In politics, there's institutions that guide the human behavior and thus create social order. Sometimes these institutions take on a personality based on those who hold the reigns of power. The interactions and relationships between institutions (such as the three main branches of the Government) may or may not lead to social, economic or political development. Institutional dynamics occurs when such interactions lead to progress or bring about what the goal of government or triumph what is right, just and good.
I have provided a link below regarding a recent interaction between the three main branches of the government. and I want you as students of PS 201, to analyze the situation whether or not the interaction between the involved institution bring about institutional dynamics, or political development.
Are the involved institutions, particularly the personalities who run the institutions doing their jobs? And if yes are they doing their jobs well? Justify your answers sensibly and substantially.
Article Source:
Punay, E. (2011, September 14). SC halts ARMM OIC appointment. Philstar.com , p. http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63.
Lyle Regencia 1POL3
ReplyDeleteYes, Their is interaction between the three main branches of the government, because of Executive, Legislature and Judiciary was exercising the principle of check and balance. The Judiciary voted for the postponement of Republic Act 10153 or the election on 2013 in Mindanao which was enacted by the Legislature and probably implement by the Executive.
source:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
http://www.arisonlinenow.net/2011/01/check-and-balances-in-philippines.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLi, Geraldine Mae 1POL3
ReplyDeleteI agree with lyle regencia that there is a relationship between the three main branches of the government. The legislative department enacted the Republic Act 10153 which was signed by President Aquino was postponed by the judiciary by 8-4 votes.
I believed that the involved institutions are doing their jobs well because they exercise the check and balance. Checks and balance is a process that each branch of the government can check the actions of the others. This process can help distribute the powers to avoid abuse of power. I knew that they are working well for the development of our country.
sources:
http://www.gov.ph/2011/06/30/republic-act-no-10153/
http://www.interaksyon.com/article/12995/supreme-court-stops-armm-oic-appointments
http://www.oppapers.com/essays/Branches-Government/128809
http://www.gov.ph/2011/07/01/president-aquino-signs-republic-act-10153-on-the-synchronization-of-armm-and-local-and-national-elections/
Villegas, Lyka Angelique F. 1POL3
ReplyDeleteThere is always an interaction between the three main branches of the government. Without this contact, everyone will be confused. They’re not fortune tellers to know what each and every one of them thinks.
In forming three branches of government, the representatives constructed "check and balance". This system was built so that no branch of our government could become too powerful. So in that case everyone will have equal authority.
Each branch is controlled by the other two in several ways. For example, the president may veto a law passed by Congress. Congress can override that veto with a vote of two-thirds of both houses. Another example is that the Supreme Court may check Congress by declaring a law unconstitutional. The power is balanced by the fact that members of the Supreme Court are appointed by the president. Those appointments have to be approved by Congress. And in our discussion, the Judiciary voted for the delay of Republic Act 10153 where it was enacted by our Congress and implement by the Executive.
These branches work as a team. Without the others they wouldn’t work properly. As they say, three heads are better than one.
Sources:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
http://www.congressforkids.net/Constitution_checksandbalances.htm
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteVillegas, Angelica Bianca R. 1pol3
ReplyDeletei agree in the statement of lyle regencia, Geraldine Li and lyka Villegas. there's always an interaction between the 3 branches of the government we all know that there's a seperation of power in this branches but i doesn't mean that they don't have any communications or interaction with each other.
There are three branches of the government legislative, executive and judicial. Each department of the government has exclusive knowledge of the matters within its jurisdiction, and is supreme within its own branch. But it does not follow from the fact that the three powers are to be kept separate and distinct that the Constitution wants them to be absolutely independent from each other. The Constitution has provided for a system of "checks and balances" to secure coordination in the workings of the various departments of the government, the checks and balances made for the interaction and other memos that comes from each department.
I think, the different institutions did their job well because they have this system that they study each law for example the legislative made a law and they give it to the executive to approved and the judiciary to study, in some reason they made a good decision because there's nothing illegal and unconstitutional in the postponed election in ARMM in which they are not included in the National election and post-poned of "AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE SYNCHRONIZATION OF THE ELECTIONS IN THE AUTONOMOUS REGION IN MUSLIM MINDANAO (ARMM) WITH THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL ELECTIONS AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES" also known as the Republic Act No. 10153.
Sources:
http://jlp-law.com/blog/branches-of-the-philippine-government-separation-of-powers/
http://www.gov.ph/2011/06/30/republic-act-no-10153/
KATE VIERNES (1POL3)
ReplyDelete.. Based on the article, I guess the institutions involved in this issue were doing their jobs well – the Supreme Court as the representative of justice and law, issued TRO on the ARMM elections to protect the province away from the threats that may harm the people on that area and for that matter, the executive branch knowing that it has the control power and the power to select officials fit to perform his/her duties will appoint OICS in the said region to temporarily look after the place while there we’re still no one to govern ARMM. That’s why in our constitution, the ‘principle of checks and balance’ is included to avoid abuse of powers in every departments, that there is equality in every branches, each branch may differ in duties or powers to execute but at one point they’re serving only ONE state – the Philippines. Therefore, with all these arguments I have, I guess there is INSTITUTIONAL DYNAMICS or there is interaction that aimed not for personal interest but for the betterment of the state particularly to our fellow Filipinos in ARMM.
Article Source:
Punay, E. (2011, September 14). SC halts ARMM OIC appointment. Philstar.com , p. http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSim Carlo Jesuel L. Arriola, 1POL3
ReplyDeleteI believe that the Philippines had made its way to its stage of having Institutional dynamics. Each branch of the government undoubtedly has performed their jobs well. Probably. Exempli gratia, just like in the news article provided, the Supreme Court was able to exercise their power in declaring the act/s of the legislature and/or the executive constitutional or not.
And I shall say that with the interaction and relationships between these institutions, it may definitely lead to the social, economic, and/or political development of our country. Constitutionally speaking, it is said that THERE IS NO "ABSOLUTE" SEPARATION AMONG THE THREE PRINCIPAL ORGANS OF THE GOVERNMENT. Everything won't be on the right track without their existence. Thus, constitutional provisions authorize a considerable amount of checking the affair/s of the other branch by a particular branch/department. The system of "check and balances" is also observed along with the doctrine of separation of "powers" to make the presidential system possibly WORKABLE.
**References:
Punay, E. (2011, September 14). SC halts ARMM OIC appointment. Philstar.com , p. http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63.
De Leon, H. S. (2008). Textbook on the Philippine Constitution. Manila: REX Book Store, Inc.
ALJON G. PANGAN, 1POL3
ReplyDeleteThere is an interaction between the three main branches of government (Executive, Legislative and Judiciary) regarding the issue of the issuance of Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) on Republic Act 10153.
Republic Act 10153, the law which postponed the Aug. 8, 2011 ARMM elections and synchronized it with the mid-term elections in May 2013, vesting President Noynoy the right and privilege to choose the OIC of the said region .Under Article VII Section 16, the President has the power to appoint all other officers of government whose appointments are not otherwise provided for by law and those whom may be authorized by law to appoint. Meaning our President can appoint officials guided by our Constitution. On this case Republic Act 10153 is passed vesting privilege to President Noynoy to appoint OIC on the said region, but is it constitutional or not? That’s why the Supreme Court issued TRO to avoid chaos in the future if the said Act is unconstitutional; this process is called the Principle of Check and Balances by the judicial department. And the Legislative branch is responsible to make certain nominee on the vacant positions in ARMM which will be submitted to the President for approval.
In this case the interaction of each branch is evidently present wherein all of them perform their own responsibilities provided by the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. I could say that the personalities involved in their own institution are performing their own task. Yes they are doing their task well because in this issue it is evident that the three branches of government performed their own responsibilities, the President issuing the RA. 10153 to appoint OIC and postpone the election in ARMM, the Legislative Branch providing the list of nominees to be submitted to the President and the Supreme Court performing his own checks, checking the constitutionality of the said Republic Act. And I could say that, somehow Institutional Dynamics here in our country is present.
References:
http://pinoysnayper.wordpress.com/tag/constitutionality-of-republic-act-10153/
Dizon, N. (2011, September 14). SC stops Palace plan to name ARMM OICs. Philippine Daily Inquirer, p. A2
De Leon, H. (2008). Textbook on the PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION. MAnila: REX Bookstore Inc.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIvan Chris Tolentino Luzuriaga, 1POL2
ReplyDeleteI’d say that the government officials specifically the people involved are doing their job pretty well. The presence of the system of checks and balances is evident and noticeable. And to further my discussion, what is the system of checks and balances? Checks and balances, to me, play an important role in the government. This makes sure that the Executive doesn’t over rule, the Legislative doesn’t make laws leaving the people dumbfounded and the Judiciary doesn’t make bad jurisdictions. A good example of the observation of Checks and Balances would be the process of making a law.
Going back, I think that there is in fact an interaction between the three main branches of the government. This is already observed on the very 1st sentence of the article wherein the Supreme Court stopped the Executive department from implementing Republic Act 10153 wherein the elections of the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao will be synchronized with the 2013 midterm polls. The solution was a temporary restraining order also known as a TRO. This doesn't stop the Executive from appointing the OICs though.
It is also evident that they are being very constitutional because from the Judiciary’s side, Supreme Court Spokesman Jose Midas Marquez explained to the press that this is to avoid confusion and even possible anarchy on my opinion. On the other hand, Interior Secretary Jesse Robredo thinks otherwise. He thinks that all of this would be just for show and that the President has already made up his mind. This would be a likely accusation but nevertheless I give the administration the benefit of the doubt that they wouldn’t do this, which would be very unconstitutional for the part of the Executive.
References:
http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0777009.html
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63 (the Article itself)
Judging from what was stated in the article, It is very obvious that there really is interaction between the 3 Political Institutions namely the, Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary.
ReplyDeleteThe President enacting the R.A 10153, passed by the Congress, is only doing his job to implement the law. From this situation, we can derive that there is interaction between the Executive and Legislature. Meanwhile, the Judiciary, the vanguard of justice has decided to Temporarily Restrain R.A 10153 because they think it is Unconstitutional and their is a provision on the appointment of OIC which would lead to confusion. There is nothing wrong with the decision of the SC because their is what we call the "Principle of Checks and Balance." The SC was only doing their part, that is to settle disputes.If the SC says an act is unconstitutional then it is unconstitutional. But, the SC should always present a factual reason and evidence why they're declaring an act against the constitution.
Therefore my opinion would be that there is Institutional Dynamics occuring in our present government
Reference:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
De Leon, 2008, Textbook on the Philippine Constitution
I agree and believe in the argument of my fellow classmates above. It is clearly seen in the Philippine Star Article that the the 3 main branches of our government work with each other. The supreme court exercise their duty to stopped Malacañang from implementing Republic Act 10153 or the law synchronizing the elections of the(ARMM) with the 2013 midterm polls. In this, we can see how they perform the system of check and balance. Also as for the legislative branch were the law came then passed to the executive, there is a connection. thus, allowing our country to be a socially, economically, and politically developed. therefore, with full confidence I can say that there is Institutional Dynamics occurring in our state that helps us to understand and connect well with each other.
ReplyDeleteSources:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
There is an interaction between the three main branches of the government. Which is Executive, Legislative, Judiciary each branches exercising the system of Checks and Balances. first, what is checks and balances? when three branches are not independent of one another because the Constitution set up a system of checks and balances to help ensure that no one branch became too powerful. Each branch has powers that it can use to check and balance the operations and power of the other two branches. Following is a look at the specific checks that each branch has been given.
ReplyDeleteIn the first part of the article. There is an interaction between the Branches of the government. When the supreme court has stopped the malacanang for implementing Republic Act 10153 which was made by the Legislature. So, there is an Institutional Dynamics happened in our state.
Source:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
I believe that there is an interaction between the three branches of the government. Their powers may be separated but still, they practice what we called check and balance or the power of each branch to check the actions of the other branches. This principle is done in many ways. One is when the congress passes a law but the Supreme Court can declare it as an unconstitutional. The president may also veto a law passed by the congress but the congress can override the veto of the president. The purpose of this principle is to maintain the equality in the 3 branches and to stress that no branch is more powerful than the other.
ReplyDeleteBrianDoce 1POL1 - I believe that the three main political institutions of our State performed their functions efficiently and it also showed the principle of checks and balances. I admire the power of our judiciary because in only one order it can suspend an act or prohibit a law unlike in the executive and legislature wherein their acts can be negated by each other and with the judiciary also...
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMark Dominic G. Gloria, 1POL3
ReplyDeleteI agree that there are interactions to the institutions of the government namely Executive, Legislative and Judicial Department. Without their interactions the Principle of Checks and Balances will lose its meaning. The interactions by these three branches of government help each other to perform their duties accordingly to the constitution. There’s no such thing as ABSOLUTE Independence in this branches. With their act, each branch performs their duties with respect to each other and for the independence of these buddies.
The TRO issued by the Supreme Court stopped the implementation of Republic Act 10153 which will synchronize the ARMM election to 2013 midterm election. As we all know the President which is the head of the Executive department has the power to appoint officials and what he did is an executive act. I think the Supreme Court’s decision in issuing a TRO is constitutional because they just only want to prevent confusion among the ARMM region. The Supreme Court also balances the effect of this act, to protect the people.
Reference:
Punay, E. (2011, September 14). SC halts ARMM OIC appointment. Retrieved September 26, 2011, from Philstar.com: http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Janella M. Quizon
ReplyDelete1pol3
I agree with the recent statements given. By this article that I have read, there is an interaction between the 3 main branches of the government, executive, legislative and judiciary.
There is a principle of check and balances which Checks and balances refers to the system that prevents any single branch of the government from exercising too much power. Each branch--executive, legislative and judicial--has a way to limit the power of the other branches. For example, the executive branch can veto laws passed by the legislative branch, but the legislative branch can override a veto with a 2/3 majority. By preventing any one branch from dominating the others, the system of checks and balances requires cooperation between the different branches of government.
I also believe that they are doing their jobs well because they are interpreting and implementing the constitution which is the highest law of the land for the welfare of the people.
References:
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5880846_principles-checks-balances.html
Janella M. Quizon
ReplyDelete1pol3
I agree to with the recent statements given. I believe that there are interactions between the 2 main branches of the government which is the executive, legislative and judiciary.
This is evident in the Principle of Check and balances which refers to the system that prevents any single branch of the government from exercising too much power. Each branch--executive, legislative and judicial--has a way to limit the power of the other branches. For example, the executive branch can veto laws passed by the legislative branch, but the legislative branch can override a veto with a 2/3 majority and by By preventing any one branch from dominating the others, the system of checks and balances requires cooperation between the different branches of government.
I also agree that the institutions are doing their jobs well. They are implementing and interpreting the constitution which is the highest law of the land for the welfare of the people.
Reference:
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5880846_principles-checks-balances.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe issue shows how the interaction of political institutions in our country works. Based on what we have learned in our Philippine Government and Constitution, there is no pure separation of powers between the three main institutions of our government. There should be a principle of "check and balance" in order to come up with accurate and best decisions on our government. The Supreme Court , which belongs to the Judiciary stopped the decision of the Malacañang Palace, which belongs to the Executive department. That scenario shows what the principle of check and balance means.
ReplyDelete**source
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
De Leon, 2011, Textbook on the Philippine Constitution
just like what they said, I, too, believe that there is a political dynamics between the three branches of government regarding the said issue. . First, when the representatives filed a case against the executive branch's action to the supreme court, that is already an incredible interaction between them. The SC decided to give the malacañan a TRO in response with the petition of the Congress. In this case, the SC made a decision with respect to the constitutional powers of the executive branch to appoint although with a TRO as respect too to the power of the congress to check the executive branch. the SC showed integrity and equality to both o the other branch which will harvest a better relationship between the three of them.
ReplyDeletesource:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Philippine Government and Constitution (2008 ed) by Hector De Leon
Mary Louise P. Leonardo
ReplyDelete1POL1
Based on the article, we can clearly see how the three political institutions in our government work. The legislative branch passed Republic Act 10153 or the law synchronizing the elections of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) with the 2013 midterm polls. This law has been given approval by the chief executive or the president. However, the Supreme Court (Judicial branch) has stopped its enforcement by issuing a temporary restraining order (TRO). It is quite evident that the three branches of governmental powers in the Philippines actively participate in the one another’s activities. I do agree that these institutions exercise the principle of “separation of powers” and “checks and balances” which is a very important element in a democratic state. They were vested with different functions and powers by the constitution in order for them to practice equality. The main objective of the principle of checks and balance and separation of powers is to ensure that there is no branch accumulating all governmental powers.
Karel Jane C. Sotto, 1POL3
ReplyDeleteI believe that there is an interaction between the three branches of the government. Each of the branches operates independently so-called the separation of powers. They may have different perspective but still they practice what we called check and balance and it guarantees no part of the government becomes too powerful.
The Supreme Court issued a TRO on R.A. 10153 which postponed the ARMM elections to 2013 midterm election. The Supreme Court cancelled the election because they are after the safety and security of the people in Mindanao.
Reference:
http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/about/system/role/government
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Jean Claudette L. Galvez 1POL1
ReplyDeleteFor me, institutional dynamics is merely the aim of this act of the Supreme Court. And of course, this decision was finally issued because good interaction is present among the three main branches of the government.
I believe that they’ve come up with a good and just decision although there are certain people who insist that the SC knew that a TRO would definitely place the entire peace process in jeopardy. The real aim of RA 10153 is to end the reign of political clans who lead election cheating according to the President but the SC halted this because they knew that it might result in bigger confusion and may even result to chaos if the court later on nullifies the appointment of the OICs. They’ve deliberated this issue thoroughly together with some representatives from the Congress. Through this, we can see that the two branches interact with each other in order for them to understand every little thing in their petitions. However, Marquez clarified that the order does not prevent the Palace from proceeding with its selection process for OICs in ARMM. Here, the executive branch enters the interaction.
Most probably, the personalities who run the institutions are doing their jobs efficiently. The SC was able to interpret or deliberate the law. The Congress was involved during the deliberations or maybe, we may call it, hearings. And of course, definitely, the executive will state their position about this thing particularly, the President because he’s the one to appoint the OICs. I could probably say that they interact with each other also through exercising the check and balance.
Another thing is the progress that the decision will contribute to our political development. If we would analyze the article, it says that the TRO was issued “to prevent confusion” that may arise once the Palace appoints OICs in ARMM and the high court eventually nullifies the law and for me, this is right and acceptable. As far as I can see, because they’re doing their jobs well, progress in our political development will be achieved. But of course, their good interaction should continue, in order for us, Filipinos, to feel it transparently.
Sources:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=701499&publicationSubCategoryId=
http://newphilrevolution.blogspot.com/2011/09/philippine-supreme-court-made-grievous.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+phil2011+%28New+Philippine+Revolution%29
Nicole Kenneth C. Miguel - 1POL2
ReplyDeleteI would say that the Supreme Court did a fair job in exercising their power in issuing a TRO in the appointment of OICs in the ARMM region in Mindanao. The Principle of Checks and Balances has been observed in this particular situation because the Supreme Court independently executed their constitutional power of issuing the TRO in order to prevent “confusion” in the appointment of OICs in near future, as SC spokesman Jose Midas Marquez said, and this decision of the Supreme Court has also gone through many deliberations in order to prevent false hopes to the applicants of this OIC positions, as the election lawyer Romulo Macalintal said.
It would also deem beneficiary for the two branches of the government that is involved in this issue, mainly the Judiciary (Supreme Court) and the Executive (President) if they will become cooperative with each other in understanding the main outcome of their actions in the appointment of OICs. The Supreme Court, for instance, issues a TRO in this appointment of OICs in the ARMM region even if the President has the appointing power in electing the officers in the Regional Legislative Assembly in ARMM, as stated in Republic Act no. 10153.
In short, the Principle of Checks and Balances is helpful and advantageous because our government officials can decide what is good for the government and society without solely relying on one power and be able to see all sides and possibility in conducting a certain action/decision, like this issue, and exercise responsible and independent decision-making because in the end, this would also reflect on how well their have performed their duties in the government and the state.
References:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
http://www.gov.ph/2011/06/30/republic-act-no-10153/
Jackiri P. Numos
ReplyDelete1POL2
The order of Supreme Court to stop Malacañang from appointing Officer In-Charge in ARMM and ordered Commission on Election (Comelec) to allow incumbent ARMM officials to keep their posts on a holdover capacity due to court fail to resolve the consolidated petitions questioning the law by Sept. 30 when their terms end.
SC justices voted 8-4 infavor with the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) so I believed majority of the justices distinguish the awful outcome of appointing OIC in ARMM. The position of ARMM Governor down to the Board Member was a position must duly elected by the people by their own choice and the government role is to guarantee that the election must be fair, honest and peaceful.
Monica Ramirez 1POL1
ReplyDeleteIt is true that there is an interaction between the three main branches of the government. Since they comply with the system of check and balance wherein it is a part of our constitution. It guarantees that no part of the government becomes too powerful. I also agree that they are doing their respective jobs. The high court issued a temporary restraining order knowing that this may prevent confusion. They are using the vested power on them to prevent further problems. Well anyway, I hope so that they are doing that for the benefit of all not for the benefit of themselves. Because questioning if they were doing their jobs well was quite vague in this issue. There are clamors stating that the advantage to be gained by postponing the elections had been laid down already. So I guess institutional dynamics cannot be clearly stated on the situation our country is facing today. But anyway, my statement must gone further research before I could prove it since I don’t have concrete evidence to prove any anomalies happening in our government.
Kim Louise B. Montero, 1POL3
ReplyDeleteThe major challenge in this point was the test of the government’s willingness and capability to interact as one body en route for social, economic or political development.
Indeed, based on the article given, each branch of the government of the Philippines, particularly the government officials involved, paved way for an Institutional Dynamics that, if ad infinitum done, would lead our country to progress and would definitely bring about the lives of each Filipino prosperous.
Going back to the interaction and relationships of these institutions, legitimately speaking, the principle of the “separation of powers” has been adopted in the Philippines in order to avoid arbitrary rule and abuse of authority. The so called “checks and balances” among the three major departments of the government - executive, legislative and the judiciary – are no more than means of control by each and upon each of the departments. At this juncture, each branch exemplifies those rules lawfully, thus ushers a way for a social, economic or political development.
References:
De Leon, H. S. (2008). Textbook on the PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION. Manila: Rex Bookstore, Inc.
Punay, E. (2011, September 14). SC halts ARMM OIC appointment. Philstar.com , p. http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
ALONZO, Carol Anne, A.
ReplyDelete1POL3
The three branches of government have different roles in our society. None of these branches are more powerful than the other. All powers of these branches are equal and should be used fairly. Though it may differ in the way it executes its powers, each has its own jurisdictions and limitations. On the same manner, it has what we call separation of powers. One of which is the separation of powers of the Church from the state. No one in the government may oppose what the Church believes is right because, of the said power. That is the same with the three branches of government namely, the executive, judicial and legislative.
I believe that they perform their jobs well. As I have said, even though they have different contributions in the society, they still act as one body which helps in the development of our economy. One is affected with the action of another. It bears the same consequences and penalties. Therefore, each of the powers that these branches possess are essential in our economy.
BERNARDINO, Ellaine 1POL2
ReplyDeleteThe involved political institutions in this issue, which concerns the Supreme Court halting the ARMM OIC appointment, are doing their jobs well. As what Ivan Luzuriaga said, it is very much evident in the first sentence of the article that they are implying the principle of checks and balances. “The Supreme Court (SC) has stopped Malacañang from implementing Republic Act 10153 or the law synchronizing the elections of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) with the 2013 midterm polls.”
The halt of the Supreme Court on the appointment of the Officer-In-Charge of the ARMM, which is the job of the executive department, had gone through many deliberations. They’re reason for the TRO is to avoid any idea of in some way influencing the result of these cases and to avoid any false hopes given to candidates; as Pimentel said that he believes the stop to the appointment will give “hope that their aspirations may be achieved without violence.” It will be better if the Legislative and the Executive will collaborate on the decision of the Judiciary.
The principle of checks and balances assures that each institution’s job is done well by the other two, to avoid abuse of power. It gives as better guarantee that “a decision” is for the development of the country. This principle enables us to see all the possible ideas, not only relying to one power. It ensures that the 3 institutions work together because in the end, a decision will reflect on what happens to the society.
Jochris Guades of 1POL1:)
ReplyDeleteThe Supreme Court ordrering a TRO to the R.A 10153 (law synchronizing the elections of the ARMM with the 2013 midterm polls) lets us see how the Goverment is making an effort to make the three political Institutions work together. This is a principle called "check and balance" were in the three has special powers were in they can use in each department altough there is a separation of power present.
The SC decision was right. They are practicing the principle of check and balance. They are just preventing the executive to have political influence to those people whom he shall appoint and maybe used in his political interest in the future. I think the three branches of our government knows the limitation and the usage of their powers and the SC are just preventing the abuse of power to happen.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteChelsea Nava 1POL1
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, even though we have some glitches in our government, we are on the way to institutional dynamics.
based on the article, our government is doing their job.
the interaction between them has been evident, sensible and fruitful.
they have talked about whether or not the screening of oics should be stopped by the administration.
as said in our pgc subject, judicial, legislative and executive are co equal.
this is to maintain balance and promote governmental efficiency.
under our constitution there is no absolute separation among the three branches of the government but their is a separation of powers. each department is given certain powers which only them is permitted to do and is checked by the others.
Congress pass RA 10153
President implements
Supreme court halts and issues TRO
house speaker and senate president will rank and endorse
President Aquino appoints.
Supreme court in turn decides if the acts of the two department is constitutional or not.
We can see here that they properly follow the constitution and effectively apply them in their work.
it has been said in the article that macalintal praise the high court for a timely action on their motion to hold back the appointment of OICs in ARMM which means that our government is doing their responsibility to the state.
Source:
Textbook on the PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION.
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Anne Medlyn Laurel 1pol1
ReplyDeleteThe Supreme Court stopped Malacañang from implementing RA 10153 or the law synchronizing the elections of the ARMM with the 2013 midterm polls. We can see that there is an interaction between these two institutions. They are practicing the Principle of Check and Balance.This principle is used to make sure that all the three institutions are doing their job and to make sure that no one is abusing its powers. I think that the Supreme Court is doing its job pretty well. They just want to avoid the abuse of power. As for the Executive branch I also think they are doing their job for they are cooperating with the other institutions.
source: http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
http://www.tribuneonline.org/headlines/20110914hed5.html
The three (3) branches of government (the executive, the legislative, and the judicial) as we all discern apply the doctrine of separation of powers. It is where the power of the government was distributed among these branches of the government with their own relevant functions. But based on the given article, it shows the oneness of these branches through the checks and balances.
ReplyDeleteChecks and balances are for the sanctuary of synchronization of the three (3) branches of the government. It guarantees that no one of these branches of the government prevails. As such, the article given above shows the oneness of the three branches of the government in THAT PARTICULAR INSTANCE, which means that I admittedly say that there are times that these branches don’t work together and shows only as our representatives or leaders in their respective offices just for the good of themselves. But as I have said, I think through the interaction of the Supreme Court (judicial department), other local representatives (legislative department) with the implementation of the Malacanang regarding Republic Act 10153, these branches did their jobs responsibly.
http://politicsandgovernance.blogspot.com/2010/06/doctrine-of-separation-of-powers.html
http://jlp-law.com/blog/primer-separation-of-powers-inquiry-in-aid-legislation/
http://www.mcwdn.org/GOVERNMENT/ChecksBalances.html
It's true that there are interactions between judicial, executive and legislative branch. They are practicing the separation of powers. Even though they have different powers they still come up with one decision for the good of our government. If one fails to do their duty, the other branches will be affected.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThyron Anthony D. Barot 1POL1
ReplyDeleteI believed that the decision of the high court to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) on RA 10153, which postponed the ARMM elections originally set last month will bring about institutional dynamics in the state and will restore peace and political development in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.
First let us discuss the benefits of postponing this act. Representative Reynaldo Umali said that the postponement of the ARMM elections is beneficial to the peace process and will greatly help the region’s advanced governing mechanism to cultivate its capabilities in addressing issues troubling the region of course with the assistance of the national government, it can also help initiate the transformation of the region into the self-determining unit as envisioned by the Constitution.
Global Filipino Nation convenor Victor Barrios called the temporary restraining order issued by the Philippine Supreme Court to stop the appointment of OICs under Republic Act No. 10153 a “supremacy of democracy over autocracy” because I think that by postponing this act it will surely eliminate the kind of autocratic rule which is currently happening in the region and will grant equal access to opportunities for public service and restrict political dynasties as said in the section 26 of article 2 in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines and will avoid further confusion in the near future as stated by Supreme Court spokesman Jose Midas Marquez although the order does not prevent the president from proceeding with its selection process for OICs in ARMM as part of the powers of the president.
The interaction between the three main branches of the government regarding this issue as others have said is very evident and I believe that they are using the different powers vested to them by the Constitution to attain prosperity and progress for our country.
Source:
http://www.thefilipinoaustralian.com/news/index.php/2011/09/21/sc-order-stopping-armm-appointments-a-win-for-democracy-gfn/
http://www.mb.com.ph/node/305845/hou
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
De Leon, H. (2008). Textbook on the PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION. Manila: REX Bookstore Inc.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBeryll Barcenas 1POL1
ReplyDeleteBased on what I have read on the article, the three branches of government definitely have done their jobs perfectly. They did their jobs in line with the separation of powers using the system of check and balance to secure the independence by simply the Legislative passing the Republic Act 10153, then the Executive administering or enforces the law and lastly, the Judicial to interpret or apply the law by issuing the TRO.
I think that they are not doing their jobs well because first of all, the Palace has not yet given any concrete plans for the political reforms of the ARMM. It would mean confusion for the government if the SC has a final decision but then it is in conflict with the OIC in placed by the President. Postponement alone does not equate to reform. So while waiting for this issue to be resolved, they should map out their course of action in instituting reforms in the region.
http://www.socialstudieshelp.com/Lesson_13_Notes.htm
http://www.gov.ph/2011/06/30/republic-act-no-10153/
Kimberly Anne T. Jarata
ReplyDelete1POL2
In the very first part of the article, the interactions of the branches can already be noted. If one of the branches feel that there may be a problem with the other branches and act against it then they are probably doing their job assuming that they are acting for the good of the people and not for themselves.
The Supreme Court applied the principle of checks and balances to ensure that there is no concentration of power to only one branch but evenly spread among the three branches.
According to the article, “The screening of potential OICs should be stopped by the administration to avoid any notion of indirectly influencing the final outcome of these cases and to prevent any false hopes given to applicants to these OIC posts”. With this statement, the Supreme Court did their job well.
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-checks-and-balances.htm
Catherine M. Mendoza 1POL2
ReplyDeleteJust like what the first students’ opinions are stated, I would have to agree that all the personalities are doing their job well. Cooperation isn’t done well without interaction from the three main branches of the government.
Every branch of the government has different functions. Thus, the separation of powers is shown, which makes it such that no branch is higher than the other. Then there is the checks and balances, a power given to each branch in order to check on how the other branch is doing and see if the other is they are doing their job well. This also helps lessen the chances of abuse on their power.
Considering the facts included in the article that the Supreme Court has stopped Malacañang from implementing the Republic Act 10153 or the law synchronizing the elections of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) with the 2013 midterm polls, then they really are not overlooking anything important. With this, I can say that institutional dynamics in the Philippines is being observed just as well.
Sources:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
De Leon, H. (2008). Textbook on the Philippine Constitution
JAVIER, Gracezhelle V. 1POL3
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Ms. Carol Alonzo said. None of these three main branches of the Government are more powerful than the other. Every branch in our society deals with different tasks and still ends up with one goal. Their duty is not to compete but to plan and approve whether a law must be done and executed.
Each branch-executive, legislative and judicial-has a way to limit the power of the other branches. For example, the executive branch can veto laws passed by the legislative branch, but the legislative branch can override a veto with a 2/3 majority.
They may not have the same levels of power but they need to 'join forces' to achieve their goals in making out a new law.
reference:
http://www.ehow.com/facts_5880846_principles-checks-balances.html
MARASIGAN, Medelyn Clarisse O.
ReplyDelete1POL3
I agree with my fellow political science students that there is an interaction between the three main branches of the government. The congress filed a petition to stop the executive branch of government to appoint Officer-In-Charge who will lead the ARMM despite the fact that there is a law to have election last month, August 08, 2011. The supreme court ruled in favor of the petitioner to stop the appointments of the would be Officer-In-Charge in the ARMM.
It shows that the power of the three branches are all equal and there is a "Check and balance" to keep the government function to the fullest and there is a fusion and interaction.
BAYAWA, CESSNA 1POL2
ReplyDeleteI think the involved institutions, particularly the personalities who run the institutions, are doing their jobs well. Supreme Court just did their job and applied the checks and balances because they think that implementing Republic Act 10153 or the law synchronizing the elections of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) should be stopped.The presence of checks and balances here is obviously noticeable.
Checks and balances are there to enforce a balanced government. Its prime function is to stop one branch becoming more powerful than the others so no one is not more powerful than the other.
Katrina Ysobelle Hernandez
ReplyDelete1POL1
I believe that the involve institutions are doing their jobs well. The interaction between the two institutions is very obvious. Each branch of the government has specific powers and area of responsibility, and each branch has certain power over the other. The legislative has judiciary power and has control of the way the executive and judiciary works. The executive could veto the law, which the legislative passed. The Judiciary has the power to correct and control the way the executive body exercises its powers. They are practicing the system of check and balance, or the separation of powers, to ensure that no one is above the other and to guarantee that no part of the government becomes too powerful.
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Albert Vincent B. Montesa-1POL1
ReplyDeleteFor me, I think the two branches of the government involved in this issue which are the Executive and the Judiciary are just doing their jobs. They are just complying with the system of check and balance. This is to guarantee that none of the three branches of the government is more powerful or higher than another and also to prevent the abuse of power of certain personalities who run a particular institution. The three branches are created co-equal by the Constitution and one of these three branches can check the others with some limitations.
I think that the two involving branches of government are doing their jobs. I think that the executive must accept what the SC's decision because the SC seen some problems that might bring problem to the Philippines.
ReplyDeletetheir duty- check and balance- was implemented very well, doing their jobs will help improve the decisions of each other.
Harvey Leo M. Romano
ReplyDelete1Pol1
According to what I have read in the article above, the two branches of our government (executive and judicial branch) do their respective jobs properly. The only problem is that their decisions are opposing.
There is a principle of check and balance showed. The judicial branch creates a decision to repel the Executives’. This decision do not imply that the executive branch is wrong rather, the judiciary wants to voice out that there is better way.
It is a mind over matter for the two branches. They are doing what they suppose to do and this is an implication that we are having a healthy political economy and the different branches are functioning properly.
I can say that political dynamics is present in us and this will lead to political development.
JocelMarieCastillo 1POL1
ReplyDeleteWhen the Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order on RA 10153, they wanted to avoid the confusion on the ARMM because the president will appoint the OICs. The issuance of the Supreme Court and the appointment of the President are not unconstitutional. It just proves that the three institutions are equal. It proves that the Supreme Court can contradict the decision of the President. It applies the principle of check and balance. The government has three institutions and the constitution made it co-equal for principle of check and balance. The principle of check and balance is to avoid the abuse of power in one institution. The issuance of the TRO by the Supreme Court proves that there is equality among the three institutions. It also proves that the Supreme Court checks every action of the President and the other institution, which is the Congress.
The issuance of the TRO on RA10153 by the Supreme Court leads to political development. The issuance was to avoid the confusion on the people because the president will appoint OICs. If the RA101053 continue to impose the people will get confused when the OICs had been appointed because, they have an election but the president appoint the OICs. The TRO in RA10153 lead to political development because it will made order between the state and the people.
These institutions are doing their job well, their main function and the checking the other institution.
Source: http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAgripino Luiz R. Mendoza -1POL1
ReplyDeleteI agree that everything had gone according to the design of the constitution.
I agree that there is indeed interaction between the three branches of government. Congress passed a bill, President signs it, Supreme Court halts it with a temporary restraining order.
The Supreme Court had done well in issuing a temporary restraining order on the ground that it might cause confusion if the law was repealed by the Court. The Legislative and the Executive Branch had done it's job well.
From what the Supreme Court had stated the Temporary Restraining Order is only put in place so that it could first question the legality of the said Law and to settle disputes about the republic act once and for all. It is it's duty as the Judicial Branch for there is an actual controversy regarding the legality of this law.
Congress had put section 3 into the bill due to the fact that Nepotism is rampant in ARMM.
The Global Filipino Nation had claimed that this law is autocratic in nature, I say nay, It is part of the democratization of ARMM, for this law would remove the true Autocrats in ARMM as embodied by Nepotism. Progress begins once order is established, the maguindanao massacre in 2009 is a clear indication that the right of suffrage of the sovereign is being challenged with the "removal" of other political candidates which happened to be their Family's Political Enemy.
The Central Government was challenged and thus Congress had to reestablish the Government's Order in the area hence section 3 was added. The President had acted accordingly to establish peace in ARMM and the dismantling of Political Dynasties in the region.
Re-establishing Order so that processes to ensure that state policies and the principles as stated in Article II are carried out and the Dismantling of Nepotism in accordance with the constitution are both part of the Government's goals for both are in the Constitution. This is what Institutional Dynamics is in this particular Case. All three institutions had done their job well in attaining the Government's Goal
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/58283/sc-stops-palace-plan-to-name-armm-oics
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/58283/sc-stops-palace-plan-to-name-armm-oics
http://www.usnewslasvegas.com/national/sc-to-rule-on-legality-of-r-a-10153/
http://www.thefilipinoaustralian.com/news/index.php/2011/09/21/sc-order-stopping-armm-appointments-a-win-for-democracy-gfn/
Textbook on the Philippine constitution. DeLeon Hector S., 2008.
Pauline Oliva 1Pol2
ReplyDeleteHaving read the article, I think the involved political institutions are doing their jobs well. Though there is the principle of separation of powers, there is also the system of checks and balances which empowers one branch to monitor if the other is working on its responsibilities to the people.
The SC halted the Malacanang from implementing RA 10153 and allowed incumbent ARMM officials to still be in office instead but it was stated in the article that, “Marquez, however, clarified that the order does not prevent the Palace from proceeding with its selection process for OICs in ARMM”, which contains a slight discrepancy.
On the other hand, although the Supreme Court issued a TRO on RA 10153, they still allow the appointment and leave the appointing powers to the executive branch which justifies the principle of the separation of powers.
They issued the said order so that people may not be confused about who their leaders would be and I think this proves that the political institutions do their primary function which is to govern and lead the people in a rightful manner.
References
http://www.gov.ph/2011/06/30/republic-act-no-10153/
http://www.answers.com/topic/checks-and-balances
Ma. Angela Emeterio, 1POL2
ReplyDeletePreventing Malacañan to implement the Republic Act 10153 or the law synchronizing the election of the ARMM was a good call from the Supreme Court. Basically, their main reason why they did not allow the election to be pursued is to avoid any confusion. By saying that they want to prevent any confusion it’s a sign of preventing any disputes to happen between Malacañan, the officers and the Supreme Court. Well, with this kind of interaction, the institutional dynamics is very evident.
I do agree with what they say that checks and balances appear here in this issue. The SC prevented an action of Malacañan, for they see it will cause confusion. The relationship is very clear. The SC checks the actions of Malacañan towards its people.
Reference:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Gertrude Pedrigosa 3scl
ReplyDeletethe way we dress is the way how we project ourselves. I agree with the last statement of sofie "that i would rather wear a terno and wear it proud than be someone I'm not"
politicians dress properly maybe because they wanted people to see them presentable, dissent and respectable persons. as in the case of Imelda Marcos, using the butterfly dress doesn't make her presentable, just for my own opiñion, it doesn't make her pleasing at all if she wears that butterfly dress.
Mon Francis Tolentino, 1POL3
ReplyDeleteI believe that the three branches of the government that were involved in the article posted have performed their jobs well and thus establishing political development. Based on the article, the Supreme Court voted to preventing the implementation of the Republic Act 10153. This move of the Supreme Court is just a representation that the principle of checks and balance was exercised for that matter. This principle makes the three branches of the government equal in power so one branch cant over rule the other.
I agree with my fellow political science batch mates on their stand about this issue. The Supreme Court avoided confusion that's why they voted for the suspension of the law being passed.
source:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Ena Corpuz 1Pol1
ReplyDeleteInteraction between the branches of the government is obvious; the question that is crucial lies on the 1) Legality 2) Constitution 3) assertion of rights.
RA 10153, enables the Malacanang to appoint OICs that is no question, the assertion is excellent, but in terms of it being unconstitutional and legal, is in great question, because it brushes aside the Autonomy of ARMM( R.A. No. 9054 and RA 6734, this which requires RA 10153 to be in a plebiscite position before enacted on ARMM), however i find this notion need to be amended, because particularly in maguindanao, the voter's list was controlled by powerful political clans and personalities, this provides an advantage to power holder in mindanao to reign supreme. Though maybe unconstitutionally and seemed illegal, they need to exercise this power, by allowing a vote plebiscite.
in terms of the TRO, the ARROYO SCs proved to be ingenious by approving a TRO for the appointment of OICs, the TRO is right in terms of constitutionality, legality but not in assertion of rights, because how can the argument that the ARMM assert their right to suffrage if indeed illegal steps are done such as fraudulent voters list?
in anyway i believe that the check in balance statement is already a cliché here. This is just a matter in which like in "Alice in wonder land through the looking glass" the good the protagonist must play chess and win within 14 moves.
CHECK and BALANCE is not properly executed.
And I think its job well done on the SC to block the Aquino movement by using TRO. its time to wait for the other party to cast their move.
Sources:
Pimentel N. COMMENTARY: RA 10153: Unconstitutional, Illegal, Defiling of sacred right of suffrage. (Aug 15, 2011) http://www.mindanews.com/mindaviews/2011/08/15/commentary-ra-10153-unconstitutional-illegal-defiling-of-sacred-right-of-suffrage/
Dedace S. SC spokesman: TRO is for the best interest of ARMM. (Sept 21, 2011) http://www.gmanews.tv/story/233005/nation/sc-spokesman-tro-is-for-the-best-interest-of-armm
Ena Corpuz 1pol1
ReplyDeletei therefore conclude that there is no political development that happened to resolve the issue.
Eunice Sushmita M. Baldos, 1POL2
ReplyDeleteThe implementation of the Republic Act 10153 or the 'law synchronizing the elections of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) with the 2013 midterm polls' by the Malacañan was hindered by the Supreme Court. Because of that, SC ‘issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on RA 10153’ to avoid uncertainty before Malacañan appoints OICs in ARMM.
The involved institutions in the article are doing their jobs well. It is evident that both of them exercised the 'check and balance' which is very important in order to establish an interaction between each other. Another thing about the 'check and balance' principle is that it supervises other institutions whether they're performing their tasks correctly.
Source:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI personally deem that the main political institutions involved in the issue, namely the judiciary and the executive, performed their jobs well. The mere fact that the Supreme Court halted Malacanang from 'implementing Republic Act 10153 the law synchronizing the elections of ARMM with the 2013 midterm polls' is already proof of the principle of checks and balances for it shows how the judiciary, as an independent body, can 'check,' ensure and verify the the decision of the other branch, may it be consititutional or not. It also shows that they have equal authority. This is proof of interaction between these political institutions. However, I don't think that this brings about political development, for this is merely one of the ten thousand dillemas that our state is facing, rather it is a step towards political development.
ReplyDeleteReferences:
Punay, Edu (2011, September 14) Retrieved from: http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
orciuncula, Jehoverey 1pol2 said...
ReplyDeleteThe interaction between involved institutions bring about institutional dynamics. How? There was a political development occurred, and that was the settling of affairs regarding the elections in ARMM. "Institutional dynamics occurs when such interactions lead to progress or bring about what the goal of government or triumph what is right, just and good." The goal of the government was to avoid confusion regarding the one who is supposed to be in power. That's why they,Supreme Court,stopped ARMM OIC appointment.
The involved institutions are of course doing their jobs, its a must. They are doing their jobs well, in terms of the maintenance accordingly with each institutions. We observed an actual example of checks and balances: in which the Legislation passed Republic Act 10153 or the law synchronizing the elections of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao with the 2013 midterm polls,and the R.A being planned to be executed/implemented by the Executive was halted by the Temporary Restraining Order of the Supreme Court getting a vote of 8 to 4.
*A TRO is a court order of limited duration. It was issued by the SC to stop the implementation of statute in order to clarify and clear the issues and avoid discrepancies in the region of ARMM regarding the elections and its OIC.
They settled the issue by giving the COMELEC an ample of time to resolve consolidated petitions.
For me,the personalities behind these institutions are doing their best to fix their conflicts from each other with the use of checks and balances in almost every national interest concerning situations which will make every problems at any condition can be resolved easily. The cooperation between these institutions will create a better nation, a better state.
REFEENCES:
http://ronaldstower.blogspot.com/
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Temporary+Restraining+Order
Punay, Edu (2011, September 14) Retrieved from: http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Fernando M. Erese Jr. 1POL2
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with the statements posted by my fellow polsci students. The three institutions were doing their job and this was affirmed by their interaction. This interaction occurred when the Legislative did their part in proposing the republic act, when the President (Chief Executive) approved the act and when the Supreme Court placed a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the RA 10153.
Again, I agree that the three institutions are doing jobs well because they maintain the principle of “checks and balance.” This “checks and balances” is an essential thing that a republic needs, for it prevents the abuse of power and maintains the equality of the three institutions.
On a statement given by SC spokesperson Marquez, "The screening process for OICs is not included in the law, which only included deferment of the Armm elections and synchronization with 2013 elections, and appointment of OICs. Only those are being restrained. The law never included screening process," he clarified. With the TRO issued by the SC, I think they did the best and put the institutional dynamics in the interaction of the three institutions because they’ve maintained the status quo.
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
http://www.sunstar.com.ph/manila/local-news/2011/09/21/high-court-palace-can-t-appoint-oics-armm-180716
Rose Anne Doña 1POL2
ReplyDeleteThe Republic of the Philippines has its governmental powers divided into three distinct branches namely the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary — by virtue of the principle of separation of powers. This principle sets governmental efficiency by the insurance that functions conferred to an institution are discharged well. However, there is no absolute separation among the three principal institutions of the government. The three are co- equal departments and to maintain balance positions each department is given the power to check the others — principle of checks and balances.
I think the two principles mentioned there above makes it possible an interaction between the three branches of the government necessary for the pursuit of the general will and interest and common good of the state. Ergo, institutional dynamics occur. There is the interdependence of government policies and affairs.
As to the recent news on the SC issuing a temporary restraint order to the R.A. 10153 (SYNCHRONIZATION LAW ON THE ARMM ELECTIONS), there exists an interaction among the three institutions of the government. We could use as proofs the two principles I have mentioned earlier. The situation involved here implies the participation of the three institutions of the government; the Congress able to enact the R.A. 10153, the chief executive approving it for policy implementation; and the highest court of the land, SC reinterpreting the statute and putting immediate actions on issues or concerns about it. The three institutions here work together, and seemingly institutional dynamics is established.
I also agree that there is an interaction between the three institution, because the supreme court's decision to issue a TRO on Republic Act 10153 or the law synchronizing the elections of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)is just part of their job to oversee the executive. the SC is just also following the "Principle of Checks and Balance" because as stated in the article, the executive's decision of implementing the said Act may create confusion that may arise once the Palace appoints OICs in ARMM and the high court eventually nullifies the law. the SC also had thorough deliberations on the consolidated petitions of House Minority Leader and Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, Datu Michael Kida of the Maguindanao Federation of Autonomous Irrigators Association, Basari Mapupuno, election lawyer Romulo Macalintal and former Senate president Aquilino Pimentel Jr. before issuing the said TRO. in conclusion the SC's issuance of the TRO to R.A 10153 and its thorough deliberations on the consolidated petitions of legislative officials is a clear proof of interaction of each branches.
ReplyDeleteSource:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLisa Marie Garan 1POL2
ReplyDeleteIn my perspective, the said issue pertaining to the Supreme Court’s halting ARMM OIC appointment shows us that indeed there is an interaction going on between these three branches or institutions of the government namely: the Executive branch, Legislative branch, and the Judicial branch.
Solicitor General Joel Cadiz said that there is nothing illegal or unconstitutional in the postponement of the polls and the power of President Aquino to appoint OICs in ARMM. This statement again reassures us that it follows the Philippine constitution, and if it doesn’t violate our constitution it is much likely for our betterment. I can surely state that there is active Political dynamics. Why do I say so? It is because of this essential principle being exercised - “The Principle of Checks and Balance”, as stated by my co-political scientist, this principle concerns maintaining the balance of powers of each and every branch of our government, this will serve as the proof that there really is an interaction between these three branches. And to me, they seem to be giving their all to resolve this issue; to some this movement may seem small but through this we are taking it one step at a time till we become a fully developed country!
References:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=726919&publicationSubCategoryId=63
Kathrine Santos 1pol1....
ReplyDeleteUnder our Constitution there is no absolute separation among the three branches of government (executive, legislative, judiciary) and the provision states that there can be a considerable amount of encroachment or checking of affairs by other departments and this is called the principle of checks and balances.
In this article, there is an interaction between the three branches of government about the law synchronizing the elections of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao(ARMM). The Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order on RA 10153 which postponed ARMM elections to "prevent confusion" (SC spokesman Jose Midas Marquez said) when the President appoints the officer in charge(OIC). The candidates will submit a recommendation letter to the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives which they will examine thoroughly before they submit to the President for approval.
I believe that the principle of checks and balances is the key in achieving institutional dynamics because it is workable in a Presidential system and those institutions may look at each other to solve actual disputes in the State. I guess the personalities who run the institution are doing there part because there is an interaction among them. They do not just sit there and and they make sure they do something which is constitutional and make sure that institutional dynamics is rightfully achieved. They make sure that that there is a process to be followed in the search for the OIC so that the future OIC will be best fitted for the job and contribute something in the progression of our country.
note: Sir I posted my reaction about the article a few weeks ago but I checked it out today and saw that it was removed, so I made another one.I sincerely don't know what happened. I checked it before and it was there and now it's gone. Hoping for your kind consideration.:)) kathrine santos 1pol1...
ReplyDelete