FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF GOVERNMENT

DEFINITION

Inherent in the state(exercised even without the need of express

constitutional grant)
Necessary and indispensable( the state cannot be effective without them)
Method by which states interfere with private property
Presupposes equivalent compensation
Exercised primarily by the legislature

ELEMENTS

Distinctions
POLICE POWER

EMINENT DOMAIN

TAXATION

As to
regulation/extent
of power

Regulates both
liberty and
property rights

Regulates only
property rights

Regulates property
rights only

As to who may
exercise

Only the
government

The government
and some private
entities

Only the
government

As to the property
taken

Destroyed because
its obnoxious

Wholesome: taken
for public use or
purpose

Wholesome: taken
for public use or
purpose

As to
compensation

Intangible altruistic
feeling that a
person has
contributed to the
general welfare

Full and fair

equivalent of the
property
expropriated

Protection and
public
improvements for
the taxes paid

LIMITATIONS:
1. May not be exercised arbitrarily to the prejudice of the Bill of Rights.
2. Subject at all times to the limitations and requirements of the Constitution
and may in proper cases be annulled by the Courts i.e. when there is grave
abuse of discretion.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
POLICE POWER: is the inherent power of the state to promote the welfare of the
society by restraining and regulating the use of property and liberty.
General Coverage
"The police power of the State," one court has said, "is a power
coextensive with self-protection, and is not inaptly termed the 'law of overruling
necessity.' [Rubi v. Provincial Board (1919)
]The state, in order to promote the general welfare, may interfere with personal
liberty, with property,and withbusiness and occupations. Persons may be subjected
to all kinds of restraints and burdens, in order to secure the general comfort health
and prosperity of the state and to this fundamental aim of our Government,
the rights of the individual are subordinated. [Ortigas and Co.,
LimitedPartnership v. Feati Bank and Trust Co. (1979)
has been properly characterized as the most essential, insistent and the
least limitable of powers, [Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Assoc. v.
Mayor of Manila (1967) Cf. Ichong v. Hernandez, (1957)] extending as it does "to all
the great public needs."[Noble State Bank v. Haskell, 219 U.S. 412]
Police Power cannot be bargained away through treaty or contract. [Ichong v.
Hernandez (1957
Specific Coverage
(1) Public Health
(2) Public Morals
(3) Public Safety
(4) Public Welfare
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SCOPE OF POLICE POWER:
1. Cannot be bargained away thru the medium of a treaty or a contract.(IChong vs.
hernandez)
2. may use taxing power as its implement ( Tio vs. Videogram Regulatory Board)
3. May use Eminent Domain as its implement ( Association of small landowners
4. Could be given retroactive effect and may reasonably impair vested rights or
contracts

5. Dynamic,not static and must move with the moving society as it supposed to
regulate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. What is the scope of the police power?
"The Supreme Court has said that police power is so far-reaching that it has
almost become impossible to limit its sweep. It derives its existence from the very
existence of the State itself, it does not need to be expressed or defined in its
scope; it is said to be co-extensive with self-protection and survival, and as such it is
the most positive and active of all governmental processes, the most essential,
insistent and illimitable. Especially it is so under the modern democratic framework
where the demands of society and nations have multiplied to almost unimaginable
proportions. The field and scope of police power have become almost boundless,
just as the fields of public interest and welfare, they cannot delimit beforehand the
extent or scope of the police power by which and through which the state seeks to
attain or achieve public interest and welfare. " (Ichong vs Hernandez)
Police power does not involve the taking or confiscation of property with the
exception of a few cases where there is the need to destroy it for the purpose of
protecting the peace and order and of promoting the general welfare as for
instance, the confiscation of an illegally possessed article, such as opium and
firearms.(City Government of Quezon City vs Ericta)

2. What are the characteristics of police power?

It may be exercised as long as the activity or the property sought to be

regulated has some relevance to the public welfare.
The person's acts and acquisitions are hemmed in by the police power.
The impairment clause must yield to the police power whenever the
contract deals with a subject affecting the public welfare.
The police power is dynamic, not static, and must move with the moving
society it is supposed to regulate.
The police power may sometimes use the taxing power as an implement
for the attainment of a legitimate police objective. Likewise, the power of eminent
domain could be used as an implement of the police power.

WHO EXERCISES POLICE POWER

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

THE LEGISLATURE(inherent)
The president( by delegation)
Administrative Board(by delegation)
Lawmaking bodies on all municipall levels, (including brgy(delegated)
Municipal Governments/LGUs conferred by statute = through= general
welfare clause of RA 7160

Test of Reasonability/ Validity of Exercise of Police

Power
(1) Lawful subject- Interest of the general public(as distinguished from a particular
class required exercise). This means that the activity or property sought to be
regulated affects the general welfare. [Taxicab Operators v. Board of Transportation
(1982)
(2) Lawful means -means employed are reasonably necessary for the
accomplishment of the purpose, and are not unduly oppressive. [Tablarin v.
Gutierrez (1987)]
(3) Least restrictions of individual right- It must also be evident that no other
alternative for the accomplishment of the purpose less intrusive of private
rights can work. [White Light Corporation, et al v. City of Manila (2009)]

Limitations
1. The limit to police power is reasonability. The Court looks at the test of
reasonability to decide whether it encroaches on the right of an individual.
So long as legitimate means can reasonably lead to create that end, it is
reasonable. [Morfe v. Mutuc (1968)]
2. The legislative determination as to what is a proper exercise of its police
powers is not final or conclusive, but is subject to the supervision of the
court.[US v. Toribio (1910) citing Mr. Justice Brown in his opinion in the case
of Lawton v. Steele (152 U.S., 133, 136)]
3. The SC upheld the validity of Administrative Orders which converted
existing mine leases and other mining agreements into productionsharing agreements within one year from its effectivity. The subject

sought to begoverned by the AOs are germane to the object and

purpose of E.O. 279 and that mining leases or agreementsgranted by
the State are subject to alterations through a reasonable exercise of
police power of the State. [Miners Association of the Philippines v. Factoran
(1995)]Limitations when police power is delegated(1) Express grant by law
[e.g. Secs. 16, 391, 447, 458 and 468, R.A. 7160, for LGUs](2) Limited within
its territorial jurisdiction [for local government units](3) Must not be contrary
to law
History of Police Power, Dissenting Opinion of Chief Justice Puno inLim v. Pacquing,
240 SCRA 649:Former Chief Justice Puno in his Dissenting Opinion in this 1995 case
said that:
The exercise of police power is not without limit. He said that while it is
theprerogative of the State to promote the general welfare of the people thru the
use of police power; on the opposite end is the right of an entity to have its
property protected against unreasonable impairment by the State. Courts accord
the State wide latitude in the exercise of its police power to bring about the greatest
good of the greatest number. But when its purpose is putrefied by private interest,
the use of police becomes a farce and must be struck down just as every
arbitrary exercise of government power should be stamped out.

When exercise of police power may be questioned

Answer: Where is there is explicit grant of power; a government agency cannot
(MMDA vs. Bel-Air village Association)