4th Batch Consti Digest

7/24/2019 4th Batch Consti Digest

1/7

EDU v ERICTA

FACTS:

1. May 20, 1970 - Respondent Galo andother motorists filed a suit for certiorariand prohibition with preliminary injunctionassailing the constitutionality of theReector Law as an inalid e!ercise of

the police power" for being iolatie of thedue process clause.

#. May 28, 1970 $ As a remedy in case thestatute be declared constitutional"%espondent also assailed the validity ofAO No. implementing such legislationbe nullified as an undue exercise oflegislatie po!er"

$ Same day" &udge ordered theissuance of a preli#inary in$unction

directed against the enforcement of suchA' (o. #

$ )ay after" Sol*en filed a +%representing ,etitioner -du but was lateron denied by respondent &udge.

. %une &0, 1970 - %udge 'ricta filed hisanswer why he restrained theenforcement of A' (o. # and he said thatit/s in e!cess of the authority conferred onpetitioner and therefore iolatie of t(e

principle of non-delegation of legislatie

po!er.

)" Ro#eo *" 'du" the 0and TransportationCommissioner filed a petition for certiorariand prohibition against respondent %udge'ricta CF2$%i3al"4ue3on City5" to annuland set aside his order for the issuance ofa !rit of preli#inary in$unction directedagainst the enforcement of Administratie'rder (o. #

I!!UE" 67( A' (o. # went beyond its

authority and iolates the principle ofnon$delegation of legislatie power.

RULIN#" NO.

1. 2t is a fundamental principle 8owing fromthe doctrine of separation of powers thatCongress may not delegate its legislatiepower to the two other branches of thegoernment" sub$ect to t(e exception t(at

local goern#ents #ay oer local a+airsparticipate in its exercise"

#. 6hat cannot be delegated is theaut(ority under t(e onstitution to #aela!s and to alter and repeal t(e#9 thetest is the completeness of the statute inall its term and proisions when it leaesthe hands of the legislature.

. To determine whether or not there is anundue delegation of legislatie power" theinuiry must be directed to the scope anddefiniteness of t(e #easure enacted. Thelegislature does not abdicate its functionswhen it describes what job must be done"who is to do it" and what is the scope ofhis authority.

;. A distinction has rightfully been madebetween delegation of power to ma. A standard thus defines legislatie policy"mar


2/7

. 2t bears repeating that the %e8ector 0awconstrued together with the 0and

Transportation Code. %epublic Act (o.;1>" of which it is an amendment" leaesno doubt as to the stress and e#p(asison public safety which is the primeconsideration in statutes of this character.

B. There is li


3/7

reason is the increasing comple!ity of thetas< of goernment and the growinginability of the legislature to cope directlywith the myriad problems demanding itsattention.

;.1 ,articularly applicable to administratiebodies. The 0egislature has found it moreand more necessary to entrust to

administratie agencies the authority toissue rules to carry out t(e general

proisions of t(e statute"This is called the-(ower of su&ordinate le%islation.-

2n fact" The authority to issue the said regulation isclearly proided in Section ;a5 of -!ecutie 'rder(o. @B@" reading as follows:

H. . . The goerning Eoard of the Administration,'-A5" as hereunder proided" shall promulgatethe necessary rules and regulations to goern thee!ercise of the adjudicatory functions of theAdministration ,'-A5.H

;.# Two acts which constitute implied or tacitrecognition of the nature of Saco/s employment atthe time of his death in 1B=.

a" sub#ission of its s(ipping articles to t(e 6'for processing, for#aliation and approal in t(eexercise of its regulatory po!er oer oersease#ploy#ent under 'xecutie rder o" 797"

b" pay#ent of t(e contributions #andated by la!and regulations to t(e :elfare *und for erseas:orers, !(ic( !as created by 6";" o" 1


4/7

. 'n the basis of the said -%C decisions"respondent ,anay -lectric Company" 2nc.,-C'5 char%ed (etitioner Ro/eo *.#erochi and all other end4users withthe =niersal (arge as re>ected in t(eirrespectie electric bills starting fro# t(e#ont( of %uly 200&"

;. ,etitioner *erochi assailed the proision

of law and its 2%% are unconstitutional onthe G grounds:

a. The UC is a ta5 which is to be collected from allelectric end$users and self$generating entities. Thepower to ta! is strictly a legislatie function and assuch" the delegation of said power to any e!ecutieor administratie agency li


5/7

-%C/s power to formulate the 2%%. These aresu?cient standards.

. Chief &ustice" %eynato S. ,uno described theimmensity of police power in relation to thedelegation of powers to the -%C and its regulatoryfunctions oer electric power as a ital public utility.H The State thru the -%C should be able to e!erciseits police power with great 8e!ibility" when theneed arises.H

This was reiterated in (ational Association of-lectricity Consumers For %eforms . -%C where theCourt held that the -%C" as regulator" should haesu?cient power to respond in real time to changeswrought by multifarious factors aGecting publicutilities.

:. !o it is clear that there is no unduedele%ation of le%islative (ower to the ERC.

1D. 6-%-F'%-" the instant case is hereby)2S+2SS-) for lac< of merit

TATAD v !ECRETAR, O+ DOE

+ACT!

1. %A (o. 1D" or the Downstrea/ Oil IndustryRe%ulation Act of 1::;" was enacted byCongress for the purpose of deregulating thedownstream oil industry.

H=nder t(e deregulated eniron#ent, .any person orentity #ay i#port or purc(ase any 3uantity of crude oiland petroleu# products fro# a foreign or do#esticsource, lease or o!n and operate refineries and ot(erdo!nstrea# oil facilities and #aret suc( crude oil or uset(e sa#e for (is o!n re3uire#ent,. sub$ect only to#onitoring by t(e ;epart#ent of 'nergy".

#. ,rior to 1B@1" there was no goernment agencyregulating the oil industry other than those dealingwith ordinary commodities. 'il companies werefree to enter and e!it the mar


6/7

The rulin% of the Court was that the earlydere%ulation under E.O. No. >: constitutes a/isa((lication of R.A. No. =1=0.

?. 2( 2-6 6-%-'F" the petitions are granted. %.A.(o. 1D is declared unconstitutional and -.'. (o.@# oid.

!EA v. COELEC

+ACT!1. The 'rdinance appended to the 1B@

Constitution apportioned two legislatiedistricts for the ,roince of +aguindanao.

The first legislatie district consists ofCotabato City and eight municipalities.

#. +aguindanao forms part of the A%++"created under its 'rganic Act" %.A. >@;"as amended by %.A. BD=;. AlthoughCotabato City is not part of the A%++ butof %egion K22" haing oted against its

inclusion in the A%++ in the plebisciteheld in (oember 1BB.

. August #" #DD> $ the A%++/s legislature$the AR Re%ional Asse/&ly"e!ercising its power to create proincesunder Sec. 1B" Article 2 of %.A. BD=;"enacted ++A Act #D1 creatin% the*rovince of !hari@ a&unsuancomposed of the eight municipalities inthe first district of +aguindanao" lateradded municipalities. Thus" what was

left of +aguindanao were themunicipalities constituting its secondlegislatie district.

;. 'ctober #B" #DD> $ oters of +aguindanao ratified ShariG Labunsuan/screation in a plebiscite

Feb. >" #DD@ $ Sangguniang ,anlungsod ofCotabato City passed %esolution (o. BBBreuesting the C'+-0-C to Hclarify t(estatus of otabato ity in ie! of t(e

conersion of t(e *irst ;istrict ofMaguindanao into a regular proince.under ++A Act #D1.

+ar. >" #DD@ $ C'+-0-C answered thatHmaintaining the status uo with CotabatoCity as part of ShariG Labunsuan in theFirst 0egislatie )istrict of +aguindanaoH

+ar. #B" #DD@ $ 2n preparation for +ay#DD@ elections" states that +aguindanao/sfirst legislatie district is composed only

of Cotabato City because of theenactment of ++A Act #D1.

+ay 1D" #DD@ $ C'+-0-C issued a%esolution no. @BD#" renaming thelegislatie district in uestion as -!hari@a&unsuan *rovince with Cota&atoCity formerly First )istrict of+aguindanao with Cotabato City5.H

=. !e/a" who was a candidate in the +ay#DD@ elections for Re(resentative of-!hari@ a&unsuan with Cota&atoCity-" prayed for the nullification ofC'+-0-C %esolution (o. @BD# and thee!clusion from canassing of the otescast in Cotabato City for that o?ce.

Contended that ShariG Labunsuan isentitled to one representatie in Congressunder Section = 5" Article 2 of the

Constitution and Section of the'rdinance.

Thus" Sema asserted that the C'+-0-C acted !it(out orin excess of its $urisdiction in issuing Resolution o" 7902"

!e/a further clai/ed that in issuin%Resolution No. B:0$ the COELECusur(ed Con%ress (ower to create orrea((ortion le%islative districts.

I!!UE!" 67( Section 1B" Article 2 of %.A.BD=;" delegating to the A%++ %egional

Assembly the power to create proinces"cities" municipalities and barangays" isconstitutional.

67( a proince created by the A%++%egional Assembly under ++A Act #D1 isentitled to one representatie in theouse of %epresentaties without need ofa national law creating a legislatiedistrict for such proince.

RULIN#" NO to &oth.

1. The creation of local goernment units isgoerned by Sec. 1D" Article K of theConstitution.

#. Thus" the creation of any of the four localgoernment units J proince" city"municipality or barangay J must complywith three conditions.

1. The creation of a local goernment unit mustfollow the criteria fi!ed in the 0ocal *oernmentCode.


7/7

#. Such creation must not con8ict with anyproision of the Constitution.. There must be a plebiscite in the political unitsaGected.

. Inder the 0ocal *oernment Code"-only . . . an Act of Con%ress- cancreate proinces" cities or municipalities.

Section 1B" Article 2 of %.A. BD=;" Congress

delegated to the A%++ %egional Assembly thepower to create proinces" cities"municipalities and barangays within theA%++.

The uestion here is if the delegation is incon8ict with the Constitution.

;. (o con8ict arises as to the delegation of thepower to create municipalities and barangays"howeer in the creation of proinces and citiesthere e!ist con8ict with the Constitution.

Section = 5" Article 2 of the Constitutionproides" H-ach city with a population of atleast two hundred fifty thousand" or eachproince" shall hae at least onerepresentatieH in the ouse of %epresentaties as similary stated by Sec ofthe 'rdinance.

Clearly" a proince cannot be created withouta legislatie district because it will iolateSection = 5" Article 2 of the Constitution aswell as Section of the 'rdinance appendedto the Constitution. Thus$ the (ower tocreate a (rovince or city inherently

involves the (ower to create a le%islativedistrict.

=. For Congress to delegate alidly the power tocreate a proince or city" it must also alidlydelegate at the same time the power to createa legislatie district.

>. Section 1B" Article 2 of %epublic Act (o.BD=; UNCON!TITUTIONAL insofar as itgrants to the %egional Assembly of theAutonomous %egion in +uslim +indanao

the power to create proinces and citiesfor being contrary to Section = of Article 2and Section #D of Article K of the Constitution"as well as Section of the 'rdinanceappended to the Constitution.

Thus" +uslim +indanao Autonomy Act (o.#D1 creating the ,roince of ShariGLabunsuan was declared OID.Conseuently" we rule that C'+-0-C%esolution (o. @BD# is A02).

TOIA! v AALO!

+ACT!

1.

Documents

4th Batch Consti Digest