I. HISTORICAL AND
I. HISTORICAL AND CONSTITUTIOCONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONSNAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Development of Administrative Law as a distinct A. Development of Administrative Law as a distinct field of public law
field of public law
1. Factors responsible for the emergence of 1. Factors responsible for the emergence of administrative agencies
administrative agencies Pangasina
Pangasinan Transportation v n Transportation v Public Service Commission (J.Public Service Commission (J. Laurel)
Laurel) 1.
1. grogrowiwing cng compomplexlexitiities of es of modmodern ern lilifefe 2.
2. multmultipliiplicatication of on of numbnumber oer of sf subjeubjects cts needneedinging government regulation
government regulation 3.
3. incincreareased dsed diffifficuiculty in adlty in adminminististeriering lang laww (Stone): the 3 branches of
(Stone): the 3 branches of government lack:government lack: 1
1.. ttiimmee 2
2.. eexxppeerrttiissee 3.
3. organorganizatizationaional apl aptitudtitude for e for effeeffectivctive and e and conticontinuinnuingg regulations of new developments in
regulations of new developments in societysociety …so administrative agenci
…so administrative agencies were created, out oes were created, out o f f necessity, to serve as a
necessity, to serve as a catch basincatch basin for the 3 branchesfor the 3 branches 2. The doctrine of separation of powers and the
2. The doctrine of separation of powers and the constitutional position of administrative agencies constitutional position of administrative agencies Doctrine of separation of powers:
Doctrine of separation of powers: -checks and balances
-checks and balances
-sovereign powers vested in 3 branches of government -sovereign powers vested in 3 branches of government -basic powers of government should be kept separate from -basic powers of government should be kept separate from each other
each other
-dispersing the centers of authority to prevent
-dispersing the centers of authority to prevent ABSOLUTISMABSOLUTISM Re: administrative agencies:
Re: administrative agencies: administrative agenciesadministrative agencies perform quasi-legislati
perform quasi-legislative, quasi-judicial functions though it ve, quasi-judicial functions though it isis under the executive branch, therefore, it seems that it under the executive branch, therefore, it seems that it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.
violates the doctrine of separation of powers. However,However, according to Stone, since the 3
according to Stone, since the 3 branches lack time, expertisebranches lack time, expertise and organizational aptitude for effective and continuing and organizational aptitude for effective and continuing regulation of new developments in society, the separation of regulation of new developments in society, the separation of powers should not be strictly construed for the system not to powers should not be strictly construed for the system not to collapse – the administrative agencies would serve as a catch collapse – the administrative agencies would serve as a catch basin for the 3
basin for the 3 branches.branches. B. Definitions of T
B. Definitions of T erms (DAVIS definition)erms (DAVIS definition) ADMINISTRATIV
ADMINISTRATIVE E LAWLAW Branch of public law Branch of public law
Dealing with the doctrines and
Dealing with the doctrines and principles governingprinciples governing POWERS and PROCEDURES of ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES POWERS and PROCEDURES of ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES ESPECIALLY including JUDICIAL REVIEW of Administrative ESPECIALLY including JUDICIAL REVIEW of Administrative action
action
ADMINISTRATIV
ADMINISTRATIVE E AGENCIESAGENCIES Any governmental ORGAN or
Any governmental ORGAN or AUTHORITYAUTHORITY Other than the court o
Other than the court o r legislative bodyr legislative body Which affects the RIGHTS of PRIVATE PARTIES Which affects the RIGHTS of PRIVATE PARTIES Through RULE-MAKING and
Through RULE-MAKING and ADJUDICATIOADJUDICATIONN
*PANGASINAN TRANSPORT INC v PUBLIC SERVICE *PANGASINAN TRANSPORT INC v PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION COMMISSION FACTS:
FACTS: PTI was applying for an authorization to operatePTI was applying for an authorization to operate additional busses, which was granted by the PBC subject to 2 additional busses, which was granted by the PBC subject to 2 conditions (that the certificate would only be valid for 25 conditions (that the certificate would only be valid for 25 years and that the government could acquire the said buses years and that the government could acquire the said buses
after just compensation) in accordance with CA 146. PTI after just compensation) in accordance with CA 146. PTI wanted CA 146 to be declared void.
wanted CA 146 to be declared void. HELD:
HELD: -CA 146 is
-CA 146 is constitutionalconstitutional..
-The PSC could issue the said orders
-The PSC could issue the said orders as a valid delegation of as a valid delegation of legislati
legislative powers ve powers (consider the FACTORS mentioned(consider the FACTORS mentioned above
above↑↑); it was ); it was a valid SUBORDINATE LEGISLATIOa valid SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION – rulesN – rules promulgated must be GERMANE and CONSISTENT with the promulgated must be GERMANE and CONSISTENT with the law it seeks to
law it seeks to implementimplement
-the said orders were in accordance with public interest, made -the said orders were in accordance with public interest, made under police powers of the state
under police powers of the state -case remanded for due
-case remanded for due process violationsprocess violations
*importance: on factors which contributed to the rise of administrative agencies *importance: on factors which contributed to the rise of administrative agencies
*MERALCO V PASAY TRANSPORTATION CO. *MERALCO V PASAY TRANSPORTATION CO. FACTS:
FACTS: Meralco wanted SC to serve as arbitrators toMeralco wanted SC to serve as arbitrators to determine the amount of toll that they would collect determine the amount of toll that they would collect HELD:
HELD: SC should strictly confine its own sphere of SC should strictly confine its own sphere of influenceinfluence to the powers EXPRESSLY or IMPLIEDLY conferred on it by the to the powers EXPRESSLY or IMPLIEDLY conferred on it by the CONSTITUTION.
CONSTITUTION.
-The SC and its members should not
-The SC and its members should not nor cannot be required tonor cannot be required to exercise any power or to perform any task, or
exercise any power or to perform any task, or to assume anyto assume any duty not
duty not pertaining to or pertaining to or connected with administering judiciaconnected with administering judiciall functions.
functions.
-A board of arbitrators is not a court
-A board of arbitrators is not a court – it possesses none of the– it possesses none of the jurisdiction granted by the Consti to SC
jurisdiction granted by the Consti to SC
*powers of SC should only be confined to what is in the CONSTITUTION *powers of SC should only be confined to what is in the CONSTITUTION
NOBLEJAS v TEEHANKEE NOBLEJAS v TEEHANKEE FACTS:
FACTS: Noblejas, Land Registration Commissioner, wasNoblejas, Land Registration Commissioner, was charged with improperly approving subdivision plans. Since charged with improperly approving subdivision plans. Since Land Registration Commissioners enjoy the SAME
Land Registration Commissioners enjoy the SAME
COMPENSATION as that of CFI Judges, Noblejas contends that COMPENSATION as that of CFI Judges, Noblejas contends that he should be investigated and dismissed like CFI judges. he should be investigated and dismissed like CFI judges. HELD:
HELD: Land Registration Commissioner DOES NOT HAVE THELand Registration Commissioner DOES NOT HAVE THE SAME RANK as CFI Judges
SAME RANK as CFI Judges 1.
1. it wit woulould mead mean pln placacing ing upoupon thn the SC te SC the dhe duty outy of f investigating and disciplining all these officials whose investigating and disciplining all these officials whose functions are purely executive and
functions are purely executive and EXPRESSLYEXPRESSLY placed under the President’s control
placed under the President’s control and supervisionand supervision 2.
2. if eif ever tver thehere ire is sus such a ch a gragrant, nt, it wit woulould bed be unconstitutiona
unconstitutional since it would be l since it would be violative of theviolative of the doctrine of separation of powers and
doctrine of separation of powers and would diminishwould diminish the control of
the control of the PRESIDENT over executive officialsthe PRESIDENT over executive officials
*It doesn’t mean that when an executive officer has the same compensation and *It doesn’t mean that when an executive officer has the same compensation and privileges as a judiciary officer that they have the same rank and should be under privileges as a judiciary officer that they have the same rank and should be under the same branch of government
the same branch of government
GARCIA v MACARAIG GARCIA v MACARAIG FACTS:
FACTS: There was a DISCIPLINARY ACTION vs a CFI JudgeThere was a DISCIPLINARY ACTION vs a CFI Judge with the DOJ for allegedly receiving his salary even if he has with the DOJ for allegedly receiving his salary even if he has not assumed his duties yet. BEFORE, CFI Judges were under not assumed his duties yet. BEFORE, CFI Judges were under the supervision of the DOJ. The said judge was not able to the supervision of the DOJ. The said judge was not able to assume his office because he DID NOT HAVE AN OFFICE YET! assume his office because he DID NOT HAVE AN OFFICE YET! HELD:
HELD: Administrative complaint should be dismissedAdministrative complaint should be dismissed -NO judge should place himself in a position where his -NO judge should place himself in a position where his actuations would be subject to review and prior
actuations would be subject to review and prior approval and,approval and, worse still, review, before they can have any
worse still, review, before they can have any legal effect, bylegal effect, by any authority other than the CA or the SC
any authority other than the CA or the SC
*a co-equal branch cannot exercise authority over a co-equal branch *a co-equal branch cannot exercise authority over a co-equal branch
*IN RE: RODOLFO MANZANO *IN RE: RODOLFO MANZANO FACTS:
FACTS: Judge Manzano requested SC to approve hisJudge Manzano requested SC to approve his appointment as a member of the Provincial Committee on appointment as a member of the Provincial Committee on Justice, which exercises administrative functions
Justice, which exercises administrative functions HELD:
HELD: Request deniedRequest denied ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS: ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS:
involve the REGULATION and CONTROL over the conduct and involve the REGULATION and CONTROL over the conduct and affairs of individuals for their own welfare
affairs of individuals for their own welfare
and the PROMULGATION of rules and regulations to better and the PROMULGATION of rules and regulations to better carry out the policy or such as are designated to any agency carry out the policy or such as are designated to any agency by the organic law of
by the organic law of its existenceits existence
*definition of ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS *definition of ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS
PUYAT v DE GUZMAN PUYAT v DE GUZMAN FACTS:
FACTS: Assemblyman served initially as counsel but whenAssemblyman served initially as counsel but when not allowed, bought shares in the company and participated not allowed, bought shares in the company and participated as shareholder in the proceedings before the SEC
as shareholder in the proceedings before the SEC HELD:
HELD: Indirect appearance as counsel by an assemblymanIndirect appearance as counsel by an assemblyman before an administrative body circumvents the
before an administrative body circumvents the constitutionalconstitutional prohibition.
prohibition.
II. CONTROL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION II. CONTROL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
A. Administrative agencies and the executive power of A. Administrative agencies and the executive power of the President
the President [ARTVII.1, CONSTI]
[ARTVII.17, CONSTI]
[ARTVII.17, CONSTI] President has control over EXECPresident has control over EXEC departments, bureaus and offices.
departments, bureaus and offices. B. Congressional Oversight Power B. Congressional Oversight Power
*MACALINTAL v COMELEC *MACALINTAL v COMELEC FACTS:
FACTS: Congress created through RA 9198 a Joint Congress created through RA 9198 a Joint
Congressional Oversight Committee to review, revise, amend Congressional Oversight Committee to review, revise, amend and approve the IRR of COMELEC for the Overseas Absentee and approve the IRR of COMELEC for the Overseas Absentee Voting Act of 2003. It was assailed to be unconstitutional as it Voting Act of 2003. It was assailed to be unconstitutional as it encroaches the “independence” granted by the Constitution encroaches the “independence” granted by the Constitution to COMELEC.
to COMELEC. HELD:
HELD: Some of the provisions of RA 9198 were stricken outSome of the provisions of RA 9198 were stricken out for being unconstitutional as it confers powers to
for being unconstitutional as it confers powers to thethe legislati
legislative which are not ve which are not provided for under the Constitutionprovided for under the Constitution **********PUNO’
**********PUNO’s s opinionopinion******************** Separation of Powers
Separation of Powers
-prevents the concentration of legislative, executive and -prevents the concentration of legislative, executive and judiciary powers to a single branch of
judiciary powers to a single branch of government by deftlygovernment by deftly allocatin
allocating their exercises to g their exercises to 3 branches of government3 branches of government -Although not “hermetically sealed” from one
-Although not “hermetically sealed” from one another, theanother, the powers of the 3
powers of the 3 branches are identifiabbranches are identifiable: legislative power =le: legislative power = enactment of the law; executive power = execution of enactment of the law; executive power = execution of thethe law; judicial power = interpretation of the law.
law; judicial power = interpretation of the law. -one branch cannot exercise or share the power
-one branch cannot exercise or share the power of the otherof the other -under separation of powers: checks and balances: under -under separation of powers: checks and balances: under checks and balances, the congressional oversight
checks and balances, the congressional oversight Congressional Oversight
Congressional Oversight
-all activities undertaken by Congress to
-all activities undertaken by Congress to enhance itsenhance its understandi
understanding of ng of and influence over the implementation of and influence over the implementation of legislati
legislation it on it has enactedhas enacted
-intrinsic in the grant of legislative power itself and integral to -intrinsic in the grant of legislative power itself and integral to the checks and balances inherent in a democratic system of the checks and balances inherent in a democratic system of government
government Categories: Categories:
1. scrutiny [Article VI, Sections 18 and 22] 1. scrutiny [Article VI, Sections 18 and 22] …determine the economy and efficienc
…determine the economy and efficiency of y of the operation of the operation of government activities
government activities …based primarily on the
…based primarily on the power of appropriation power of appropriation of of Congress wherein the Congress conduct hearings for Congress wherein the Congress conduct hearings for administrati
administrative officers to ve officers to justify their budget proposals; andjustify their budget proposals; and subsequently under
subsequently under [ArtVI.22][ArtVI.22], to invite department heads, to invite department heads on any matter pertaining to their
on any matter pertaining to their departments;departments; …could also be based on the
…could also be based on the power of confirmation power of confirmation of theof the Congress under
Congress under [ArtVI.18][ArtVI.18], wherein Congress shares, wherein Congress shares appointing power of the
appointing power of the executive to lessen politicalexecutive to lessen political considerations and an opportunity for Congress to find considerations and an opportunity for Congress to find outout whether the nominee
whether the nominee possesses the necessary possesses the necessary qualificqualificationsations required.
required.
2. investigation [Article VI, Section 21] 2. investigation [Article VI, Section 21] …limitat
…limitations: (a) in ions: (a) in aid of legislation; (b) in accordance withaid of legislation; (b) in accordance with duly published rules of procedure; (c) rights of
duly published rules of procedure; (c) rights of personspersons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected …essential and appropriate auxilia
…essential and appropriate auxiliary to ry to the legislativethe legislative function, which also includes the power to hold a
function, which also includes the power to hold a person inperson in contempt
contempt [Arnault v Nazareno][Arnault v Nazareno]..
…but the matters which should be addressed in the …but the matters which should be addressed in the investigati
investigations MUST ons MUST BE IN AID BE IN AID OF LEGISLATIONOF LEGISLATION [Bengzon v[Bengzon v Senate Blue Ribbon Committee]
Senate Blue Ribbon Committee] 3. supervision
3. supervision -generall
-generally, the congress retains a y, the congress retains a “right” to approve or“right” to approve or disapprove any regulation before it takes effect if the disapprove any regulation before it takes effect if the rule- rule-making power of the administrative agency is made to making power of the administrative agency is made to depend on a statute.
depend on a statute. -however, this case is
-however, this case is an exception since the rule-makingan exception since the rule-making power of COMELEC was conferred not by
power of COMELEC was conferred not by a legislation but bya legislation but by the
the CONSTITUTIOCONSTITUTION.N.
C. Legislative and Judicial Control of Administrative C. Legislative and Judicial Control of Administrative Decision-making. Dean Carlota
Decision-making. Dean Carlota -administrat
-administrative agencies affect ive agencies affect private rights and private rights and publicpublic interest. It was first objected to due to the doctrine of interest. It was first objected to due to the doctrine of separation of powers BUT with the
separation of powers BUT with the PangasinaPangasinan case, J. Laureln case, J. Laurel
enunciated the factors that made
enunciated the factors that made administraadministrative agenciestive agencies necessary
necessary
Legislative Control: Legislative Control:
1.
1. CrCreaeatition on anand ad abobolilititionon 2
2.. ApAppproroppririaatitionon 3
3.. InInveveststiigagatitionon
Non-delegation Doctrine and Legislative Standards Non-delegation Doctrine and Legislative Standards GR: under the
GR: under the non-delegnon-delegation doctrine, legislative powersation doctrine, legislative powers conferred by the Constitution to
conferred by the Constitution to the Legislature cannot bethe Legislature cannot be conferred to other branches of
conferred to other branches of government.government. EXCEPTION:
EXCEPTION: 1. the law is
1. the law is complete in itself, has a policycomplete in itself, has a policy 2. the law comes with
2. the law comes with standardsstandards
…however, even if the delegation is broad, judiciary is often …however, even if the delegation is broad, judiciary is often hesitant to strike it
hesitant to strike it down. Therefore, the focus of down. Therefore, the focus of their judicialtheir judicial review is WON the administrative standards emanate from the review is WON the administrative standards emanate from the law which created the agency itself
law which created the agency itself Judicial Review
Judicial Review -judicial review allow
-judicial review allowed on questions of ed on questions of law; if it involveslaw; if it involves questions of fact and policy, JR
questions of fact and policy, JR only allowed when there is (1)only allowed when there is (1) lack of jurisdiction; (2) GAD; (3) error of law; (4)
lack of jurisdiction; (2) GAD; (3) error of law; (4) fraud orfraud or collusion
collusion
-on ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIE
-on ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES: JR S: JR not resorted not resorted because of because of their expertise
their expertise EXCEPTION
EXCEPTIONS: re: questions of S: re: questions of fact: JR resorted to fact: JR resorted to when nowhen no substantial evidence
substantial evidence
Re: questions of policy: when question of
Re: questions of policy: when question of policy are intimatelypolicy are intimately connected with questions of law
connected with questions of law
D. The Ombudsman: Its effectivity and visibility amidst D. The Ombudsman: Its effectivity and visibility amidst bureacratic abuse and irregularity. Dean Carlota
bureacratic abuse and irregularity. Dean Carlota Ombudsman’s essential
Ombudsman’s essential characteristicharacteristicscs 1.
1. PoPolilititicacal inl indedepependndenencece 2.
2. AcceAccessibssibilitility and y and expeexpeditidition: haon: has des deputiputies aes all ovll overer the country and may establish offices outside Metro the country and may establish offices outside Metro manila whenever necessary.
manila whenever necessary. 3.
3. InvInvestestigaigatortory powey powers: cars: can inven investistigatgate UPONe UPON COMPLAINT or on OWN INITIATIVE
COMPLAINT or on OWN INITIATIVE 4.
4. absence of revisory jurisdiction: cannot modify orabsence of revisory jurisdiction: cannot modify or overturn decisions of
overturn decisions of administrativadministrative agencies in thee agencies in the performance of its
performance of its rulemaking and adjudicarulemaking and adjudicativetive functions
functions
*CONCERNED OFFICIALS OF MWSS v VASQUEZ *CONCERNED OFFICIALS OF MWSS v VASQUEZ FACTS:
FACTS: There was a public bidding which was contested by There was a public bidding which was contested by the losing bidder to the Office of the Ombudsman.
the losing bidder to the Office of the Ombudsman. Ombudsman set aside the MWSS decision to award the Ombudsman set aside the MWSS decision to award the project to the winning bidder
project to the winning bidder HELD:
HELD: Ombudsman may not veto or Ombudsman may not veto or revise an exercise of revise an exercise of judgment or discretion by an agency or
judgment or discretion by an agency or officer upon whomofficer upon whom that judgment or
that judgment or discretion is lawfully vested especially whendiscretion is lawfully vested especially when the matter involves
the matter involves basicallbasically technical matters coming y technical matters coming underunder the special technical knowled
the special technical knowledge and training of the ge and training of the agency oragency or officer.
officer.
-in this case the losing bidder was suggesting the use -in this case the losing bidder was suggesting the use of of fiberglass pipes instead of steel
fiberglass pipes instead of steel pipes. The Ombudsman hadpipes. The Ombudsman had no authority to interfere with the judgment of MWSS of what no authority to interfere with the judgment of MWSS of what kind of pipes to use!
kind of pipes to use!
*Ombudsman has no revisory power *Ombudsman has no revisory power
*LASTIMOSA V VASQUEZ *LASTIMOSA V VASQUEZ FACTS:
FACTS: Provincial prosecutor filed only “acts of Provincial prosecutor filed only “acts of lasciviousness” instead of “attempted rape” which was lasciviousness” instead of “attempted rape” which was ordered by the Office of the Ombudsman, and thus was ordered by the Office of the Ombudsman, and thus was placed under preventive suspension
placed under preventive suspension HELD:
HELD: The ombudsman has the power to rThe ombudsman has the power to r eview, revise,eview, revise, direct, reverse or modify a
direct, reverse or modify a decision of a prosecutor deputizeddecision of a prosecutor deputized or designated to be under the
or designated to be under the his control and supervision, andhis control and supervision, and thus, can also punish and discipline them.
thus, can also punish and discipline them.
-The Ombudsman has the power to INVESTIGATE AND -The Ombudsman has the power to INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE on its own or on complaint by any person PROSECUTE on its own or on complaint by any person (1) Any act or omission by any PUBLIC OFFICER OR (1) Any act or omission by any PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE, OFFICE or AGENCY
(2) When such act or
(2) When such act or omission appears to be ILLEGAL,omission appears to be ILLEGAL, UNJUST, IMPROPER or INEFFICIENT (IUII)
UNJUST, IMPROPER or INEFFICIENT (IUII)
-includes ANY CRIME COMMITTED by a public official -includes ANY CRIME COMMITTED by a public official regardless of WON acts are related to,
regardless of WON acts are related to, connected with, orconnected with, or arise from the performance of his
arise from the performance of his official dutyofficial duty
*Although the ruling of this case involves the power of Ombudsman over its *Although the ruling of this case involves the power of Ombudsman over its deputies, the case also highlighted that it has jurisdiction over ALL KINDS OF deputies, the case also highlighted that it has jurisdiction over ALL KINDS OF CASES INVOLVING A PUBLIC OFFICIAL regardless if it’s connected with his official CASES INVOLVING A PUBLIC OFFICIAL regardless if it’s connected with his official duty
duty
*BIR v OFICE OF T
*BIR v OFICE OF T HE OMBUDSMANHE OMBUDSMAN FACTS:
FACTS: Upon information of an informant that BIR wasUpon information of an informant that BIR was granting anomalous grant of tax refunds, the Ombudsman granting anomalous grant of tax refunds, the Ombudsman directed BIR’s legal department to appear before him and to directed BIR’s legal department to appear before him and to bring the case dokets of the two companies involved. BIR bring the case dokets of the two companies involved. BIR protested, arguing that there was already a previous case protested, arguing that there was already a previous case
which upheld the validity of the tax refunds and that THERE which upheld the validity of the tax refunds and that THERE MUS BE A PENDING ACTION BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF A MUS BE A PENDING ACTION BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF A SUBPOENA
SUBPOENA HELD:
HELD: the pendency of an action is not a prerequisite for thethe pendency of an action is not a prerequisite for the Ombudsman to start its own investigation. It can
Ombudsman to start its own investigation. It can do so evendo so even on a
on a verbal, unsigned or unverified complaintverbal, unsigned or unverified complaint
*Ombudsman can motu propio investigate *Ombudsman can motu propio investigate
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN V ENOC OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN V ENOC FACTS:
FACTS: Ombudsman filed information against employees of Ombudsman filed information against employees of the OSCC who were accused with malversation through the OSCC who were accused with malversation through falsification. These employees had a salary grade below falsification. These employees had a salary grade below SG27. Respondents moved to quash information on the SG27. Respondents moved to quash information on the ground that regular courts had jurisdiction over the case ground that regular courts had jurisdiction over the case (therefore provincial prosecutor should file case, not (therefore provincial prosecutor should file case, not ombudsman)
ombudsman) HELD:
HELD: Ombudsman has plenary and unqualified powers toOmbudsman has plenary and unqualified powers to prosecute NOT ONLY GRAFT
prosecute NOT ONLY GRAFT CASES WITHIN THE JURISDICTIONCASES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN but also those COGNIZABLE BY THE OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN but also those COGNIZABLE BY THE REGULAR COURTS as long as (1) these acts were done by REGULAR COURTS as long as (1) these acts were done by public officer or employee and (2) these acts
public officer or employee and (2) these acts appear to be IUII.appear to be IUII.
*Ombudsman can prosecute cases even if not under the jurisdiction of the *Ombudsman can prosecute cases even if not under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
Sandiganbayan
*FUENTES V OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN *FUENTES V OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN FACTS:
FACTS: There was an expropriation case wherein the scrapThere was an expropriation case wherein the scrap iron in the said expropriated area was sold in a public auction iron in the said expropriated area was sold in a public auction and to be able to withdraw said scrap iron, the winning bidder and to be able to withdraw said scrap iron, the winning bidder applied for a writ of execution before the petitioner judge. The applied for a writ of execution before the petitioner judge. The writ of execution was granted but was subsequently
writ of execution was granted but was subsequently cancelled. Administrative charges were filed against the cancelled. Administrative charges were filed against the officers involved in the granting and implementing of the writ officers involved in the granting and implementing of the writ of execution, including the judge who issued the said writ. of execution, including the judge who issued the said writ. Ombudsman was to investigate the acts of said judge. Ombudsman was to investigate the acts of said judge. HELD:
HELD: Ombudsman may not initiate a criminal orOmbudsman may not initiate a criminal or administrati
administrative complaint before his ve complaint before his office against a judge,office against a judge, pursuant to his power to
pursuant to his power to investigate public officers.investigate public officers. Ombudsman must indorse the case to the SC
Ombudsman must indorse the case to the SC for appropriatefor appropriate action. [Art VIII.6, CONSTI] exclusively vests in SC
action. [Art VIII.6, CONSTI] exclusively vests in SC administrati
administrative supervision over ve supervision over all courts and all courts and court personnelcourt personnel
*Ombudsman cannot investigate and prosecute any act or omission of a court *Ombudsman cannot investigate and prosecute any act or omission of a court officer or personnel
officer or personnel
LEDESMA V CA LEDESMA V CA FACTS:
FACTS: Ledesma, as chair of BSI of BID filed a complaint Ledesma, as chair of BSI of BID filed a complaint (criminal and administrative) against 2 of its employees for (criminal and administrative) against 2 of its employees for allegedly granting extension of Temporary Resident Visas. allegedly granting extension of Temporary Resident Visas. Ombudsman conducted an investigation and subsequently Ombudsman conducted an investigation and subsequently held that the grant of TRVs were regular. Ledesma appealed held that the grant of TRVs were regular. Ledesma appealed the “recommendation” of the Ombudsman to CA, CA denied the “recommendation” of the Ombudsman to CA, CA denied MFR.
MFR. HELD:
HELD: Under [ArtXI.13(3), CONSTI] a recommendation” thatUnder [ArtXI.13(3), CONSTI] a recommendation” that emanates from the Ombudsman after it has conducted its emanates from the Ombudsman after it has conducted its investigati
investigation is on is NOT MERELY ADVISORY BUT NOT MERELY ADVISORY BUT BINDING ANDBINDING AND MANDATORY.
MANDATORY. -On RA 6770 vs
-On RA 6770 vs CONSTI: RA 6770 grants the ombudsman theCONSTI: RA 6770 grants the ombudsman the power to
power to remove, suspend, demote…erring officials when theremove, suspend, demote…erring officials when the CONSTI merely provided that Ombudsman can only
CONSTI merely provided that Ombudsman can only
“recommend” the removal of the said official. SC held that “recommend” the removal of the said official. SC held that thethe
word “recommend” should be interpreted with the phrase word “recommend” should be interpreted with the phrase “and ensure compliance therewith”.
“and ensure compliance therewith”.
*Ombudsman can direct and compel the head
*Ombudsman can direct and compel the head of the agency or office to of the agency or office to implementimplement the penalty imposed. Not merely advisory but Mandatory
the penalty imposed. Not merely advisory but Mandatory
*ESTARIJA v RANADA *ESTARIJA v RANADA FACTS:
FACTS:Estarija was found guilty by the Ombudsman of Estarija was found guilty by the Ombudsman of dishonesty and grave misconduct for demanding monies for dishonesty and grave misconduct for demanding monies for the approval and issuance of berthing permits and monthly the approval and issuance of berthing permits and monthly contributions, and was dismissed from service. He questioned contributions, and was dismissed from service. He questioned the constitutionality of RA 6770 as granting powers to the the constitutionality of RA 6770 as granting powers to the Ombudsman which were not provided for by the COnsti Ombudsman which were not provided for by the COnsti HELD:
HELD: Upheld the validity of RA 6770 based on Upheld the validity of RA 6770 based on the ff:the ff: 1.
1. JurJurispisprudrudenence: ce: [LE[LEDEDESMA SMA V CV CA]A] 2.
2. intintent fent fo frao framemers of trs of the cohe consnsti: pti: poweowers of rs of Ombudsman not exclusive
Ombudsman not exclusive 3.
3. constconsti: Thi: The coe consti nsti alloallows lws legisegislatulature to re to enacenact a lt a lawaw that would spell out the
that would spell out the powers of the Ombudsman.powers of the Ombudsman. III. POWERS AND
III. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVEFUNCTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
AGENCIES
A. Legislative function A. Legislative function 1. nondelegation doctrine:
1. nondelegation doctrine: potestas delegate non delegare potestas delegate non delegare potest
potest
COMPANIA GENERAL DE TABACCO V BOARD OF PUBLIC COMPANIA GENERAL DE TABACCO V BOARD OF PUBLIC
UTILITY COMMISSION UTILITY COMMISSION
FACTS: Act No. 2307 conferred the Board with authority to FACTS: Act No. 2307 conferred the Board with authority to require every public utility reports containing such matters require every public utility reports containing such matters “as the Board may from time to time by order prescribe”. In “as the Board may from time to time by order prescribe”. In pursuance to the said law, the Board required Compania to pursuance to the said law, the Board required Compania to present a detailed report of its finances and operations of its present a detailed report of its finances and operations of its
vessels. Compania contested the validity of Act 2307 for vessels. Compania contested the validity of Act 2307 for being an unlawful attempt to delegate legislative power to the being an unlawful attempt to delegate legislative power to the Board.
Board.
HELD: Act was
HELD: Act was unconstitutionaunconstitutional. Unlawful delegation of l. Unlawful delegation of legislati
legislative ve power.power.
-The law should provide the general rules of
-The law should provide the general rules of action underaction under which the Board was to
which the Board was to proceed.proceed. -legislati
-legislative power, ve power, which involves discretion and which involves discretion and judgment,judgment, should be exercised by the body entrusted
should be exercised by the body entrusted with the duty andwith the duty and cannot delegate it.
cannot delegate it.
-the law must be complete, in all its
-the law must be complete, in all its terms and provisions,terms and provisions, when it leaves the legislature, so that, in
when it leaves the legislature, so that, in form and substanceform and substance it is a law in all its details, in presenti, but which may be left to it is a law in all its details, in presenti, but which may be left to take effect in futuro.
take effect in futuro.
*For nondelegation: the law should provide general rules of action, must be *For nondelegation: the law should provide general rules of action, must be complete
complete
*US v ANG TANG HO *US v ANG TANG HO
FACTS: Act 2868 authorized the Governor General to fix FACTS: Act 2868 authorized the Governor General to fix quantities of agricultural products that a company or quantities of agricultural products that a company or
merchant may acquire, and the maximum sale price that the merchant may acquire, and the maximum sale price that the company or merchant may demand for any cause. Ang Tang company or merchant may demand for any cause. Ang Tang Ho was prosecuted for allegedly imposing excessive price. He Ho was prosecuted for allegedly imposing excessive price. He questioned constitutionality of said Act for authorizing GG to questioned constitutionality of said Act for authorizing GG to fix price.
fix price. HELD:
HELD: UnconstitutiUnconstitutional.onal. 1.
1. LegiLegislatuslature lre left eft GG tGG to deto determinermine we when hen a ca crime rime isis committed
committed 2.
2. LegiLegislatuslature care cannot nnot deledelegate gate its pits power ower to mato make a ke a lawlaw but it can make a law to delegate a power to
but it can make a law to delegate a power to determine some fact or state
determine some fact or state of things upon whichof things upon which the law makes or intends to make its own action to the law makes or intends to make its own action to depend
depend
*When a legislative act remains to be done to make it a law or a crime, it is undue *When a legislative act remains to be done to make it a law or a crime, it is undue delegation
delegation
*PEOPLE V VERA *PEOPLE V VERA
FACTS: Cu Unjieng convicted for a crime, applied for FACTS: Cu Unjieng convicted for a crime, applied for probation. Act providing for probation assailed to be probation. Act providing for probation assailed to be unconstitutional for leaving each provincial board the unconstitutional for leaving each provincial board the discretion on WON to apply it.
discretion on WON to apply it. HELD: UNCONSTITUTIONAL. HELD: UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
TEST for determining WON there was UNDUE DELEGATION OF TEST for determining WON there was UNDUE DELEGATION OF
LEGISLATIVE POWER: WON the law does not lay down
LEGISLATIVE POWER: WON the law does not lay down any ruleany rule by which the administrative office or board my
by which the administrative office or board my be guided inbe guided in the exercise of the discretionary powers delegated to it. the exercise of the discretionary powers delegated to it.
*Test to determine undue delegation *Test to determine undue delegation
*PELAEZ V AUITOR GENERAL *PELAEZ V AUITOR GENERAL
FACTS: VP Pelaez assailed the constitutionality of EOs issued FACTS: VP Pelaez assailed the constitutionality of EOs issued by the President creating 33 municipalities for being an undue by the President creating 33 municipalities for being an undue delegation of legislative power, and since the Administrative delegation of legislative power, and since the Administrative Code which the President used to create the municipalities Code which the President used to create the municipalities was repealed by a law which prohibited him from even was repealed by a law which prohibited him from even creating barrios.
creating barrios.
HELD: UNCONSTITUTIONAL HELD: UNCONSTITUTIONAL
-Creation of municipalities not an administrative function but -Creation of municipalities not an administrative function but one which is legislative in character.
one which is legislative in character. -COMPLETEN
-COMPLETENESS TEST: (1) law ESS TEST: (1) law must be complete in itself,must be complete in itself, setting forth the policy to be executed, carried out or setting forth the policy to be executed, carried out or implemented by the delegate
implemented by the delegate (2) it must
(2) it must fix a standard – the fix a standard – the limits are sufficientlylimits are sufficiently determinate or determinable to which the delegate must determinate or determinable to which the delegate must conform in the performance of his
conform in the performance of his functions.functions.
*Requisites for nondelegation *Requisites for nondelegation
*EDU V ERICTA *EDU V ERICTA
FACTS: Galo assailed validity of the Reflector Law FACTS: Galo assailed validity of the Reflector Law HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL
HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL
-The standard defines the legislative policy, marks
-The standard defines the legislative policy, marks its limits,its limits, maps out the boundaries and specifies the public agency to maps out the boundaries and specifies the public agency to apply it. It indicates the circumstances under which the apply it. It indicates the circumstances under which the legislati
legislative command is ve command is to be to be effected.effected.
-The standard may be express or implied. Standard here is -The standard may be express or implied. Standard here is public safety.
public safety.
*Standards may be IMPLIED *Standards may be IMPLIED
AGUSTIN v EDU AGUSTIN v EDU
FACTS: This time the Reflector law was implemented through FACTS: This time the Reflector law was implemented through the Letters of Instruction which required all owners and the Letters of Instruction which required all owners and drivers to obtain a pair of reflectorized triangular early drivers to obtain a pair of reflectorized triangular early warning device.
warning device. HELD: Letters of
HELD: Letters of Instruction CONSTITUTIONInstruction CONSTITUTIONALAL -the legislature must determine matters of
-the legislature must determine matters of principle, lay downprinciple, lay down fundamental policy, and indicate the circumstances under fundamental policy, and indicate the circumstances under which the legislative command is to
which the legislative command is to be effected.be effected.
*Also, standards may be IMPLIED (Public safety) *Also, standards may be IMPLIED (Public safety)
FREE TELEPHONE WORKERS UNION V MINISTER OF LABOR FREE TELEPHONE WORKERS UNION V MINISTER OF LABOR
AND EMPLOYMENT AND EMPLOYMENT
FACTS: Union assails the constitutionality of the amendment FACTS: Union assails the constitutionality of the amendment to the Labor Code which allows the Minister of Labor to certify to the Labor Code which allows the Minister of Labor to certify cases as “adversely affecting the national interest” for
cases as “adversely affecting the national interest” for compulsory arbitration.
compulsory arbitration. HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL -To determine WON there
-To determine WON there is undue delegation of is undue delegation of legislativelegislative power, inquire on the scope of
power, inquire on the scope of definitenedefiniteness of ss of the measurethe measure enacted.
enacted.
ON SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION: ON SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION: All that is required is
All that is required is that:that: 1.
1. the rthe regulegulatioation shon should buld be gee germane rmane to thto the obje objects ects andand the purposes of the law
the purposes of the law 2.
2. the rthe regulegulatioation be n be not inot in conn contraditradictioction win with itth it, but, but conform to the standards of the law
conform to the standards of the law -case was not yet ripe
-case was not yet ripe for adjudicationfor adjudication *PHILCOMSAT V ALCUAZ *PHILCOMSAT V ALCUAZ
FACTS: Philcomsat has long been the provider of satellite FACTS: Philcomsat has long been the provider of satellite circuits in the Philippines. Then, NTC acquired jurisdiction over circuits in the Philippines. Then, NTC acquired jurisdiction over Philcomsat and required the latter to reduce the rates it has Philcomsat and required the latter to reduce the rates it has been imposing. Philcomsat now assails the said orders for not been imposing. Philcomsat now assails the said orders for not fixing standards.
fixing standards.
HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL -delegati
-delegation of on of legislative power may be sustained only legislative power may be sustained only uponupon the ground that some standard for
the ground that some standard for its exercise is provided andits exercise is provided and
that the legislature in
that the legislature in making the delegation has prescribedmaking the delegation has prescribed the manner of the exercise of
the manner of the exercise of the legislative power.the legislative power. -in delegation of rate-fixing power, only
-in delegation of rate-fixing power, only standard legislature isstandard legislature is required to prescribe for the
required to prescribe for the guidance of the administrativeguidance of the administrative authority is that the
authority is that the rate be reasonable and just.rate be reasonable and just.
*difference between a legislative act and a quasi-legislative act in rate-fixing *difference between a legislative act and a quasi-legislative act in rate-fixing Legislative: concerns all companies
Legislative: concerns all companies QJ: concerns a specific entity QJ: concerns a specific entity
*STANDARD FOR RATE-FIXING POWER *STANDARD FOR RATE-FIXING POWER
*CHIONGBIA
*CHIONGBIAN V N V ORBOSORBOS
FACTS: President Aquino merged provinces to form ARMM, FACTS: President Aquino merged provinces to form ARMM, pursuant to RA 6734 and the Constitution, through and EO. pursuant to RA 6734 and the Constitution, through and EO.
EO was assailed as unconstitutional. EO was assailed as unconstitutional. HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL.
HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL.
-MERGING of provinces into regions is similar to the power to -MERGING of provinces into regions is similar to the power to adjust municipal boundaries which is “administrative in adjust municipal boundaries which is “administrative in nature”. NOT CREATING MUNICIPALITIES WHICH IS PURELY nature”. NOT CREATING MUNICIPALITIES WHICH IS PURELY LEGISLATIVE.
LEGISLATIVE.
-standard may be embodied in other statues on
-standard may be embodied in other statues on the samethe same matter and not necessarily in the same law being challenged. matter and not necessarily in the same law being challenged.
*standard may be found in other germane statutes; merging provinces *standard may be found in other germane statutes; merging provinces administrative, not legislative
administrative, not legislative
SANTIAGO v COMELEC SANTIAGO v COMELEC
FACTS: PIRMA launched a peoples’ initiative to remove the FACTS: PIRMA launched a peoples’ initiative to remove the term limits on elective posts. COMELEC issued a resolution term limits on elective posts. COMELEC issued a resolution adopted to govern the conduct of people’s initiative to fill out adopted to govern the conduct of people’s initiative to fill out gaps of the enabling law RA 6735. This resolution was
gaps of the enabling law RA 6735. This resolution was assailed.
assailed.
HELD: NOT VALID EXERCISE OF
HELD: NOT VALID EXERCISE OF SUBORDINATSUBORDINATE LEGISLATIONE LEGISLATION -no standard, not complete
-no standard, not complete
*The ruling here is questioned because the SC did not explain why the “standards” *The ruling here is questioned because the SC did not explain why the “standards” of the RA 6735 were incomplete, inadequate. The Resolution of COMELEC
of the RA 6735 were incomplete, inadequate. The Resolution of COMELEC specifically was intended to make the said insufficiencies of the said law! specifically was intended to make the said insufficiencies of the said law!
*PANAMA v RYAN *PANAMA v RYAN
FACTS: An act empowered the President to prohibit the FACTS: An act empowered the President to prohibit the
transportation in interstate and foreign commerce of “hot oil”. transportation in interstate and foreign commerce of “hot oil”. Panama assailed said law.
Panama assailed said law.
HELD: Law unconstitutional. No standard, no HELD: Law unconstitutional. No standard, no policy.policy. The legislature, to prevent its being a
The legislature, to prevent its being a pure delegation of pure delegation of legislati
legislative power, must enjoin upon ve power, must enjoin upon the agent a certain coursethe agent a certain course of procedure and certain rules of
of procedure and certain rules of decision in the performancedecision in the performance of its function.
of its function. -delegati
-delegation of power on of power to make law is to make law is unconstitutionaunconstitutional; power tol; power to confer authority or discretion as to
confer authority or discretion as to its execution is allowed.its execution is allowed. -discretion is not unconfined and vagrant. It is canalized within -discretion is not unconfined and vagrant. It is canalized within the banks that keep it from overflowing [J. Cardozo,
the banks that keep it from overflowing [J. Cardozo, dissenting, thinks that if viewed as a whole, the said law is dissenting, thinks that if viewed as a whole, the said law is provided with a
provided with a standard]standard]
ALA SCHECTER POULTRY CORP V US ALA SCHECTER POULTRY CORP V US FACTS: President conferred the power to approve or FACTS: President conferred the power to approve or disapprove codes of Fair Competition applied by a trade or disapprove codes of Fair Competition applied by a trade or industrial group assailed.
industrial group assailed.
HELD: (vs. PANAMA v RYAN) when no statutory standards or HELD: (vs. PANAMA v RYAN) when no statutory standards or procedural safeguards for promulgating the codes
procedural safeguards for promulgating the codes areare provided, then it is undue delegation of legislative power. provided, then it is undue delegation of legislative power.
*”delegation run riot” *”delegation run riot”
FEDERAL ENERGY ADMINISTRATION v AL GONQUIN SNG, INC. FEDERAL ENERGY ADMINISTRATION v AL GONQUIN SNG, INC. FACTS: Trade Expansion Act authorizes the President to take FACTS: Trade Expansion Act authorizes the President to take action upon the finding of the
action upon the finding of the Sec. of Treasury that an Sec. of Treasury that an articlearticle is being imported in such quantities or under such
is being imported in such quantities or under such
circumstances as to “threaten to impair the national security”. circumstances as to “threaten to impair the national security”. President did just that.
President did just that. Companies assail constitutionaCompanies assail constitutionality of lity of said Act.
said Act.
HELD: Act CONSTITUTIONAL. It provided standards for the HELD: Act CONSTITUTIONAL. It provided standards for the president to follow president to follow *Just an example… *Just an example… WHITE v ROUGHTON WHITE v ROUGHTON
FACTS: standards for granting welfare assistance determined FACTS: standards for granting welfare assistance determined by the general township assistance program. The people who by the general township assistance program. The people who
filed case vs. Roughton complains that they were deprived of filed case vs. Roughton complains that they were deprived of the benefits without notice or explanation for the decisions. the benefits without notice or explanation for the decisions. HELD: Notice and hearing first before
HELD: Notice and hearing first before -establish written standards and
-establish written standards and regulationsregulations *sir said this case was unique because it said that
*sir said this case was unique because it said that if there areif there are no standards, agency itself should
no standards, agency itself should provide standardsprovide standards 2. Permissible Delegation
2. Permissible Delegation a. Ascertainment of Fact a. Ascertainment of Fact
PANAMA v RYAN, supra PANAMA v RYAN, supra
Congress can leave selected instrumentalities the making of Congress can leave selected instrumentalities the making of subordinate rules within prescribed limits and the
subordinate rules within prescribed limits and the determinati
determination of on of facts to which the policy as facts to which the policy as declared by thedeclared by the Legislature is to
Legislature is to apply.apply.
LOVINA v MORENO LOVINA v MORENO
FACTS: Statute provided the Secretary of Public Works FACTS: Statute provided the Secretary of Public Works andand Communica
Communications the authority to tions the authority to determine WON a stream isdetermine WON a stream is public and WON dams encroach upon such waters…
public and WON dams encroach upon such waters… HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL
HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL
-when an officer is REQUIRED by law to
-when an officer is REQUIRED by law to inquire into theinquire into the existence of certain facts, and to APPLY THE LAW – no existence of certain facts, and to APPLY THE LAW – no delegati
delegation oon o f judicial powerf judicial power
*ABAKADA GURO V ERMITA *ABAKADA GURO V ERMITA
FACTS: ABAKADA et.al assails the constitutionality of VAT FACTS: ABAKADA et.al assails the constitutionality of VAT Reform Act. ON NONDELEGATION ISSUE, they assail the Reform Act. ON NONDELEGATION ISSUE, they assail the sections which provides the Sec. of Finance the power to sections which provides the Sec. of Finance the power to ascertain WON the VAT collection as a percentage of the GDP ascertain WON the VAT collection as a percentage of the GDP exceeded a certain percentage…
exceeded a certain percentage… HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL
HELD: CONSTITUTIONAL -delegati
-delegation of ascertainment of facts on of ascertainment of facts upon which theupon which the enforcement and administration of the increased rate enforcement and administration of the increased rate wouldwould depend is not a delegation of legislative power but simply a depend is not a delegation of legislative power but simply a delegati
delegation of on of ascertainmeascertainment of nt of facts.facts. -Sec of Finance is acting as the
-Sec of Finance is acting as the agent of the legislativeagent of the legislative department, to determine and declare the event upon which department, to determine and declare the event upon which its expressed will is to
its expressed will is to take effect.take effect.
*delegation of power to ascertain facts allowed *delegation of power to ascertain facts allowed
b. filling in of details b. filling in of details
ALEGRE V COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS ALEGRE V COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS
FACTS: Allegre who was an exporter of abaca, applied for FACTS: Allegre who was an exporter of abaca, applied for permit to export abaca, but was
permit to export abaca, but was denied unless he obtained adenied unless he obtained a certification from the Fiber
certification from the Fiber StandardizaStandardization Board.tion Board.
HELD: NO delegation. Just carried out purpose and intent of HELD: NO delegation. Just carried out purpose and intent of the law, which is
the law, which is administratiadministrativeve *a statute which leaves to the
*a statute which leaves to the Executive the power to fill inExecutive the power to fill in the technical details in view of the latter’s expertise is the technical details in view of the latter’s expertise is aa recognized delegation of legislative power.
recognized delegation of legislative power. C. Administrative Rule-making
C. Administrative Rule-making
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF 1987, BOOK VII ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF 1987, BOOK VII
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL PROVISIONSPROVISIONS SEC1. SCOPE. All agencies
SEC1. SCOPE. All agencies Except: Except: -Congress -Congress -Judiciary -Judiciary -Constitutiona
-Constitutional l CommissionsCommissions -military establishme
-military establishments in matters nts in matters relating exclusively to AFrelating exclusively to AF personnel
personnel
-Board of Pardons and Parole -Board of Pardons and Parole -state universities and colleges -state universities and colleges Sec2. definitions
Sec2. definitions
CHAPTER 2. RULES AND
CHAPTER 2. RULES AND REGULATIONSREGULATIONS SEC3. FILING
SEC3. FILING (1
(1)) FiFille we wiith th ththe e UP UP LaLaw Cw Ceentnteer 3 r 3 cceertrtififiieded copies
copies
(2
(2)) ReReccorordds s ofofffiicecer r shshaall ll cacarrrry y ouout t ththee requirements under pain of
requirements under pain of disciplindisciplinary actionary action (3
(3)) PePermrmananenent rt regegisisteter or of af all ll ruruleles ss shahall ll be be kekeptpt by the issuing agency
by the issuing agency SEC4. EFFECTIVITY
SEC4. EFFECTIVITY
Each rule shall be effective 15 DAYS FROM
Each rule shall be effective 15 DAYS FROM DATE OF FILING ASDATE OF FILING AS ABOVE PROVIDED
ABOVE PROVIDED UNLESS A DIFFERENT DATE IS FIXED BY UNLESS A DIFFERENT DATE IS FIXED BY LAW.
LAW.
SEC5. PUBLICATION AND RECORDING SEC5. PUBLICATION AND RECORDING UP Law Center shall publish bulletin UP Law Center shall publish bulletin
SEC 6. OMISSION OF SOME RULES. Could omit
SEC 6. OMISSION OF SOME RULES. Could omit rules which arerules which are cumbersome, expensive or inexpedient to publish
cumbersome, expensive or inexpedient to publish -if penal rule, should be published in FULL TEXT -if penal rule, should be published in FULL TEXT
SEC7. DISTRIBUTION OF BULLETIN AND CODIFIED RULES. SEC7. DISTRIBUTION OF BULLETIN AND CODIFIED RULES. SEC 8. JUDICIAL NOTICE. Court shall take judicial notice of SEC 8. JUDICIAL NOTICE. Court shall take judicial notice of certified copy of each rule duly filed or
certified copy of each rule duly filed or as published in theas published in the bulletin
bulletin
SEC9. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SEC9. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
(1)
(1) agenagency publcy publish or circish or circulatulate notice notices of proposes of proposed ruleed ruless + opportunity for interested parties to
+ opportunity for interested parties to submit theirsubmit their views (UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY LAW) views (UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY LAW) (2)
(2) FIXIFIXING RATENG RATES: propoS: proposed ratesed rates shals shall have bl have beeneen published in a newspaper of
published in a newspaper of general circulation atgeneral circulation at least 2 weeks before first hearing – or else proposed least 2 weeks before first hearing – or else proposed rates INVALID (so
rates INVALID (so publicatipublication + on + hearing)hearing) 1. Limits on Rule-Making Power
1. Limits on Rule-Making Power
OLSEN INC V ALDANESE OLSEN INC V ALDANESE
FACTS: In implementing an act improving method of FACTS: In implementing an act improving method of production and quality of tobacco, CIR issued AO 35 which production and quality of tobacco, CIR issued AO 35 which
limited the exportation into the US of Philippine cigars to limited the exportation into the US of Philippine cigars to those manufactured from long filler tobacco exclusively the those manufactured from long filler tobacco exclusively the product of provinces Cagayan, Isabela or Nueva Viscaya. product of provinces Cagayan, Isabela or Nueva Viscaya.
HELD: CIR exceeded its
HELD: CIR exceeded its rule-making powerrule-making power
*The authority of CIR to make any rules and regulation should be founded upon *The authority of CIR to make any rules and regulation should be founded upon some legislative act (LAW), and that they must follow and be within the scope and some legislative act (LAW), and that they must follow and be within the scope and purview of the act.
purview of the act.
SYMAN V JACINTO SYMAN V JACINTO
FACTS: Collector seized the goods consigned to Syman, but FACTS: Collector seized the goods consigned to Syman, but subsequently it was held that the said goods be released. subsequently it was held that the said goods be released. Syman did not appeal from the said decision, and was asking Syman did not appeal from the said decision, and was asking for the execution of the said judgment. However, the said for the execution of the said judgment. However, the said decision was endorsed to the Commissioner of Customs in decision was endorsed to the Commissioner of Customs in accordance with a Memo issued by the Commissioner accordance with a Memo issued by the Commissioner
providing that the Commissioner can review the decisions of providing that the Commissioner can review the decisions of
the Collector, regardless if appealed or not. the Collector, regardless if appealed or not. HELD: Memo void
HELD: Memo void (1)
(1) not anot approvepproved by td by the Dehe Departmpartment Hent Headead (2
(2)) nonot pt pubublilishsheded (3)
(3) inconinconsistesistent witnt with law, Reh law, Revisevised Admid Admin Coden Code specifical
specifically provides that an ly provides that an appeal should first beappeal should first be made before Commissioner may review
made before Commissioner may review casecase
*the rule should not be inconsistent with the law (Revised Admin Code) *the rule should not be inconsistent with the law (Revised Admin Code)
PEOPLE V MACEREN PEOPLE V MACEREN
FACTS: Accused convicted of violation of Fisheries Admin FACTS: Accused convicted of violation of Fisheries Admin Order prohibiting electro fishing in all Philippine Waters. But Order prohibiting electro fishing in all Philippine Waters. But enabling law which was promulgated did not prohibit electro enabling law which was promulgated did not prohibit electro fishing
fishing
HELD: The rule-making power must be confined to details for HELD: The rule-making power must be confined to details for regulating the mode or proceeding to carry
regulating the mode or proceeding to carry into effect the lawinto effect the law as it has been enacted. The power
as it has been enacted. The power cannot be extended tocannot be extended to amending or expanding the statutory requirements or to amending or expanding the statutory requirements or to embrace matters not covered by the
embrace matters not covered by the statute.statute.
*cannot make penal rule if enabling law does not allow for one. *cannot make penal rule if enabling law does not allow for one.
TOLEDO V CSC TOLEDO V CSC
FACTS: Toledo was appointed as Manager of Education and FACTS: Toledo was appointed as Manager of Education and Information Department of the COMELEC even though he was Information Department of the COMELEC even though he was 57 years old, in violation of the Civil Service Rules on
