Philippine Bar review · Topic
Self-executing and Non-self-executing Provisions
Explore Self-executing and Non-self-executing Provisions in The Constitution for the Philippine Bar. Browse subtopics and published practice questions, then…
Explore the syllabus
Direct subtopics
This topic has no further subtopics. Explore its practice questions below.
Put it into practice
Practice questions
- What chiefly distinguishes a self-executing constitutional provision from a non-self-executing provision?
- According to Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS, what is the starting presumption when determining whether a constitutional pr…
- How did Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS classify the second paragraph of Article XII, Section 10, directing State preferenc…
- A qualified Filipino bidder invokes Article XII, Section 10, second paragraph, in a State transaction involving nationa…
- A litigant demands that a court devise a nationwide employment subsidy, relying only on Article II, Section 9, on a jus…
- Children allege that a State authorization for destructive logging threatens the ecology on which they and future gener…
- An agency argues that a constitutional right cannot be self-executing because a statute also provides a procedure and p…
- A State agency rejects a claim under a constitutional provision solely because no enabling statute exists. Explain the …
- A patients' group seeks a judicial order creating a fixed annual cash allowance for all indigent patients. It relies ex…
- A student writes: 'Every provision in Article II is merely aspirational, so Article II can never support a judicial cla…
- Which feature most strongly indicates that a constitutional provision supplies a rule enforceable without further legis…
- Under Manila Prince, can different parts of one constitutional provision differ as to self-execution?