1. Nature and Concept

Nature and Concept of the Constitution

Concept

The Constitution identifies the Philippines as a democratic and republican State. Its starting point is popular sovereignty: sovereignty resides in the people, and all government authority emanates from them. Government authority is therefore traced to the people, rather than to an independent source of power in any government office or institution. (Art. II, Sec. 1, 1987 Const.)¹

Governing provisions

Article II, Section 1 states the governing principle of popular sovereignty. Sections 9 and 10 of Executive Order No. 292 set out ways to propose changes to the Constitution and the requirement of ratification in a plebiscite. Read together, these provisions distinguish the source of government authority from the prescribed processes for changing the constitutional text. (Art. II, Sec. 1, 1987 Const.)¹ (Sec. 9, Exec. Order No. 292)² (Sec. 10, Exec. Order No. 292)³

Requisites / Rules

• The Philippines is both a democratic and a republican State; sovereignty resides in the people, from whom all government authority emanates. (Art. II, Sec. 1, 1987 Const.)¹
• A constitutional change proposed by Congress or a constitutional convention becomes valid upon ratification by a majority of the votes cast in the prescribed plebiscite. Proposal alone does not meet the stated requirement of ratification. (Sec. 10, Exec. Order No. 292)³
• An amendment directly proposed by the people through initiative likewise requires ratification by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite. The provision on initiative addresses amendments, while the provision on proposals by Congress or a constitutional convention addresses amendments and revisions. (Sec. 9, Exec. Order No. 292)² (Sec. 10, Exec. Order No. 292)³

Distinctions

Popular sovereignty concerns the source of all government authority. A proposal to change the Constitution, by contrast, concerns a process governed by stated rules on proposal and ratification. The fact that authority emanates from the people should not be confused with a claim that any proposed change takes effect without the plebiscite required by the governing provision. (Art. II, Sec. 1, 1987 Const.)¹ (Sec. 9, Exec. Order No. 292)² (Sec. 10, Exec. Order No. 292)³

Key doctrines

In a challenge requiring judicial review, an actual case or controversy is an absolute and indispensable prerequisite. The Court must address threshold questions of justiciability before reaching the merits. Thus, invoking a constitutional principle does not, by itself, dispense with the requirements for judicial review. (Paa v. Lacuna-Pangan, G.R. No. 262192, 3 June 2026)⁴

Locus standi requires a personal and substantial interest involving direct injury from the challenged governmental act. Where the challenged measures have been superseded or rendered defunct, mootness may also prevent relief. These rules concern whether a constitutional challenge may be heard, not where sovereignty resides. (Paa v. Lacuna-Pangan)⁴ (Art. II, Sec. 1, 1987 Const.)¹

Bar tip

For a question on the Constitution’s basic premise, begin with Article II, Section 1: the people are sovereign, and government authority emanates from them. If the question instead asks how constitutional text is changed or challenged, apply the separate rules on ratification or judicial review. (Art. II, Sec. 1, 1987 Const.)¹ (Sec. 10, Exec. Order No. 292)³ (Paa v. Lacuna-Pangan)⁴