act to amend is not to consider the advisability of changing the entire constitution or of considering
that possibility. The intention rather is to improve specific parts of the existing constitution or to add to it
provisions deemed essential on account of changed conditions or to suppress portions of it that seem obsolete, or
dangerous, or misleading in their effect. (SINCO, Vicente, PHILIPPINE POLITICAL LAW, as cited in Santiago vs.
COMELEC & LAMBINO VS. COMELEC)

What is the doctrine of constitutional supremacy?

Under the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, if a law or contract violates any norm of the constitution that law
or contract whether promulgated by the legislative or by the executive branch or entered into by private persons
for private purposes is null and void and without any force and effect. Thus, since the Constitution is the
fundamental, paramount and supreme law of the nation, it is deemed written in every statute and contract.
(Manila Prince Hotel Corporation Case)

What is the “Doctrine of Proper Submission” in connection with proposed amendments to the Constitution?
“Doctrine of Proper Submission” means all the proposed amendments to the Constitution shall be presented to the
people for their ratification or rejection at the same time, not piecemeal. (TOLENTINO VS. COMELEC, 41 SCRA 702)