Talaan ng mga Kaso

Filter by Subject

Text Search

There are 129 results on the current subject filter

Title	IDs & Reference #s	Background	Primary Holding	Subject Matter
Manubay, et al. vs. Sec. Garilao (16th April 2009)	AK319606 603 Phil. 135 , G.R. No. 140717	The case revolves around a 124-hectare parcel of land in Barrio Cadlan, Pili, Camarines Sur, owned by the petitioners. In 1994, this property was placed under the coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) by the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO). Subsequently, the petitioners applied for the conversion of this land from agricultural to residential/commercial use, which was denied by the DAR, leading to this legal dispute.	An application for land conversion can be validly denied if the subject property has already been placed under the coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) prior to the application, and a party aggrieved by a DAR Secretary's decision must first exhaust available administrative remedies, such as an appeal to the Office of the President as provided by DAR rules, before resorting to a petition for certiorari in court, unless grave abuse of discretion is clearly shown and no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy exists.	Constitutional Law I
Divinagracia vs. Consolidated Broadcasting System, Inc., et al (7th April 2009)	AK738845 602 Phil. 625 , G.R. No. 162272	The regulation of broadcast media in the Philippines involves a dual requirement: a legislative franchise granted by Congress and a license to operate (such as a CPC) issued by the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC). This system traces back to Act No. 3846 (Radio Control Act of 1931). The case arises from a dispute concerning the alleged failure of broadcast franchisees to comply with a provision in their legislative franchises mandating the public offering of a portion of their common stocks, leading to a complaint filed with the NTC seeking cancellation of their operating licenses.	The National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) does not have the power to cancel Certificates of Public Convenience (CPCs) or other operating licenses it has issued to broadcast stations based on the ground that the franchisees have violated the terms of their legislative franchises; such cancellation would effectively be a revocation of the legislative franchise itself, a power not delegated to the NTC, and the proper remedy for such violations is a quo warranto proceeding.	Constitutional Law I
Spouses Dela Paz (Ret.) vs. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, et al. (13th February 2009)	AK971434 598 Phil. 981 , G.R. No. 184849	The case arose from the "Moscow incident" where Gen. Eliseo Dela Paz, then PNP comptroller and part of a Philippine delegation to an INTERPOL conference in Russia, was apprehended at the Moscow airport on October 11, 2008, for failing to declare 105,000 euros found in his luggage, with an additional 45,000 euros in his possession. This led to his detention and the confiscation of the money by Russian authorities, prompting a legislative inquiry by the Philippine Senate.	The Supreme Court held that each House of Congress has full discretionary authority to determine its rules of proceedings, and the exercise of this power is generally exempt from judicial supervision, except on a clear showing of arbitrary and improvident use constituting a denial of due process; the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations acted within its jurisdiction in investigating the "Moscow incident" due to its potential impact on foreign relations and international obligations.	Constitutional Law I
Garcillano vs. The House of Representatives Committees on Public Information, et al. (23rd December 2008)	AK185298 595 Phil. 775 , G.R. No. 170338 , G.R. No. 179275	The "Hello Garci" tapes, allegedly containing a wiretapped conversation between then-President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and COMELEC Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano discussing the manipulation of the 2004 presidential election results, surfaced and caused a major political controversy. Both Houses of Congress initiated separate legislative inquiries into the matter, leading to the petitions filed in this case.	The Senate or its committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation only in accordance with duly published rules of procedure; publication of such rules is mandatory for each Congress and failure to do so renders any such inquiry procedurally infirm and unconstitutional.	Constitutional Law I
Bagabuyo vs. COMELEC (8th December 2008)	AK041705 593 Phil. 678 , G.R. No. 176970	On October 10, 2006, then Congressman Constantino G. Jaraula of Cagayan de Oro City filed House Bill No. 5859, "An Act Providing for the Apportionment of the Lone Legislative District of the City of Cagayan De Oro." This bill was subsequently enacted into Republic Act No. 9371, which increased the city's legislative districts from one to two. The law mandated that for the May 2007 elections, voters in Cagayan de Oro would be classified as belonging to either the first or second legislative district based on their residence, with each district electing its own representative to Congress and eight members to the Sangguniang Panglungsod.	Legislative reapportionment, which involves the creation or realignment of legislative districts for purposes of representation in the legislature, is fundamentally different from the creation, division, merger, abolition, or substantial alteration of boundaries of a local government unit, and thus does not require the conduct of a plebiscite for its validity.	Constitutional Law I
Social Justice Society (SJS) vs. Dangerous Drugs Board, et al (3rd November 2008)	AK613538 591 Phil. 393 , G.R. No. 157870	Republic Act No. 9165, the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, was enacted to intensify the government's campaign against dangerous drugs. Section 36 of this Act mandated drug testing for various sectors of society. These provisions prompted challenges from different petitioners, questioning their validity on several constitutional grounds, leading to these consolidated petitions before the Supreme Court.	The mandatory drug testing requirement for candidates for public office (Sec. 36(g) of RA 9165) is unconstitutional because it imposes an additional qualification not found in the Constitution. Mandatory drug testing for persons accused of crimes (Sec. 36(f)) is also unconstitutional as it violates the right to privacy and the right against self-incrimination. However, mandatory random drug testing for students (Sec. 36(c)) and employees (Sec. 36(d)) is constitutional, being a reasonable exercise of the State's police power and, in the case of students, within the schools' _in loco parentis_ authority, and for employees, a reasonable regulation for workplace safety.	Constitutional Law I
Province of North Cotabato vs. Government of the Republic of the Philippines Peace Panel on Ancestral Domain (GRP) (14th October 2008)	AK025291 568 SCRA 402 , 589 Phil. 387 , G.R. No. 183591 , G.R. No. 183752 , G.R. No. 183893 , G.R. No. 183951 , G.R. No. 183962	The case arose from the long-standing armed conflict between the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) in Mindanao. Decades of negotiations aimed at achieving peace led to various agreements, including the 2001 GRP-MILF Tripoli Agreement on Peace, which outlined security, rehabilitation, and ancestral domain aspects for further discussion. The MOA-AD represented the culmination of negotiations specifically on the Ancestral Domain aspect, intended to address historical grievances and establish a framework for Bangsamoro self-governance.	The Memorandum of Agreement on the Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD) is unconstitutional and contrary to law because its provisions, particularly the creation of the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity (BJE) under an "associative" relationship, violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines, and the process of its negotiation failed to comply with the constitutional and statutory requirements for public consultation and the right to information. Furthermore, the Executive branch exceeded its authority by guaranteeing constitutional and legal amendments necessary for the MOA-AD's implementation, as such power rests solely with Congress and the sovereign people.	Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II Philosophy of Law
Neri vs. Senate Committee on Accountability of Public Officers and Investigations, et al. (4th September 2008)	AK278418 586 Phil. 135 , G.R. No. 180643	The case arose from a legislative inquiry conducted by respondent Senate Committees into the National Broadband Network (NBN) project, a government project awarded to Zhong Xing Telecommunications Equipment (ZTE). Petitioner Romulo L. Neri, then Director-General of the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA), was a key figure in the evaluation of this project. During his testimony, he disclosed an alleged bribery attempt but invoked executive privilege when asked about his conversations with President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo regarding the NBN project, specifically on three questions.	The claim of presidential communications privilege, when properly invoked by the President or through the Executive Secretary concerning communications with close advisors on matters quintessential to the President's duties and responsibilities, is presumptively valid and can only be overcome by a specific, demonstrated, and compelling need by the investigating legislative body that is critical to the exercise of its legislative functions, a burden which the respondent Senate Committees failed to discharge in this case.	Constitutional Law I
Abakada Guro Party List vs. Purisima (14th August 2008)	AK884230 562 SCRA 251 , 584 Phil. 246 , G.R. No. 166715	Republic Act No. 9335, the Attrition Act of 2005, was enacted to improve the revenue-generation capabilities of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and the Bureau of Customs (BOC). The law established a system of rewards for officials and employees who exceed revenue targets and sanctions for those who fall short, funded by a Rewards and Incentives Fund and overseen by a Revenue Performance Evaluation Board for each agency. This legislative measure was part of broader tax reform efforts aimed at enhancing government revenue collection.	Section 12 of Republic Act No. 9335, creating a Joint Congressional Oversight Committee with the power to approve the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the law, is unconstitutional as it constitutes an encroachment on executive power (implementation of laws) and violates the principles of separation of powers, bicameralism, and the presentment clause. However, the remainder of RA 9335 is constitutional and remains in force and effect due to the law's separability clause.	Constitutional Law I Statutory Construction
Sema vs. Commission on Elections, et al. (16th July 2008)	AK715226 580 Phil. 623 , G.R. No. 177597	The 1987 Constitution apportioned two legislative districts for Maguindanao, with the first district including Cotabato City and eight municipalities. Maguindanao is part of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), but Cotabato City, despite being in its first legislative district, is not part of ARMM, having voted against inclusion. Republic Act No. 9054, amending the ARMM Organic Act, granted the ARMM Regional Assembly the power to create provinces. This grant of power and its subsequent exercise led to the legal disputes in this case.	The power to create provinces and cities, which inherently includes the power to create legislative districts, is vested exclusively in Congress and cannot be delegated to the ARMM Regional Assembly; therefore, any province or city created by the ARMM Regional Assembly under such delegated authority is void.	Constitutional Law I
Akbayan Citizens Action Party ("AKBAYAN"), et al. vs. Aquino, et al. (16th July 2008)	AK279548 580 Phil. 422 , G.R. No. 170516	The case arose from the negotiation of the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA), a comprehensive bilateral free trade agreement between the Philippines and Japan. Amidst concerns about transparency and the potential impact of the agreement on various national interests, petitioners sought access to the complete JPEPA documents, including the initial offers exchanged between the two countries during the negotiation phase, which the government had kept confidential.	Offers exchanged by parties during diplomatic negotiations for a treaty, such as the JPEPA, are covered by executive privilege, specifically the diplomatic negotiations privilege, and remain confidential even after the main treaty text is published, unless a sufficient showing of public interest or need to overcome the privilege is demonstrated by the requesting party.	Constitutional Law I
Planters Products, Inc., vs. Fertiphil Corporation (14th March 2008)	AK870529 572 Phil. 270 , G.R. No. 166006	The case arose from the issuance of LOI No. 1465 by then-President Ferdinand Marcos, which mandated the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA) to include a P10 capital recovery component (CRC) per bag in its fertilizer pricing formula. This CRC was to be collected until adequate capital was raised to make Planters Products, Inc. (PPI), a private corporation, financially viable. Fertiphil Corporation, another private entity engaged in the fertilizer business, paid these levies and, after the 1986 EDSA Revolution, sought a refund from PPI, contending the LOI was unconstitutional.	Letter of Instruction (LOI) No. 1465, which imposed a capital recovery component on the sale of fertilizers to benefit Planters Products, Inc. (PPI), is unconstitutional because it violates the public purpose requirement inherent in the power of taxation, as the levy was designed to aid a private enterprise rather than serve a public interest.	Constitutional Law I
Trillanes IV vs. Judge Pimentel, Sr., et al. (7th February 2008)	AK688993 578 Phil. 1002 , G.R. No. 179817	The case arose after the "Oakwood Incident" on July 27, 2003, where over 300 armed soldiers, led by junior AFP officers including petitioner Antonio F. Trillanes IV, took over the Oakwood Premier Apartments in Makati City, demanding the resignation of the President and other key officials. Following their surrender, Trillanes was charged with coup d'etat and remained in detention. While detained, he ran for and won a seat in the Senate in the May 2007 elections.	A detention prisoner, even if an elected public official like a Senator, cannot be allowed to leave detention to attend legislative sessions or perform other official functions outside their place of confinement, as the fact of lawful detention inherently curtails rights and privileges, including the full exercise of civil and political rights associated with public office, especially when bail has been denied due to strong evidence of guilt for a non-bailable offense.	Constitutional Law I
Pharmaceutical and Health Care Assoc. of the Phils. vs. Health Sec. Duque III (9th October 2007)	AK573831 561 Phil. 386 , G.R. No. 173034	Executive Order No. 51, "The Milk Code," was issued in 1986 to give effect to Article 11 of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes (ICMBS), aiming to protect and promote breastfeeding. Over the years, the World Health Assembly (WHA) adopted various resolutions recommending stricter measures for marketing breastmilk substitutes, including absolute bans on advertising and promotion for certain age groups. The Department of Health (DOH), citing these international instruments and its mandate under the Milk Code and the Administrative Code, issued A.O. No. 2006-0012 (RIRR) to update the implementing rules of the Milk Code, leading to this legal challenge by manufacturers of breastmilk substitutes.	The Department of Health (DOH) exceeded its rule-making authority when it issued RIRR provisions (Sections 4(f), 11, and 46) that absolutely prohibited advertising, promotions, and sponsorships of breastmilk substitutes for infants and young children up to 24 months and imposed administrative fines not authorized by the Milk Code (E.O. No. 51). While the DOH has the power to issue rules to implement the Milk Code, these rules cannot expand, modify, or contradict the parent statute; international instruments like World Health Assembly (WHA) Resolutions, unless transformed into domestic law through legislation or qualifying as customary international law, cannot be implemented by executive agencies as if they were binding domestic law.	Constitutional Law I
National Electrification Administration vs. Morales (24th July 2007)	AK115653 528 SCRA 79 , 555 Phil. 74 , G.R. No. 154200	Danilo Morales and other employees of the National Electrification Administration (NEA) filed a class suit against NEA for the payment of various allowances and longevity pay purportedly authorized under Republic Act No. 6758 (Compensation and Classification Act of 1989). The RTC granted their petition, ordering NEA to settle their claims.	A judgment directing a government-owned or controlled corporation (GOCC) to "settle the claims" of its employees is a special judgment for the performance of an act other than the payment of a specific sum of money, and its execution cannot be enforced through garnishment; furthermore, even if a GOCC's funds can generally be garnished, a claim for payment of a judgment award against it must first be filed with the Commission on Audit (COA) before execution can proceed.	Constitutional Law I
Bantay Republic Act or BA-RA 7941 vs. COMELEC (4th May 2007)	AK522247 551 Phil. 1 , G.R. No. 177271 , G.R. NO. 177314	The case arose from the upcoming May 14, 2007 party-list elections. Various groups filed manifestations of intent to participate, and some were accredited by the COMELEC. Public perception grew that some individuals behind these accredited party-list groups did not genuinely represent marginalized and underrepresented sectors. Petitioners, concerned about the qualifications and sectoral representation of these nominees, sought the disclosure of their names from the COMELEC, which the latter refused, leading to these petitions.	The Commission on Elections has a constitutional duty to disclose to the public the names of party-list nominees, as this is a matter of public concern falling under the people's right to information; Section 7 of R.A. No. 7941, which states that "The names of the party-list nominees shall not be shown on the certified list," only prohibits the inclusion of such names on the certified list posted in polling places on election day and does not constitute an absolute bar to their disclosure through other means before the election.	Constitutional Law I
Rev. Fr. Cayat vs. COMELEC (1st Div.) (24th April 2007)	AK957651 550 Phil. 209 , G.R. No. 163776 , G.R. No. 165736	Rev. Fr. Nardo B. Cayat and Thomas R. Palileng, Sr. were candidates for Mayor of Buguias, Benguet in the May 10, 2004 local elections. Cayat had been previously convicted by final judgment for Forcible Acts of Lasciviousness, a crime involving moral turpitude, and was under probation when he filed his certificate of candidacy. This conviction became the basis for Palileng's petition to disqualify Cayat.	A candidate disqualified by final judgment before an election cannot be voted for, and votes cast for him shall not be counted; consequently, the candidate who is the sole remaining qualified candidate does not merely take second place but is the only placer and is entitled to be proclaimed.	Constitutional Law I
Citizen’s Battle Against Corruption (CIBAC) vs. COMELEC (13th April 2007)	AK084300 549 Phil. 76 , G.R. No. 172103	The dispute arose from the allocation of party-list seats in the House of Representatives following the May 2004 National and Local Elections. After petitioner CIBAC was proclaimed as having qualified for one seat by receiving the required two percent (2%) of the total votes cast for party-list representatives, a controversy emerged regarding its entitlement to an additional seat, hinging on the correct formula for computation to be used by the COMELEC.	The correct and prevailing formula for computing additional seats for qualified party-list groups is the one established in Veterans Federation Party v. COMELEC, which is: (Number of votes of concerned party / Number of votes of first party) x Number of additional seats allocated to the first party. A party-list group must obtain an exact whole number in this computation to be entitled to an additional seat; fractions are not rounded up.	Constitutional Law I
Rufino vs. Endriga (21st July 2006)	AK344369 528 Phil. 473 , G.R. No. 139554	Presidential Decree No. 15 created the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) as a non-municipal public corporation governed by a Board of Trustees. PD 15, as amended, provided that vacancies in the Board were to be filled by election by a majority of the remaining trustees. Only if the Board became entirely vacant could the President of the Philippines fill such vacancies. This case arose from a dispute between a group of trustees appointed by then-President Joseph E. Estrada (Rufino group) and the incumbent trustees (Endriga group) who claimed their terms had not yet expired and that vacancies should be filled according to PD 15.	Section 6(b) and (c) of Presidential Decree No. 15, as amended, are unconstitutional insofar as they authorize the remaining trustees of the Cultural Center of the Philippines Board to fill vacancies in the Board by election, as this mechanism infringes upon the President's constitutional power of appointment and power of control.	Constitutional Law I
Public Interest Center, Inc. vs. Elma (30th June 2006)	AK754720 526 Phil. 550 , G.R. No. 138965	The case arose from the appointment of Magdangal B. Elma to two significant government positions: first as Chairman of the PCGG and subsequently, during his tenure there, as Chief Presidential Legal Counsel. This dual appointment raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest and violations of constitutional provisions designed to prevent officials from holding multiple public offices, particularly given the distinct and potentially overlapping or conflicting responsibilities of the two roles.	The concurrent appointments of an individual as Chairman of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) and as Chief Presidential Legal Counsel (CPLC) are unconstitutional because the two offices are incompatible, violating the prohibition against holding multiple offices under Section 7, Article IX-B of the 1987 Constitution.	Constitutional Law I
Estrada vs. Escritor (22nd June 2006)	AK431336 492 SCRA 1 , 525 Phil. 110 , A.M. No. P-02-1651	The case arose from a sworn letter-complaint filed by Alejandro Estrada against Soledad Escritor, a court interpreter, alleging that her living arrangement with Luciano Quilapio, Jr.—a man married to another woman—constituted disgraceful and immoral conduct tarnishing the image of the judiciary. Escritor, a widow whose own husband was previously estranged, admitted the cohabitation but claimed it conformed to the religious doctrines and practices of the Jehovah's Witnesses, formalized through a "Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness" approved by her congregation, as Quilapio faced legal impediments to remarriage. This created a conflict between state laws penalizing such relationships and Escritor's constitutional right to religious freedom.	The State failed to demonstrate a compelling interest that would justify infringing upon the respondent's fundamental right to the free exercise of her religion, and failed to show that the means adopted was the least restrictive; therefore, the respondent's conjugal arrangement, sanctioned by her religious beliefs and practices as a Jehovah's Witness, cannot be penalized as disgraceful and immoral conduct, and she is entitled to an exemption based on her right to religious freedom.	Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II Philosophy of Law Freedom of Religion
David vs. Macapagal-Arroyo (3rd May 2006)	AK973659 489 SCRA 160 , 522 Phil. 705 , G.R. No. 171396 , G.R. No. 171409 , G.R. No. 171485 , G.R. No. 171483 , G.R. No. 171400 , G.R. No. 171489 , G.R. No. 171424	On February 24, 2006, amidst alleged conspiracies by political opposition, leftist insurgents (NDF-CPP-NPA), and military adventurists to overthrow the government, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued PP 1017, declaring a state of national emergency. This declaration cited threats to the democratic Philippine State, including plots to unseat or assassinate the President, magnified by certain media segments, and actions adversely affecting the economy and national security. On the same day, G.O. No. 5 was issued to implement PP 1017, directing the AFP and PNP to suppress acts of terrorism and lawless violence. These issuances followed a series of events, including the escape of Magdalo Group members, discovery of "Oplan Hackle I" (a plot for bombings and assassinations), recapture of Lt. San Juan with subversive documents, alleged defection plans within the PNP-SAF, and confessions by military officers about plans to join anti-Arroyo protests.	The President has the constitutional power to declare a state of national emergency and call out the Armed Forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence under Section 18, Article VII of the Constitution. However, such a declaration does not authorize the President to (1) issue decrees, (2) direct the AFP to enforce laws unrelated to suppressing lawless violence, (3) impose prior restraint on the press, or (4) take over privately-owned public utilities or businesses affected with public interest without legislative authority under Section 17, Article XII of the Constitution. General Order No. 5 is constitutional in providing a standard for the AFP and PNP to implement PP 1017, but its reference to undefined "acts of terrorism" is unconstitutional.	Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II Philosophy of Law
Senate of the Philippines vs. Ermita (20th April 2006)	AK395231 488 SCRA 1 , 522 Phil. 1 , G.R. No. 169777 , G.R. No. 169659 , G.R. No. 169660 , G.R. No. 169667 , G.R. No. 169834 , G.R. No. 171246	The case arose from various Senate inquiries into matters of public concern, including the North Luzon Railways (NorthRail) Project, the "Gloriagate Scandal" involving alleged electoral fraud and wiretapping, and the fertilizer fund scam. Several executive officials invited to these hearings declined to attend, citing E.O. 464, which President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued on September 28, 2005. This prompted multiple petitioners, including the Senate, legislators, and public interest groups, to challenge the constitutionality of E.O. 464 before the Supreme Court.	Executive Order No. 464 is unconstitutional in part: Sections 2(b) and 3 are void because they allow executive officials to evade congressional inquiries without a specific and properly invoked claim of executive privilege by the President or the Executive Secretary (by order of the President), thereby unduly infringing upon the legislative power of inquiry. Section 1 is valid when construed to apply only to the Question Hour (Art. VI, Sec. 22, Constitution), and Section 2(a) is valid as an internal guideline for the executive department concerning information that may be considered privileged.	Constitutional Law I Philosophy of Law Statutory Construction
Executive Secretary vs. Southwing Industries, Inc. (20th February 2006)	AK861204 518 Phil. 103 , G.R. No. 164171 , G.R. No. 164172 , G.R. No. 168741	On December 12, 2002, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued Executive Order No. 156, "Providing for a Comprehensive Industrial Policy and Directions for the Motor Vehicle Development Program and its Implementing Guidelines." Article 2, Section 3.1 of EO 156 prohibited the importation into the country, inclusive of the Subic Bay Freeport, of all types of used motor vehicles, subject to limited exceptions. This was intended to rationalize the importation of used motor vehicles and enhance the competitiveness of the domestic motor vehicle manufacturing industry. Respondents, entities operating within the Subic Bay Freeport and engaged in the business of importing and trading used motor vehicles, challenged this provision.	Article 2, Section 3.1 of Executive Order No. 156, prohibiting the importation of used motor vehicles, is valid and constitutional in its application to the Philippine territory outside the secured area of the Subic Bay Freeport, but it is ultra vires and void in its application to the presently secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area (the "Secured Area" of the Subic Bay Freeport as defined in EO 97-A), because such application exceeds the President's delegated authority and unreasonably modifies the freeport status established by RA 7227.	Constitutional Law I
Pimentel, Jr. vs. Exec. Secretary Ermita (13th October 2005)	AK992362 509 Phil. 567 , G.R. No. 164978	The case arose after President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo appointed several individuals as acting secretaries of various executive departments in August 2004, while the 13th Congress was in its regular session and the Commission on Appointments had already been constituted. Petitioners, who are members of the Senate, questioned the legality of these appointments, arguing they bypassed the confirmation process required by the Constitution.	The President of the Philippines has the constitutional and statutory power to appoint department secretaries in an acting capacity without the consent of the Commission on Appointments, even while Congress is in session, as such appointments are temporary measures to fill vacancies and ensure the continuous performance of executive functions.	Constitutional Law I
Abakada Guro Party List vs. Ermita (1st September 2005)	AK134713 469 SCRA 14 , 506 Phil. 1 , G.R. No. 168056 , G.R. No. 168207 , G.R. No. 168461 , G.R. No. 168463 , G.R. No. 168730	The enactment of Republic Act No. 9337 stemmed from the government's need to address a mounting budget deficit and generate significant revenue to stabilize the country's fiscal situation. The law aimed to restructure the Value-Added Tax (VAT) system by expanding its base, increasing the rate (with a standby authority for the President to raise it further), and introducing measures intended to improve tax administration and collection efficiency as part of a broader fiscal reform agenda.	Republic Act No. 9337 is constitutional; its enactment did not violate the procedural requirements of the Constitution regarding the origination of revenue bills or the amendment process, and its substantive provisions, including the President's standby authority to increase the VAT rate and the limitations on input tax credits, do not constitute undue delegation of legislative power, nor do they violate the due process, equal protection, uniformity, or progressivity clauses of the Constitution.	Constitutional Law I Philosophy of Law Statutory Construction
Sen. Pimentel, Jr. vs. Office of the Executive Secretary (6th July 2005)	AK539131 501 Phil. 303 , G.R. No. 158088	The Philippines, through its Charge d' Affaires, signed the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on December 28, 2000. The Rome Statute establishes the ICC to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, and its provisions require ratification, acceptance, or approval by signatory states for it to become binding. Petitioners, concerned with human rights and the enforcement of international criminal law, urged the executive department to transmit the signed Statute to the Senate for its concurrence to complete the ratification process.	The President of the Philippines possesses the discretionary power to ratify treaties, including the decision of whether and when to submit a signed treaty to the Senate for concurrence; this act is not a ministerial duty compellable by a writ of mandamus.	Constitutional Law I
Tecson vs. Commission on Elections (3rd March 2004)	AK663881 424 SCRA 277 , 468 Phil. 421 , G.R. No. 161434 , G.R. No. 161634 , G.R. No. 161824	The cases arose in the lead-up to the May 10, 2004 national elections, following the filing of a certificate of candidacy for President by respondent Ronald Allan Kelley Poe, also known as Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ), wherein he declared himself a natural-born Filipino citizen.	The Supreme Court's jurisdiction as the sole judge of presidential election contests under Article VII, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution is limited to post-election disputes and cannot be invoked to rule on a candidate's qualifications before the election; challenges to a candidate's qualifications based on alleged material misrepresentation in the certificate of candidacy fall under the COMELEC's jurisdiction pursuant to Section 78 of the Omnibus Election Code, reviewable by the Supreme Court via certiorari, where the petitioner must prove not just falsity but deliberate misrepresentation.	Constitutional Law I Philosophy of Law
Senate Blue Ribbon Committee vs. Majaducon (29th July 2003)	AK802239 455 Phil. 61 , G.R. No. 136760 , G.R. NO. 138378	The case arose from two Senate Resolutions: No. 157, directing an inquiry into alleged coup d'etat plans related to probing AFP fund irregularities, and No. 160, directing an inquiry into alleged mismanagement of AFP-Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFP-RSBS) funds. These resolutions were referred to the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee and the Committee on National Defense and Security for investigation.	A Regional Trial Court has no jurisdiction to prohibit the Senate or its committees from conducting inquiries in aid of legislation, as this would violate the principle of separation of powers; furthermore, the use of terms like "gross ignorance of the law" in pleadings challenging a judge's order, without malice, does not automatically constitute indirect contempt, especially when such terms are descriptive of alleged errors in applying fundamental legal principles.	Constitutional Law I
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. COMELEC (25th June 2003)	AK413799 452 Phil. 899 , G.R. No. 147589 , G.R. No. 147613	The case emerged from the complexities of the 2001 party-list elections, following the Supreme Court's June 26, 2001 Decision that established eight-point guidelines for party-list qualification. Numerous party-list groups participated, leading to disputes over qualification, the computation of votes, the determination of the two-percent threshold, and the allocation of seats, necessitating further clarification from the Court on how to apply the party-list law (RA 7941) and its previous rulings.	In party-list elections, votes cast for organizations that are subsequently disqualified for failing to meet the statutory and jurisprudential requirements must be deducted from the "total votes cast for the party-list system" for the purpose of determining the two-percent threshold required to win a seat in the House of Representatives, as mandated by Section 10 of RA 7941, which states that votes for those "not entitled to be voted for shall not be counted."	Constitutional Law I
Dadole vs. Commission on Audit (3rd December 2002)	AK714832 441 Phil. 537 , G.R. No. 125350	For several years, RTC and MTC judges in Mandaue City had been receiving monthly additional allowances from the city government through appropriation ordinances. In 1991, this amount was P1,500. In 1994, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) issued Local Budget Circular No. 55 (LBC 55), which limited such additional allowances from provinces and cities to P1,000.00 per month. This circular led to the Mandaue City Auditor issuing notices of disallowance for the amounts received by the petitioner judges in excess of P1,000 and requiring reimbursement.	Local Budget Circular No. 55, issued by the Department of Budget and Management, is null and void because it overstepped the President's power of general supervision over local government units by imposing a specific monetary limit on additional allowances not found in the enabling law (R.A. 7160), and because it was not published as required for administrative rules intended to enforce or implement existing law.	Constitutional Law I
Matibag vs. Benipayo (2nd April 2002)	AK305174 429 Phil. 554 , G.R. No. 149036	The case arose following changes in the leadership of the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). Petitioner Ma. J. Angelina G. Matibag, who held a temporary appointment as Director IV of the COMELEC's Education and Information Department (EID), was reassigned to the Law Department by newly appointed ad interim COMELEC Chairman Alfredo L. Benipayo. This reassignment, coupled with the ad interim appointments and their subsequent renewals for Chairman Benipayo and Commissioners Borra and Tuason by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, prompted Matibag to challenge the constitutionality and legality of these appointments and her reassignment, citing concerns over COMELEC's independence and alleged violations of constitutional prohibitions.	Ad interim appointments to the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) are permanent appointments that take effect immediately upon qualification and are not considered temporary or acting appointments prohibited by Article IX-C, Section 1(2) of the Constitution; furthermore, the renewal of such ad interim appointments when by-passed by the Commission on Appointments does not violate the constitutional prohibition on reappointment, as this prohibition applies only to appointees who have been previously confirmed by the Commission on Appointments and have served a term or part thereof.	Constitutional Law I
Estrada vs. Desierto (2nd March 2001)	AK430917 353 SCRA 452 , 406 Phil. 1 , G.R. Nos. 146710-15 , G.R. No. 146738	Joseph Estrada’s presidency began in 1998 with broad public support but was marred by corruption allegations, including his involvement in illegal gambling operations (jueteng). A series of political and public upheavals culminated in his impeachment trial, which was aborted after senators voted to suppress key evidence. Massive public protests followed, leading to the withdrawal of military and police support for Estrada and the ascension of Vice President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.	The Supreme Court held that Joseph Ejercito Estrada had effectively resigned as President of the Philippines on January 20, 2001, and that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo had validly assumed the presidency.	Constitutional Law I
De Rama vs. Court of Appeals (28th February 2001)	AK337670 405 Phil. 531 , G.R. No. 131136	Upon assuming office as Mayor of Pagbilao, Quezon, petitioner Conrado L. de Rama sought to recall the appointments of fourteen municipal employees. These appointments were made by the outgoing mayor, Ma. Evelyn S. Abeja, in the period leading up to the end of her term and after the election of de Rama. The core of the dispute revolved around the petitioner's belief that these were "midnight appointments" and were therefore invalid, leading him to request their recall from the Civil Service Commission.	The constitutional prohibition against "midnight appointments" found in Article VII, Section 15 of the 1987 Constitution applies only to a President or Acting President and does not extend to appointments made by local elective officials. Furthermore, once an appointment is issued, accepted, and the appointee assumes office, they acquire a legal right to the position, protected by due process, and such appointment cannot be unilaterally revoked by the appointing authority or their successor without just cause and adherence to procedural requirements, with the Civil Service Commission having the authority to review and recall appointments only on specific grounds.	Constitutional Law I
Veterans Federation Party vs. Commission on Elections (6th October 2000)	AK393743 396 Phil. 419 , G.R. No. 136781 , G.R. No. 136786 , G.R. No. 136795	The 1987 Constitution introduced the party-list system of representation in the House of Representatives to enable marginalized and underrepresented sectors to participate in lawmaking. Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution mandates that party-list representatives shall constitute twenty percent of the total number of representatives. Congress enacted R.A. No. 7941 (The Party-List System Act) to implement this constitutional provision, outlining the procedure for the election and allocation of seats for party-list representatives. The May 11, 1998 elections were the first time party-list representatives were elected under this system.	The allocation of seats for party-list representatives under R.A. No. 7941 must adhere to four inviolable parameters: (1) the twenty percent allocation of the total House membership for party-list representatives is a ceiling, not a mandatory number to be filled at all times; (2) the two percent threshold of total valid votes cast for the party-list system is a valid requirement for a party to qualify for a seat; (3) each qualified party is entitled to a maximum of three seats; and (4) additional seats for qualified parties must be computed based on proportional representation.	Constitutional Law I
Integrated Bar of the Philippines vs. Zamora (15th August 2000)	AK990550 338 SCRA 81 , G.R. No. 141284 , 392 Phil. 618	In response to an alarming increase in violent crimes such as robberies, kidnappings, and carnappings in Metro Manila, the President verbally ordered the PNP and the Philippine Marines to conduct joint visibility patrols for crime prevention and suppression. This directive was subsequently formalized through a Memorandum and implemented via Letter of Instruction 02/2000, establishing "Task Force Tulungan."	The President's exercise of the power to call out the armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence is a discretionary power vested by the Constitution, and while subject to judicial review for grave abuse of discretion, the Court will not substitute its judgment for the President's determination of the necessity for such action unless a clear showing of arbitrariness or lack of factual basis is established by the petitioner.	Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II
Defensor-Santiago vs. Guingona, Jr. (18th November 1998)	AK966337 359 Phil. 276 , G.R. No. 134577	The case arose from the organization of the Eleventh Congress of the Philippines in July 1998. Following the election of Senator Marcelo B. Fernan as Senate President, a dispute emerged regarding who should be recognized as the Senate Minority Leader. Senator Tatad, who lost the bid for Senate President, claimed the position, supported by Senator Santiago. Simultaneously, a group of seven senators belonging to the Lakas-NUCD-UMDP party, also a minority bloc, elected Senator Teofisto T. Guingona Jr. as their choice for Minority Leader. Senate President Fernan eventually recognized Senator Guingona.	The selection of the Senate Minority Leader is an internal matter of the Senate, and courts will not interfere with such internal workings unless a clear violation of the Constitution, laws, or the Senate's own rules, or grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, is demonstrated.	Constitutional Law I
Manila Prince Hotel vs. GSIS (3rd February 1997)	AK613501 267 SCRA 408 , G.R. No. 122156	The case arose from the Philippine Government's privatization program under Proclamation No. 50. Respondent Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) decided to sell 30% to 51% of its shares in respondent Manila Hotel Corporation (MHC), which owns the historic Manila Hotel. The sale was intended to attract a "strategic partner" to provide management expertise, an international marketing/reservation system, and financial support to enhance the Manila Hotel's profitability.	Section 10, second paragraph, Article XII of the 1987 Constitution, which provides that "In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos," is a self-executing provision and requires that a qualified Filipino bidder be allowed to match the highest bid of a foreign bidder in transactions involving national patrimony, and upon matching, the award should go to the Filipino bidder.	Constitutional Law I Statutory Construction
Republic vs. National Labor Relations Commission (17th October 1996)	AK521819 263 SCRA 290 , 331 Phil. 608 , G.R. No. 120385	Pantranco North Express, Inc. (PNEI) faced financial difficulties, leading to its ownership transfer to the National Investment Development Corporation (NIDC), a PNB subsidiary, after foreclosure. PNEI was later sequestered by the PCGG and its management transferred to the Asset Privatization Trust (APT) for eventual sale. Due to its deteriorating financial condition, PNEI petitioned for suspension of payments and implemented a retrenchment program, which resulted in numerous labor complaints for unpaid benefits and separation pay filed by its employees against PNEI and APT.	While the Asset Privatization Trust (APT) can be sued, its liability for the obligations of a privatized corporation (PNEI) is limited to the assets of that corporation it holds in its capacity as a conservator. APT's own funds, being public funds, are not subject to garnishment or execution to satisfy such obligations, even if a judgment holds APT jointly and solidarily liable with the privatized entity, as such liability only extends to the assets taken over from the privatized firm.	Constitutional Law I
Mariano, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections (7th March 1995)	AK024914 312 Phil. 259 , G.R. No. 118577 , G.R. No. 118627	Republic Act No. 7854 was enacted to convert the Municipality of Makati into a highly urbanized city. This conversion and specific provisions within the Act, such as the definition of its territory, the status of incumbent officials, and the creation of new legislative districts, prompted legal challenges from taxpayers and a senator who questioned their compliance with constitutional and statutory requirements.	Republic Act No. 7854, particularly its sections 2 (territorial delineation), 51 (continuity of officials and new corporate existence), and 52 (creation of legislative districts), is constitutional. The delineation of territory by reference to existing boundaries is permissible, especially with pending boundary disputes. Challenges to term limits based on future contingencies are premature. Reapportionment of legislative districts can be done through a special law creating a new city, and the population requirement for an additional district was met.	Constitutional Law I
JUSMAG Philippines vs. NLRC (15th December 1994)	AK645294 239 SCRA 224 , 309 Phil. 213 , G.R. No. 108813	JUSMAG-Philippines was created pursuant to the Military Assistance Agreement of March 21, 1947, between the Philippines and the United States, with the primary task of advising and assisting the Philippines on military matters. Initially, the costs of locally employed personnel were borne by the Republic of the Philippines, but this changed in 1991 when the US Government offered to provide funds for the salaries of security assistance support personnel (SASP) and other operational costs.	The Joint United States Military Assistance Group to the Republic of the Philippines (JUSMAG-Philippines), when performing governmental functions pursuant to the Military Assistance Agreement between the Philippines and the United States, is immune from suit, and such immunity is not waived by entering into employment contracts related to these sovereign functions.	Constitutional Law I
Tolentino vs. Secretary of Finance (25th August 1994)	AK459748 305 Phil 686 , G.R. No. 115455 , G.R. No. 115525 , G.R. No. 115543 , G.R. No. 115544 , G.R. No. 115754 , G.R. No. 115781 , G.R. No. 115852 , G.R. No. 115873 , G.R. No. 115931	The Philippine government sought to widen the tax base of the existing Value-Added Tax (VAT) system and enhance its administration to address a growing budget deficit and improve revenue collection. This led to the legislative effort to amend the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) through what would become Republic Act No. 7716. The law aimed to remove certain VAT exemptions, expand the coverage of VAT to previously exempt goods and services, and restructure its application, sparking widespread opposition from various sectors who feared its economic impact and questioned its legality.	Republic Act No. 7716, the Expanded Value-Added Tax Law, is constitutional, having been enacted in compliance with the procedural requirements of the Constitution, and its provisions do not, on their face, violate the Bill of Rights or other constitutional mandates concerning taxation, freedom of speech and religion, or impairment of contracts; claims regarding its regressive nature or oppressiveness are considered prematurely raised without a sufficient factual record.	Constitutional Law I
Philippine Constitution Association vs. Enriquez (19th August 1994)	AK037325 305 Phil. 546 , G.R. No. 113105 , G.R. No. 113174 , G.R. No. 113766 , G.R. No. 113888	The case arose from the enactment of Republic Act No. 7663, the General Appropriations Act (GAA) for 1994. After its passage by both houses of Congress, the President signed it into law but vetoed several provisions and imposed conditions on others through a Presidential Veto Message. Various groups, including the Philippine Constitution Association and several Senators, questioned the constitutionality of certain provisions of the GAA itself (like the Countrywide Development Fund and realignment of operational expenses) and the legality of the President's exercise of the veto power over specific items and special provisions, leading to these consolidated petitions before the Supreme Court.	The President has the power to veto "inappropriate provisions" in a general appropriations bill, treating them as items for veto purposes, even if they are not specific appropriations of money, particularly if such provisions attempt to amend substantive law or encroach on executive functions; however, the President cannot veto a provision that is directly related to an item of appropriation without vetoing the item itself.	Constitutional Law I
Garcia vs. Commission on Audit (14th September 1993)	AK053844 297 Phil. 394 , G.R. No. 75025	Petitioner Vicente Garcia was a Supervising Lineman summarily dismissed from the Bureau of Telecommunications on April 1, 1975, for alleged dishonesty related to the loss of telegraph poles. A criminal case for qualified theft based on the same facts was filed against him. He was acquitted in the criminal case, with the trial court noting his innocence and commending his dedication. Despite the acquittal, his request for reinstatement was initially denied, leading him to seek executive clemency, which was eventually granted.	A public employee reinstated pursuant to an executive clemency grounded on the employee's innocence is entitled to full back wages from the date of illegal dismissal to the date of reinstatement, as the clemency obliterates the adverse effects of the administrative decision and nullifies the dismissal.	Constitutional Law I
Oposa vs. Factoran, Jr. (30th July 1993)	AK199582 224 SCRA 792 , 296 Phil. 694 , G.R. No. 101083	The case arose amidst growing concerns over rapid deforestation in the Philippines and its detrimental environmental consequences. Petitioners highlighted the significant reduction in the country's rainforest cover over 25 years, from approximately 16 million hectares to about 1.2 million hectares by 1987, and further to a mere 850,000 hectares of virgin old-growth rainforests. This deforestation was attributed largely to commercial logging operations sanctioned by Timber License Agreements (TLAs) issued by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), leading to severe environmental degradation, including water shortages, soil erosion, loss of biodiversity, and climate change impacts.	The Supreme Court held that petitioners, including minors representing their generation and generations yet unborn, have the legal standing (locus standi) to sue for the enforcement of their fundamental constitutional right to a balanced and healthful ecology, which is self-executing and judicially enforceable. Furthermore, Timber License Agreements (TLAs) are not contracts but mere privileges granted by the State, which can be amended, modified, replaced, or rescinded when the national interest so requires, and thus are not protected by the non-impairment of contracts clause.	Constitutional Law I Philosophy of Law
Philip Morris, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals (16th July 1993)	AK115794 296 Phil. 451 , G.R. No. 91332	Petitioners are foreign corporations and registered owners of the trademarks "MARK VII," "MARK TEN," and "LARK" for cigarettes in the Philippines. They alleged that Fortune Tobacco Corporation's manufacture and sale of "MARK" cigarettes infringed their trademarks. Petitioners are not doing business in the Philippines but claimed to be suing on an isolated transaction and under the protection of international conventions and Philippine trademark law. The dispute centered on whether Fortune's use of "MARK" should be preliminarily enjoined pending the outcome of the main infringement case.	A foreign corporation, even if it has registered trademarks in the Philippines and possesses the capacity to sue for infringement under Section 21-A of the Trademark Law, is not automatically entitled to a writ of preliminary injunction unless it can establish actual use of its trademarks in commerce in the Philippines, as required by Sections 2 and 2-A of the Trademark Law, to demonstrate a clear and unmistakable right that is being violated and that would result in irreparable injury.	Constitutional Law I
Labo, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections (3rd July 1992)	AK581326 286 Phil. 397 , G.R. No. 105111 , G.R. No. 105384	This case arose after Ramon L. Labo, Jr., despite a previous Supreme Court ruling in 1989 (_Labo v. Commission on Elections, 176 SCRA 1_) declaring him not a Filipino citizen, filed a certificate of candidacy for Mayor of Baguio City in the May 11, 1992 elections, asserting he was a "natural-born" Filipino. Roberto Ortega, another mayoral candidate, subsequently filed a disqualification case against Labo before the Commission on Elections (Comelec) based on this prior judgment and Labo's alleged false representation of citizenship.	A candidate previously declared by a final Supreme Court judgment to be a non-Filipino citizen remains disqualified from running for and holding public office unless reacquisition of Philippine citizenship is proven; winning an election does not cure such ineligibility, and the candidate receiving the second-highest number of votes is not entitled to be proclaimed the winner, with the vacancy to be filled by operation of the rule on succession (i.e., by the vice-mayor elect).	Constitutional Law I
Caltex Philippines, Inc. vs. Commission on Audit (8th May 1992)	AK960993 284-A Phil. 233 , G.R. No. 92585	The case revolves around the Oil Price Stabilization Fund (OPSF), created by P.D. No. 1956, as amended by E.O. No. 137. The OPSF was established to minimize frequent price changes of crude oil and petroleum products due to exchange rate adjustments or world market price changes, and to reimburse oil companies for cost increases and certain cost underrecoveries. The Department of Energy (formerly Ministry of Energy/Office of Energy Affairs) administered the OPSF, with the Department of Finance determining specific reimbursable "other factors" leading to cost underrecovery.	The Commission on Audit (COA) possesses broad powers under the 1987 Constitution to examine, audit, and settle all government accounts, and to promulgate rules for the prevention and disallowance of irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable expenditures, which includes the authority to disallow claims not sanctioned by law, such as certain reimbursements from the Oil Price Stabilization Fund (OPSF).	Constitutional Law I
Bengzon Jr. vs. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee (20th November 1991)	AK129190 280 Phil. 829 , G.R. No. 89914	Following the 1986 People's Revolution, the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) was tasked with recovering alleged ill-gotten wealth accumulated by former President Ferdinand E. Marcos, his family, and close associates. One such associate was Benjamin "Kokoy" Romualdez. The PCGG filed Civil Case No. 0035 before the Sandiganbayan against Romualdez and others, including the petitioners, for reconveyance, reversion, accounting, restitution, and damages related to numerous corporations allegedly acquired through illicit means. The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee subsequently initiated an inquiry into the purported sale of these Romualdez corporations to the Lopa Group, a transaction also central to the PCGG's case.	The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee is enjoined from compelling the petitioners to testify and produce evidence because its contemplated inquiry is not in aid of legislation and, if pursued, would violate the principle of separation of powers by encroaching upon matters already within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, and would disregard the petitioners' constitutional rights, particularly the right against self-incrimination, given the pending judicial case involving the same issues.	Constitutional Law I
Ganzon vs. Court of Appeals (5th August 1991)	AK696650 277 Phil. 311 , G.R. No. 93252 , G.R. NO. 93746 , G.R. NO. 95245	The cases arose from a series of administrative complaints filed in 1988 against Mayor Rodolfo Ganzon of Iloilo City and Sangguniang Panglunsod member Mary Ann Rivera Artieda. The complaints, lodged by various city officials, alleged offenses such as abuse of authority, oppression, grave misconduct, and culpable violation of the Constitution. These complaints led to investigations by the Department of Local Government and the imposition of preventive suspensions by the Secretary of Local Government, prompting the petitioners to question the Secretary's authority under the new constitutional framework emphasizing local autonomy.	The President of the Philippines, through the Secretary of Local Government, possesses the authority to investigate and impose preventive suspensions on elective local officials in accordance with the procedures and limitations set forth in the Local Government Code (Batas Blg. 337), as this power is a component of the President's general supervision over local governments and was not abrogated by the 1987 Constitution; however, such power must not be exercised oppressively, and successive suspensions for numerous charges arising from acts committed prior to the first suspension may be curtailed to prevent what amounts to a de facto removal from office.	Constitutional Law I