d2015member

People v. Jolliffe (1959) Concepcion, J. Facts:

William Ernest Joliffe is a Canadian, born in China, permanently residing in Hongkong, the son of a former Chancellor of the West China Union University and had been Trade Commissioner for Canada in Shanghai & Hongkong. He was from a reputable family & is quite well-known. He made several trips to Manila, sometimes for business trips, sometimes to meet his wife & children who would be passing through. One day he came to Manila to collect on a debt from Woo. He did not know if he was going to be paid. He was paid in gold which he hid under his shirt. When he was going to his hotel room, he was accosted by a woman secret service agent, Amanda Arimbay, and was brought to a search room. He tried to prevent the gold from being found but eventually, 4 pcs of gold bullion and a 100$ travellers check was found on him. He offered to settle the case by bribing the agents. He does not deny that he had no license to export the gold. o He was arrested for violating RA 265: An Act Establishing The Central Bank Of The Philippines, Defining Its Powers In The Administration Of The Monetary And Banking System, Amending The Pertinent Provisions Of The Administrative Code With Respect To The Currency And The Bureau Of Banking, And For Other Purposes o Sec 34 of said act states: Whenever anyone wilfully violates this Act or any order, instruction, etc. legally issued by the Monetary Board, he/she shall be punished by a fine and by imprisonment. o Note that when he was arrested, there was already CB Circular 21: Any person desiring to export gold bullions must obtain a license from the Central Bank. CFI found him guilty. Jolliffe questions validity of CB Circular 21 for being an undue delegation of legislative power.

Issue/Held: Is CB Circular 21 valid? YES. Ratio: Re: Delegation of Legislative Power Under our system of govt, legislative power may not be delegated except to local govts. HOWEVER, it is one thing to delegate the power (1) to determine what the law shall be; and another thing (2) to delegate the authority to fix the details in the execution or enforcement of a policy set out in the law itself. nd The rule is that the delegated power fall under the 2 category, if the law authorizing the delegation furnishes a reasonable standard which sufficiently marks the field within which the Administrator is to act so that it may be known whether he has kept within it in compliance with the legislative will. Re: Application to this case In this case, Sec 74 of RA 265 conferred upon the Monetary Board and the President the power: o To subject to licensing all transactions in gold and foreign exchange to protect the international reserve of the Central Bank during an exchange crisis and to give the Monetary Board and the Government time to take constructive measures to combat such crisis. o The Board is also authorized to take such appropriate remedial measures to protect the international stability of the peso, whether the international reserve is falling, as a result of payment or remittances abroad which, in the opinion of the Monetary Board, are contrary to the national welfare. Note that these powers must be exercised in relation to the objectives of the law creating the Central Bank, which are (Sec 2 RA 265): o To maintain monetary stability in the Philippines; o To promote a rising level of production, employment and real income in the Philippines. These standards are sufficiently definite to vest in the delegated authority the character of administrative details in the enforcement of the law and to place the grant of authority BEYOND the category of a delegation of legislative powers Appeal denied.