History of Philippine Constitutions

This is a practitioner-oriented overview of the Philippines’ constitutional evolution—from the late Spanish period and the revolutionary era, through American rule and the Commonwealth, to the present 1987 Constitution. It highlights texts adopted, how they were made legitimate, what institutions they created, how they were amended or displaced, and the jurisprudence and practice that give them life today.

What counts as a “Philippine constitution”?

A constitution is the state’s supreme law: it founds government, divides and limits power, declares rights, and sets the rules for changing itself. In Philippine history, “constitutions” have included:

Revolutionary charters (Biak-na-Bato 1897; Malolos 1899);
Colonial “organic acts” (Spanish and American instruments that functioned as basic law);
National constitutions (1935, 1943, 1973, the 1986 Freedom Constitution, and 1987).

Legitimacy has come by different routes: plebiscites, legislative enactment by a colonizer, “people’s assemblies,” or revolutionary success ratified at the polls.

Antecedents under Spain

Cadiz Constitution of 1812. Briefly extended to overseas provinces (including the Philippines) during liberal intervals, it promised representation in the Cortes and local autonomy, though its application was episodic and limited.
Maura Law of 1893. A late-colonial municipal reform statute; not a constitution, but it foreshadowed later local-autonomy clauses.
Customary law. Pre-colonial polities had unwritten norms; none rose to the level of a pan-archipelago constitutional text.

Revolutionary constitutions

Constitution of Biak-na-Bato (1897)

Context. Adopted by the revolutionary government under Emilio Aguinaldo during the first phase of the Revolution.
Character. Temporary, influenced by contemporary Latin American revolutionary texts.
Institutions. A provisional republican framework; it envisaged a future, permanent constitution after independence.
Fate. Superseded by the Pact of Biak-na-Bato’s truce and Aguinaldo’s exile; historically significant as a first assertion of constitutional statehood.

Malolos Constitution (1899)

Context. Drafted by the Malolos Congress; ratified January 21, 1899; established the First Philippine Republic.
Key features.
- Sovereignty resides in the people; separation of powers; unicameral Assembly.
- Civil liberties guaranteed (speech, press, religion, association, due process).
- Secular state. The State recognizes freedom and equality of all religions (no state church).
Legacy. The first republican constitution in Asia authored by Asians themselves. Overrun by U.S. military rule, but it left a durable rights vocabulary and republican template.

American period “organic constitutions”

Philippine Organic Act (Philippine Bill) of 1902

Nature. U.S. federal statute serving as the basic law.
Institutions. A civil governor; a Philippine Commission (appointed) and later a Philippine Assembly (elected), moving toward representative government.
Rights. A statutory bill of rights modeled on the U.S. Bill of Rights.

Jones Law (Philippine Autonomy Act) of 1916

Nature. Replaced the 1902 Act; promised eventual independence.
Institutions. Bicameral legislature (Senate and House), both elective; stronger Filipino participation in the executive.

Tydings–McDuffie Act (Philippine Independence Act) of 1934

Trigger. Authorized a Constitutional Convention to draft a national constitution for a 10-year Commonwealth, to be followed by independence.
Outcome. Led directly to the 1935 Constitution and independence on July 4, 1946 (later observed as June 12 for Independence Day by statute).

The 1935 Constitution (Commonwealth; then the Third Republic)

Drafting & ratification. Convention (1934–1935); ratified by plebiscite (May 14, 1935); approved by the U.S. President as required by Tydings–McDuffie.
Design. Presidential system; initially a unicameral National Assembly; a U.S.-style Bill of Rights; judicial review by a Supreme Court.
1940 Amendments. Major redesign:
- Restored bicameral Congress (Senate and House).
- Changed the presidential term from six years without reelection to four years with one reelection.
- Created the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) as an independent constitutional body.
Continuity through war. Interrupted by Japanese occupation, but restored in 1945 and served as the charter of the Third Republic after 1946 independence—until displaced by the 1973 Constitution.

The 1943 Constitution (Japanese-sponsored Second Republic)

Context. Framed under occupation; promulgated by a convention convened through KALIBAPI.
Design. Parliamentary-style features with a President elected by the National Assembly; a rights catalog qualified by “public order and morals.”
Assessment. Considered imposed and short-lived (1943–45). Its legal weight post-war was largely denied; its historical significance lies in showing the malleability—and dangers—of constitution-making under duress.

The 1973 Constitution (Martial Law era)

Drafting. 1971 Constitutional Convention begun before Martial Law; text “ratified” in 1973 via so-called citizens’ assemblies while Congress was padlocked.
Judicial posture. In Javellana v. Executive Secretary (1973), a divided Supreme Court concluded there was no further judicial obstacle to its effectivity, allowing the regime to govern under it.
Design on paper. A parliamentary government with a National Assembly, Prime Minister as head of government, and a President as head of state.
In practice. Through transitory provisions and subsequent amendments (notably 1976 and 1981), the President (Ferdinand E. Marcos) concentrated legislative and executive power, ruling by decree under Martial Law and thereafter under a “modified” presidential-parliamentary setup.
Late-period tweaks. 1984 changes reconvened a Regular Batasang Pambansa (unicameral), but did not meaningfully re-balance power.

The 1986 Freedom Constitution (Proclamation No. 3)

Nature. A transitional charter issued by President Corazon C. Aquino after the 1986 People Power Revolution.
Function. Abolished the Batasang Pambansa, vested legislative power in the President pending a new constitution, preserved a bill of rights, and called a new Constitutional Commission.
Temporal role. Operated from March 25, 1986 until superseded in 1987.

The 1987 Constitution (in force)

Drafting & ratification. Written by a 48-member Constitutional Commission (appointed; chaired by Cecilia Muñoz-Palma). Ratified by plebiscite on February 2, 1987; effective the same day.
Structure. Preamble and 18 Articles, including:
- I. National Territory (archipelagic doctrine and baselines principle carried through);
- II. Principles and State Policies (e.g., civilian supremacy, social justice, independent foreign policy, freedom from nuclear weapons);
- III. Bill of Rights (robust due process/equal protection, speech/press, privacy, searches/seizures, etc.);
- VI–VIII. Legislative, Executive, Judiciary (presidential system; bicameral Congress; Supreme Court with expanded judicial power);
- IX. Constitutional Commissions (CSC, COMELEC, COA—independent);
- X. Local Government (local autonomy; mandate for a Local Government Code; possible autonomous regions—Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras—subject to organic acts and plebiscites);
- XI. Accountability of Public Officers (impeachment, Sandiganbayan, Ombudsman/Tanodbayan);
- XII. National Economy and Patrimony (Filipino control over natural resources; nationality restrictions in certain sectors; equitable distribution of opportunities);
- XIII. Social Justice and Human Rights (Commission on Human Rights established; labor, agrarian, urban land reform, health, women, marginalized sectors);
- XIV–XVII. Education, arts, culture and sports; Family; General Provisions; Amendments or Revisions;
- XVIII. Transitory Provisions (e.g., sequestration of ill-gotten wealth; interim bodies and timelines).
Design choices & safeguards.
- Presidential system with term limits; bicameralism; independent commissions; constitutional offices (Ombudsman, CHR).
- Expanded judicial power (courts may strike down grave abuse of discretion, curbing political‐question evasions).
- Commander-in-Chief clause with guardrails: Congressional review and SC review of martial law/suspension of the writ; time limits; no military tribunals for civilians when civil courts are open.
- People’s participation: initiative and referendum mechanisms; party-list representation; directive to proscribe political dynasties by law (still awaiting a comprehensive enabling statute).
- Languages. Filipino and English as official; development of Filipino; regional languages as auxiliary; Spanish and Arabic promoted on an optional basis.
- Police and military. One police force, civilian in character, under a national police commission; AFP as protector of the people and the State; civilian supremacy guaranteed.

Amendments to date. Since 1987, no constitutional amendment or revision has been ratified. Congress and various administrations have proposed changes—ranging from economic liberalization to shifts to parliamentary or federal systems—but none has completed the Article XVII process.

Changing the Constitution under Article XVII (1987)

Two kinds of change.

Amendment: alters specific provisions.
Revision: overhauls the basic plan (e.g., changing the system of government).

Three modes to propose change.

Congress as a Constituent Assembly (“Con-Ass”). By a vote of three-fourths of all its Members. Prevailing view and practice treat the Senate and House as voting separately (the text says “all its Members,” but institutional bicameralism and practice favor separate tallies).
Constitutional Convention (“Con-Con”). Congress may call one by two-thirds vote, or by majority vote subject to plebiscite approval.
People’s Initiative. Petition of at least 12% of registered voters, with at least 3% in every legislative district; available only for amendments, not revisions; full text of the proposal must be shown to signatories. It cannot be used within five years of ratification of the Constitution, nor more often than once every five years thereafter.

Ratification. Any amendment/revision is valid only if ratified by a majority in a plebiscite held not earlier than 60 days nor later than 90 days after approval of the proposal.

Key jurisprudence.

Santiago v. COMELEC (1997). Cast doubt on the sufficiency of the then-existing initiative law to cover constitutional amendments.
Lambino v. COMELEC (2006). Struck down a people’s initiative seeking a shift to parliamentarism as a revision; emphasized the full-text requirement for signatories. The Court did not greenlight using initiative for revisions and treated Santiago’s constraints as controlling.

Recurring post-1987 “charter change” themes (none adopted)

Economic liberalization. Proposals to relax or relocate nationality restrictions (e.g., letting Congress define limits by statute rather than hard-coding percentages in the Constitution).
System of government. Shifts to parliamentary or semi-presidential forms; federalism proposals creating constitutionally entrenched states/regions.
Political reforms. Clarifying dynasty prohibitions, refining party-list, adjusting term limits, altering initiative rules.
Judicial architecture. Occasional ideas to restructure courts or the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC).

Hallmarks of the 1987 constitutional order

Constitutional supremacy. All statutes, orders, and acts—public and private—must conform; judicial review enforces supremacy.
Checks and balances. Bicameral legislature, presidential veto with override, impeachment, independent commissions, COA audit jurisdiction, Ombudsman prosecution of graft, Sandiganbayan jurisdiction over public-officer offenses.
Human rights & social justice. A strong Bill of Rights plus directive principles on labor, agrarian reform, urban housing, health, indigenous peoples, women, children, and the poor; CHR to investigate violations.
Local autonomy & asymmetric arrangements. Constitutional space for autonomous regions (implemented in Muslim Mindanao via organic law and plebiscites), while Cordillera attempts have repeatedly failed at the polls.
National territory & archipelagic doctrine. The Constitution embraces the archipelagic state concept and treats waters around, between, and connecting the islands as internal (without prejudice to international law and baselines legislation).

How the rights catalogue evolved

Malolos (1899). Early, explicit civil-liberties guarantees.
1935. U.S.-style bill of rights grafted onto a presidential frame; due process, equal protection, free speech/press, search and seizure, takings, religion, association, ex post facto/bills of attainder bans.
1973. Rights text remained but was diluted in practice by Martial Law decrees and amendment-backed executive legislation.
1987. Rights strengthened; judicial power expanded to check grave abuse of discretion; privacy, communication secrecy, speedy trial, free access to courts reaffirmed; socio-economic commitments constitutionalized.

Institutions that the 1987 text constitutionalized or reshaped

Judicial and Bar Council (JBC). A mixed body to screen nominees for the judiciary, intended to de-politicize appointments.
Commission on Human Rights (CHR). An independent constitutional office (though not a “constitutional commission”) with broad investigatory power.
COMELEC/CSC/COA. Elevated, insulated from political interference via fixed terms and security of tenure.
Ombudsman (Tanodbayan). Independent body to investigate and prosecute public-sector corruption.
National Police. Mandated to be civilian in character, later implemented by statute (PNP under DILG).

Timeline (thumbnail)

1812 – Cadiz Constitution (limited/episodic application).
1897 – Biak-na-Bato provisional constitution.
1899 – Malolos Constitution; First Republic.
1902 – Organic Act; American civil government.
1916 – Jones Law; fully elective legislature.
1935 – Commonwealth Constitution (amended 1940).
1943 – Occupation Constitution (Second Republic).
1946 – Independence; 1935 text governs Third Republic.
1973 – Marcos Constitution; later heavily amended.
1986 – Freedom Constitution (transitional).
1987 – Current Constitution, ratified Feb 2, 1987.

Practice points for lawyers and students

Always ask “text, history, structure, practice.” Philippine constitutional law is text-driven but informed by institutional practice (e.g., separate voting in Con-Ass, congressional-and-judicial checks on martial law).
Mind the difference between constitutional command and statutory implementation. Many 1987 directives (political dynasties, party-list design, autonomous regions, police structure) rely on enabling laws and have evolved through legislation and jurisprudence.
Amendment mechanics are exacting. Plebiscite windows (60–90 days), initiative thresholds (12%/3%), and the amendment-versus-revision line (Lambino) are recurring traps.
No amendments yet. As of today, any claim that the 1987 text has been amended requires extraordinary proof; changes you encounter are nearly always statutory or jurisprudential, not constitutional.
Use jurisprudence to translate principles to outcomes. The “grave abuse” clause, martial-law review, and accountability mechanisms are lived through cases—know the leading ones and the remedial writs the Court has crafted under its rule-making power.

Closing synthesis

The Philippines has moved from revolutionary constitutions that asserted sovereignty, to colonial organic acts that tutored representative government, to national constitutions that oscillated between liberty and concentration of power. The 1987 Constitution—born from a democratic transition—leans hard into checks and balances, rights, and accountability, while leaving contested choices (economic nationality rules, political dynasties, system of government) to future politics and, if consensus emerges, to Article XVII’s demanding amendment path. Understanding this arc—texts, institutions, and the cases that animate them—is the key to practicing Philippine constitutional law with both historical fidelity and contemporary competence.