Documents

DOJ Opinion 87-2012 Upholding DILG Opinion

Description
DOCUMENT
Categories
Published
of 7
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
Share
Transcript
  RepublikangPilipinas K W R NN K T RUN N  epartmentojJusticeManilaã LML-L-lSJ12-  luI 18 September 2012 DirectorJESUSG DOQUEIV DirectorIII,LegalServiceDepartmentofInteriorandLocalGovernmentEDSAcor.MapagmahalSt.,Dilirnan,QuezonCityDear DirectorDoque: ThisreferstoyourrequestforareviewoftheDepartmentofInteriorandLocalGovernment DILG)position,addressingcontinuousdisobedienceofLocalGovernmentUnits LGUs),onpatentlyvoid localordinancesandresolutions .Youstatethat theDILGhasbeenswampedwithproblemsarisingfromtheimplementationofordinanceswhichcontainprovisionsthatclearlyviolateexistingnationallaws,i.e.ordinancesprohibitingopenpitmining, whenthenationallaw)thePhilippineMiningAct,doesnotprohibitsuchactivity.ãJudicialremedy:Inthisregard,yourLegalServicemadeanextensivestudyonthelegalissuesposedandcameupwiththefollowingremedies, viz DeclaratoryRelief,aremedy whi h youstate,isnotavailableto.theDILG,deemednota r lp rtyinint r st tobringactiontocourt; 2 DeclarationofNullityoftheassailedordinanceãAdministrativeremedy:   IssuanceofaMemorandumCirculardirectingreviewofquestionableordinance;  OP N ON NO . ~J_._ S Cf ll 2 MemorandumofAgreementbetweentheDILGandtheOfficeoftheOmbudsmantoaddressabusesofpoweroflocalofficialshidingunderthecloakofvalidexerciseofindependentlocalautonomy;and 3 FilingofAdministrative cases againsterringlocalofficials,onthegroundof: (1) graveabuseofauthorityor (2) gravemisconduct.TheConstitution,inSection IV Article X provides: xxxxxx  ThePresidentofthePhilippinesshallexercisegeneralsupervisionoverlocalgovernments.Provinceswithrespect to componentcities,andmunicipalitieswithrespecttocomponentbarangaysshallensurethattheactssof4their;~componentunitsarewithinthescopeoftheirprescribedpowersandfunctions. xxxxxx Pagl or> The powerofgeneralsupervisionofthePresidentoveranlocalgovernmentunitswasdelegatedtotheDILGSecretarybyvirtueofAdministrativeOrderNo. 267dated February 18,1992. ThePresident spowerofgeneralsupervisionoverlocalgovernmentunitsisconferreduponhimbytheConstitution.Thepowerofsupervisionisdefinedas  thepowerofasuperiorofficertoseetoitthatIowerofficersperformtheirfunctionsinaccordance w t Iaw-. Thisisdistinguishedfromthepowerofcontrolor thepowerofanofficertoalterofmodifyorsetasidewhatasubordinateofficerhaddoneintheperformanceofhisdutiesandtosubstitutethejudgmentoftheformerforthe later.s TheSupremeCourtin Bito Ononvs Fernandez: held, v z xxx xxx   Emphasis ours. 2 Bito Ononvs.Fernandez et.al GRNo.139813.January31 2011.3 GRNo. 139813. January 31, 201l.   Onmanyoccasionsintnepast,thiscourthashadtheopportunitytodistinguishthepowerofsupervisionfromthepowerofcontrol.In Taulevs Santos weheldthattheChiefExecutivewieldednomoreauthoritythanthatofcheckingwhetheralocalgovernmentortheofficersthereofperformtheirdutiesasprovidedbystatutoryenactments.Hecannotinterferewithlocalgovernmentsprovidedthatthesameoritsofficersactwithinthescopeoftheir authoritys Supervisorypower,whencontrastedwithcontrol,isthepowerofmereoversightoveraninferiorbody;itdoesnotincludeanyrestrainingauthorityoversuchbody.Officerincontrollaysdowntherulesinthedoingofanact.   theyarenotfollowed,itisdiscretionaryonhisparttoordertheact un one orre-donebyhissubordinateorhemayevendecidetodoithimself.Supervisiondoesnotcoversuchauthority.Supervisingofficersmerelyseetoitthattherulesarefollowed,buthehimselfdoesnotlaydownsuchrules,nordoeshehavethediscretiontomodifyorreplacethem.   therulesarenotobserved,hemayordertheworkdoneorre-donetoconformtotheprescribedrules.Hecannotprescribehisownmannerforthe.,,-;doing-oftheact. ..~~   Further,in Pimentelvs Aguirre  G.R.No. 132988 19 July 2000 theCourtstated:   TheConstitutionveststothePresidentwiththepowerofsupervision,notcontrol,overlocalgovernmentunits  LGUs . Suchpowerenables\himtoseetoitthatLGUsandtheirofficialsexecutetheirtasks in accordancewithIawse. Despitetheforegoingconstitutionalmandate,thevaliddelegatedauthority,andjurisprudentialpronouncements,youclaimthatanumberofLGUshaveconstantlyviolatedtheprevious adviceorguidance ,issuedbyyourOfficeinregard patentlyvoidordinances,enacted,orcontainprovisionsthatcontravenenationallaws,policies,rulesandregulations ,hence,yourrequest.   Emphasisours, 5 Emphasisours.   PINrON NO ~_ IT _ ~ 10 Jl Subjecttothediscussionhereinprovided,weagreewithyourposition.Thetestsofavalidordinancearewellestablished.Alonglineofdecisionsheldthatforanordinancetobevalid,itmustnotonlybewithinthecorporatepowersofthelocalgovernmentunittoenactandmustbepassedaccordingtotheprocedureprescribedbylaw,itmustalsoconformtothefollowingsubstantiverequirements:  1 mustnotcontravenetheConstitutionoranystatute;  2 mustnotbeunfairoroppressive; 3)mustnotbepartialordiscriminatory;  4) mustnotprohibitbutmayregulatetrade;  5 mustbegeneralandconsistent withpublicpolicy;and 6)mustnotbe unreasonables. Ordinancesshallonlybevalid whentheyarenotcontrarytotheConstitutionandtothelawsz,TheOrdinancemustsatisfytworequirements:itmustpassmusterunderthetestofconstitutionalityandthetestofconsistencywiththeprevailinglaws.Thatordinancesshouldconstitutionallyuphold theprincipleofthesupremacyoftheconstitution.Therequirementthattheenactmentmustnotviolate existinglawgivesstresstothepreceptthatlocalgovernmentunitsareabletolegislateonlybyvirtueoftheirderivativelegislativepower,adelegationoflegislativepowerfromthenationallegislature.Thedelegatecannotbesuperiortotheprincipalorexercisepowershigherthanthoseofthelatter ,ThisrelationshipbetweenthenationallegislatureandthelocalgovernmentunitshasnotbeenenfeebledbythenewprovisionsintheConstitutionstrengtheningthepolicyoflocalautonomy.Thenationallegislature  s stilltheprincipalofthelocalgovernmentunits,whichcannotdefydts w ll or modify orviolateit9.   AnentthesupervisorypowerofthePresidentovertheLGUsasexercised by theDILGSecretary,testofavalidordinanceandtheprincipleofdelegatedlegislativepowerbythelegislaturetotheLGUs,asdiscussedabove,itmaybeworthtotakeintoconsiderationaswellthesettledruleonthepresumptionofregularityintheperformanceofofficialdutiesoractions,thus:   Emphasissupplied.CityofManila,et.al.vs.PerfectoLaguio, Jr et.AI.,GRNo. 118127.12 April 2005 Emphasisours. 8 Cityof Manila, et al vs PerfectoLaguio Jr et al GRNo 118127,12 April 2005. 9 Cityof Manila, et al vs. PerfectoLaguio Jr et al GRNo 118127,12 April 2005.
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks