ARTICLE VIII JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.
Section 1
Rundown of the Court System in
the Philippines
Supreme Court and other lower courts, difference between the two as stated in
Section 1.
● There is only one Supreme Court, which is a constitutional body. It may notbe abolished by law.
Rundown:
First Level:
MeTC (Metropolitan Manila area),
MTCC (cities outside Metropolitan Manila),
MTC (cover only one municipality),
MCTC (cover multiple municipalities)
Second Level Court:
RTC, which were established among the thirteen Judicial regions in the Philippines consisting
of Regions I to XII and the National Capital Region (NCR). RTCs were formerly called the Court
of First Instance since the Spanish era. It was only in the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980
that its name was changed from being called the
Court of First Instance to Regional Trial Court.
*The Shari’a District Courts are equivalent to the Regional Trial Courts in rank, which were
established in certain provinces in Mindanao
CA: considered as the second highest tribunal in the country.
Sandiganbayan: It has jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases involving graft and corrupt
practices and such other offenses committed by public officers and employees, including those
in government-owned or controlled corporations, in relation to their office as may be
determined by law.
CTA: CTA became an appellate Court, equal in rank to the Court of Appeals.
Supreme Court: The Supreme Court has the exclusive power to promulgate rules concerning
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in
all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal assistance to the
underprivileged. Any such rules shall provide a simplified and
inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of
the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of
procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless
disapproved by the Supreme Court.
Judicial Power
A. Definition:
● FIRST PART: Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving
rights which are legally demandable and enforceable
●
●
●
●
Review the Political Question
doctrine and the effect of the
expanded judicial power:
Article 9 (Civil Code): No judge or court shall decline to render judgment by reason of the silence, obscurity
or insufficiency of the laws.
In criminal cases: This power includes the duty to settle actual controversies involving rights that are
legally demandable and enforceable and to determine if any branch or instrumentality of government has
acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of excess of jurisdiction.
SECOND PART: and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government. (expanded
judicial power or expanded certiorari jurisdiction)
What does "on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government" mean? →
The Supreme Court uses its own understanding of the Constitution in reviewing the legitimacy of acts by
other branches of the government, even though this power is not apparent from the plain text of the
document.
Political Question doctrine refers to those questions which, under the Constitution, are to be decided by the people in
their sovereign capacity, or in regard to which full discretionary authority has been delegated to the legislative or
executive branch of the government. It is concerned with issues dependent upon the wisdom, not the legality, of a
particular measure.
Effect of the expanded judicial power: Under the court’s expanded jurisdiction, a petition for certiorari is a proper
remedy to question the act of any branch or instrumentality of the government on the ground of grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction by any branch or instrumentality of the government, even if
the latter does not exercise judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions.
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
Section 2 & 3
Section 4
What is a division and what is en
Banc?
A division of the Supreme Court is
considered to be the Supreme Court
itself. The Supreme Court has three
divisions, each with five members. The
Court may sit en banc, which means
that a case is heard by all the judges of
the court
a. Sitting en banc
a1. List of instances when the Supreme Court shall sit en banc
●
It may sit en banc or in its discretion, in division of three, five, or seven Members
●
All cases involving the constitutionality of a treaty, international or executive agreement, or law, which
shall be heard by the Supreme Court en banc
●
all other cases which under the Rules of Court are required to be heard en banc, including those involving
the constitutionality, application, or operation of presidential decrees, proclamations, orders, instructions,
ordinances, and other regulations, shall be decided with the concurrence of a majority of the Members who
actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon.
●
Cases or matters heard by a division shall be decided or resolved with the concurrence of a majority of the
Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon, and in no
case without the concurrence of at least three of such Members. When the required number is not obtained,
the case shall be decided en banc: Provided that no doctrine or principle of law laid down by the court in a
decision rendered en banc or in division may be modified or reversed except by the court sitting en banc.
●
The Supreme Court en banc shall have the power to discipline judges of lower courts, or order their
dismissal by a vote of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in
the case and voted thereon.
Section 3 of the Internal Rules of the Supreme Court (AM No 10-4-20-SC) provides that the following case shall be
heard by the Supreme court en banc:
(a) cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law,
executive order, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question;
(b) criminal cases in which the appealed decision imposes the death penalty or reclusion perpetua;
(c) cases raising novel questions of law;
(d) cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls;
(e) cases involving decisions, resolutions, and orders of the Civil Service Commission, the Commission on Elections,
and the Commission on Audit;
(f) cases where the penalty recommended or imposed is the dismissal of a judge, the disbarment of a lawyer, the
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
suspension of any of them for a period of more than one year, or a fine exceeding forty thousand pesos;
(g) cases covered by the preceding paragraph and involving the reinstatement in the judiciary of a dismissed judge,
the reinstatement of a lawyer in the roll of attorneys, or the lifting of a judge’s suspension or a lawyer’s suspension
from the practice of law;
(h) cases involving the discipline of a Member of the Court, or a Presiding Justice, or any Associate Justice of the
collegial appellate court;
(i) cases where a doctrine or principle laid down by the Court en banc or by a Division may be modified or reversed;
(j) cases involving conflicting decisions of two or more divisions;
(k) cases where three votes in a Division cannot be obtained;
(l) Division cases where the subject matter has a huge financial impact on businesses or affects the welfare of a
community;
(m) Subject to Section 11 (b) of this rule, other division cases that, in the opinion of at least three Members of the
Division who are voting and present, are appropriate for transfer to the Court en banc;
(n) Cases that the Court en banc deems of sufficient importance to merit its attention; and
(o) all matters involving policy decisions in the administrative supervision of all courts and their personnel.
a2. How do the justices vote when en banc?
All decisions and actions in Court en banc cases shall be made upon the concurrence of the majority of the Members
of the Court who actually took part in the deliberation on the issues or issues involved and voted on them.
When in a division?
All decisions and actions in Division cases shall be made upon the concurrence of at least three Members of the
Division who actually took part in the deliberations on the issue or issues involved and voted on them.
a3. What is the effect if the required votes in an en banc session cannot be had in criminal cases?
In criminal cases, when the Court en banc is equally divided in option of the necessary majority cannot be had, the
Court shall deliberate on it anew. If after such deliberation still no decision is reached, the Court shall reverse the
judgment Of conviction of the lower court and acquit the accused.
In Civil Cases?
In civil cases, including special proceedings and special civil actions, where the Court en banc is equally divided in
option or the necessary majority vote cannot be had, the Court shall deliberate on it anew. If after such deliberation
still no decision is reached, the Court shall, in an original action filed with it, dismiss the case; in appealed cases, it
shall affirm the judgment or order appealed from.
a4. On reversing a decision:
●
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
III. Judicial Review
a. Judicial Review as defined under Sec. 5 (2)
Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari final judgments and orders of lower courts and to
determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on
the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government
Angara v. Electoral Commission
That judicial supremacy is but the power of judicial review in actual and appropriate cases and controversies, and is
the power and duty to see that no one branch or agency of the government transcends the Constitution, which is the
source of all authority.
b. Is this power confined only to the Supreme Court?
1.
Article VIII, Section 5 (2) (a)
Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of Court may
provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in:
(a) All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement,
law, presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question.
c. Requisites for the exercise of the power of judicial review:
(1) an actual case or controversy calling for the exercise of judicial power;
● The case must not be moot or academic, or based on extra-legal or other similar considerations not
cognizable by a court of justice.
●
Ripeness for adjudication has a two-fold aspect: first, the fitness of the issues for judicial decision; and
second, the hardship to the parties entailed by withholding court consideration. The first aspect requires
that the issue must be purely legal and that the regulation subject of the case is a "final agency action." The
second aspect requires that the effects of the regulation must have been felt by the challenging parties in a
concrete way. To stress, a constitutional question is ripe for adjudication when the challenged
governmental act has a direct and existing adverse effect on the individual challenging it.
(2) the person challenging the act must have "standing" to challenge;
(3) the question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest possible opportunity; and
(4) the issue of constitutionality must be the very lis mota of the case.
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
ii. Ripeness - without this, the decision of the court would amount to an advisory opinion
Do we need to wait for an actual case?
a. Pimentel v. Legal Education, G.R. No.
230642
Ultimately, whether an actual case is present or not is determinative of whether the Court's hand should be stayed
when there is no adversarial setting and when the prerogatives of the co-equal branches of the Government should
instead be respected.
iii. MOOT and ACADEMIC
1. General Rule: Even if the issue is ripe for resolution, but then becomes unnecessary, will not be resolved by the
Court.
2. Exception when moot and academic cases shall still be resolved:
Courts will not render judgment on a moot and academic case unless any of the following circumstances exists:
"(1) [g]rave constitutional violations;
(2) [e]xceptional character of the case;
(3) [p]aramount public interest;
(4) [t]he case presents an opportunity to guide the bench, the bar, and the public; or
(5) [t]he case is capable of repetition yet evading review."
b. Locus Standi
Locus standi is defined as “a right of appearance in a court of justice on a given question.” It is defined as a personal
and substantial interest in the case such that the party has sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result of the
governmental act that is being challenged.
i. DIRECT INJURY TEST
1. People v. Vera, GR. No. L-45685
“The person who impugns the validity of a statute must have a personal and substantial interest in the case such
that he has sustained, or will sustain, direct injury as a result of its enforcement.”
The direct injury test is used to determine if a private individual can invoke judicial power to challenge the validity
of a legislative or executive action. The individual must show that they have suffered a direct injury as a result of the
action.
ii. Taxpayers
There must be a claim of illegal disbursement of public funds or that the tax measure is unconstitutional
iii. Voters
There must be a showing of obvious interest in the validity of election law in question
iv. Legislators
There must be a claim that the official action complained of infringes upon the prerogatives of legislators.
v. Citizens
There must be a showing that the issues raised are of transcendental importance which must be settled early.
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
c. Must be raised at the earliest
opportunity
As a general rule, the question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest opportunity, so that if not raised by
the pleadings, ordinarily it may not be raised at the trial, and if not raised in the trial court, it not will be considered
on appeal.
d. Constitutionality must be the LIS
MOTA (“litigation moved”)
Simply put, the case can only be decided by resolving the issue on constitutionality
This is the cause or motivation of a legal action or lawsuit. The SC ruled that lis mota – the fourth requirement to
satisfy before this Court will undertake judicial review means that the Court will not pass upon a question of
unconstitutionality, although properly presented is the case can be disposed of on some other grounds, such as the
application of the statute or the general law.
Lis Mota literally means “the cause of the suit or action”
Effects of a Declaration of
Unconstitutionality
Republic v. CA, G.R. No. 79732 (on the 2 views)
● The first is the orthodox view. Under this rule, as announced in Norton v. Shelby, an unconstitutional act is
not a law; it confers no right; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal
contemplation, inoperative, as if it had not been passed. It is therefore stricken from the statute books and
considered never to have existed at all. Not only the parties but all persons are bound by the declaration of
unconstitutionality, which means that no one may thereafter invoke it nor may the courts be permitted to
apply it in subsequent cases. It is, in other words, a total nullity.
●
Operative Fact Doctrine
The second or modern view is less stringent. Under this view, the court in passing upon the question of
constitutionality does not annul or repeal the statute if it finds it in conflict with the Constitution. It simply
refuses to recognize it and determines the rights of the parties just as if such statute had no existence. The
court may give its reasons for ignoring or disregarding the law, but the decision affects the parties only
and there is no judgment against the statute. The opinion or reasons of the court may operate as a
precedent for the determination of other similar cases, but it does not strike the statute from the statute
books; it does not repeal, supersede, revoke, or annul the statute. The parties to the suit are concluded by
the judgment, but no one else is bound.
The doctrine of operative fact recognizes the existence of the law or executive act prior to the determination of its
unconstitutionality as an operative fact that produced consequences that cannot always be erased, ignored or
disregarded. In short, it nullifies the void law or executive act but sustains its effects.
Section 5 POWERS OF THE SUPREME COURT
Par. 1 - What do you mean by ORIGINAL
Jurisdiction. Is it the same with
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
Cases are directly filed with the SC in the first instance without passing through any of the lower courts. Original
jurisdiction is a court's power to hear and decide a case before any appellate review.
EXCLUSIVE?
Exclusive jurisdiction refers to cases in which only the supreme court has the authority to hear and decide.
The Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction over cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and
consuls and original and exclusive jurisdiction in petitions for the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition and
mandamus against the Court of Appeals.
Par. 2 - Appellate Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court has the power to review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the law or
the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in.
• Right to appeal judicial decisions
• Judicial precedence
a. All cases in which the constitutionality or validity of any treaty, international or executive agreement, law,
presidential decree, proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or regulation is in question.
• Legal status of treaties
b. All cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty imposed in relation
thereto.
c. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any lower court is in issue.
d. All criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher.
e. All cases in which only an error or question of law is involved.
Take note of Article VI, Section 30.
No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as provided in this Constitution
without advice and concurrence.
Par. 3 - included in Administrative
Functions
The Supreme Court has the power to assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other stations as public interest
may require. Such temporary assignment shall not exceed six months without the consent of the judge concerned.
Par. 4 – Change of Venue
The Supreme Court has the power to order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice.
Par. 5 – Rule making power
a. What are the limitations?
The Supreme Court has the power to
promulgate rules concerning:
1. The protection and enforcement of
constitutional rights;
2. Pleading, practice, and procedure in
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
1.
2.
3.
Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases.
They shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade.
They shall not diminish, increase, modify substantive rights.
Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the
Supreme Court.
all courts;
3. The admission to the practice of law,
4. The Integrated Bar;
5. Legal assistance to the
underprivileged. (Section 5(5))
Par. 6 – included in Administrative
Functions
b. Admission to the Bar – you will learn this on your Legal Ethics
c. More on the independence of the judiciary
Article VIII, Section 6 exclusively vests in the Supreme Court administrative supervision over all courts and court
personnel, from the Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeals down to the lowest municipal trial court clerk. By
virtue of this power, it is only the Supreme Court that can oversee the judges’ and court personnel’s compliance with
all laws, and take proper administrative action against them if they commit any violation thereof. No other branch
of government may intrude into this power, without running afoul to the doctrine of separation of powers.
Administrative Functions of the Supreme Court
I. Temporary Assignment of Judges
(Section 5(3), Article VIII)
The Supreme Court to assign temporarily judges of lower courts to other stations as public interest may require.
Such temporary assignment shall not exceed 6 months without the consent of the judge concerned.
II. Appointment of Officials and
Employees (Section 5(6), Article VIII)
The Supreme Court shall have the power to appoint all officials and employees of the Judiciary in accordance with
the Civil Service Law.
III. Rule Making Power
(mentioned above)
IV. SECTION 6, Article VIII –
administrative supervision
The Supreme Court shall have administrative supervision over all courts and court personnel, from the Presiding
Justice of the Court of Appeals down to the lowest municipal trial court clerk.
Section 7 and 8
I. Qualifications of Justices and Judges
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
Justices or Member of the
Supreme Court
Members of Court of
Appeals
RTC Judges
Judges of Lower Courts
- a natural-born citizen
of the Philippines
- a citizen of the
Philippines
1. Citizen of the
Philippines
1. Citizen of the
Philippines;
- at least forty years of
- a member of the
2. Member of the
2. Member of the
age
Philippine Bar.
Philippine Bar
Philippine Bar
- must have been for
fifteen years or more a
judge of a lower court or
engaged in the practice
of law in the Philippines.
- a person of proven
competence, integrity,
probity, and independence
3. A person of proven
competence, integrity,
probity and
independence.
3. A person of proven
competence, integrity,
probity and
independence.
4.Possessing the other
qualifications prescribed
by Congress:
a) At least 35 years
old
b) Has been
engaged for at
least [10] years in
the practice of
law in the
Philippines or
has held public
office in the
Philippines
requiring
admission to the
practice of law
as an
indispensable
requisite.
4. Possessing the other
qualifications prescribed
by Congress:
a) At least 35 years
old
b) Has been
engaged for at
least 5 years in
the practice of
law in the
Philippines or
has held public
office in the
Philippines
requiring
admission to the
practice of law
as an
indispensable
requisite.
- the Congress shall
prescribe the
qualifications of judges of
lower courts
Section 7 of BP 129 provides
that, ”The Presiding Justice
and the Associate Justice
shall have the same
qualifications as those
provided in Constitution
for Justice of the Supreme
Court”.
Hence,
the
members of the CA must
also be:
a.
Must at least be 40
years of age;
b.
Must have been
for 15 years or
more a judge of a
lower court or
engaged in the
practice of law in
the Philippines
Who/what provides for the qualifications of the justices/judges?
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
7 (2), Art. VIII of the Constitution, provides: “The Congress shall prescribe the qualifications of judges of lower courts,
but no person may be appointed judge thereof unless he is a citizen of the Philippines and a member of the Philippine
Bar.”
II. Judicial and Bar Council
i. Members and their appointment
(1) A Judicial and Bar Council is hereby created under the supervision of the Supreme Court composed of the
1. Chief Justice as ex officio Chairman,
2. the Secretary of Justice, and
3. a representative of the Congress as ex officio Members,
4. a representative of the Integrated Bar,
5. a professor of law,
6. a retired Member of the Supreme Court, and
7.
a representative of the private sector.
(2) The regular Members of the Council shall be appointed by the President for a term of four years with the consent
of the Commission on Appointments. Of the Members first appointed, the representative of the Integrated Bar shall
serve for four years, the professor of law for three years, the retired Justice for two years, and the representative of
the private sector for one year.
ii. Role and duties
(3) The Clerk of the Supreme Court shall be the Secretary ex officio of the Council and shall keep a record of its
proceedings.
(4) The regular Members of the Council shall receive such emoluments as may be determined by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court shall provide in its annual budget the appropriations for the Council.
(5) The Council shall have the principal function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary. It may exercise such
other functions and duties as the Supreme Court may assign to it.
Section 9
Period to fill vacancies in the SC and in
other courts
The judges of lower courts shall be appointed by the President from a list of at least three nominees prepared by the
Judicial and Bar Council for every vacancy. Such appointments need no confirmation.
For the lower courts, the President shall issue the appointments within ninety days from the submission of the list.
(Section 9)
The prohibition under Article VII, Section 15 of the Constitution against presidential appointments immediately
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
before the next presidential elections and up to the end of the term of the President does not apply to vacancies in
the Supreme Court. (De Castro v. JBC, March 17, 2010)
Can the JBC provide a list with a single
nominee for a vacancy?
No. The reason for requiring at least three nominees for every vacancy is to give the President enough leeway in the
exercise of his discretion when he makes his appointment. If the nominee were limited to only one, the appointment
would in effect be made by the Judicial and Bar Council, with the President performing only the mathematical act of
formalizing the commission.
Section 10
Section 11
Tenure of Justices and Judges
70 years or become incapacitated
The judges of lower courts shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of seventy years or become
incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office. (Section 11)
No law shall be passed reorganizing the Judiciary when it undermines the security of tenure of members. (Section 2)
Power of SC to discipline judges of
lower courts
The Supreme Court en banc shall have the power to discipline judges of lower courts, or order their dismissal by a
vote of a majority of the Members who actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted
thereon.
According to People v. Gacott, (1995), only dismissal of judges, disbarment of a lawyer, suspension of either for more
than 1 year or a fine exceeding 10,000 pesos requires en banc decision.
The grounds for the removal of a judicial officer should be established beyond reasonable doubt, particularly where
the charges on which the removal is sought are misconduct in office, willful neglect, corruption and incompetence.
(Office of the Judicial Administrator v. Pascual, 1996)
Section 12
The Members of the Supreme Court and of other courts established by law shall not be designated to any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative
functions.
Sections 13, 14 and 15
Sandiganbayan Delays, read A.M. No.
00-8-05-SC
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)
A.M. No. 00-8-05-SC is a resolution on the problem of delays in cases before the Sandiganbayan. The resolution was
promulgated on November 28, 2001. It includes the following measures:
Cases submitted for decision must be decided within three months, not twelve months, from submission
Supreme Court Administrative Circular 10-94 applied to the Sandiganbayan
Article VIII, Section 15 (1) and (2), of the 1987 Constitution provides:
"Sec. 15. (1) All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this Constitution must be decided or resolved within
twenty-four months from date of submission to the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court,
twelve months for all lower collegiate courts, and three months for all other lower courts.
"(2) A case or matter shall be deemed submitted for decision or resolution upon the filing of the last pleading, brief or
memorandum required by the Rules of Court or by the court itself."
The above provision does not apply to the Sandiganbayan. The provision refers to regular courts of lower collegiate
level that in the present hierarchy applies only to the Court of Appeals.
The Sandiganbayan is a special court of the same level as the Court of Appeals and possessing all the inherent
powers of a court of justice, with functions of a trial court.
Thus, the Sandiganbayan is not a regular court but a special one. The Sandiganbayan was originally empowered to
promulgate its own rules of procedure. However, on March 30, 1995, Congress repealed the Sandiganbayan's power
to promulgate its own rules of procedure and instead prescribed that the Rules of Court promulgated by the
Supreme Court shall apply to all cases and proceedings filed with the Sandiganbayan.
Given the clarity of the rule that does not distinguish, we hold that the three (3) month period, not the twelve (12)
month period, to decide cases applies to the Sandiganbayan. Furthermore, the Sandiganbayan presently sitting in
five (5) divisions, functions as a trial court. The term "trial" is used in its broad sense, meaning, it allows introduction
of evidence by the parties in the cases before it. The Sandiganbayan, in original cases within its jurisdiction,
conducts trials, has the discretion to weigh the evidence of the parties, admit the evidence it regards as credible and
reject that which they consider perjurious or fabricated.
Section 16
The Supreme Court shall, within thirty days from the opening of each regular session of the Congress, submit to the President and the Congress an annual
report on the operations and activities of the Judiciary.
Constitutional Law I Notes (Finals)