EASTERN SAMAR STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Philippine History and Constitution
Submitted by:
JIAMELA PANDAPATAN
08-21828
Submitted to:
RAY DOMINIC R. LADERA
Instructor
March 06, 2012
1
Discuss the three major steps in changing the constitution.
-
In the book, there are only 2 steps in changing constitution:

Proposal – first step, were it means that contemplated changes are
formulated or expressed in a written statement.

Ratification – or approval of the people. This ratification upholds
the principle that “sovereignty resides in the people and all
government authority emanates from them” (Art. II Sec.1). After a
proposal has been made by either Congress or the Constitutional
Convention, it must be submitted to the people through a plebiscite
for approval or rejection.
The 3 constituent bodies are:
1. CONGRESS
-
It is a constituent assembly or body that is empowered to propose
amendments. Remember, Congress is basically a legislative body, not a
constituent body. It needs to pass a resolution to turn itself.
2. CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
-
Members of a Constitutional Convention are selected by qualified votes. The
delegates or members are the direct representative of the people in framing the
fundamental law.
3. ELECTORATE
-
Refers to the qualified voters through popular initiative. The power of the
people to directly propose a change in the constitution is enshrined in the 1987
Constitution Art. XVII, Sec.2. It cannot be found in the 1935 or 1973
Constitution. Qualified voters herein referred to are citizens who are 18 years
old, registered voters, and have none of the qualification provided by law (Art.
V, Sec 1).
2
a. Why is there a need to change the constitution? Justify.
-
There is a need to change the constitution for a reason that, new political
developments and circumstances may require that the fundamental law of
the land be modified accordingly. Now, if the needed modification cannot
be carried out within a reasonable period of time, problems may ensue. If
the constitution cannot ride with the genuine wave for change, the good of
the nation may not be realized. Public interest will suffer. People will only
violate an obsolete rule that does not answer their needs and aspirations
for a better life. Worst, a revolution may be thought of as an answer to the
necessary change.
b. What are the advantages and the disadvantages of the constitutional
change?
The following are the advantages of constitutional change:

Changing of the form of government from presidential to
parliamentary.

Election of senators by regions to correct the unbalanced
representation in the senate.

Returning of police control to the local government.

The return of a two-party system. The multi-party system has caused
confusion in the electoral system and is likely to elect a minority
president.

Reversion to the safer provision that the government has the prime
duty to protect the people and the state. The military as protector of the
people is a dangerous provision (Art. II, Sec. 3).

Others see it as a chance for the military to excuse themselves and
wrest power from duly constituted authorities when a political crisis
occurs.
3

To allow foreign investors to own land and operate public utilities
such transportation, electricity, and telecommunications.

Provision that will specify to whom the President will tender his
resignation in case of his resignation.
The following are the disadvantages of the constitutional change:

The 1987 Constitution is still young.

Changing the Constitution often is not good for the country. We have
had four major constitutions. The United States Constitution since
1790 has never been replaced. Its first amendment was only after 10
years. To date, the Philippine Constitution has been amended 27 times
and the last was in 10992.

Majority of the people as shown by surveys are against it (7 out of 10
are against it according to the Social Weather Station ) (Philippine
Daily Inquirer, June, 1999)

Reforms can be done through ordinary legislation.

Amending the constitution, especially the Congress as a constituent
assembly will open the floodgates to political amendments that will
benefit members of Congress. An example is the lifting of terms of
limits. Most of our Congressmen now are on their last term.
c. Differentiate the Ramos, Estrada, and Arroyo Administration in their plan to
amend or change the constitution?
The first Charter Change attempt on the 1987 Constitution was
under President Fidel V. Ramos. Among the proposed changes in the constitution
included a shift to a parliamentary system and the lifting of term limits of public
officials. Ramos argued that the changes will bring more accountability,
continuity and responsibility to the "gridlock" prone Philippine version
of presidential bicameral system. Some politically active religious groups,
opposition politicians, business tycoons and left wing organizations opposed the
4
Charter change process that was supposed to lead to a national referendum.
Critics argued that the proposed constitutional changes for one would benefit the
incumbent which during that time was Ramos. On September 21, 1997, a church
organized rally brought in an estimated half a million people to Rizal Park
Furthermore, on September 23, 1997 the Charter Change advocates suffered a
setback when the Supreme Court, under Chief Justice Andres Narvasa, narrowly
dismissed a petition filed by the People's Initiative for Reform, Modernization and
Action (PIRMA) that sought to amend the Constitution through a signature
campaign or "People's Initiative". The Supreme Court dismissed the petition on
the grounds that the People’s Initiative mode does not have enough enabling law
for the proposed revisions or amendments in the 1987 constitution. Had the
petition been successful, a national plebiscite would have been held for proposed
changes.
Under President Joseph Estrada, there was a similar attempt to change the
1987 constitution. The process is termed as CONCORD or Constitutional
Correction for Development. Unlike Charter change under Ramos and Arroyo the
CONCORD proposal, according to its proponents, would only amend the
'restrictive' economic provisions of the constitution that is considered as impeding
the entry of more foreign investments in the Philippines.
Estrada proposed that foreign investors own:
1. 100% of corporations they would like to put up in the Philippines. The present
constitution allows only 40% foreign equity (Art. XII, Sec. 10).
2. Lands (Art. XII, Sec. 3). Presently, foreign investors enjoy 25-50 years lease
on lands.
3. Public utilities (Art. XII, Sec. 11), mass media (Art. XVI, Sec. 11(1),
advertising (Art. XVI, Sec. 12 (2), and educational institutions (Art. XIV, Sec.
4 (2).
4. Exploration and development of natural resources (Art. XII, Sec. 2)
5
There were once again objections from opposition politicians, religious
sects and left wing organizations based on diverse arguments such as national
patrimony and the proposed constitutional changes would be self serving. Like his
predecessor, Estrada's government was accused of pushing Charter change for
their own vested interests.
Under President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, there were more solid attempts
to change the 1987 constitution. Charter change was included in Arroyo's election
campaign platform during the 2004 elections and was considered as a high
prority. After winning the 2004 elections, President Arroyo by virtue of Executive
Order No. 453, created the Consultative Commission headed by Dr. Jose V.
Abueva. The task of the Consultative Commission was to propose the "necessary"
revisions on the 1987 constitution after various consultations with different
sectors of society. After about a year of consultations, the Consultative
Commission
came
up
with
unicameral parliamentary form
proposals that
of
included:
government; economic
a
shift
to
a
liberalization;
further decentralization of national government and more empowerment of local
governments via transition to a parliamentary-federal government system. While
Charter change and "opening up" of the Philippine economy are generally
supported by small to mid size businesses in the country (such as Philippine
Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI), Employers Confederation of the
Philippines (ECOP)), it is opposed by the powerful Makati Business Club (MBC).
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_reform_in_the_Philippines)
6
Discuss the Philippine Territory

Compare the 1935, 1973, and 1987 definition of National Territory
-1935 Constitution
Article 1 National Territory SECTION 1
The Philippines comprises all the territory ceded to the United States by the
Treaty of Paris concluded and Spain on the tenth day of December eighteen hundred and
ninety – eight, the limits of which are set forth in Article III of said treaty, together with
all the islands embraced in the treaty conclude at Washington, between the United States
and Spain on the seventh day of November, nineteen hundred, and in the treaty concluded
between the United States and Great Britain on the second day of January, nineteen
hundred thirty, and all territory over which the present Government of the Philippine
Islands exercises jurisdiction.
-1973 Constitution
Article 1 National Territory SECTION 1
The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands
and the waters embraced therein and all the other territories belonging to the Philippines
by historic right or legal title, including the territorial sea, the air space, the subsoil,
seabed, the insular shelves, and the other submarine areas over which the Philippines has
sovereignty or jurisdiction. The waters around, between and connecting the islands of the
archipelago, irrespective of their breadth and dimensions, from part of the internal waters
of the Philippines.
-1987 Constitution
Article 1 National Territory SECTION 1
The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands
and the waters embraced therein, and all the other territories over which islands and
waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has
sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains,
including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other
submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the
archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, from part of the internal waters
of the Philippines.
7
Define National Territory and its components
The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands
and waters embraced therein, and all other territories, over which the Philippines has
sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestial, fluvial, and aerial domains,
including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other
submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the
archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, from part of the internal waters
of the Philippines.
Article I, Section I provides what comprises our national territory, these are:
A. The Philippine Archipelago with all the Islands and waters embraced therein
-
The term archipelago is derived from the Greek word pelagos which means
sea. Archipelago is that part of the sea studded with islands. The sea and the
islands are considered as a single geographical unit.
The archipelago that is referred to in Article I, Sec. 1 includes;
1. Those ceded by Spain to the US according to the Treaty of Paris on
December 10, 1898;
2. Those that were included according to the Treaty of Washington
on November 7, 1900 between US and Spain, which were not
included in the Treaty of Paris. These are the islands of Cagayan,
Sulu, and Sibuto;
3. Those which were identified in the Treaty with Great Britain on
January 2, 1930 between US and Great Britain, such as the Turtle
Islands and the Mangsee Islands; and
4. The islands of Batanes, which were included under the Treaty of
Paris and consequently, covered under the 1935 constitution.
8
B. All other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction
-
These refer to territories already acquired or will be acquired in the future
according to international law. These include Batanes Islands, which was left
out under the Treaty of Paris. It pertains also to Sabah, Spratly Islands in the
China Sea, and Marianas Islands that includes Guam in the Pacific. In the
1973 Constitution, the phrase was originally worded “and all other territories
belonging to the Philippines by historic right and legal title”. It was changed
to the present phrase to avoid direct referral to our claim to Sabah, which
Malaysia detests. This change was aimed to improve Philippine relations with
Malaysia. It does not mean, however, that we drop our claim to Sabah. This
phrase does not actually claim nor disclaim Sabah but there is no obstacle to
pursue our claim on it under Public International Law (Nolledo, 1994).
C. The terrestrial, fluvial, and aerial domains
The fluvial domains, aside from its external waters, are:
1. The territorial sea, which extends 12 nautical miles (19 kms) from the
shore. It is also called “marginal sea” or “marine belt”. It is the belt of
waters, which are adjacent or parallel to the coastline of the state, outside
of the internal waters.
2. The seabed or the seafloor. It is the land holding the sea extending from
the shore. It is simply the bottom of the territorial sea.
3. The subsoil, which is the soil layer beneath the surface soil of the
territorial sea or seabed.
4. The insular shelves or the continental shelves. It is that submerged portion
of the continent or offshore, extending to a point of steep descent to the
ocean floor. It consists of the seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas
adjacent to the shore but outside of the territorial sea, to a depth of 200
meters and beyond.
5. Other submarine areas, which refer to those areas under the territorial sea
called as refers, basins, shoal, and the like.
9
D. The Islands Waters
There are three kinds of waters of the seas. These are:
1. Internal or inland waters (referred to as national waters);
2. Territorial sea; and
3. High seas.
The internal or inland waters are waters around, between and
connecting the islands of the archipelago. They are in the same category as
inland rivers or lakes which are subject to the exclusive use and exploitation of
the state. The internal waters are referred to as national waters. The inland
water and the territorial waters of the state in which the state exercises
sovereignty and exclusive domain just like its land territory. However, through the
principle of right of innocent passage, foreign ships can pass through the
territorial sea of a state subject to regulations imposed by the state. But the open
seas or the high seas that lie seaward of the territorial sea or are beyond the
territorial sea are international waters and therefore, every state has the equal
right of use and not subject to sovereignty of any state.
Define Archipelago Doctrine
The Philippine is one of the largest archipelagos in the world lies southeast of
the Southeast Asian region, directly below Taiwan. It is bounded by the South
China Sea on the West, the Pacific Ocean on the east, the Sulu Sea and the
Celebes Sea on the south, and the Bashi Tunnel on the north. The Philippines is
composed of about 7,200 small and large islands scattered over some 1,295,000
square kilometers of oceanic waters. Its total land area is 300,000 square
kilometers. Only 2,700 islands are named, and the eleven largest islands account
for almost 95% of the land and population. The waters surrounding them, or in
between them, may separate one or more islands from the Philippine territory, if
these waters which are around, between, and connecting the islands (Sec. I) are
not recognized by the international community as part of the national territory.
That is why, the Philippines’ position was made clear in the International
Convention on the law of the Sea held in Geneva, Switzerland in 1958 which
10
established the three-mile rule. The three-mile established the delineation of
territorial waters of a state which is three miles away from its baseline. If this rule
will apply, the Philippine waters, which may not covered, will become
international waters or open seas. It will also cause the separation of the Visayas
by the Sibuyan Sea or Sulu and Palawan by the Mindanao Strait. The three-mile
rule therefore, is not applicable to the Philippines considering also the security
problems it will cause.
Former Senator Arturo Tolentino clearly explained this problem in
1958 in the convention. Just like Indonesia which is also an archipelago,
Tolentino defended that the waters separating the islands should be considered as
a single because of the reasons stated. This is referred to as Archipelgic Principle
or Archipelago Doctrine which posited the unity of the land, water and people
into a single entity (Tolentino, 1990).
Justify the Philippine claim to the kalayaan Group of Islands and Sabah

The Philippine claim on the Spratlys or the kalayaan Group of
Islands
The Spratly is a chain of more than 100 islands, cays, reefs, and shoals in
the South China Sea. The Philippine claim on the Spratlys started when Tomas
Cloma, a fishing magnate of a nautical school (Philippine Maritime Academy),
sent a note to the Vice President and Foreign Affairs Secretary Carlos P. Garcia
on May 15 and again on May 26, 1925, claiming that he discovered in 1947, and
had occupied what he called Freedomland Archipelago (Batungbacal,1999). He
claimed it by the virtue of “discovery and effective occupation” in his private
capacity and not in behalf of the government of the Philippines. Taiwan and
Vietnam, upon learning of Cloma’s claim, asserted their claim on Spratly Islands.
The formal claim of the Philippines on KGI (kalayaan Group Islands) started
when it occupied some of the islands in 1970. The biggest of these is the Pagasa
Islands in which an airship was built and Filipino soldiers were staioned.
Claimant countries scrambled to occupy the islands after the Philippines placed
11
troops and declared that it was making an official claim on the KGI. President
Marcos issued P.D. 1596 on June 11, 1978 declaring the KGI as part of Philippine
territory and created it as a municipality of Palawan. On the same date, P.D. 1599
was also issued establishing the delimitation of the EEZ, which covers the KGI.
The Philippine claim on Sabah
In 1704, North Borneo, which is now called Sabah, was given as a gift to
the Sultan of Sulu by the Sultan of Brunei when former was able to help the latter
in quelling a rebellion. Hence, the Sultan acquired sovereignty on North Borneo.
In 1878, at the height of the Spanish attack on Sulu, their heir to the Sultanate of
Sulu, Sultan Jamalul Alam, leased North Borneo to the British North Borneo
Company owned by an Austrian national, Gustavos von Overbeck and his British
business partner, Alfred Dent. The company administered the territory up to 1946
and paid the Sultan of Sulu an annual rate of $5,000 Malaysian dollars which was
increased to $5,300 in 1903 (Currents, 1997). During that time, Malaysia was
already under the British control but the British did not claim sovereignty over
Sabah. However, in 1946, the British government annexed and took over Sabah
despite its earlier pronouncements that it had no right to claim sovereignty over
Sabah (Rasul, 1989).
What is Treaty of Paris?
-
The Treaty of Paris, signed on September 3, 1783, ended the American
Revolutionary War between Great Britain on the one hand and theUnited
States of America and its allies on the other. The other combatant
nations, France, Spain and the Dutch Republic had separate agreements; for
details of these, and the negotiations which produced all four treaties,
see Peace of Paris (1783).[1][2] It is most famous for being "exceedingly
generous" to the United States in terms of enlarged boundaries.[3]
-
The treaty document was signed at the Hotel d'York – which is now 56 Rue
Jacob – by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and John Jay (representing the
United
States)
and David
Hartley (a
member
of
the British
Parliament representing the British Monarch, King George III).
12
-
On September 3, Britain also signed separate agreements with France and
Spain, and (provisionally) with the Netherlands.[4] In the treaty with Spain, the
territories of East and West Florida were ceded to Spain (without any clearly
defined northern boundary, resulting in disputed territory resolved with
the Treaty of Madrid), as was the island of Minorca, while the Bahama
Islands, Grenada and Montserrat, captured by the French and Spanish, were
returned to Britain. The treaty with France was mostly about exchanges of
captured territory (France's only net gains were the island of Tobago,
and Senegal in Africa), but also reinforced earlier treaties, guaranteeing
fishing rights off Newfoundland. Dutch possessions in the East Indies,
captured in 1781, were returned by Britain to the Netherlands in exchange for
trading privileges in the Dutch East Indies, by a treaty which was not finalised
until 1794.[5]
-
The American Congress of the Confederation ratified the Treaty of Paris on
January 14, 1784 (Ratification Day).[6] Copies were sent back to Europe for
ratification by the other parties involved, the first reaching France in March.
British ratification occurred on April 9, 1784, and the ratified versions were
exchanged in Paris on May 12, 1784. It was not for some time, though, that
the Americans in the countryside received the news because of the lack of
speedy communication.
Preface: Declares the treaty to be "in the name of the most holy and undivided Trinity,"
states the bona fides of the signatories, and declares the intention of both parties to
"forget all past misunderstandings and differences" and "secure to both perpetual peace
and harmony."
1. Acknowledging the United States to be free, sovereign and independent states,
and that the British Crown and all heirs and successors relinquish claims to the
Government, propriety, and territorial rights of the same, and every part thereof;
2. Establishing the boundaries between the United States and British North America;
3. Granting fishing rights to United States fishermen in the Grand Banks, off the
coast of Newfoundland and in the Gulf of Saint Lawrence;
4. Recognizing the lawful contracted debts to be paid to creditors on either side;
5. The Congress of the Confederation will "earnestly recommend" to state
legislatures to recognize the rightful owners of all confiscated lands "provide for
13
the restitution of all estates, rights, and properties, which have been confiscated
belonging to real British subjects [Loyalists]";
6. United States will prevent future confiscations of the property of Loyalists;
7. Prisoners of war on both sides are to be released and all property left by the
British army in the United States unmolested (including slaves);
8. Great Britain and the United States were each to be given perpetual access to
the Mississippi River;
9. Territories captured by Americans subsequent to treaty will be returned without
compensation;
10. Ratification of the treaty was to occur within six months from the signing by the
contracting parties.

Spain received East and West Florida under the separate Anglo-Spanish peace
agreement.

Historians have often commented that the treaty was very generous to the
United States in terms of greatly enlarged boundaries, which came at the
expense of the Indian allies of the British. The point was America would be a
major trading partner. As the French minister Vergennes later put it, "The
English buy peace rather than they make it."[7]

Privileges which the Americans had received from Britain automatically when
they had colonial status (including protection from pirates in
the Mediterranean Sea in respect of which see: Barbary Wars) were
withdrawn. Individual States ignored Federal recommendations, under Article
5, to restore confiscated Loyalist property, and also evaded Article 6 (e.g. by
confiscating Loyalist property for "unpaid debts"). Some, notably Virginia,
also defied Article 4 and maintained laws against payment of debts to British
creditors. Individual British soldiers ignored the provision of Article 7 about
removal of slaves. The real geography of North America turned out not to
match the details given in the Canadian boundary descriptions. The Treaty
specified a southern boundary for the United States, but the separate AngloSpanish agreement did not specify a northern boundary for Florida, and the
Spanish government assumed that the boundary was the same as in the 1763
agreement by which they had first given their territory in Florida to Britain.
While that dispute continued, Spain used its new control of Florida to block
American access to the Mississippi, in defiance of Article 8.[8] Inthe Great
14
Lakes area, the British adopted a very generous interpretation of the
stipulation that they should relinquish control "with all convenient speed",
because they needed time to negotiate with the Native Americans, who had
kept the area out of United States control, but had been completely ignored in
the Treaty. Even after that was accomplished, Britain retained control as a
bargaining counter in hopes of obtaining some recompense for the confiscated
Loyalist property.[9] This matter was finally settled by the Jay Treaty in 1794,
and America's ability to bargain on all these points was greatly strengthened
by the creation of the new constitution in 1787.

Only Article 1 remains in force as of 2012.[10]
Discuss the State
a. Discuss the definition of State.
-
“The prime duty of the government is to serve and protect the people. The
government may call upon the people to defend that state and, in the
fulfillment thereof, all citizens may be required, under conditions provided by
law, to render personal, military or civil service”.
b. What is the separation of Church and State?
-
Both the 1973 and the 1987 Constitution express the separation of church and
state. They also declare its inviolability. Article III, Sec. 5, of the 1987
Constitution reiterates the separation of church and state which prohibits any
law to be made respecting the establishment of religion and curtailing its free
exercise. By this, it is meant that the state cannot declare an official for its
citizens nor prohibit the formation of any religion as long as such religion
does not violate the laws of the state. It also means that the state cannot aid
one religion and disregard another. The principle of separation and state is
seen by others as the application of the bibilical admonition, render to Caesar
the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’s. This
principle prohibits both the church and the state to interfere in each other’s
affairs. It was borne out our experience during the Spanish colonialism that
the union of the church and state is anathema to both religion and government.
But the separation may not be clear. For many years, the church has been very
15
vocal against government programs policies especially during the time of
President Marcos and to government programs on population control during
President Ramos’ administration.
-
The church here refers to the Catholic Church of the Philippines. Opposition
to government policies and programs and even on certain political
personalities is primarily expressed by the highly politicized Archbishop of
Manila, Jaime Cardinal Sin. In letter literally urging the members of the
church not to vote for certain candidates. Members of the clergy were active
in rallies and against the government. This, of course, met criticisms against
the church as violating the principle. However, according to the church, the
priest and nuns are also citizens of the country and such are just exercising
their rights as citizens.
c. Define Local Government, its composition, organization, and function.
-
Local Government refers to a municipal corporation. A municipal corporation
created by the government for political purposes with subordinate and local
powers of legislation. It refers to the political subdivision of the sate
commonly referred to as barangay, municipalities, cities and provinces.
-
The provision on autonomy operationalized by the Local Government Code of
1991 (R.A. 7160). It is said that this law institutionalizes democracy at the
local level through the transfer of power and authority from the national
government units. R.A. 7160 provides autonomy or limited self rule to the
local government units through decentralization to promote government
efficiency at the local level. Decentralization here means the transfer or the
sharing of the powers of the national government with the local government.
Senator
Paterno
proposed
3
areas
for
government’s
decentralization which was incorporated in R.A. 7160.
These 3 areas are decentralization in:
1. functions;
2. authorities; and
16
3. budget
2 types of decentralization, namely:
1. Political Decentralization or Decentralization of Power
-
It involves the transfer of powers to the local government. Also
known as devolution, political decentralization refers to the act by
which the national government units perform specific functions
and responsibilities.
-
Among the government functions services transferred are:
o Concerning about health
o Social welfare and development
o Agriculture
o Public works
o Tourism
o Public buildings and other facilities
o Population development
o Environment and natural resources
2. Administrative Decentralization or Decentralization of Administration
-
It involves the delegation of administrative power by broadening
the base of government power and in the process, making the
local government responsive and accountable. The delegation of
administrative power relieves the national government from the
burden of managing the local affairs and concentrate on national
concerns.
-
Sections 5 and 6 of Article X deal with taking powers of local
government units and the automatic release of share of national
taxes.
-
Section 5. Each local government unit shall have the power to
create its own resources of revenue and to levy taxes, fees, and
charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress
may provide, consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy.
17
Such taxes, fees, and charges shall accrue exclusively to the local
government.
-
Section 6. Local government units shall have a just share, as
determined by law, in the national taxes which shall be
automatically released to them.
The Government Code also provides for a stronger participation of
people’s organization (Pos) and nongovernment organizations (NGOs) in local
governance to make them active partners in pursuit of local autonomy.
The 1987 Constitution defines people’s “bona fide associations of citizens
with demonstratedcapacity to promote the public interest and with identifiable
leadership, membership and structure”. The National economic and Development
Authority (NEDA) refer to nongovernmental organizations as private, non-profit
and voluntary organizations that are committed to the task of socioeconomic and
development and are established primarily for services. The difference between
POs and NGOs is that, POs are membership-based organizations while NGOs are
non-membership, small organizations possessing specialist knowledge.
New associations continue to emerge and most often than not, they are
adversarial and critical of government policies. These associations, bound
together, are called “civil society”, which refers to “the multitude of associations
around with society voluntarily organizes itself to advocate and take action
primarily for social voluntarily organizes itself to advocate and take action
primarily for social development and public interest (NEDA, 1998).
A civil society is composed of nongovernment organizations, people’s
organization, labor organizations, women’s groups and youth, religious and
environmental groups. It includes the academe, social and civic clubs, media and
other kinds of group or associations with similar or different political persuasions.
The three sectors – government, business sector, and the civil society, create triad
linkages in governance to attain and sustain human development and advance the
people’s welfare.
18
d. What is the role of women in gender equality?
-
According to the Article II, Sec. 14 is recognition of the vital role
of women in our society. It states: “the state recognizes the role of
women in nation building and shall ensure the fundamental
equality before law of women and men”’ as emphasized by
Section 4 of the Constitution.
-
What is the in the bill of rights that was violated? Completely site the
provisions and justify the answer.
The bill of rights that were violated:
Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of
law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
-
The policemen compensate Aling Loring’s goodies and item and brought her to precinct
without proper due process of law.
Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of
the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government
for redress of grievances.
-
The police officer threatened Aling Loring and told her not to speak to anyone. She was
not even allowed to talk to her children inspite of her begging the police officer that she
would remain silent.
Section 11. Free access to the courts and quasi-judicial bodies and adequate legal
assistance shall not be denied to any person by reason of poverty.
-
Aling Loring was not given any lawyer prior to the settlement of her case.
Section 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have
the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and
independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services
of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing
and in the presence of counsel.
19
-
There was no lawyer provided to Aling Loring.
Section 12. (2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which
vitiate the free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary,
incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are prohibited.
-
The police officer asks to take Aling Loring’s clothes and ask her to dance for him.
Threatened and verbally abused her. She wore the same clothes for the entire three
weeks, with only bread and coffee as meals. Her floor of her cell served as her bed and
comfort room at the same time and was not allowed to talk to her children.
Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due
process of law.
-
There was no due process that held Aling Loring to be convicted and accused as
criminal. Aling Loring vending at that street were merely illegal but there were no signs
prohibiting her from selling items, and she was suddenly arrested and detained without
even explaining to Aling Loring her violation and offences.
How can accused invoke her constitutional rights?
Aling Loring needs to have a lawyer to fight for her right. She needs a proper due process of
all the legality of her rights, she needs a lawyer to defend herself against all the accusation.
20