Liwayway Vinsons Chato vs Fortune Tobacco held in Cojuangco, Jr. v.
Court of Appeals, 309 SCRA 602
Corporation (1999), that a public officer who directly or indirectly violates the constitutional rights of another, may be Administrative Law; Public Officers; Damages; The validly sued for damages under Article 32 of the Civil general rule is that a public officer is not liable for Code even if his acts were not so tainted with malice or damages which a person may suffer arising from the just bad faith. Thus, the rule in this jurisdiction is that a performance of his official duties and within the scope of public officer may be validly sued in his/her private his assigned tasks; However, a public officer is by law not capacity for acts done in the course of the performance of immune from damages in his/her personal capacity for the functions of the office, where said public officer: (1) acts done in bad faith which being outside the scope of acted with malice, bad faith, or negligence; or (2) where his authority, are no longer protected by the mantle of the public officer violated a constitutional right of the immunity for official actions.— The general rule is that a plaintiff. office, where said public officer: (1) acted with public officer is not liable for damages which a person malice, bad faith, or negligence; or (2) where the public may suffer arising from the just performance of his official officer violated a constitutional right of the plaintiff. duties and within the scope of his assigned tasks. An officer who acts within his authority to administer the affairs of the office which he/she heads is not liable for damages that may have been caused to another, as it Carino vs Commission on Human Rights would virtually be a charge against the Republic, which is not amenable to judgment for monetary claims without its Constitutional Law; Jurisdiction; Commission on consent. However, a public officer is by law not immune Human Rights; Court declares the Commission on from damages in his/her personal capacity for acts done Human Rights to have no jurisdiction on adjudicatory in bad faith which, being outside the scope of his powers over certain specific type of cases like alleged authority, are no longer protected by the mantle of human rights violations involving civil or political immunity for official actions. rights.—The threshold question is whether or not the Commission on Human Rights has the power under the Constitution to do so; whether or not, like a court of Same; Same; Same; A public officer who directly or justice, or even a quasi-judicial agency, it has jurisdiction indirectly violates the constitutional rights of or adjudicatory powers over, or the power to try and another, may be validly sued for damages under decide, or hear and determine, certain specific type of Article 32 of the Civil Code even if his acts were not cases, like alleged human rights violations in volving civil so tainted with malice or bad faith; Instances Where a or political rights. The Court declares the Commission on Public Officer May Be Validly Sued in His/Her Private Human Rights to have no such power; and that it was not Capacity for Acts Done in the Course of the Performance meant by the fundamental law to be another court or of the Functions of the Office.—In addition, the Court quasijudicial agency in this country, or duplicate much investigate all forms of human rights violations involving less take over the functions of the latter. civil and political rights. It can exercise that power on its own initiative or on complaint of any person. It may Same; Same; Same; Same; The most that may be exercise that power pursuant to such rules of procedure conceded to the Commission in the way of as it may adopt and, in cases of violations of said rules, adjudicative power is that it may investigate, i.e., cite for contempt in accordance with the Rules of Court. receive evidence and make findings of fact as regards In the course of any investigation conducted by it or claimed human rights violations involving civil and under its authority, it may grant immunity from political rights.—The most that may be conceded to the prosecution to any person whose testimony or whose Commission. in the way of adjudicative power is that it possession of documents or other evidence is necessary or may investigate, i.e., receive evidence and make findings convenient to determine the truth. It may also request the of fact as regards claimed human rights violations assistance of any department, bureau, office, or agency in involving civil and political rights. But fact-finding is not the performance of its functions, in the conduct of its adjudication, and cannot be likened to the judicial investigation or in extending such remedy as may be function of a court of justice, or even a quasi-judicial required by its findings. agency or official. The function of receiving evidence and ascertaining therefrom the facts of a controversy is not a Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; It cannot try and judicial function, properly speaking. To be considered decide cases (or hear and determine causes) as courts such, the faculty of receiving evidence and making factual of justice or even quasi-judicial bodies do.—But it conclusion in a controversy must be accompanied by the cannot try and decide cases (or hear and determine authority of applying the law to those factual conclusions causes) as courts of justice, or even quasijudicial bodies to the end that the controversy may be decided or do. To investigate is not to adjudicate or adjudge. determined authoritatively, finally and definitively, Whether in the popular or the technical sense, these subject to such appeals or modes of review as may be terms have well understood and quite distinct meanings. provided by law. This function, to repeat, the Commission does not have. Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; The Commission on Human Rights having merely the Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; The Constitution power to investigate cannot and should not try and clearly and categorically grants to the Commission resolve on the merits the matters involved in Striking the power to investigate all forms of human rights Teachers HRC Case No. 90–775.—Hence it is that the violations invoking civil and political rights.—As Commission on Human Rights, having merely the power should at once be observed, only the first of the “to investigate,” cannot and should not “try and resolve enumerated powers and functions bears any resemblance on the merits” (adjudicate) the matters involved in to adjudication or adjudgment. The Constitution clearly Striking Teachers HRC Case No. 90–775, as it has and categorically grants to the Commission the power to announced it means to do; and it cannot do so even if there be a claim that in the administrative disciplinary proceedings against the teachers in question, initiated Same; Same; Same; As a matter of administrative and conducted by the DECS, their human rights, or civil procedure, a department secretary may utilize other or political rights had been transgressed. officials to investigate and report the facts from which a decision may be based; Neither the PCAGC under EO 151 Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; The nor the Ad Hoc Investigating Committee created under AO matters are undoubtedly and clearly within the original 298 had the power to impose any administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary of Education and also within sanctions directly—their authority was limited to the appellate jurisdiction of the Civil Service conducting investigations and preparing their findings Commission.—These are matters undoubtedly and clearly and recommendations.—As a matter of administrative within the original jurisdiction of the Secretary of procedure, a department secretary may utilize other Education, being within the scope of the disciplinary officials to investigate and report the facts from which a powers granted to him under the Civil Service Law, and decision may be based. In the present case, the secretary also, within the appellate jurisdiction of the Civil Service effectively delegated the power to investigate to the Commission. PCAGC. Neither the PCAGC under EO 151 nor the Ad Hoc Investigating Committee created under AO 298 had the DOH vs Camposano power to impose any administrative sanctions directly. Their authority was limited to conducting investigations Same; Same; Administrative Law; Department Secretaries and preparing their findings and recommendations. The are authorized to investigate and decide matters involving recommendations.—As a matter of administrative disciplinary actions for officers and employees under their procedure, a department secretary may utilize other jurisdiction.—The Administrative Code of 1987 vests officials to investigate and report the facts from which a department secretaries with the authority to investigate decision may be based. In the present case, the secretary and decide matters involving disciplinary actions for effectively delegated the power to investigate to the officers and employees under the former’s jurisdiction. PCAGC. Neither the PCAGC under EO 151 nor the Ad Hoc Thus, the health secretary had disciplinary authority over Investigating Committee created under AO 298 had the respondents. Note that being a presidential appointee, Dr. power to impose any administrative sanctions directly. Rosalinda Majarais was under the jurisdiction of the Their authority was limited to conducting investigations President, in line with the principle that the “power to and preparing their findings and recommendations. The remove is inherent in the power to appoint.” While the invalid decision. The disciplining authority should not Chief Executive directly dismissed her from the service, merely and solely rely on an investigator’s he nonetheless recognized the health secretary’s recommendation, but must personally weigh and assess disciplinary authority over respondents when he the evidence gathered. There can be no shortcuts, remanded the PCAGC’s findings against them for the because at stake are the honor, the reputation, and the secretary’s “appropriate action.” livelihood of the person administratively charged. In the present case, the health secretary’s two-page Order dismissing respondents pales in comparison with the presidential action with regard to Dr. Majarais. Prior to Same; Same; Same; Administrative power is concerned the issuance of his seven-page decision, President Fidel V. with the work of applying policies and enforcing orders as Ramos conducted a restudy of the doctor’s case. He even determined by proper governmental organs.— noted a violation that had not been considered by the Administrative power is concerned with the work of PCAGC. On the other hand, Health Secretary Carmencita applying policies and enforcing orders as determined by N. Reodica simply and blindly relied on the dispositive proper governmental organs. It enables the President to portion of the Commission’s Resolution. She even fix a uniform standard of administrative efficiency and misquoted it by inadvertently omitting the check the official conduct of his agents. To this end, he recommendation with regard to Respondents Enrique L. can issue administrative orders, rules and regulations. Perez and Imelda Q. Agustin Same; Same; Same; Administrative Order No. 308 OPLE VS TORRES involves a subject that is not appropriate to be covered by an administrative order.—Prescinding from these Constitutional Law; Administrative Law; Administrative precepts, we hold that A.O. No. 308 involves a subject Order No. 308; As a Senator, petitioner is possessed of that is not appropriate to be covered by an administrative the requisite standing to bring suit raising the issue that order. x x x An administrative order is an ordinance the issuance of Administrative Order No. 308 is a issued by the President which relates to specific aspects usurpation of legislative power. —As is usual in in the administrative operation of government. It must be constitutional litigation, respondents raise the threshold in harmony with the law and should be for the sole issues relating to the standing to sue of the petitioner and purpose of implementing the law and carrying out the the justiciability of the case at bar. More specifically, legislative policy. respondents aver that petitioner has no legal interest to uphold and that the implementing rules of A.O. No. 308 have yet to be promulgated. These submissions do not Same; Same; Same; Argument that Administrative Order deserve our sympathetic ear. Petitioner Ople is a No. 308 implements the legislative policy of the distinguished member of our Senate. As a Senator, Administrative Code of 1987 rejected.—We reject the petitioner is possessed of the requisite standing to bring argument that A.O. No. 308 implements the legislative suit raising the issue that the issuance of A.O. No. 308 is policy of the Administrative Code of 1987. The Code is a a usurpation of legislative power. As taxpayer and general law and “incorporates in a unified document the member of the Government Service Insurance System major structural, functional and procedural principles of (GSIS), petitioner can also impugn the legality of the governance” and “embodies changes in administrative misalignment of public funds and the misuse of GSIS structures and procedures designed to serve the people.” funds to implement A.O. No. 308. Same; Same; Same; Administrative Order No. 308 cannot promulgate, which are the product of a delegated pass constitutional muster as an administrative legislative power to create new and additional legal legislation because facially it violates the right to provisions that have the effect of law, should be within privacy.—Assuming, arguendo, that A.O. No. 308 need the scope of the statutory authority granted by the not be the subject of a law, still it cannot pass legislature to the administrative agency. It is required that constitutional muster as an administrative legislation the regulation be germane to the objects and purposes of because facially it violates the right to privacy. The the law, and be not in contradiction to, but in conformity essence of privacy is the “right to be let alone.” with, the standards prescribed by law. They must conform to and be consistent with the provisions of the Smart vs NTC enabling statute in order for such rule or regulation to be valid. Constitutional and statutory provisions control with Administrative Law; National Telecommunications respect to what rules and regulations may be Commission; Powers; Quasi-Legislative Power; promulgated by an administrative body, as well as with Administrative agencies possess quasilegislative or rule- respect to what fields are subject to regulation by it. It making powers and quasijudicial or administrative may not make rules and regulations which are adjudicatory powers.—Administrative agencies possess inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution or a quasi-legislative or rule-making powers and quasi-judicial statute, particularly the statute it is administering or or administrative adjudicatory powers. Quasilegislative or which created it, or which are in derogation of, or defeat, rule-making power is the power to make rules and the purpose of a statute. In case of conflict between a regulations which results in delegated legislation that is statute and an administrative order, the former must within the confines of the granting statute and the prevail. doctrine of nondelegability and separability of powers.
Same; Same; Same, Quasi-Judicial Power; The
administrative body exercises its quasi-judicial power when it performs in a judicial manner an act which is essentially of an executive or administrative nature.—Not to be confused with the quasi-legislative or rule-making Same; Same; Same; Same; The rules and regulations power of an administrative agency is its quasi-judicial or that administrative agencies promulgate, which are the administrative adjudicatory power. This is the power to product of a delegated legislative power to create new and hear and determine questions of fact to which the additional legal provisions that have the effect of law, legislative policy is to apply and to decide in accordance should be within the scope of the statutory authority with the standards laid down by the law itself in enforcing granted by the legislature to the administrative agency.— and administering the same law. The administrative body The rules and regulations that administrative agencies exercises its quasi-judicial power when it performs in a judicial manner an act which is essentially of an executive that the legislature itself determines matters of principle or administrative nature, where the power to act in such and lays down fundamental policy. manner is incidental to or reasonably necessary for the performance of the executive or administrative duty PEOPLE VS MACEREN entrusted to it. In carrying out their quasijudicial functions, the administrative officers or bodies are Fishing; Administrative law; Fishery Adm. Order No. 84 required to investigate facts or ascertain the existence of penalizing electro fishing is null and void because the facts, hold hearings, weigh evidence, and draw Fishery Laws under which it was issued (Act 4003 and conclusions from them as basis for their official action R.A. 3512) did not expressly prohibit electro fishing.—We and exercise of discretion in a judicial nature. are of the opinion that the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the Commissioner of Fisheries exceeded their authority in issuing Fisheries EDU VS ERICTA Administrative Orders Nos. 84 and 84-1 and that those orders are not warranted under the Fisheries Law, Act No. Constitutional Law; Police Power; State has inherent 4003, and under the law creating the Fisheries Law does power enabling it to prohibit all things hurtful to comfort, not expressly prohibit electro fishing. As electro fishing is safety and welfare of society.—The police power is thus a not banned under that law, the Secretary of Agriculture dynamic agency, suitably vague and far from precisely and Natural Resources and the Commissioner of Fisheries defined, rooted in the conception that men in organizing are powerless to penalize it. In other words, the State and imposing upon its government limitations Administrative Orders Nos. 84 and 84-1, in penalizing to safeguard constitutional rights did not intend thereby electro fishing, are devoid of any legal basis. to enable an individual citizen or a group of citizens to obstruct unreasonably the enactment of such salutary Same; Same; Lawmaking body cannot delegate to measures calculated to insure communal peace, safety, administrative official the power to declare what act good order and welfare. constitute a criminal offense.—The law making body cannot delegate to an executive official the power to declare what acts should constitute a criminal offense. It Same; Same; Valid Delegation of Legislative Power; can authorize the issuance of regulations and the Standard must be set to avoid the taint of unlawful imposition of the penalty provided for in the law itself. delegation.—What cannot be delegated is the authority under the Constitution to make laws and to alter and Same; Same; An administrative regulation must be in repeal them. The test is the completeness of the statute in harmony with law; it must not amend an act of the all its terms and provisions when it leaves the hands cf legislature.— Administrative regulations adopted under the legislature. To avoid the taint of unlawful delegation, legislative authority by a particular department must be there must be a standard which implies at the very least in harmony with the provisions of the law, and should be for the sole purpose of carrying into effect its general primary legislation by providing the details thereof. They provision. By such relations, of course, the law itself usually implement existing law, imposing general, extra- cannot be extended. (U.S. vs. Tupasi Molina, supra). An statutory obligations pursuant to authority properly administrative agency cannot amend an act of Congress. delegated by Congress and effect a change in existing law x x x The rule-making power must be confined to details or policy which affects individual rights and obligations. for regulating the mode or proceeding to carry into effect Meanwhile, interpretative rules are intended to interpret, the law as it has been enacted. The power cannot be clarify or explain existing statutory regulations under extended to amending or expanding the statutory which the administrative body operates. Their purpose or requirements or to embrace matters not covered by the objective is merely to construe the statute being statute. Rules that subvert the statute cannot be administered and purport to do no more than interpret sanctioned the statute. Simply, they try to say what the statute means and refer to no single person or party in particular but concern all those belonging to the same class which REPUBLIC VS DRUGMAKER’S LABORATORIES may be covered by the said rules. Finally, contingent rules are those issued by an administrative authority Administrative Agencies; Administrative agencies may based on the existence of certain facts or things upon exercise quasi-legislative or rule-making powers only if which the enforcement of the law depends. there exists a law which delegates these powers to them.—Administrative agencies may exercise quasi- legislative or rule-making powers only if there exists a law Same; When an administrative rule is merely which delegates these powers to them. Accordingly, the interpretative in nature, its applicability needs nothing rules so promulgated must be within the confines of the further than its bare issuance, for it gives no real granting statute and must involve no discretion as to consequence more than what the law itself has already what the law shall be, but merely the authority to fix the prescribed.—In general, an administrative regulation details in the execution or enforcement of the policy set needs to comply with the requirements laid down by out in the law itself, so as to conform with the doctrine of Executive Order No. 292, s. 1987, otherwise known as the separation of powers and, as an adjunct, the doctrine of “Administrative Code of 1987,” on prior notice, hearing, non-delegability of legislative power. and publication in order to be valid and binding, except when the same is merely an interpretative rule. This is Administrative Law; An administrative regulation may be because “[w]hen an administrative rule is merely classified as a legislative rule, an interpretative rule, or a interpretative in nature, its applicability needs nothing contingent rule.—An administrative regulation may be further than its bare issuance, for it gives no real classified as a legislative rule, an interpretative rule, or a consequence more than what the law itself has already contingent rule. Legislative rules are in the nature of prescribed. When, on the other hand, the administrative subordinate legislation and designed to implement a rule goes beyond merely providing for the means that can facilitate or render least cumbersome the implementation requirement of publication, thus: We hold therefore that of the law but substantially increases the burden of those all statutes, including those of local application and governed, it behooves the agency to accord at least to private laws, shall be published as a condition for their those directly affected a chance to be heard, and effectivity, which shall begin fifteen days after publication thereafter to be duly informed, before that new issuance unless a different effectivity date is fixed by the is given the force and effect of law.” legislature. Covered by this rule are presidential decrees ASTEC VS ERC and executive orders promulgated by the President in the exercise of legislative powers whenever the same are Statutes; Publication; Procedural Due Process; validly delegated by the legislature or, at present, directly Publication is a basic postulate of procedural due conferred by the Constitution. Administrative rules and process. The purpose of publication is to duly inform the regulations must also be published if their purpose is to public of the contents of the laws which govern them and enforce or implement existing law pursuant also to a valid regulate their activities.—Publication is a basic postulate delegation. of procedural due process. The purpose of publication is to duly inform the public of the contents of the laws Manila Jockey Club vs CA which govern them and regulate their activities. Article 2 of the Civil Code, as amended by Section 1 of Executive Horse Racing; Breakages; Words and Phrases; Order No. 200, states that “[l]aws shall take effect after “Breakages” are the fractions of ten centavos eliminated fifteen days following the completion of their publication from the dividend of winning tickets.—“Breakages” are the either in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general fractions of ten centavos eliminated from the dividend of circulation in the Philippines, unless it is otherwise winning tickets. For example the dividends due on a provided.” Section 18, Chapter 5, Book I of Executive winning ticket is ten pesos and ninety-eight centavos, the Order No. 292 or the Administrative Code of 1987 fraction of ten centavos or eight centavos shall be similarly provides that “[l]aws shall take effect after fifteen deducted from the dividends and set aside as part of (15) days following the completion of their publication in breakages. the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation, unless it is otherwise provided.” Same; Franchises; Words and Phrases; Franchise laws are privileges conferred by the government on corporations to do that “which does not belong to the Same; Same; Same; Procedural due process demands citizens of the country generally by common right.”— that administrative rules and regulations be published in Franchise laws are privileges conferred by the government order to be effecttive.—Procedural due process demands on corporations to do that “which does not belong to the that administrative rules and regulations be published in citizens of the country generally by common right.” As a order to be effective. In Tañada v. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27 rule, a franchise springs from contracts between the (1986), this Court articulated the fundamental sovereign power and the private corporation for purposes of individual advantage as well as public benefit. Thus, a officials, her alter egos.—Amidst the changes effected on franchise partakes of a double nature and character. In procurement rules, the NEDA’s duty to issue a JV so far as it affects or concerns the public, it is public juris Guidelines under the said executive orders remained and subject to governmental control. The legislature may unaffected. Through Section 5 of EO No. 109, Section 8 of prescribe the conditions and terms upon which it may be EO No. 109-A and now Section 8 of EO No. 423, the held, and the duty of grantee to the public exercising it. President effectively delegated her inherent executive power to issue rules and regulations on procurement to her subordinate executive officials, her alter egos, the most recent of which reads in this wise: Section 8. Joint Venture Agreements.—The NEDA, in consultation with SM LAND vs BASES CONVERSION the GPPB, shall issue guidelines regarding joint venture agreements with private entities with the objective of Administrative Orders; Under the Administrative Code of promoting transparency, competitiveness, and 1987, acts of the President providing for rules of a general accountability in government transactions, and, where or permanent character in implementation or execution of applicable, complying with the requirements of an open constitutional or statu and competitive public bidding. Pursuant to said repeated 615 tory powers shall be promulgated in Executive Orders directives from no less than the Chief Executive, the (EOs). —Under the Administrative Code of 1987, acts of NEDA issued the JV Guidelines providing the procedures the President providing for rules of a general or for the coagulation of joint ventures between the permanent character in implementation or execution of government and a private entity. In this regard, attention constitutional or statutory powers shall be promulgated must be drawn to the well-established rule that in Executive Orders (EOs). In other words, it is through administrative issuances, such as the NEDA JV these orders that the President ensures that laws are Guidelines, duly promulgated pursuant to the rule- faithfully executed, by handing out instructions to making power granted by statute, have the force and subordinate executive officials and the public, in the form effect of law. of implementing rules and regulations, on how the law should be executed by subordinate officials and complied EASTERN SHIPPING LINES VS POEA with by the public. Same; Same; Delegation of power; Legislative discretion as to the substantive contents of the law cannot be Same; Delegation of Powers; Through Section 5 of delegated; What can be delegated is the discretion to Executive Order (EO) No. 109, Section 8 of EO No. 109-A determine how the law may be enforced.—The second and now Section 8 of EO No. 423, the President effectively challenge is more serious as it is true that legislative delegated her inherent executive power to issue rules and discretion as to the substantive contents of the law regulations on procurement to her subordinate executive cannot be delegated. What can be delegated is the discretion to determine how the law may be enforced, not the observation that the delegation of legislative power what the law shall be. The ascertainment of the latter has become the rule and its non-delegation the exception. subject is a prerogative of the legislature. This prerogative cannot be abdicated or surrendered by the legislature to Same; Same; Same; Reason for the frequent delegation of the delegate. power by the legislature.—The reason is the increasing complexity of the task of government and the growing Same; Same; Same; Accepted tests to determine whether inability of the legislature to cope directly with the myriad or not there is valid delegation of legislative power.—There problems demanding its attention. The growth of society are two accepted tests to determine whether or not there has ramified its activities and created peculiar and is a valid delegation of legislative power, viz., the sophisticated problems that the legislature cannot be completeness test and the sufficient standard test. Under expected reasonably to comprehend. Specialization even the first test, the law must be complete in all its terms in legislation has become necessary. To many of the and conditions when it leaves the legislature such that problems attendant upon present-day undertakings, the when it reaches the delegate the only thing he will have to legislature may not have the competence to provide the do is enforce it. Under the sufficient standard test, there required direct and efficacious, not to say, specific must be adequate guidelines or limitations in the law to solutions. map out the boundaries of the delegate’s authority and These solutions may, however, be expected from its prevent the delegation from running riot. Both tests are delegates, who are supposed to be experts in the intended to prevent a total transference of legislative particular fields assigned to them. authority to the delegate, who is not allowed to step into the shoes of the legislature and exercise a power Same; Same; Same; Reasons for delegation of legislative essentially legislative. powers are particularly applicable to administrative bodies; Delegated power to issue rules to carry out the Same; Same; Same; Principle of non-delegation of powers general provisions of the statute is called power of is applicable to all the 3 major powers of the government, subordinate legislation.—The reasons given above for the but is especially important in the case of the legislative delegation of legislative powers in general are particularly power.—The principle of non-delegation of powers is applicable to administrative bodies. With the proliferation applicable to all the three major powers of the of specialized activities and their attendant peculiar Government but is especially important in the case of the problems, the national legislature has found it more and legislative power because of the many instances when its more necessary to entrust to administrative agencies the delegation is permitted. The occasions are rare when authority to issue rules to carry out the general executive or judicial powers have to be delegated by the provisions of the statute. This is called the “power of authorities to which they legally pertain. In the case of the subordinate legisla-tion.” legislative power, however, such occasions have become more and more frequent, if not necessary. This had led to Same; Same; Same; Administrative bodies implement the broad policies by promulgating their supplemental Administrative law; Power of President to create regulations, such as the implementing rules issued by the municipalities.—Since January 1, 1960, when Republic Department of Labor on the new Labor Code.—With this Act No. 2370 became effective, barrios may "not be power, administrative bodies may implement the broad created or their boundaries altered nor their names policies laid down in a statute by “filling in” the details changed" except by Act of Congress or of the which the Congress may not have the opportunity or corresponding" provincial board "upon petition of a competence to provide. This is effected by their majority of the voters in the areas affected" and the promulgation of what are known as supplementary "recommendation of the council of the municipality or regulations, such as the implementing rules issued by the municipalities in which the proposed barrio is situated." Department of Labor on the new Labor Code. These This statutory denial of the presidential authority to regulations have the force and effect of “law create a new barrio implies a negation of the bigger power to create municipalities, each of which consists of several barrios. CERVANTES VS. AUDITOR GENERAL Same; Same; Nature of power to create municipalities.— CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE Whereas the power to f ix a common boundary, in order POWER.—The rule is that so long as the Legislature "lays to avoid or settle conflicts of jurisdiction between down a policy and a standard is established by the adjoining municipalities, may partake of an statute" there is no undue delegation. (11 Am. Jur. 957). administrative nature—involving, as it does, the adoption Republic Act No. 51, in authorizing the President of the of means and ways to carry into effect the law creating" Philippines to make reforms and changes in government- said municipalities—the authority to create municipal controlled corporations, lays down a standard and policy corporations is essentially legislative in nature, that the purpose shall be to meet the exigencies attendant upon the establishment of the free and independent Same; Same; Same; Requisites for valid delegation of Government of the Philippines and to promote simplicity, power. —Although Congress may delegate to another economy and efficiency in their operations. The standard branch of the government the power to fill in the details in was set and the policy fixed. The President had to carry the execution, enforcement or administration of a law, it out the mandate, and this he did by promulgating is essential that said law: (a) be complete in itself, setting Executive Order (No. 93) in accordance with Republic Act forth therein the policy to be executed, carried out or No. 51, which, tested by the said rule, does not constitute implemented by the delegate; and (b) fix a standard—the an undue delegation of legislative power. limits of which are sufficiently determinate or determinable—to which the delegate must conform in the performance of his functions. PELAEZ VS AUDITOR GENERAL Same; Same; Same; Same; Requirements of due the Revised Administrative Code. The creation of delegation of power not met by Section 68 of Revised municipalities being essentially and eminently legislative Administrative Code.— Section 68 of the Revised in character, the question whether or not "public interest" Administrative Code, insofar as it grants to the President demands the exercise of such power is not one of fact It is the power to create municipalities, does not meet the purely a legislative question (Carolina-Virginia Coastal well-settled requirements for a valid delegation of the Highway vs. Coastal Turnpike Authority, 74 S.E. 2d. 310- power to fix the details in the enforcement of a law. It 313, 315-318), or a political question (Udall vs. Severn, does not enunciate any policy to be carried out or 79 P. 2d. 347-349). implemented by the President. Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; Abdication of powers of Congress in favor of the Same; Same; Same; Same; Proof that issuance of Executive.—If the validity of said delegation of powers, Executive Orders in question enteils exercise of purely made in Section 68 of the Revised Administrative Code, legislative functions.— The fact that Executive Orders were upheld. there would no longer be any legal Nos. 93 to 121, 124 and 128 to 129, creating thirty-three impediment to a statutory grant of authority to the municipalities, were issued after the legislative bills for President to do anything which, in his opinion, may be the creation of the said municipalities had failed to pass required by public welfare or public interest. Such grant Congress, is the best proof that their issuance entails the of authority would be a virtual abdication of the powers of exercise of purely legislative functions Congress in favor of the Executive, and would bring about a total collapse of the democratic system established by BALBUENA VS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY the Constitution. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; DEPARTMENT ORDER No. 8, Same; Same; Same; Nature of powers dealt with in SERIES OF 1955, VALID; SECRETARY OF EDUCATION Section 68 of the Revised Administrative Code.—It is true AUTHORIZED TO PROMULGATE IT; FLAG CEREMONY that in Calalang vs. WiIliams (70 Phil. 726) and People vs. OR SALUTE PROVIDED THEREIN NOT VIOLATIVE OF Rosenthal (68 Phil. 328), this Court had upheld "public CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS ON FREEDOM OF welfare" and "public interest," respectively, as sufficient RELIGION.—Department Order No. 8, series of 1955, is standards for a valid delegation of the authority to valid. The Secretary of Education was duly authorized by execute the law. But the doctrine laid down in these cases the Legislature thru Republic Act 1265 to promulgate said must be construed in relation to the specific facts and Department Order, and its provisions requiring the Issues involved therein, outside of which they do not observance of the flag salute, not being a religious constitute precedents and have no binding effect. Both ceremony but an act and profession of love and allegiance cases involved grants to administrative officers of powers and pledge of loyalty to the fatherland which the flag related to the exercise of their administrative functions, stands for, does not violate the constitutional provision on calling for the determination of questions of fact. Such is freedom of religion (Gerona, et al. vs. Secretary of not the nature of the powers dealt with in Section 68 of Education, et al., 106 Phil., 2; 57 Off. Gaz., [5] 820). means “what has been delegated, cannot be delegated.” ID.; REPUBLIC ACT 1265 DOES NOT CONSTITUTE This doctrine is based on the ethical principle that such UNDUE DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWER; delegated power constitutes not only a right but a duty to REQUIREMENTS IN SECTIONS 1 AND 2 THEREOF TO be performed by the delegate through the instrumentality OBSERVE DAILY FLAG CEREMONY WITH SIMPLICITY of his own judgment and not through the intervening AND DlGNITY AND THE PLAYING OR SlNGING OF mind of another. However, this principle of non-delegation NATIONAL ANTHEM CONSTITUTE ADEQUATE of powers admits of numerous exceptions, one of which is STANDARD.—The requirements set in Sections 1 and 2 of the delegation of legislative power to various specialized the Act constitute an adequate standard, to wit, simplicity administrative agencies like the Board in this case. and dignity of the flag ceremony and the singing of the National Anthem. That the Legislature did not specify the SERENO CONCURRING OPINION details of the flag ceremony is no objection to the validity Constitutional Law; Actions; Congress must revisit the of the statute, for all that is required of it is the laying' constitutional provision and weigh the question of down of standards and policy that will limit the discretion whether it has wrongly and excessively defaulted on the of the regulatory agency. To require the statute to exercise of this constitutional duty to set tariffs in favor of establish in detail the manner of exercise of the delegated the President.—For the longest time, Congress has not power would be to destroy the administrative flexibility made its voice heard on this matter and has simply that the delegation is intended to achieve allowed the President to determine tariff rates by one executive order after another. From the above language, it would seem that delegated presidential tariff rate setting BOC EMPLOYEES VS TEVES powers has been designed to be exercised only as an exception, and not as the norm. Congress must revisit Constitutional Law; Administrative Agencies; Separation this constitutional provision and weigh the question of of Powers; The principle of separation of powers ordains whether it has wrongly and excessively defaulted on the that each of the three great branches of government has exercise of this constitutional duty to set tariffs in favor of exclusive cognizance of and is supreme in matters falling the President. within its own constitutionally allocated sphere; The principle of non-delegation of powers admits of numerous exceptions.—The principle of separation of powers ordains that each of the three great branches of government has exclusive cognizance of and is supreme in matters falling within its own constitutionally allocated sphere. US VS ANG TANG HO Necessarily imbedded in this doctrine is the principle of non-delegation of powers, as expressed in the Latin THE POWER TO DELEGATE.—The Legislature cannot maxim potestas delegata non delegari potest, which delegate legislative power to enact any law. If Act No. 2868 is a law unto itself and within itself, and it does nothing mor£ than to authorize the Governor-General to make rules and regulations to carry it into effect, then the Legislature created the law. There is no delegation of power and it is valid. On the other hand, if the act within itself does not define a crime and is not complete, and some legislative act remains to be done to make it a law or a crime, the doing of which is vested in the GovernorGeheral, the act is a delegation of legislative power, is unconstitutional and void.
POWER VESTED IN THE LEGISLATURE.—By the organic
act and subject only to constitutional limitations, the power to legislate and enact laws is vested exclusively in the Legislature, which is elected by a direct vote of the people of the Philippine Islands.