Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
DEFENSE: (MANILA) 1. the petition did fail to state a cause of action 2. the challenged ordinance bears a reasonable relation, to a proper purpose, which is to curb immorality valid and proper exercise of the police power 3. that only the guests or customers not before the court could complain of the alleged invasion of the right to privacy and the guaranty against self incrimination, with the assertion that the issuance of the preliminary injunction ex parte was contrary to law, respondent Mayor prayed for, its dissolution and the dismissal of the petition. The lower court declared Ordinance 4760 NULL & VOID
SC RULING: Primarily what calls for a reversal of such a decision is the absence of any evidence to offset the presumption of validity that attaches to a challenged statute or ordinance. The Judiciary should not lightly set aside legislative action when there is not a clear invasion of personal or property rights under the guise of police regulation. This particular manifestation of a police power measure being specifically aimed to safeguard public morals is immune from such imputation of nullity resting purely on conjecture and unsupported by anything of substance. To hold otherwise would be to unduly restrict and narrow the scope of police power which has been properly characterized as the most essential, insistent and the least limitable of powers,4 extending as it does "to all the great public needs."5 There is no question but that the challenged ordinance was precisely enacted to minimize certain practices hurtful to public morals. alarming increase in the rate of prostitution, adultery and fornication in Manila traceable in great part to the existence of motels, which "provide a necessary atmosphere for clandestine entry, presence and exit" and thus become the "ideal haven for prostitutes and thrill-seekers." Moreover, the increase in the licensed fees was intended to discourage "establishments of the kind from operating for purpose other than legal" and at the same time, to increase "the income of the city government." It would appear therefore that the stipulation of facts, far from sustaining any attack against the validity of the ordinance, argues eloquently for it. In view of the requirements of due process, equal protection and other applicable constitutional guaranties however, the exercise of such police power insofar as it may affect the life, liberty or property of any person is subject to judicial inquiry. Where such exercise of police power may be considered as either capricious, whimsical, unjust or unreasonable, a denial of due process or a violation of any other applicable constitutional guaranty may call for correction by the courts. There is no controlling and precise definition of due process. It furnishes though a standard to which the governmental action should conform in order that deprivation of life, liberty or property, in each appropriate case, be valid.