BarBud

PARA BA SA MGA BAKAL AT TIBO ANG CAGANDAHAN LAW?

Ang pinaka-simpleng sagot sa katanungang ito at HINDI dahil ang Cagandahan Law, na isang panukalang batas pa lamang (House Bill No. 5474), ay para sa mga inters*x.

Ang tanong ngayon, ano o sino ba ang inters*x?

Ayon sa House Bill No. 5474, ang "inters*x" ay ang "umbrella term used to describe a wide range of innate bodily variations in s*x characteristics. Inters*x people are born with physical s*x characteristics (such as s*xual anatomy, reproductive organs, hormonal patterns, and/or chromosomal patterns) that do not fit typical definitions for male or female bodies."

Upang atin pang mas maunawaan kung ano o sino ba ang inters*x, marapat nating alamin kung bakit ang House Bill No. 5474 ay pinamagatang "Cagandahan Law".

Dahil ba para ito sa mga miyembro ng LGBTQIA+ Community na magaganda? Marahil sila nga ay magaganda, ngunit hindi ito ang tunay na kadahilanan.

Hango ang pamagat ng House Bill No. 5474 kay Jeff B. Cagandahan, na ang pangalan noon ay "Jennifer B. Cagandahan".

Noong pinanganak si Jeff, siya ay nirehistro sa kanyang Certificate of Live Birth bilang isang babae, ngunit sa kanyang paglaki, siya ay nagkaroon ng mga katangian ng isang lalaki. Siya ay may kondisyon na tinatawag na Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH).

Ang mga taong may kondisyon na CAH ay may mga katangian ng pang-lalaki at pang-babae.

Kung kaya't hiniling ni Jeff sa korte na i-tama ang nakasaad na kanyang kasarian sa kanyang Certificate of Live Birth mula sa babae or "female" at gawin itong lalaki or "male". Hiniling niya ring mapalitan ang kanyang pangalan mula sa "Jennifer" at gawin itong "Jeff".

Ayon kay Dr. Michael Sionzon (Dr. Sionzon) ng Department of Psychiatry, University of the Philippines-Philippine General Hospital, genetically, si Jeff ay isang babae, pero dahil ang katawan nya ay sobrang dami kung maglabas ng pang-lalaking hormones (androgen), hindi nabuo ng normal ang kanyang pang-babaeng ari. Dahil dito, siya ay maroong ari ng babae, at siya rin ay nagkaroon ng ari ng lalaki. Ayon pa kay Dr. Sionzon, walang gamot o lunas sa kondisyon ni Jeff.

Isa (1) sa sampu hanggang labing walong libo (10,000-18,000) na sanggol na pinapanganak ay may kondisyon na CAH.

Ayon sa ating Kataas-taasang Hukuman, kung ang isang tao ay "biologically" o "naturally" na inters*x, ang "determining factor" sa kanyang "gender classification" ay ang pipiliin niyang kasarian sa kanyang paglaki. Sa kaso ng mga inters*x na tao, hindi "conclusive" ang "gender classification" nila sa kapanganakan. Ang kasarian nila ay malalaman lamang sa kanila pang pagtanda.

Ayon pa sa ating Kataas-taasang Hukuman, hindi makatarungan kung mapipilitan si Jeff na sumailalim sa mga gamutan o uminom ng mga gamot para lamang siya ay manatiling isang babae, kung hindi naman niya ito kagustuhan. Si Jeff ang mabubuhay na may inters*x na kondisyon. Kaya si Jeff ang nararapat na mamili ng landas na kanyang tatahakin sa kanyang "s*xual development" at "maturation".

Sa makatuwid, pinahintulutan ng ating Kataas-taasang Hukuman na maitama ang kasaraian ni Jeff mula babae o "female" at ginawa itong lalaki or "male". Pinahintulutan din ang pagpalit ng kanyang pangalan mula sa "Jennifer" at ginawa itong "Jeff". (Republic of the Philippines vs. Jennifer B. Cagandahan, G.R. No. 166676, 12 September 2008, 586 Phil. 637)

Naisalarawan din ang inters*x sa pelikulang Conclave (2024). Sa nasabing pelikula, ang nahirang na Santo Papa ay ipinanganak na may obaryo at matris. Nalaman lamang niya ito noong siya ay sumailalim sa appendectomy, isang operasyon para tanggalin ang appendix.

Ang House Bill No. 5474 ay may maganda, malinis, at makatarungan na hangarin. Ito ay ipinapanukala para sa mga taong ipinanganak na may natatanging kondisyon at katangian na hindi nila pinili, ngunit ipinagkaloob sa kanila ng May Kapal. Ito ay pagsasabatas lamang ng desisyon o hatol ng ating Kataas-taasang Hukuman sa kasong Republic of the Philippines vs. Jennifer B. Cagandahan (G.R. No. 166676, 12 September 2008, 586 Phil. 637), na may hangarin na pabilisin at gawing hindi magastos ang proseso nito.

(Photo by Inters*x Philippines)

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

I will advise her that the search was constitutional.

In a case (Pollo v. Constantino-David, G.R. No. 181881, 18 October 2011, 675 Phil. 225), the Supreme Court held that "[o]ne of the factors stated in O'Connor [v. Ortega (480 U.S. 709 [1987])] which are relevant in determining whether an employee's expectation of privacy in the workplace is reasonable is the existence of a workplace privacy policy."

The Civil Service Commission (CSC), in its Computer Use Policy (Office Memorandum No. 10, s. 2002), "had implemented a policy that put its employees on notice that they have no expectation of privacy in anything they create, store, send or receive on the office computers, and that the CSC may monitor the use of the computer resources using both automated or human means. This implies that on-the-spot inspections may be done to ensure that the computer resources were used only for such legitimate business purposes."

Moreover, "[a] search by a government employer of an employee's office is justified at inception when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that it will turn up evidence that the employee is guilty of work-related misconduct."

In this case, Zenaida, being a government employee, has no expectation of privacy in anything she create, store, send or receive on her office computer. Moreover, the purpose of the search conducted upon Zenaida's office computer was to investigate work-related misconduct.

Therefore, the search conducted upon Zenaida's office computer is not violative of her right to privacy and right against unreasonable searches and seizures, and hence, constitutional.

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

No. Severino is wrong.

In a case (Saluday v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 215305, 3 April 2018, 829 Phil. 65), the Supreme Court ruled that "the constitutional immunity against unreasonable searches and seizures is a personal right, which may be waived. However, to be valid, the consent must be voluntary such that it is unequivocal, specific, and intelligently given, uncontaminated by any duress or coercion."

In this case, without any duress, coercion, force, or intimidation from Paul, a police officer, Severino consented to have his black bag opened by the former.

Therefore, Severino deemed to have waived his right against unreasonable searches and seizures, and consequently, the search of his black bag and seizure of the firearm and the live gr***de found therein was valid.

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

No. Ramon is wrong.

Under Republic Act No. 9225 [Sec. 5 (3)], or the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003, those who retain or re-acquire Philippine citizenship thereunder and appointed to any public office, to "enjoy full civil and political rights and be subject to all attendant liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws of the Philippines", "shall subscribe and swear to an oath of allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines and its duly constituted authorities prior to their assumption of office[,]" and "they renounce their oath of allegiance to the country where they took that oath[.]"

Moreover, in a case (Gana-Carait v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 257453, 9 August 2022, 927 Phil. 890), the Supreme Court held that "[t]he requirement to renounce foreign citizenship, and therefore have full and sole allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, is merely a condition imposed upon the exercise by a naturalized dual citizen of his political right to seek elective public office," but not upon an appointive public office.

In this case, Professor Chiara was appointed by the President as her National Security Adviser, an appointive public office. Upon her appointment, Professor Chiara took her oath of allegiance to
the Philippines and renounced her allegiance to the UK.

Therefore, Professor Chiara has complied with the requirements set forth under the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003.

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

No. Hector is wrong.

In a case (San Felix v. Civil Service Commission, G.R. No. 198404, 14 October 2019, 865 Phil. 21), the Supreme Court held that although the power and authority to administer entrance and promotional examinations for police officer and senior police officer positions and consequently, investigate on the anomalies and irregularities committed during said examinations had been transferred to the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM), the Civil Service Commission (CSC), however, "as the central personnel agency," "has the original disciplinary jurisdiction over the act of [any civil servant] in order to protect the integrity of the civil service system which is an integral part of the CSC's duty, authority and power as provided in Article IX-B, Section 3 of the Constitution by removing from its roster of eligibles those who falsified their qualifications. This should be distinguished from ordinary proceedings intended to discipline a bona fide member of the system, for acts or omissions that constitute violations of the law or the rules of service. Clearly, the [NAPOLCOM] has no jurisdiction concerning matters involving the integrity of the civil service system." As such, the CSC still has jurisdiction to investigate on the veracity of the facts stated by a civil servant in his or her personal data sheet.

In this case, Hector, by conspiring with and allowing Ignacio to take, in his behalf, the Police Officer I Examination, undermines the integrity of the civil service system. Therefore, the CSC has jurisdiction to investigate the veracity of the facts stated by Hector in his personal data sheet.

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

No. The proposed provision is unconstitutional.

Under the Constitution [Sec. 2 (C), Art. IX (C)], the Commission on Elections shall "[e]xercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all contests relating to the elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective regional, provincial, and city officials, and appellate jurisdiction over all contests involving elective municipal officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction, or involving elective barangay officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction."

In this case, the Proposed Electoral Code of the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao grants to the Bangsamoro Parliament's Electoral Tribunal the exclusive original jurisdiction over "all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the members of the Parliament[,]" which was already granted to the Commission on Elections under the Constitution.

Therefore, the proposed provision is repugnant to the Constitution, and as such, unconstitutional.

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

The Office of the Solicitor General is correct.

In a catena of cases, the Supreme Court ruled that "[t]he requisites of judicial review include: (1) there must be an actual case or controversy; (2) it must be ripe for adjudication; (3) the person challenging the validity of the act must have standing to sue; (4) the question of constitutionality must have been raised at the earliest opportunity; and (5) the issue of constitutionality must be the very lis mota of the case."

"[A] case to be considered ripe for adjudication, it is a prerequisite that something had been accomplished by either branch of government before a court may step in."

In this case, the Congress yet passed an amnesty law. Therefore, the issue raised by the Philippine Constitution Association is yet ripe for adjudication, i.e. the second requisite of judicial review is lacking.

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

No. In the coming 2028 elections, President Teodoro and Vice-President Angel may not legally run for President of the Philippines.

Under the Constitution (Sec. 4, Art. VII), "[t]he President shall not be eligible for any reelection." Moreover, "[n]o person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time."

In this case, Vice-President Angel already served as the President of the Philippines from 2010 to 2016. Moreover, when former President Priscilla resigned due to health conditions as President of the Philippines, she was only on her fifteenth (15th) month in office. As such, when President Teodoro succeeded former President Priscilla as President of the Philippines, he served as such for four (4) years and nine (9) months.

Therefore, President Teodoro and Vice-President Angel are no longer qualified to run for President of the Philippines.

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

No. The petition will not prosper.

In a case (Hagedorn v. House of Representatives, G.R. No. 275800, 22 April 2025), the Supreme Court held that "[i]n the event of vacancy in the House of Representatives that occurs at least one year before the expiration of the term of such seat, it is incumbent upon the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to call for and hold a special election to fill such vacancy not earlier that 60 days nor longer than 90 days after the occurrence of the vacancy. This is mandatory and ministerial duty of the COMELEC to call and hold the special election emanates from Republic Act No. 6645, as amended by Republic Act No. 7166, and is no longer conditioned upon any certification or call from the House of Representatives."

It is settled that mandamus is a remedy to compel the performance of purely ministerial acts, and upon a clear legal imposition of a duty upon the office or officer sought to be compelled to act.

In this case, the power and duty to call for and hold a special election in case of a vacancy in the House of Representatives resides with the COMELEC.

Therefore, the petition for the issuance of a writ of mandamus filed by the members of the party of Alfonso to compel House Speaker Rodil to call for a special election in their district will not prosper.

KAPAG BA IN-ACQUIT O PINAWALANG-SALA NG ISANG HUKUMAN ANG ISANG AKUSADO, IBIG SABIHIN BA NITO WALA TALAGA ITONG KASALANAN?

Hindi sa lahat ng pagkakataon.

Ayon sa Korte Suprema, mayroong dalawang (2) uri ng pagpapawalang-sala.

Una, ang pagpapawalang-sala dahil napag-alaman na hindi ang akusado ang gumawa ng krimen.

Sa sitwasyong ito, masasabing ang akusado ay talagang walang pagkakasala.

Pangalawa, ang pagpapawalang-sala sa kadahilanang may makatwirang pagdududa sa pagkakasala ng akusado.

Ang hatol ng hukuman ay nakabase lamang sa mga ebidensya na nai-presenta ng prosekusyon na tinanggap ng korte.

Sa sitwasyong ito, marahil ay hindi sapat ang mga ebidensya ng prosekusyon upang mapatunayan ang pagkakasala ng isang akusado, ngunit hindi ibigsabihin ay hindi talaga nito nagawa ang krimen. Sa madaling salita, maaaring ginawa ng akusado ang krimen, ngunit hindi ito nagawang mapatunayan ng prosekusyon sa hukuman.

Sabi nga ng Korte Suprema, mas mabuti nang magpawalang-sala ng isang maysala kaysa humatol at magkulong ng isang inosente.

(Photos by Jesse Bustos/The Philippine STAR)

2023 BAR EXAMINATIONS
POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

My Suggested Answer:

Yes. The "Ang Nars Incentives Act of 2023" is constitutional.

In a case (Carlos Superdrug Corporation v. Department of Social Welfare and Development, G.R. No. 166494, 29 June 2007, 553 Phil. 120), the Supreme Court stated that by virtue of its police power, the State, "in promoting the health and welfare of a special group of citizens" can validly compel private establishments to partly subsidize a government program. The Supreme Court further stated that although a tax deduction did not offer a full reimbursement of the extended senior citizen discount, as it "does not reduce taxes owed on a peso for peso basis but merely offers a fractional reduction in taxes owed[,]" the taking was still valid for being an exercise of the State's police power. For this reason, when the conditions so demand as determined by legislature, property rights must bow to the primacy of police power because property rights, though sheltered by due process, must yield to the general welfare. (Estoconing v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 231298, 7 October 2020)

In this case, the "Ang Nars Incentives Act of 2023" is a valid exercise of police power because it was enacted to give an incentive for Filipino nurses to remain and be employed in the Philippines, promoting the health and welfare of Filipino people in general.

Therefore, although the "Ang Nars Incentives Act of 2023" merely offers 50% reduction in taxes owed, the taking of the other 50% was still valid for being an exercise of police power.

THE ORDER OF PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION

Ngayong araw, ika-21 ng Setyembre, taong 2025, sa "Trillion Peso March Against Corruption" na ginaganap sa EDSA People Power Monument sa Quezon City, at sa "Baha sa Luneta: Aksyon Na Laban sa Korapsyon!" rally against corruption na ginaganap naman sa Luneta Park sa Manila City, ay nanawagan ang mga raliyista na bumaba sa kanilang mga katungkulan sina Pangulong Ferdinand "Bongbong" Romualdez Marcos Jr. (PBBM) at Pangalawang-pangulong Sara Zimmerman Duterte-Carpio (VP Sara).

Kung sakaling dinggin nina PBBM at VP Sara ang daing ng mga raliyista at bumaba nga sila sa kanilang mga katungkulan, sino ang hahalili sa kanilang mga katungkulan upang mamuno sa Pilipinas?

Ayon sa ating Saligang Batas (Sec. 8, Art. VII), ang pansamantalang hahalili sa kanilang mga katungkulan upang mamuno sa Pilipinas ay ang pangulo ng Senado, at kung sakaling wala itong kakayanan, ay ang Ispiker ng Kapulungan ng mga Kinatawan ng Pilipinas (House of Representatives), hanggang sa may maihalal na bagong Pangulo o Pangalawang-pangulo ng Pilipinas.

Paano naman kung manawagan rin ang mga raliyista na bumaba sa kanilang mga katungkulan ang pangulo ng Senado at ang Ispiker ng Kapulungan ng mga Kinatawan ng Pilipinas? Sino ang nararapat na pansamantalang mamuno sa Pilipinas?

Ayon ulit sa ating Saligang Batas (Sec. 8, Art. VII), ang Kongreso, sa pamamagitan ng isang batas, ang magtatalaga kung sino ang nararapat na pansamantalang hahalili upang mamuno sa Pilipinas.

Ngunit kung sisiyasatin, mapag-aalaman na mayroong dalawang naipasang batas kaugnay dito: 1.) ang Republic Act No. 181 na naipasa noong ika-21 ng Hunyo, taong 1947; at 2.) ang Batas Pambansa Blg. 882 na naipasa noong ika-3 ng Disyembre, taong 1985.

Mapapansin na walang batas kaugnay dito ang ipinasa ng Kongreso matapos maratipika ang ating kasalukuyang Saligang Batas noong ika-2 ng Pebrero, taong 1987.

Ano ang epekto nito?

Ayon sa Korte Suprema, ang isang batas ay mananatiling may bisa hanggang hindi ito ipinapasawalang-bisa ng isang kasunod na batas, o kung ito ay hindi taliwas sa ating Saligang Batas.

Ang Batas Pambansa Blg. 882 ay taliwas sa ating Saligang Batas dahil ito ay tumutukoy sa isang "Parliamentary System" na pamahalaan, samantalang ang ating Saligang Batas ay tumutukoy sa isang Republikang pamahalaan.

Ang Republic Act No. 181 ay tumutukoy sa isang Republikang pamahalaan kaya maaari nating gamitin ang probisyon nito sa ating kasalukuyang Saligang Batas. Ayon rito, ang Kongreso, sa magkasamang sesyon, ay magbobotohan upang maghalal ng isang Senador o isang miyembro ng Kapulungan ng mga Kinatawan ng Pilipinas na siyang pansamantalang mamumuno sa Pilipinas, hanggang sa may maihalal na bagong Pangulo o Pangalawang-pangulo ng Pilipinas.