PHILOSOPHY OF LAW NOTES
JURIDICAL SCIENCE VS PHILOSOPHY OF
LAW
Philosophy of Law
Juridical Science

branch of philosophy which deals with law,
that is the wisdom of the law.
 studies the nature of law with particular
reference to the origin and end of law, and all
the principles that govern its formulation.
 part of practical philosophy.
Philosophy of Law: Object
The object of philosophy of law is the study of laws
in a universal sense.
As to its particular points:
 Juridical Science or
 Jurisprudence
Parts of the system:
 Public Law and
 Private Law.
Jurisprudence-reliant of judges in the establishment
of judgment
Juridical Science- more on civil laws
The object of philosophy of law is the study of laws
in a universal sense.
As to its particular points:
 Juridical Science or
 Jurisprudence
Parts of the system:
 Public Law and
 Private Law


Philosophy of Law



transcends the competence of each individual
juridical science.
considers essential elements which are
common to all juridical systems.
looks into the universal concepts of law.
PHILOSOPHY provides a "map" that:


gives coherence to his activities and
makes of human life a meaningful whole
Philosophy: Metaphysician
Tries to elaborate a helpful, illuminating, clarifying,
view of reality.
Philosophy: Metaphysics

Public Law considers:
 Constitutional Law,
 Administrative Law,
 Penal Law, Procedural Law and
 International Laws
can inform the people only of the law among
certain people in a given period.
does not answer what is law, answers the
question only of what is established by law of
a certain system. (Immanuel Kant)

is seen as a conspectus, map, grid or
framework
used to arrange and structure our experience,
considered as a whole, into some meaningful,
organic unity.
Philosophy: Metaphysical Scheme/System
Private law deals with:



Civil Law,
Commercial Law and
those that govern relationships among
individuals or juridical entities.
A metaphysical system is the linguistic formulation
of such a conspectus on the world as whole, which
would otherwise be left obscure, problematic and
unclear.
Hence the practical relevance of the metaphysical
scheme: it helps a person situate himself in the
whole.
Philosophy: Task



provides a "map" that.
gives coherence to his activities and
makes of human life a meaningful whole
Philosophy as a Cosmic Map


Philosophy gives man's endeavors some
coherence
A philosophy of law will always be the
proposal of a philosopher or a jurist on the
place of philosophy in human becoming, in
that momentous project of being human and
in the historicality of man. That such a "man"
is called for becomes dramatically clear when
we recall that one of the present time's
dissatisfactions is with the dictatorship of the
sciences and the human bankruptcy of an age
that has made science the autocratic
paradigm.
PHILOSOPHY OF LAW - Proposal of the
philosopher or the jurists on what is or what should
be.
Science’s Inhumanity






While indeed science is effective and
efficient, it can be inhuman. But there still
remains the search for the "humanum" the
vision of being “fully human, fully alive
• To be a humanizing factor, he has to share this
vision: he has to have a place in the scheme. This is
what the philosophy of law is all about.
Why is the philosophy of a particular philosopher
always a proposal, never an answer?

In many things in Philosophy, there will
never be a definite answer.
 Philosophers propose a way to navigate
difficult situations.
 We "philosophize" when we ask:
 What is my place in relation to the Law?
 What is the Purpose of the Law?
 How did our laws come to be?
Go back to the Jeepney Modernization Program...
 How does a person relate to the law being
implemented?
 Can the few be sacrificed for the good of the
majority?
 Can we sacrifice the welfare of the jeepney
drivers if it will benefit the riding public?
While indeed science is effective and
efficient, it can be inhuman. But there still
remains the search for the "humanum", the
vision of being "fully human, fully alive".
To be a humanizing factor, he has to share
this vision: he has to have a place in the
scheme. This is what the philosophy of law is
all about.
In discussing property and property rights,
for example, the jurist is not some automaton
applying fixed and unyielding commandstatements to a situation.
He must ask himself how well (or "unwell')
present principles of proprietary rights serve
the purposes of doing justice in a society
marked by severe inequity.
PHILOSOPHY
Provides a "map" that:
 gives coherence to his activities and
 makes of human life a meaningful whole
Provides no definite answers
 Provides "maps" or points of view that are
always subject to
 CRITIQUE.
That such a "man" is called for becomes
dramatically clear when we recall that one of
the present time's dissatisfactions is with the
dictatorship of the sciences and the human
bankruptcy of an age that has made science
the autocratic paradigm.
CRITIQUE VS DEBATE
Debate
 Given a position or statement to argue for or
against
 Goal: to win the argument
CRITIQUE IN PHILOSOPHY
 A good thing
 Cultivates growth and dialogue
 Philosophers propose maps on how to go
about our lives that are subject to critique
 Causes
generational dialogue among
philosophers
Critique
 Philosophers still argue with each other
 Goal: come up with a philosophy which best
reflects the human experience
Critique in Philosophy
 Philosophers try to figure out difficult
questions together.
 No single philosophy fully explains the
experience of what It is to be human.
Why, then, is it important for citizens to
understand their relationship with the law?
Being able to understand the law is important in the
process of internalization of the law.
On Internalization: Structure
 The objective scheme of things structures
 my thinking about things, and
 the thinking of society



Encroachments by the Executive on the
independence of the Judiciary earn strong
reactions
It is a "should" from the governmental
structure in place, and, at the same time, a
structure we have ourselves put
On Internalization: Survival
 The survival of any social institution depends
on its internalization.
 The moment members of society keep the
institution external to them, it will not
survive.
 When people no longer thought in terms of
the Divine origins of the absolute rights of
monarchs, talk of rebellion filled the air, the
Bastille was stormed, and soon crowned
heads started to roll!
On Internalization: Survival
Essential too to the survival of law as a social
institution is
 its observance by a cohesive community and
 communication between members of the
community.
On Internalization: Observance
 Poor prognosis for a system of law largely
ignored by the population
 Agents of the law must act with dispatch in
arresting those who flaunt violation of the
law.

Courts must, with equal dispatch, deal
severely with violators.
 Without doubt, impression on society is that
it pays to obey and does not pay to break it.
Ex. 1989 (?) Constitution was not abrogated
On Internalization: Communication
 Exchange and dialogue between members of
society
 who uphold the law and seek its protection,
 who invoke it, or
 who criticize it with the purpose of improving
on it
 is important in keeping the regime of law in
place.
On Internalization: Society Fading to Oblivion
 Where the law is not talked about,
 where individuals in a body-politic
 do not support each other in maintaining it, or
 deal with each other in its terms,
 it soon fades into oblivion.
Ex. French Revolutionaries Storm the Bastille
THE
PRACTICAL
PURPOSE
PHILOSOPHY OF LAW
Week Three
Practical Purpose of Philosophy of Law
 To be a better law student
 To be a better lawyer
 To be a better judge
OF
THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY FOR THE
LAW STUDENT
Faithfulness to the Text
 Applicable in studying the philosophy as well
as studying the law
 Connotes faithfulness to the structure
 Making sense of the structure involves
"internalization" of the law
 "Externalization" is the realm of legislature
and judiciary
1. Read. Philosophy and the Law in its Purest
Form
 Read original text of philosophers just as you
read laws and cases in full.
 As law students, reading laws and cases in its
purest form is you being "faithful to the text.
2. Intellectual Honesty
 Be honest with yourself on what you do and
don't understand

Have an honest evaluation of whether you
have internalized the law or not.
3. Read
 Being faithful to the text and being able to
evaluate your internalization of the law
requires reading.
 Read the assigned laws and cases.
 Evaluate your internalization of the law and
jurisprudence.
NOTES:



Internalization of the law happens with your
other law subjects.
Philosophy of law helps you by giving depth
to your understanding of the law.
By understanding the principles behind the
law, you will be able to know the situation
that said law should be applicable.
MODEL: Legal Formalism
According to the formalist model,
• the legal outcome (that is, the holding)
logically follows from
 the legal rule (major premise) and
 a statement of relevant facts (minor premise).
Model
Legal Outcome (holding)
= Decision
Legal Rule (major premise)
= Law or Legal Principle
Statement of Relevant Facts (minor premise)
= Facts of the Case
Irrelevant Facts (implied existence)
Dissonance



HOW THEN DOES PHILOSOPHY OF LAW
ENTER THE PICTURE?
Jurisprudence (1st Meaning)


p.48. Aquino, David Robert. "The Philosophy of
Law" Central Bookstore 2020. Quezon Avenue,
Quezon City.
operating on different levels within the model
one focuses on matters different from what is
important to the other
a misappreciation of the importance of the
parts of the case
Jurisprudence is the body of case law on a
particular topic.
A case is a decision rendered by a judge or
justice of the peace after hearing all the sides
to a dispute.
Indeed, the practice of law can and should be a
pursuit of Philosophy.
"Jurisprudence", often associated with "case law", in
fact means, the theory and study of law. From the
Latin juris and prudentia, or the "prudence of the
law" or "practical knowledge of the law",
jurisprudence is supposed to explain the practical
nature, theory and development of the law. John
Austin in The Uses and Studies of Jurisprudence
called jurisprudence as "the knowledge of law as a
science, combined with the art or practical habit
or skill of applying it".
It is the "study of principles, notions and distinctions
common to various (legal) systems, and forming
analogies or likeness by which such systems are
allied." The study of jurisprudence makes us know
the wisdom behind the law's promulgation. A law
earns more credulity as one understands not only the
what of the law, but the how and why of it. In fact,
the only way to understand the law is to plough
through case law that developed doctrines
interpreting or applying the law."
p. 5. Bernardo.
People of the Philippines v. Crisente Nunez, G.R.
No. 209342


Jurisprudence (2nd Meaning)




More broad and more literal prudence of the
law™
The knowledge of law as a science, combined
with the art or practical habit or skill of
applying it"
the only way to understand the law is to
plough through case law that developed
doctrines interpreting or applying the law* Bernardo


July 25, 2023
THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY FOR THE
LAW STUDENT


Why is the Philosophy of Law a concern for the law
student?
1. Jurisprudence is necessary in giving depth to your
understanding of the law.

Depth in understanding the law translates to
better recitations and grades.
Human memory does not record events like a
video recorder.
In the first place, human memory Is more
selective than a video camera.
The sensory environment contains a vast
amount of information, but the memory
process perceives and accurately records only
a very small percentage of that information.
Second, because the act of remembering is
reconstructive, akin to putting puzzle pieces
together
Human memory can change in dramatic and
unexpected ways because of the passage of
time or subsequent events, such as exposure
to
"post-event"
information
like
conversations with other witnesses or media
reports.
Third, memory can also be altered through
the reconstruction process.
Questioning a witness about what he or she
perceived and requiring the witness to
reconstruct the experience can cause the
witness memory to change by unconsciously
blending the actual fragments of memory of
the event with information provided during
the memory retrieval process.
Why is Philosophy of Law a concern for the law
student?
Contrast this to Memorization



Memorization of law is sometimes necessary
in law school.
Memorizing is a surface level of intellectual
activity, in as far as the law is concerned.
Memory is unreliable if that is your only
mental approach if you wrestle with the law.
Why is Philosophy of Law a concern for the law
student?
1. Jurisprudence is necessary in giving depth to your
understanding of the law.
2. It complements the activity of memorizing by not
making you rely on your fleeting memory.
Tabucanon, Gil Marvel. "Legal Philosophy For
Filipinos: A Case Study Approach", Rex Book
Store, Inc., 2016 [reprint], Manila Philippines

1. Jurisprudence is necessary in giving depth to your
understanding of the law.
2. It complements the activity of memorizing by not
making you rely on your fleeting memory.

Legal philosophy equips students with
outright skills in questioning analysis and the
ability to look at the facts and law from
different viewpoints.
The course teaches students how to be
broadminded, mindful of the 'essence of the
rules rather than merely sticking to their
literal signification, for in the end it is the
letter that 'killeth and spirit that giveth life
THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY FOR THE
LAWYERS AND PRACTITIONERS

As practitioners - whether as a member of the bench
or the bar 

[Legal philosophy
guideposts

in the drafting and preparation of arguments
and ultimately in the resolution of justiciable
controversies through the issuance of
decisions and orders.
provides
invaluable

courts and presage a change in the march of
time"
In many ways, lawyers and philosophers can
be good fellows that one can, or should be.
both
It is no accident that many Philosophy majors
eventually take up law and may lawyers craft
their own philosophies
While the pilosopo gets around things by
argument. the lawyer gets his client off the
hook by wordsmith
Both offer solace. the philosopher his wisdom, the
lawyer his counsel
P 360. David Robert Aquino (2020)
As practitioners - whether as a member of the bench
or the bar 

THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY FOR THE
JUDGES
Legal education, has for its purpose,
to teach and train individuals to become
lawyers and officers of the court in the
dispensation of justice"
P 360. David Robert Aquino (2020)
Associate Justice Bienvenido Reyes, Foreword for
Philawsophia: Philosophy and Theory of
Philippine Law



Our future lawyers (and justices) deserve
both the skills and training to argue
effectively,
equipped with the knowledge on the
evolution of thought
regarding different issues, especially through
classic ideologists who moved the law by
their pen
P.1, Bernardo.

Although neither a lawyer nor a jurist.
Jose Rizal in Chapter 53 of his Noli Me Tangere
notes how lawyers should in time develop their own
legal philosophy to persuasively stir change.

"New lawyers form themselves into new
molds of the philosophy of Law. Some begin
to shine amid the mists that surround our
What is a penumbral case?
A penumbral case is a case in which the crux of the
controversy



does not squarely fall under a particular law
or legal precedent but
does not fall outside of a justiciable
controversy or the law either
gray area of the law* cases that exist between
the light and darkness of the law
SUMMARY:
CONTRAST WITH A “Core Case”



Cases that fall within the clear light of the law
A case which the statute is intended to cover
Simple cases and cases with direct answers
under existing laws and jurisprudence
Ex: article 41 (personality of unborn child)
Fr. Ranhilio Aquino on Penumbral Cases







What morality refers to when the law
enforces it was precisely the subject of a
characteristically scholarly and wellresearched ponencia of Mr. Justice Reynato
Puno in Estrada versus Escritor
Since the respondent in this case was charged
with immorality for the very coverture that
her church and religion condoned, the case
provided the ponente opportunity to explore
the difficult terrain of religious freedom.
But more importantly, for our purposes the
judgment in this case demonstrates judicial
philosophizing particularly in penumbral
cases.
Lest it be thought that penumbral cases are
the exception rather than the rule, it need only
be remembered that such cases arise precisely
because no legislator or legislature - though
endowed perhaps with superior providence
and foresight - can anticipate every possible
case to which the law will apply
I do not think it is helpful in fact to think the
law as "anticipating" a given
class of cases.
In each case that is more than the run-of-themill unlawful detainer or collection-of-asum-of-money case, the paramount question
before the court will always be whether or not
there are good reasons to include the case and the parties thereto
- within the ambit of a particular provision of law.

Such question triggers not only questions
about the purpose and the policy of a
particular law, but calls on the suppositions
justices and judges have about the purpose of
the law and its workings.
1. Core cases:
a. Collection of sum of money
b.Unlawful detainer on overstaying
tenants
2. Core cases are more common than penumbral
cases
a. core cases are justiciable controversies
3. Non-justiciable Controversies
4. When in penumbra, judge is focused in “judicial
philosophizing”
July 27, 2023
But what happens when a judge is asked to decide a
case that falls in the penumbra of a law, outside of its
settled meaning? As Holmes and Frank observed,
these sorts of cases suggest that the law is not a
matter of applying logic to facts and rules. And that
I suggests that law is not a system of rules.
Hart was concerned with a point that goes beyond
what Holmes and Frank said. It is that judges must
take into account the way laws ought to be when they
decide unsettled cases. And that, Hart thinks,
involves mixing the two things that he thinks are
separate: the way the law is and the way it ought to
be.
Hart, along with Holmes, finds it clearer to say that
in at least some of these cases, judges are legislating.
They are making settled law where before there had
been none:
There is another way of responding to this kind of
ambiguity that Hart did not directly address. It
involves claiming that judges actually do find settled
meanings in the law. It's just a kind of settled
meaning that no one else had fully appreciated.
Hart on Judges. Retrieved from: http://carneades.
pomona.edu/2015-Law/06.HartJudges.html
OF WHAT RELEVANCE IS PHILOSOPHY TO
THE JUDGE?
ARTICLE 9 of the Civil Code. No judge or court
shall decline to render judgment by reason of the
silence, obscurity or insufficiency of the laws.
ARTICLE 10 of the Civil Code. In case of doubt in
the interpretation or application of laws, it is
presumed that the lawmaking body intended right
and justice to prevail
AUGUST 8, 2023
Cases:
Republic vs Manalo
Republic vs Iyoy




just.
obligatory,
formulated by legitimate power
for common observance and benefit.
Law: Summa Theologica (St. Thomas Aquinas)
Law is:
 an ordinance of reason
 ordered towards the common good,
 promulgated
 by him who has charge of the community.
THERE ARE SOME INSTANCES WHERE A
LAW ITSELF CANNOT DECIDE, in penumbra
cases..
WHAT MAKES A LAW A GOOD LAW
What is law? The law must be reasonable;




The law must be for the common good;
Utilitarianism;
Personal Perfection;
Majoritarianism;
The law must be promulgated;
The law must be promulgated by legitima
• Charisma; Tradition; Legal dominion;
LAW- Connotes binding communal rules
 "Do's and don't's" of social order
LAW: PRIMARY CLASSIFICATION Jural
 Human Law
 Sanctioned/enacted law
Non-Jural
 Meta-legal
 Not
anchored/premised
on
human
promulgation
Non-Jural Law: Premises



Divine Law- Sacred Writings (Bible Quran,
Kabbalah, etc.)
Natural Law- Laws of Human Nature
Physical Law- Laws of Motion, Laws of
Thermodynamics
LAW: FELIPE SANCHEZ ROMAN
Law, in its specific and concrete sense, is:
 a rule of conduct,
Law v. Convention or Rules of Conduct
Laws differ from customs and conventions because
of:



The duty to comply
Due to external actions or threats
By individuals tasked to enforce the law.
Law v. Convention or Rules of Conduct
Conventions are mere agreements that


parties have a duty to follow in good faith,
but without a corollary punishment when
disobeyed.
Elements of Law: (St. AQUINAS)




Reasonable ordinance (rationis ordinatio)
For the common good (bonus communis)
Promulgated
By legitimate authority
FIRST ELEMENT: THE LAW MUST BE
REASONABLE


"an ordinance of reason for the common
good" made and enforced by a ruler or
government.
people were not bound to obey laws made by
humans that conflicted with natural law
SECOND ELEMENT: THE LAW MUST BE
FOR THE COMMON GOOD
Utilitarian Version of Common Good: Analysis
For Saint Thomas Aquinas
"Is the law reasonable?"


If reasonable, continually observe.
If not, stricken down.
"Man is made in the image and likeness of God."
Starting Point of Philosophy as a Christian
Philosopher.
Starting Point of Philosophy as a Christian
Philosopher.
1. identify the various courses of action
available to us
2. who will be affected by each action
3. what benefits or harms will be derived from
each
4. choose the action that will produce the
greatest benefits and the least harm
Bernardo on Personal Perfection as another
Conception of Common Good

Aquinas on Belief
[O]ne should believe only


what is self-evident (e.g. human beings use
reason) or
what can be deduced from self-evident
propositions (e.g. human reason can discover
truth)
Aquinas on Natural Law


"the light of reason is placed by nature (and
thus by God) in every man to guide him in his
acts."
Therefore, human beings, alone among God's
creatures, use reason to lead their lives. This
is natural law.
Aquinas on Human Law

While natural law applied to all humans and
was unchanging, human law could vary with
time, place, and circumstance.



The common good need not be the utilitarian
ethic of "the greatest happiness for the
greatest number." Rather, it is the good of
everyone towards achieving personal
perfection.
Bears the common aspirations of all, not just
the majority or the authority.
Based on the principle of equal dignity of all
to have a quality of life.
Common good is realized through
democratic participation or consideration of
all members of society.Considers all
stakeholder's interest, special conditions and
integral development
Points for Your Consideration




No answer of what the best regulation would
be for society
Approaches are not mutually exclusive of
each other
There are questions where these approaches
critique each other. There are issues in
government action that these approaches may
not agree.
None of these conceptions are the definitive
definitions of common good
Manipulation


Majoritarianism



idea that the numerical majority of a
population should have the final say in
determining the outcome of a decision.
although the majority opinion can be fallible,
it is still the best way to arrive at the most
reasonable terms as more heads are better
than one; that there is more intelligence,
experience, and wisdom in number
Lawmaker should frame the law according to
how the subject matter commonly occurs in
majority of the instances lawmaker not
expected to assume every single case
possible, but should at least leave room for
exceptions when the law need not be strictly
applied
UTILITARIANISM- Lawmakers determines what’s
best for the people
MAJORITARIAN- people determines what’a best
for them
Question:
•Can manipulation of people by the legislation be
justified if it is for the common good?
Can manipulation of people by the legislation be
justified if it is for the common good?





similar but different with utilitarianism
in utilitarianism, the lawmaker considers
what is best for the greatest number of people
in majoritarianism, it is the majority itself that
provides the wisdom in what's best for them
Utilitarian = CAN
Pursuit of Personal Perfection = CANNOT
Majoritarian - CANNOT
Bernardo on Majoritarianism
Majoritarianism v. Utilitarianism


often characterized as a form of influence that
is neither coercion nor rational persuasion
Is every form of influence that is neither
coercion nor rational persuasion a form of
manipulation? If manipulation does not
occupy the entire logical space of influences
that are neither rational persuasion nor
coercion, then what distinguishes it from
other forms of influence that are neither
coercion nor rational persuasion?


We should be careful, though, to distinguish
popular morality or popular good from
common public good,
A law can be a valid public order - reasonable
and fair to all - although it may be unpopular
to many
Populist or majoritarian morality is only good
or bad as the population forming it
Argumentum ad populum


Argumentum ad populum (Latin for
"argument to the people") is a logical fallacy
that occurs when something is considered to
be true or good solely because it is popular.
Undoubtedly many popular notions are true,
but their truth is not a function of their
popularity, except in circumstances where
other factors ensure that popularity is related
to truth
Fr. Ranhilio Aquino on the Mechanisms in Gov't
facilitating "Common Good"

Because the "bonus communis" (common
good) is the purpose of law, the members of
the
"communitas" (community) must have some manner
of seeing to their welfare through (and sometimes, in
spite of) their representatives

Within the framework of Philippine political
law, there are at least three (3) ways.
1. The first is obviously by the judicious
exercise of the right of suffrage. That is why
a person-directed electorate is ultimately a
scourge to the common good. The people
must know what the candidate represents,
what platform he stands on, and what
measures he intends to introduce. It is on this
basis that the choice ought to be made
2. A second way is lobbying. There is nothing
illegal or immoral about lobbying.
Representatives, after all, have a duty to listen to the
public. The public has the right to make its opinion
known. It is not to be denied that illegal practices
may be connected with lobbying, but the same thing
may be said of almost anything else
3. Challenge of constitutionality before the
courts may be counted as the third, for it is
one way the public can direct the course of
legislation .
THIRD ELEMENT: THE LAW MUST BE FOR
PROMULGATED
TRADITION



The authority from a leader, due to his
magnanimity or extent of influence, is passed
on to his successors or heirs.
Society has made the leader its center and
identity, and will want to keep him alive
through his descendants who are supposed to
bear his qualities.
Tradition itself cannot be the sole ource of
legal authority
LEGAL DOMINION


AUGUST 22, 2023
THE LAW MUST BE PROMULGATED
(3rd Element)


The law must be promulgated BY LEGITIMATE
AUTHORITY
Max Weber in Politics as a Vocation

three ways on how authority establishes itself
in society:



charisma,
tradition, and
legal dominion.
CHARISMA




"charisma" Gk. meaning "grace"
The personal ascendancy that an individual
gains in a society through his passion and
determination for a cause of mission
Ordinarily, charismatic or popular authorities
may include experts in a field who are
unquestionably believed at or followed the
way fans react to their idols.
Charisma alone cannot be the basis of
authority which promulgates the law.
Legal dominion is impersonal. The officers
operate through institutions, under given
terms, periods and conditions. They have to
be professional and not personally favor or
receive favor from anyone.
Laws are legitimate if they are enacted
according to rules of procedure and
individual merit.
Most modern societies observe authority by
legal dominion.
Different forms of government have different
takes on from whom should this legal
dominion be bestowed upon
The Truth: Objectivity and Relativity
What is the Truth?






Truth as per Rules on Evidence
Relativism versus Objectivism
Different quantum of proof as different
degrees of verisimilitude
The "truth" versus, legal truth
Classic objectivism and legal cases
Relativity and legal cases
(1) Truth as per Rules on Evidence




Section 1, Rule 128. Evidence defined. Evidence is
the means,
o sanctioned by these rules,
of ascertaining
o in a judicial proceeding
the truth
o respecting a matter of fact.
Admissibility of Evidence


Section 3, Rule 128. Admissibility of
evidence.
Evidence is admissible when it
o is relevant to the issue and
o is not excluded by
1.the' Constitution,
2. the law or
3. these Rules.
the relevant framework of assessment is
specified or supplied.


Admissibility of Evidence




Section 4, Rule 128. Relevancy; collateral
matters.
Evidence must have such a relation
o to the fact in issue
o as to induce belief
o in its existence or non-existence.
GR: Evidence on collateral matters shall not
be allowed,
XPN: except when it tends
o in any reasonable degree
o to establish the probability or
improbability
o of the fact in issue.

Objectivity, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

(2) TRUTH AS DISCUSSED IN PHILOSOPHY


TRUTH IS RELATIVE
TRUTH IS OBJECTIVE TRUTH
Relativism, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy



Relativism, roughly put, is the view that truth
and falsity, right and wrong, standards of
reasoning, and procedures of justification are
products of differing conventions and
frameworks of assessment and that their
authority is confined to the context giving
rise to them.
More precisely, "relativism" covers views
which maintain that-at a high level of
abstraction- at least some class of things have
the properties they have (e.g., beautiful,
morally good, epistemically justified) not
simpliciter, but only relative to a given
framework of assessment (e.g., local cultural
norms,
individual
standards),
and
correspondingly, that the truth of claims
attributing these properties holds only once
Relativists
characteristically
insist,
furthermore, that if something is only
relatively so, then there can be no frameworkindependent vantage point from which the
matter of whether the thing in question is so
can be established.
Relativists would often caution that "truth is
relative", subjective, perspectival, and
limited by that the person (the witness)
personally experienced or gained knowledge
of. Truth is limited to one's awareness.
This is the reason why two opposing
witnesses may, in earnest honesty, disclose
what they thought to be the true version of
facts. Faulty memory, the limits of our senses
(hallucinations, nighttime), lack of sanity or
objectivity and framing of questions and
answers may affect a person's testimony
The terms "objectivity" and "subjectivity." in
their modern usage. generally relate to a
perceiving subject (normally a person) and a
perceived or unperceived object The object is
something
that
presumably
exists
independent of the subject's perception of it.
In other words, the object would be there, as
it is, even if no subject perceived it. Hence,
objectivity is typically associated with ideas
such as reality, truth and reliability.
The perceiving subject can either perceive
accurately or seem to perceive features of the
object that are not in the object. For example,
a perceiving subject suffering from jaundice
could seem to perceive an object as yellow
when the object is not actually yellow.
Hence, the term "subjective" typically
indicates the possibility of error.
Classic Definition of Objectivity

In a classic approach, a domain is objective
in case the existence and character of the
objects that populate the domain is
independent of the mind. that is, of thoughts,
beliefs, desires, and other aspects of the
mental.

A more promising test requires that truths in
that domain be independent of thoughts or
beliefs or desires. Specifically, the test
requires that if p is the objective truth, it holds
independently of people's thoughts or beliefs
or desire.
RULE 133: WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF
EVIDENCE
Section 2. Proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Question

"If a tree falls down in the middle of the forest and
there is no one around to hear it, does it make a
sound?"



A relativist would say: "No, the tree does not
make a sound".
An objectivist would say: "Yes. The falling
tree makes a sound regardless if someone
hears it or not."
In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to
an acquittal, unless his or her guilt is shown
beyond reasonable doubt.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not
mean such a degree of proof as, excluding
possibility of error, produces absolute
certainty
Moral certainty only is required, or that
degree of proof which produces conviction in
an unprejudiced mind. (2a)
AUGUST 24, 2023
What about truth then?
Does a statement or a fact need to be perceived in
order to become true?
Or is a statement or a fact true regardless if someone
perceives it?
(3) DIFFERENT QUANTUM OF PROOFS
FIRST PREMISE:
PEOPLE V ELIZABETH GANGUSO Y DECENA
(G.R. No. 115430)
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
RULE 133; WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF
EVIDENCE
Section 1. Preponderance of evidence, how
determined. -
EXPECTATION: courts striving for "objective
truth" in deciding cases

REALITY: courts can only strive for a semblance of
an

"objective truth"
• Verisimilitude: Truth-likeness
In philosophy, verisimilitude is the notion that some
propositions are closer to being true than other
propositions. The problem of verisimilitude is the
problem of articulating what it takes for one false
theory to be closer to the truth than another false
theory.
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
In civil cases, the party having the burden of
proof must establish his or her case by a
preponderance of evidence.
• In determining where the preponderance or
superior weight of evidence on the issues
involved lies, the court may consider
o all the facts and circumstances of the
case,
o the witnesses' manner of testifying,
o their intelligence,
o their means and opportunity of
knowing the facts to which they are
testifying,
o the nature of the facts to which they
testify,
o the probability or improbability of
their testimony,
o their interest or want of interest, and
o also their personal credibility
so far as the same may legitimately appear upon the
trial.
The court may also consider the number of
witnesses, though the preponderance is not
necessarily with the greater number. (1a)

OGAWA V MENIGISHI (G.R. No. 193089)
GAJUDO V TRADERS ROYAL BANK (G.R.
No. 151098)


more robust than possessing truth (such as the
possession of knowledge) still affirm truth as
a necessary componeht of the end of inquiry.
And, other things being equal, it seems better
to end an inquiry by endorsing truths rather
than falsehoods.
Even if there is something to the thought that
inquiry aims at truth, it has to be admitted that
truth is a rather coarse-grained property of
propositions.
o

CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
• Used in cases proving fraud and overcoming certain
disputable presumptions in law
proof beyond reasonable doubt
clear and convincing

preponderance of evidence
RIGUER V MATEO (G.R. NO. 222538)
Some falsehoods seem to
realize the aim of getting at
the truth better than others.
 Some truths better realize the
aim than other truths.
 And perhaps some falsehoods
even realize the aim better
than some truths do.
The dichotomy of the class of propositions
into truths and falsehoods needs to be
supplemented with a more fine-grained
ordering - one which classifies propositions
according to their closeness to the truth, their
degree
of
truthlikeness,
or
their
verisimilitude"
AUGUST 31, 2023
Truth and Standards of Evidence
(4) The “TRUTH” Versus Legal Truth

The different standards of evidence all aim
for the truth but to be satisfied, there only
needs to be closeness to the truth, or the
degree of truthlikeness or verisimilitude.

Sufficient for the judge to be "morally
certain" in a criminal case; not have the
absolute truth but this closeness to the truth.
In a civil case requiring a preponderance of
evidence, sufficient for' your claim to be
closer to the truth than what the defendant is
saying.
In other words, the different standards of
proof require different degrees of closeness to
the truth, truthlikeness or verisimilitude.
The "truth" as a concern of the end of the law
which is justice is much more complicated
than scientific "truths"
The "Truth" v. Legal Truth



THE TRUTH is different from the LEGAL
TRUTH insider a courtroom.,
For as long as a piece of evidence is
admissible and relevant, it becomes part of
the legal truth of that case.
Judicial decisions are supported not by a
strict objective truth, but by truthlikeness or
verisimilitude.
of

Truth is widely held to be the constitutive aim
of inquiry.
Even those who think the aim of inquiry is
something more accessible than the truth
(such as the empirically discernible truth), as
well as those who think the aim is something

Truthlikeness,
Philosophy



Stanford
Encyclopedia
statute to furnish support to critics who cavil
at the want of scientific precision in the law.
Every provision of the law should be construed in
relation and with reference to every other part.
(Estrada v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 148560 | November 19, 2001)
(5) CLASSIC OBJECTIVISM AND LEGAL
CASES
(6) RELATIVITY AND LEGAL CASES
On Relativity and Legal Cases





"Relative statements seem to be 'unreliable'."
"'Has no place in law' or 'has no place in the
courtroom'
"Relativism is something we want to avoid."
Sometimes the acknowledgement that truth is
relative can precisely help in the achieving of
the ultimate end of the law.
Besides, inaccuracies and inconsistencies in a
rape victim's testimony are generally
expected. (People v. Rubio, G.R. No.
195239,March 7, 2012)
SEPTER 5, 2023
Morality and the Law
Morality and the Law: Subtopics



Truth in a Just, Fair And Equitable Decision by a
Court



Truth in relation to a just, fair and equitable
decision by a court is much more complicated
that just a collection of "true" statements.
It is also not necessary that a decision be
supported by "scientific truths".
Ambiguity, where none exists, cannot be
created by dissecting parts and words in the


"Legality" and "Morality" are not the same;
o Articles 19, 20, 21 and 1352 of the
New Civil Code;
Mala in se versus Mala Prohibita;
Religious Morality versus Secular Morality;
o Victoriano versus Elizalde Rope
Workers Union (59 SCRA 54);
Estrada versus Escritor: Decision and
Dissenting Opinion;
o Alejandro Estrada versus Soledad
Escritor (A.M. No. P-02-1651,
August 4, 2003)
o Aleiandro Estrada versus Soledad
Escritor (A.M. No. P-02-1651, June
22, 2006)
Ecclesiastical Affair versus Secular Matter;
o Bishop Shinii Amari of Abiko Baptist
Church versus Ricardo R.Villaflor,
(G.R. No. 224521, February 17,
2020);
Crime mala prohibita

"Legality" and "Morality" are Not the Same”





What is legal is not necessarily moral and
what is moral is not necessarily legal.
A moral obligation does not establish a
juridical or legally enforceable tie
Even when there is no absolute
correspondence in law and morality, there is
still no relation recognized by law itself
between law and morals.
In fact, moral customs are among the sources
of law. According to Tolentino, "laws and
morals have a common ethical basis and
spring from the same source - the social
conscience."
E.g. Gambling





Marijuana Possession

Mala in se VS. Mala prohibita

Crimes mala in se

those offenses that are prohibited because
they are considered wrong in themselves,
including crimes against persons, property
and security that are universally proscribed.
acts punished not because they are inherently
evil, but because they are prohibited by
legislature to maintain order in society.
Not being "inherently immoral", how
societies relate to it will vary depending on
the context you apply it.
E.g. possession of marijuana
Punished under Republic Act 9165.
However, several states in the United States
allow not only possession of marijuana but
also the use of marijuana.
Whether the act of possession criminalized or
not depends on the context. Possession in
the Philippines vs. Possession in the US.



Whether or not the use of marijuana is ethical
or unethical is subject for debate.
Focus on the act of possession of marijuana:
marijuana in your pocket or your hand, not
even ingesting or smoking it.
Use and possession are different things.
Marijuana is an inanimate object: it is not
inherently good or evil.
Marijuana in your pocket is not doing harm
or doing good to anyone.
Crimes mala prohibita
Why, then, is it criminal?

prohibited only because of a special law such
as traffic offenses, but they are not
themselves morally wrong.

Crime mala in se





widely accepted to be inherently immoral.
wrong in whatever context you apply it, e.g.
murder
Murder is condemned under Philippine
society and Philippine law, just as it is
condemned in American society and
American law, European society and law and
for all other civilized society
Has been classically held as immoral even in
past and ancient human civilizations.

It is criminal because it is criminalized by
statute, not because it is inherently evil. It is
criminalized in am effort to regulate the
general behavior of society.
Philippine society wants to avoid citizens
from using marijuana thus the possession is
also criminalized.
Possession of marijuana is thus a crime mala
prohibita.
Religious Morality versus Secular Morality;
(NAA SA PIKAS PDF HUHU)
SEPTEMBER 12, 2023

NATURAL LAW THEORY
What is Natural Law Theory? (Tabucanon, G.)




Natural law theory believes that the essence
of law is morality and justice. That the
principles of what is 'good' and 'fair' can be
found within nature itself, and they can be
accessed through human reason.
In fact, law should be based on reason, on
those rules and principles which are obvious
to every rational being as the right
or "natural thing" to do.
Thus, under natural law theory there are
rational and objective limits to the power of
legislature to enact laws.
These limits are the boundaries set by
morality and justice.
What is Natural Law Theory? (Aquino, D. R.)


Natural law theory proposes that there is a
link or relationship between concepts of law
and morality. As it stands, one can fully
appreciate the nature of law through a
necessary reference to established precepts of
morality.
According to natural law legal theory, the
authority of legal standards necessarily
derives, at least in part, from considerations
having to do with the moral merit of those
standards. There are a number of different
kinds of natural law legal theories, differing
from each other with respect to the role that
morality plays in determining the authority of
legal norms.
International Encyclopedia of Philosophy


It does not refer to the laws of nature, the laws
that science aims to describe.
According to natural law moral theory, the
moral standards that govern human behavior
are, in some sense, objectively derived from
the nature of human beings and the nature of
the world.
RP v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 104768, 21 July
2003):

Aristotle also wrote in his Nicomachean
Ethics: "Of political justice part is | natural,
part legal natural, that which everywhere has
the same force and does not exist by people's
thinking this or that; legal, that which is
originally indifferent, but when it has been
laid down is not indifferent, e.g. that a
prisoner's ransom shall be mina, or that a goat
and not two sheep shall be sacrificed, and
again all the laws that are passed for
particular cases...
Aristotle states that "(p)articular is that which
each community down and applies to its own
members: this is partly written and partly
unwritten. Universal law is the law of
Nature. For there really is, as everyone to
some extent divines, a natural justice and
injustice that is binding on all men, even on
those who have no association or covenant
with each other.
Teleological School of Thought, in
general
Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy




Telos is the ancient Greek term for an end,
fulfilment, completion, goal or aim; it is the
source of the modern word 'teleology'
In Greek philosophy the term plays two
important and interrelated roles, in ethics and
in natural science; both are connected to the
most common definitional account of the
telos, according to which a telos is that for the
sake of which something is done or occurs.
In ethical theory, each human action is taken
to be directed towards some telos (i.e. end),
and practical deliberation involves specifying
the concrete steps needed to attain that telos.
An agent's life as a whole can also be
understood as aimed at the attainment of the
agent's overall telos, here in the sense of their
final end or summum bonum (highest good'),
generally identified in antiquity as
eudaimonia (happiness).
"Telos"

"Telos" is inherent and natural to the agent.
"Telos" of an agent is beyond its utility to
humans.


"Telos" is a constant actualization of an ideal,
not an actual end goal.
An agent has a fundamental "telos" with
subordinate "telos"
EX: SERVICE DOG
SEPTEMBER 14, 2023
Teleological School of Thought
As ordinary people know well, animals too have
natures, genetically based, physically and
psychologically expressed which determine how
they live in their environments. Following Aristotle,
I call this the telos of an animal, the pigness of the
pig, the dogness of the dog - 'fish gotta swim, birds
gotta fly'. (.) Social animals need to be with others of
their kind; animals built to run need to run; these
interests are species specific. Others are ubiquitous
in all species with brains and nervous systems - the
interest in avoiding pain, in food and water, and so
forth.
2."Telos" is a constant actualization of an ideal,
not an actual end goal
Natural law, for Plato, is not the law of the common
man or the popular law of the majority, but the law
of the ideal man.
The ideal man, much like our modern concept of
Superman, does not exist, yet we have a common
idea of what a perfect man should of what a perfect
man should be and this should be the goal of the law.
Source: p.95, Bernardo, Nicolo and Bernardo,
Oscar.
"Philawsophia: Philosophy and Theory of Law
(Revised Edition)", Rex Book Store, Inc., 2021,
Manila Philippines
3.An agent has a fundamental "telos" with
subordinate "telos"

3 Conceptualization of TELOS
1."Telos" is inherent and natural to the agent

According to Aristotle, happiness is the only end or
good that we desire for its own sake, and it is for the
sake of happiness that we desire all other ends or
goods. Happiness, however, is not merely a
pleasurable feeling of contentment or satisfaction,
but an activity of human beings, and one that is
understood in terms of the function of human beings
in particular (see Teleology). Only the rational
principle is particular to human beings, and a human
life, in order to be happy, must be lived in accordance
with reason.
Such a life is one in which reason and emotion are
properly balanced and harmonized, and in which
reason is the guiding principle. Since it is the
function of all human beings to live a certain sort of
life--and this life is an activity or action of the soul
(think mind and spirit, here) implying a rational
principle--then the function of good human beings is
the excellent and noble performance of these
activities or actions. Thus happiness, for Aristotle, is
an activity of the human soul in accordance with
excellence and virtue, and it is manifested over an
entire lifetime (see Virtue).







The most fundamental "telos" of the human
person is "happiness" and this "happiness"
more of a constant process of selfactualization rather than a feeling or an
emotion.
All other goals or processes are subordinate
to this fundamental purpose life.
The subordinate goal is a means to achieve
the greater goal.
The subordinate goal is a means to achieve
the greater goal.
The subordinate "telos" can be done away
with or sacrificed if it is inconsistent with the
fundamental "telos".
If the subordinate telos is already inconsistent
with your fundamental telos, then you can do
away with the former.
The pursuit to live a good life will outweigh
whatever activity that does not conform to
living the good life.
Subordinate goals could either be consistent
or inconsistent with the fundamental telos: if
it is consistent, then great. If it is inconsistent,
then it can be done away with.
We think about our individual goals as well
but more importantly, the goal is always
happiness. The activities we do to reach
that goal of happiness can always change.
AGENT CAN MEAN person, animal, object
SEPTEMBER 16, 2023
The "telos" of jural law should be consistent with
natural law


Jural law is a law of a particular time and
place; thus this basically refers to human law
or laws which are man-made.
Non-jural
laws
are
beyond
legal
Jurisdictions. Natural law falls within the
category of "non jural" law; it is beyond
Tegal jurisdiction.
The "telos" of jural law should be consistent with
natural law
What is the purpose of life? Does life have a
meaning? We humans often ask. We can ask the
same things about the law. What is its purpose? For
what use? For what end?
The teleological school looks into the principles,
purpose andend (telos) of the law. It goes to the
question of the why of the law, The proponents of
this school believe that the law serves as a higher
universal order or "natural order", which we can
discover through our common human reason, needs,
and aspirations and validated by human experience.
Natural law is an example of "normative
jurisprudence," which evaluates the purposes of
norms behind the law. Laws are rules for man to
realized his basic natural goods and when shared,
become society's common good.
According to natural law, natures is how people
normally behave and are expected to behave. Human
nature, in particular, is rational. The law is law as
long as it pursues the precepts of reason:
reasonableness, justice, equality and fairness.
For instance, the law may be stricken down for being
unreasonable or unjust. The jurist appeals to a higher
law, that is, the principles of rational or moral law in
the absence of a law or in the presence of a bad law.
Different societies have correspondingly different
jural laws
It is common knowledge that the laws of different
communities differ on the same subject matter
Perhaps, Socrates suggests, law may not always
achieve its ideal of discovering true reality. Still, he
adds, no society, not even the Persians, believe that
the just can really be unjust. It is thus a universal rule
that realities, and not unrealities, are accepted as real
However, answers the companion, we are
continually changing the laws in all sort of ways.
Perhaps it is because you do not reflect that when we
change our draughts they are the same pieces, replies
Socrates. Those who know always accept the same
views, whether Greeks or foreigners, they will not
write differently at different times on the same
matters, nor will they ever change one set of accepted
rules of another in respect of the same matters. If we
see some persons anywhere doing this, we can say
that they ha no knowledge
ANALOGY: CHESS, CHESS SETS
Regardless of the Jural laws we have, we can still try
to achieve our goal, which is to achieve or pursue
Justice, regardless of its form.
It is common knowledge that the laws of different
communities differ on the same subject matter.
Perhaps, Socrates suggests, law may not always
achieve its ideal of discovering true reality. Still, he
adds, no society, not even the Persians, believe that
the just can really be unjust. It is thus a universal rule
that realities, and not unrealities, are accepted as real
However, answers the companion, we are
continually changing the laws in all sort of ways.
Perhaps it is because you do not reflect that when we
change our draughts they are the same pieces, replies
Socrates.
Those who know always accept the same views,
whether Greeks or foreigners; they will not write
differently at different times on the same matters,
nor will they ever change one set of accepted rules
of another in respect of the same matters. If we
see some persons anywhere doing this, we can say
that they have no knowledge.
Utopia


Utopia is a term denoting a visionary or
ideally perfect state of society, whose
members live the best possible life. The term
"Utopia" was coined by Thomas More from
the Greek words ou (no or not), and topos
(place), as the name for the ideal state in his
book
(However, the etymology of "utopia" can also
be traced to eu-topia from the Greek words eu
(good), and topos (place).
Utopia not as an End
Our (world] is only a shadow of the perfect world,
like the Christian dichotomy of heaven and earth.
The role of the ruler is to get society close to the
perfect form.
The Laws comprises a conversation in 12 books, set
on Crete, among three interlocutors. an unnamed
Athenian Visitor (Plato's spokesman in the Laws),
Megillus, a Spartan, and Kleinias, a Cretan. The
Athenian proposes that the three discuss governance
and laws as they walk along the long road to the
temple of Zeus.
Just as Socrates develops an account of a virtuous,
successful human being and contrasts it with several
defective characters, he also develops an account of
a virtuo successful city and contrasts it with several
defective constitutions.
An agent has a fundamental "telos" with
subordinate "telos"
In the laws (that's the title of the work, The Laws) the
Athenian also tells us that laws are true laws insofar
as they promote the happiness (eudaimonia) of the
citizens.
Immediately after he first makes this latter claim, he
draws a distinction between human and divine goods
and tells us that the human goods - like wealth and
health - are dependent upon the divine goods, of
which wisdom is first, then moderation, then justice
and finally courage; he later describes this
dependency by saying that the human goods are good
tor someone who is virtuous but bad for bad men
(Laws 661B-C).
The dependency thesis helps Plato bring together the
two characterizations of the goal of the laws in terms
of the citizens virtue and happiness, respectively: if
virtue is necessary for benefit and thus for happiness,
promoting the happiness of the citizens will require
making them virtuous.
An agent has a fundamental "telos" with
subordinate "telos"
The idealism of law has been associated with Plato,
For instance, we craft marriage laws because we
want an ideal family, not just any family. Our
Political Constitution is meant to build an ideal
government.
We dream of the ideal romance, the ideal politics, the
ideal version of ourselves. We expect justice to be
served and the truth to come forth even when we
know that life can be unjust, or politics can be
corrupt.
For without ideals, we cease to aspire; we simply
resign, get passive, or worse, despair. If we are to
base our legal expectations on the actual state of
things, we may not improve at all. Or work for his
standards of living.
Source: P.95, Bernardo,
Teleological School of Thought ON THE LEVEL
OF HUMAN BEINGS
1. "Telos" is inherent and natural to the agent.
2. "Telos" is a constant actualization of an ideal,
not an actual end goal.
3. An agent has a fundamental "telos" with
subordinate "telos"
Overlap Thesis
All forms of natural law theory subscribe to the
Overlap Thesis, which is that there is a necessary
relation between the concepts of law and morality.
According to this view, then, the concept of law
cannot be fully articulated without some reference to
moral notions. Though the Overlap Thesis may seem
unambiguous, there are a number of different ways
in which it can be interpreted.
The strongest form of the Overlap Thesis underlies
the classical naturalism of St. Thomas Aquinas and
William Blackstone, As Blackstone describes the
thesis:
does not conform to the natural. - Aristotle or
Plato.
This law of nature, being co-eval with mankind and
dictated by God himself, is of course superior in
obligation to any other. It is binding over all the
globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human
laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such
of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their
authority, mediately or immediately, from this
original (1979, p. 41).
The tension between the law king crayon regarding
the lack of burial of antagone’s brother.
In this passage, Blackstone articulates the two claims
that constitute the theoretical core of classical
naturalism: 1) there can be no legally valid standards
that conflict with the natural law; and 2) all valid
laws derive what force and authority they have from
the natural law. On this view, to paraphrase
Augustine, an unjust law is no law at all.
Natural law posits that there is no separation between
law and morality. A law's worth is judged by its
moral content alone, and not by who made or
espoused it. For natural law philosophers, it is not
enough that a rule is sanctioned by the state; if we are
to have an obligation to obey a law, the law must be
morally justified as well. The law's authority in other
words does not depend on preexisting human or
social convention but on its logical connection with
ethical principles. Natural law theory subscribes in
the Augustinian dictum that an unjust law is no law
(*lex injusta non est lex") since true law aligns and
intersects itself with morals. The notion that law and
morality intersect is called the "overlap thesis"
Source: p.112, Tabucanon.
Natural law that overlaps with jural law is a valid
law. Outside of it does not make a law at all.
If there is no overlap with the natural law, the
jural law must be abolished.


God has given us the natural ability to reason.
If the law is not reasonable then it does not
conform to the natural. If there is no overlap
with the natural law, the jural law must be
abolished, - St. Thomas Aquinas
The natural inclination ("telos") of man is
happiness or eudemonia. If the law does not
promote the happiness of the person, then it
Republic
of
the
Philippines
versus
Sandiganbayan, (G.R. No. 104768, 21 July 2003)
As early as the Greek civilization, man has alluded to
a higher, natural standard or law to which a state and
its laws must conform.
Sophocles unmistakably articulates this in his
poignant literary piece, Antigone. In this mid-fifth
century Athenian tragedy, a civil war divided two
brothers, one died defending Thebes, and the other,
Polyneices, died attacking it. The king forbade
Polyneices burial, commanding instead that his body
be left to be devoured by beasts. But according to
Greek religious ideas, only a burial even a token one
with a handful of earth- could give repose to his soul.
Moved by piety, Polyneices sister, Antigone,
disobeyed the command of the king and buried the
body. She was arrested.
Brought before the king who asks her if she knew of
his command and why she disobeyed, Antigone
replies
Antigone's Reply
*. …These laws were not ordained of Zeus, And she
who sits enthroned with gods below, Justice, enacted
not these human laws.
Nor did I deem that thou, a mortal man, Couldst by a
breath annul and override The immutable unwritten
laws of heaven.
They were not born today nor yesterday;
They die not; and none knoweth whence they sprang.
Antigone was condemned to be burled alive for
violating the order of the king.
Influence of Natural Law Legal Theory to Philippine
Law
The civil law tradition simply trails codification of
natural principles by Justinian. The Philippine Civil
Code acknowledges the existence of natural rights.
Article 19 of the Civil Code maintains that it is not
enough that an act is legal, but
norms of human conduct set forth in Article 19 must
be observed.
"every person must, in the exercise of his rights and
in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give
everyone his due and observe honesty and good
faith"
(Cebu Country Club versus Elizagaque)
P59, Bernardo
Our jural laws tell us how to conduct ourselves





The law provides for activities that we can do
and cannot do
The law also provides us our rights and
privileges.
Despite our jural law, we have to yield to a
greater reality in our dealings with others
"Justice, honesty, due process and good faith"
Our rights must yield to greater ideals in our
society
Guidelines to Understanding Article 19 Cases


The principle is "abuse of right
1. What is the right in the first place?
2. How was the right abused?
Another way of stating it using the language
of the natural law theorists
1. What is the jural right?
2. How did its exercise violate natural
las principles?
Primordial: exists at the beginning of time, primeval,
basic, fundamental
The obligation of a corporation to treat every person
honestly and in good faith extends even to its
shareholders or members, even if the latter find
themselves contractually bound to perform certain
obligations to the corporation. A certificate of stock
cannot be a charter of dehumanization.
(Calatagan Golf Club versus Clemente)
One of the more notable innovations of the New Civil
Code is the codification of "some basic principles
that are to be observed for the rightful relationship
between human beings and for the stability of the
social order." Xox The framers of the Code, seeking
to remedy the defect of the old Code which merely
stated the effects of the law, but failed to draw out its
spirit, incorporated certain fundamental precepts
which were "designed to indicate certain norms that
spring from the fountain of good conscience" and
wha were also meant to serve as "guides for human
conduct (that) should run as golden threads through
society, to the and that hav may approach its supreme
ideal, which is the sway and doranan of justice."
(Globe Mackay versus Court of Appeals)
Influence of Natural Law Legal Theory to
Philippine Law
(Uypitching versus Quiamco)
I answer that, As stated above (Article 4), every law
is directed to the common weal of men, and derives
the force and nature of law accordingly. Hence the
jurist says [Pandect. Justin. lib. I, ff., tit. 3, De Leg.
et Senat.]: "By no reason of law, or favor of equity,
is it allowable for us to interpret harshly, and render
burdensome, those useful measures which have been
enacted for the welfare of man." Now it happens
often that the observance of some point of law
conduces to the common weal in the majority of
instances, and yet, in some cases, is very hurtful
The law, therefore, recognizes a primordial
limitation on all rights; that in their exercise, the
Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Thelogiae. First Part of
the Serond Part, Question 96
Influence of Natural Law Legal Theory to
Philippine Law
Furthermore, in this case, the Supreme Court said:
Honeste vivere, non alterum laedere et jus suum
cuique tribuere. To live virtuously, not to injure
others and to give everyone his due. These supreme
norms of justice are the underlying principles of law
and order in society.
For instance, suppose that in a besieged city it be an
established law that the gates of the city are to be kept
closed, this is good for public welfare as a general
rule: but, it were to happen that the enemy are in
pursuit of certain citizens, who are defenders of the
city, it would be a great loss to the city, if the gates
were not opened to them: and so in that case the gates
ought to be opened, contrary to the letter of the law,
in order to maintain the common weal, which the
lawgiver had in view.
Influence of Natural Law Legal Theory to
Philippine Law
Unjust enrichment exists "when a person unjustly
retains a benefit at the loss of another, or when a
person retains money or property of another against
the fundamental principles of justice, equity and
good conscience." The prevention of unjust
enrichment is a recognized public policy of the State,
for Article 22 of the Civil Code explicitly provides
that "[e]very person who through an act of
performance by another, or any other means,
acquires or comes into possession of something at the
expense of the latter without just or legal ground,
shall return the same to him." It is well to note that
Article 22 "is part of the chapter of the Civil Code on
Human Relations, the provisions of which were
formulated as basic principles to be observed for the
rightful relationship between human beings and for
the stability of the social order; designed to indicate
certain norms that spring from the fountain of good
conscience; guides for human conduct that should
run as golden threads through society to the end that
law may approach its supreme ideal which is the
sway and dominance of justice."
(Gonzalo versas Tarnati)