2. Original and Appellate Jurisdiction

The power to hear and decide a case.

• Who Defines: Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe and apportion the jurisdiction of the various courts, but may not deprive the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Sec. 5, Art. VIII [PHIL. CONST., art. VIII, § 2.],
• No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as provided in the Constitution without its advice and concurrence (PHIL. CONST., art. VI, § 30.)

Earliest Possible Opportunity

General Rule: An act or law’s constitutionality cannot be raised for the first time at the appellate level, unless that court has original jurisdiction over the case. The earliest opportunity to raise a constitutional issue is during the pleadings before a competent court that can resolve the same [Sta. Rosa Realty Development Corp. v. Amante, G.R. No. 112526 (2005)].

POWER TO APPOINT

The Supreme Court appoints all officials and employees of the Judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Law.

Original and Appellate Jurisdiction (Phil. Const., art. VIII, § 5(1)–(2))

The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over cases affecting foreign ambassadors, other foreign public ministers, and consuls stationed in the Philippines. It also has original jurisdiction over petitions for:

• Certiorari
• Prohibition
• Mandamus
• Quo warranto
• Habeas corpus

The Supreme Court may review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on appeal or certiorari final judgments and orders of lower courts in:

• Cases involving the constitutionality or validity of a law, international agreement, or treaty
• Cases involving the constitutionality or validity of a presidential decree, order, proclamation, ordinance, regulation, or instruction
• Cases involving the legality of a tax, impost, toll, assessment, or related penalty
• Cases in which the jurisdiction of a lower court is in issue
• Criminal cases in which the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua or higher
• Cases involving only errors or questions of law

COMELEC Jurisdiction Over Election Contests:

• Original jurisdiction over contests relating to elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective:
• Regional
• Provincial
• City officials
• Appellate jurisdiction over contests involving:
• Elective Municipal officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction
• Elective Barangay officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction
• COMELEC may issue extraordinary writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus

Where final and executory COMELEC and Supreme Court rulings establish a petitioner as the duly elected representative and nullify another’s proclamation, mandamus may compel the Speaker of the House to administer the oath and the House Secretary General to enter the member’s name in the Roll of Members of the House of Representatives. (Velasco v. Belmonte, G.R. 211140, 2016).

Election Protest

i. Election Protest

Commission on Elections

EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL jurisdiction over all contests relating to the elections, returns, and qualifications of all elective REGIONAL, PROVINCIAL and CITY officials

Election contests in the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) are not under COMELEC jurisdiction but under the jurisdiction of the DILG.

• APPELLATE jurisdiction over all contests involving:
• ELECTIVE MUNICIPAL officials decided by trial courts of general jurisdiction
• ELECTIVE BARANGAY officials decided by trial courts of limited jurisdiction
• A petition for certiorari questioning an interlocutory order of a trial court in an electoral protest was within the appellate jurisdiction of the COMELEC. The Court recognizes the COMELEC’s appellate jurisdiction over petitions for certiorari against all acts or omissions of courts in election cases (Bulilis v. Nuez, G.R. No. 195953, Aug. 9, 2011).
• The COMELEC HAS jurisdiction over intraparty disputes. The ascertainment of the identity of a political party and its legitimate officers is a matter that is well within its authority. The COMELEC has the power to enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election.
• To resolve the issue, the COMELEC need only refer to the Party Constitution. It need not go as far as to resolve the root of the conflict between the parties. It need only resolve issues as may be necessary in the exercise of its enforcement powers.

Non-impairment of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

SECTION 2, ARTICLE VIII. The Congress shall have the power to define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of the various courts but may not deprive the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction over cases enumerated in Section 5 hereof.

SECTION 5(2)(b), ARTICLE VIII. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: xxx

(2) Review, revise, modify or affirm on appeal or certiorari, as the laws or the Rules of Court may provide, final judgments and orders of lower courts in xxx

(b) all cases involving the legality of any tax, impost, assessment or toll or any penalty imposed in relation thereto.

Even the legislative body cannot deprive the SC of its appellate jurisdiction over all cases coming from inferior courts where the constitutionality or validity of an ordinance or the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, or toll is in question [San Miguel Corp v. Avelino, G.R. No. L-39699 (1979)].

SECTION 30, ARTICLE VIII. No law shall be passed increasing the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court without its advice and concurrence.

Scope of Judicial Review in taxation: Limited only to the interpretation and application of tax laws. Its power does not include inquiry into the policy of legislation. Neither can it legitimately question or refuse to sanction the provisions of any law consistent with the Constitution [Coll. v. Bisaya Land Transportation, 105 Phil. 338 (1959)].