With the passage of time, the members of the House of Representatives increased with the creation of new legislative districts and the corresponding adjustments in the number of party-list representatives. At a time when the House membership was already 290, a great number of the members decided that it was time to propose amendments to the Constitution. The Senators, however, were cool to the idea. But the members of the House insisted. They accordingly convened Congress into a constituent assembly in spite of the opposition of the majority of the members of the Senate. When the votes were counted, 275 members of the House of Representatives approved the proposed amendments. Only 10 Senators supported such proposals. The proponents now claim that the proposals were validly made, since more than the required three-fourths vote of Congress has been obtained. The 14 Senators who voted against the proposals claim that the proposals needed not three-fourths vote of the entire Congress but each house. Since the required number of votes in the Senate was not obtained, then there could be no valid proposals, so argued the Senators. Were the proposals validly adopted by Congress? (5%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
No, the proposed amendments were not validly adopted by Congress.
Under Section 1, Article XVII of the Constitution, amendments may be proposed by Congress upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members. In a bicameral legislature, each house must vote separately on constituent matters to preserve bicameralism and Senate independence, requiring a three-fourths vote in the House and a separate three-fourths vote in the Senate.
Here, while 275 House members approved the proposals, only 10 out of 24 Senators voted in favor. Because 10 votes fall short of the required three-fourths majority (18 votes) in the Senate, the constitutional threshold for separate voting was not obtained.
Therefore, the proposed constitutional amendments were not validly adopted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Under Section 1, Article XVII of the 1987 Constitution, what vote is required for Congress, acting as a Constituent Assembly, to propose constitutional amendments?
Proposing constitutional amendments through a Constituent Assembly requires a vote of three-fourths of all members of Congress.
In a bicameral legislature, how must Congress vote when acting as a Constituent Assembly to propose constitutional amendments?
Under the principle of bicameralism, each house of Congress must vote separately on constituent matters.
How many votes in the Senate are required to satisfy the three-fourths voting threshold in a 24-member Senate?
Three-fourths of a 24-member Senate requires at least 18 affirmative votes.
When does the Constitution explicitly require Congress to vote jointly in a single session?
The Constitution explicitly mandates joint voting when Congress acts to revoke or extend martial law under Section 18, Article VII.
What is the legal consequence if a proposed constitutional amendment obtains a three-fourths vote in the House but fails to secure a three-fourths vote in the Senate?
Failure to obtain the required separate three-fourths vote in the Senate renders the proposed amendment invalid and unconstitutional.
Learn more about these topics
1. Constituent Assembly Voting
Under Section 1, Article XVII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, any amendment to or revision of the Constitution may be proposed by Congress acting as a Constituent Assembly upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members. While the provision does not explicitly state whether the voting must be joint or separate, fundamental principles of bicameralism mandate that each house of Congress must vote separately. Because the Senate and the House of Representatives act as distinct legislative bodies, constituent power cannot be exercised in a joint voting structure that effectively nullifies the voting weight and constitutional role of the Senate.
2. Principle of Bicameralism
Bicameralism is a cornerstone of Philippine constitutional law, ensuring a system of checks and balances between the House of Representatives and the Senate. In all legislative actions and constituent functions, each house must deliberate and vote as a separate entity unless the Constitution explicitly provides for joint voting, such as in revoking martial law declarations or confirming a Vice President. Allowing the House of Representatives to override the Senate through numerical superiority in a joint vote on constitutional amendments violates the principle of bicameralism and destroys the co-equal status of the two legislative chambers.
3. Separate Voting Requirement
To validly propose constitutional amendments through a Constituent Assembly, the required three-fourths vote threshold must be independently satisfied in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. In a Senate composed of 24 members, at least 18 senators must vote in favor of the proposed amendments. Obtaining the approval of three-fourths of the total combined membership of Congress dominated by the House does not satisfy the constitutional requirement. Consequently, any proposed constitutional amendment that fails to secure a separate three-fourths vote in the Senate is unconstitutional and void.