Case
Pangasinan Transportation Co. vs. The Public
Service Commission
Manila Electric Co. vs Pasay Transportation Co.
Doctrine
Public Service Commission decided that certificates can last for 25 years and gave the
condition that the PH can acquire it. It is valid because:
Sec 6, Article XII: The State may, in the interest the State may, in the interest of national
welfare and defense, establish and operate industries and means of transportation and
communication, and,
upon payment of just compensation, transfer to public ownership utilities and other
private enterprises to be operated by the Government.
Sec 8, Art XIII: “No franchise, certificate, or any other form of authorization for the
operation of a public utility shall be "for a longer period than fifty years
The administrative function, involving the use of discretion to carry out the will of the
National Assembly having in view the promotion of public interests in a proper and
suitable manner”
Subordinate legislation is adopted due to the complexities of modern governments.
• There is a constantly growing tendency toward the delegation of greater powers by
the legislature with the growing complexity of modern life
• multiplication of the subjects of governmental regulation
• increased difficulty of administering the laws
An act that allowed the members of the Supreme Court sitting as a board of arbitrators
to determine the terms of which another person or corporation may use a right of way
as well as the compensation was deemed unconstitutional. Members of the SC cannot
perform administrative or quasi judicial functions. The only means an exercise of
“jurisdiction” by the SC is acting as a court and not as a “board of arbitrators.”
Noblejas vs. Teehankee
Garcia vs. Macaraig
In Re: Judge Rodolfo Manzano
Puyat vs. De Guzman Jr.
Chiongbian vs. Orbos
Congressional Oversight Power
Despite being of the same rank as a CFI Judge, a Commissioner is not entitled to the
same procedure for his suspension or investigation. If it is so, it would mean that the SC
will have the duty to investigate and discipline even executive officials. It would be a
violation of the separation of powers since SC will be charged with the Administrative
function of supervisory control over executive officials.
The Court frowned upon the practice of judges being detailed in the DOJ to assist the
secretary even if it were only in connection with his work of exercising administrative
authority over the courts. A member of the judiciary cannot be asked to discharge non-
official functions.
An Executive Judge cannot be designated as a member of a Provincial Committee on
Justice since it will entail the performance of Administrative functions. Being a member
tasks him to receive complaints against any officer who commits abuses in the discharge
of his duties, as well as recommend revision of any law or regulation which is prejudicial
to proper administration of criminal justice.
Administrative Functions: those which involve the regulation and control over the
conduct and affairs of individuals for their own welfare and the promulgation of rules
and regulations to better carry out the policy of the legislature or such as are devolved
upon the administrative agency by the organic law of its existence
A member of the Interim Batasang Pambansa cannot appear as counsel before any
administrative body, according to Sec 11, Article VIII of the 1973 Constitution.
The power to merge administrative is executive in character since the division of the
country into regions is intended to facilitate not only the administration of local
governments but also the direction of executive departments which the law requires
should have regional offices.
Macalintal vs. COMELEC The Congress cannot review, raise, amend, and approve the implementing
Rules and Regulations that the COMELEC shall promulgate since it was granted
to the COMELEC to strengthen its independence.

Congressional Oversight: Task to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed,
makes sure that administrative agencies perform their functions within the
authority delegated to them,

a. Scrutiny:
 Lesser intensity and continutity of attention to administrative
operations
 Determines economy and efficiency of the operation of
government activities
 Congress may request information and reports from other
branches of government.
 Congress may give recommendations of pass resolutions for
consideration of the agency involved.
 Power of appropriation
 Question hour
 Power of confirmation where the Congress shares in the appointing
power of the executive

b. Congressional Investigation:
 More intense digging of facts recognized by Sec. 1, Article VI
 Limitations: 1) In aid of legislative function, 2) Conducted in
accordance with duly published rules of procedure, 3) Persons
appearing are afforded their constitutional rights

c. Legislative Supervision:

Abakada Guro Party List vs. Purisima
MWSS vs. Vasquez
 Continuing and informed awareness on the part of a congressional
committee regarding executive operations in a given administrative
area
 Allows Congress to scrutinize the exercise of delegated law-making
authority and permits Congress to retain part of that delegated
authority
 Veto power
Sec. 1, Article IX-A:
Several departments were to promulgate the IRR of an act to be approved by a
Joint Congressional Oversight Committee. The creation of a Congressional
Oversight Committee violates the separation of powers since it is supposed to
be the Judiciary’s job, and it amounts to a Legislative Veto. A Legislative Veto is
a statutory provision which requires the implementing agency to present the
proposed IRR to Congress, which retains the power to approve or disapprove
such regulations. It gives Congress a direct role in enforcing, applying, or
implementing its own laws.
The MWSS was reported for the bidding it conducted and choosing to
contract with fiberglass pipe suppliers. Though the Ombudsman has a broad
authority to investigated any act or omission which appears illegal, unjust,
improper or inefficient, it does not have a veto or revisory power over an
exercise of judgment or discretion by an agency or officer upon whom the
judgment or discretion is vested. The bidding process was surrounded with
technical issues, and the MWSS is the agency that is in the best position to
evaluate the feasibility of the projections of the bidders and decide which is
compatible with development plans.
Lastimosa vs. Vasquez The Ombudsman referred a rape case by a Mayor to a prosecutor to file the
info on the RTC. The prosecutor decided to conduct a private investigation
and found that only acts of lasciviousness has been committed and filed it in
the MCTC. Cases were filed against the prosecutor for not following the
Ombudsman’s directives.

Sec. 15(1) Ombudsman Act 1989: Ombudsman has the power to investigate
and prosecute on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or omission
of any public officer or employee, office or agency when such act or omission
appears to be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient.

Sec. 31: Ombudsman can call in prosecutors for assistance

Bk. IV, Ch. 7 Sec 38(1) Admin Code: When a prosecutor is deputized, he
comes under supervision and control of the Ombudsman and is subject to the
power of Ombudsman to direct, review, approve, reverse, or modify the
prosecutor’s decision.
BIR vs. Ombudsman Ombudsman issued a subpoena to bring relevant documents. Despite there
having an absence of a pending action before it, the Ombudsman may issue
such subpoena. Ombudsman and his Deputies, as protectors of the people,
shall act promptly on COMPLAINTS FILED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER against
public officials or employees of the government, or any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled
corporations, and shall, in appropriate case, notify the complainants of the
action taken and the result thereof. There is no requirement of a pending
action. The Ombudsman can resort to this power on its own or upon a
complaint filed in any form or manner. The Ombudsman also has jurisdiction
to review tax credits since its power to investigate and prosecute is plenary
and qualified. Ombudsman’s jurisdiction encompasses all kinds
of malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance that have been committed by
any officer or employee . . . during his tenure of office”
Ombudsman vs. ENOC Officers had salary grade 27 and therefor claimed that they did not have the
rank required to come under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. It was
held that the Ombudsman is allowed to prosecute cases filed before regular
courts.

Sec. 15(1) of RA 70: authorizes the Ombudsman “to take over, at any stage,
from any investigatory agency of the government, the investigation of such
cases.” This authority does not necessarily imply that the Ombudsman cannot
investigate cases outside the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. The power
granted to the Ombudsman is very broad as to encompass all kinds of
malfeasance committed by public officials.

The Special Prosecutor is only a component of the Ombudsman and may only
act under its supervision. The Law allows the Ombudsman to designate any
person to act as special prosecutor to assist in certain cases and to direct the
Special prosecutor to prosecute cases outside of Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction
in accordance with Sec. 11.
Fuentes vs. Ombudsman The Ombudsman does not have disciplinary authority over officials who may
be removed only by impeachment or over members of the Congress and the
Judiciary. The Ombudsman may not initiate or investigate a criminal or
administrative complaint before his office against a judge, and must indorse
the case to the SC. Article VIII, Sec. 6 of the Constitution vests the SC with the
administrative supervision of all courts and Court personnel.
Ledesma vs. CA The Chairman of the Board of Special Inquiry (BSI) was charged with grave
misconduct and violation of the anti graft and corruption law. The
Ombudsman was found to be authorized to conduct administrative
investigations and its orders are binding. The Ombudsman can determine the
administrative liability of any public official and compel the head of the
agency concerned to implement the penalty imposed. Following it is
mandatory.

Estarija vs. Ranada
Ombudsman vs. Masing
Samson vs. Restiviera
Legislative Function
1. Non Delegation Doctrine
Article XI: The Ombudsman can “direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action
against a public official or employee at fault, and recommend his removal, suspension,
demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith.”
Sec. 15, RA6770: Allows Ombudsman to discipline any officer who, without just cause,
refuses to comply with an order to remove, suspend, demote, or prosecute an officer at fault.
As held in Uy v. Sandiganbayan, the Philippine Ombudsman departs from the
classical Ombudsman model whose function is merely to receive and process complaints. The
Philippine Ombudsman is armed with the power to prosecute and enforce the law.
RA 6770, which grants the power to directly remove, suspend, demote, fine,
or censure erring officials is not unconstitutional. The lawmakers intended
that the Ombudsman has power to punish for contempt and preventively
suspend an officer, and given the disciplinary authority over all elective and
appointed officials.
Constitutional framer Monsod: We leave it up to the Congress at some future
time to designate what powers the Ombudsman needs in order to be more
effective.
Exclusive disciplinary authority on the DECS over public school teachers is not
conferred since the law was passed before the Constitution and RA 6770.
The Ombudsman has jurisdiction over a case involving a private dealing by a
government employee where his act is not related to the performance of his
official duty. The law does not qualify the nature of the illegal act or omission
of the public official or employee that the Ombudsman may investigate.
Compania General Tobacco vs. Board of Public An act granted the Board of Public Utility Commissioners the power to
Utility Commission require every public utility to furnish annual reports. This is an invalid
delegation of power since the provision did not lay down the general rules of
action under which the commission shall proceed and does not prescribe in
detail what the reports shall contain. Everything is left to the judgment and
discretion of the Board.
US vs. Tang Ho An act which authorized the Governor General to issue a proclamation fixing
the price of rice, and to make the sale of rice in violation of the price a crime
is unconstitutional. There was no act of the Legislature making it a crime to
sell rice at any price, and without proclamation.
People vs. Vera The probation law states that it only applies to those provinces wherein the
probationary officer is granted a salary not lower than provincial fiscals by
respective provincial boards. It is unconstitutional since there are no
standards upon which the provincial boards may be guided in the exercise of
their discretionary power. They are endowed with the power to determine
when the act would take effect in their respective provinces.
Pelaez vs. Auditor General Sec. 68 of the Revised Administrative Code provides that the President may
define or divide the boundary or boundaries of any province, sub-province,
municipality, municipal district XXX as the public welfare may require
provided, that the authorization of the Congress of the Philippines shall first
be obtained. This is unconstitutional since RA 2370 provides that barrios may
not be created or their boundaries altered nor their names changed except
by an act of congress or of the corresponding provincial board. The authority
to create municipal corporations is essentially legislative in natureThe power
to fix such common boundary, in order to avoid or settle conflicts of
jurisdiction between adjoining municipalities, may partake of an
administrative nature in the adoption of means and ways to carry into effect
the law creating said municipalities.
Edu vs. Ericta The Reflector Law (RA 5715 amending RA 4136) requires the use of
appropriate parking lights or flares visible 100 m away whenever a vehicle is
parked on highways or in places that are not well-lighted or is placed in such

Agustin vs. Edu
Free Telephone Workers Union vs. Minister of
Labor and Employment
Phil. Communications Satellite Corp vs. Alcuaz
Santiago vs. COMELEC
Panama Refining Co. vs. Ryan
Abakada Guro Party list vs. Ermita
manner as to endanger passing traffic. Reflectors or other similar warning
devices visible 100 m away are likewise required on the front
and back of the vehicle. Violation of these requirements shall be a bar for
vehicle registration. AO No. 2, on the other hand, has provisions on reflectors
reproducing what was set forth in the aforesaid legislation. Provisions on
dimensions, placement, color, and penalties are likewise present. AO No. 2 is
valid since it only provides additional guidelines.
The NTC ordered a 15% reduction in the charges of Philcomsat. It is valid
since the NTC is limited by the requirements of public safety, public interest,
reasonable feasibility, and reasonable rates pursuant to EO 546. The
standard does not have to be spelled out specifically, and coult be implied
from the policy and the purpose of the act as considered as a whole.
Delegation of legislative power may be sustained only upon the ground that
some standard for its exercise is provided and that the legislature in making
the delegation has prescribed the manner of the exercise of the delegated
power.
A law granted a stand-by authority to the President, upon recommendation
of the Secretary of Finance (SoF), to raise the VAT rate to 12%, effective
January 1, 2006, after any of the following conditions have been satisfied:
1) Value-added tax collection as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) of the previous year exceeds 2 and
4/5%; or
2) National government deficit as a percentage of GDP of the previous year
exceeds 1ó%
It is valid since it only leaves a ministerial duty to the president upon any of
the conditions specified by Congress.
Review Center Association of the Phils vs. Ermita
ALA Shecter Poultry Corp vs. US
Federal Energy Admin vs. Al Gonquin
White vs. Roughton
The President issued an order which authorizes CHED to supervise the
establishment and operation of all review centers and similar entities in the
country. This is invalid since the law creating CHED states that CHED’s
coverage shall be both public and private institutions of higher education as
well as degree granting programs in all post-secondary educational
institutions.
The Trade Expansion Act authorizes to take such action and for such time as
he deems necessary to adjust the imports of articles and derivatives when it
threatens or impairs the national security. This is valid since there is a
standard provided.
People were receiving general assistance when it was terminated without
notice or explanation. Roughton, as the administrator of general assistance
program is required to establish written standards and regulations to ensure
the fair and consistent application of eligibility requirements. He and his staff
were determining eligibility upon his own unwritten personal standards and
procedure.

Permissible Delegation
a. Ascertainment of fact

Lovina vs. Moreno Law empowers the Secretary of Public Works and Communications to remove
unauthorized obstructions or encroachments upon public streams, constructions
that no private person was anyway entitled to make because the bed of
navigable streams is public property and ownership thereof is not acquirable by
adverse possession. The Secretary determines some questions of fact but these
functions are merely incidental to the exercise of the power granted by law. The
mere fact that an officer is required to inquire the existence of certain facts and
apply the law thereto do not constitute an exercise of judicial powers.

b. Filling in of Details
 Alegre vs. Collector of Customs
c. Administrative Rule making
Limits on Rule-making Power
Olsen vs. Aldanese
Syman vs. Jacinto
An act was passed by Congress with the intent to provide in detail for the
inspection grading and baling of fibers and for a uniform scale for grading, as
well as to issue official certificates as to the kind and quality of hemp. This was
later carried into as part of the Admin Code, which instructs the collector of
customs not to permit fibers for which standard grades have been established by
the Director of Agriculture to be laden aboard a vessel clearing for a foreign port,
unless they confirm to requirements relative to the shipment. The Admin code
provides in detail for the inspection, grading and baling of hemp and by whom
and how it should be done, and creates the Fiber Board with power and
authority to devise ways and means for its execution.
The law empowers the CIR to establish rules defining the standard and the type
of leaf and manufactured tobacco which may be exported to the US, makes CIR
certificate of origin showing that tobacco to be exported is standard, and makes
CIR inspection a requirement before manufactured tobacco is exported to the
US. The CIR promulgated an AO which limits the exportation of Philippine Cigars
to those manufactured from long filler tobacco exclusively from Cagayan, Isabela
or Nueva Vizcaya. This is invalid since its powers is confined only to the making
of rules and regulations for the classification, marking, and packing of tobacco as
may be necessary to secure good quality tobacco handled uner sanitary
conditions.
The Commissioner tried to revise an unappealed decision of the Collector in a
seizure case pursuant to a MO. The MO, however was neither approved by the
Department Head nor published, in contravention of Sec. 551 of the Rev. Admin
Code
People vs. Maceren The Secretary of Agriculture and National Resources as well as the Commissioner
of Fisheries cannot issue an AO which prohibits electro fishing since the Fisheries
Law does not expressly prohibit electro fishing. Neither of them can penalize it.
Toledo vs. CSC Age limit to government service is being assailed. The age limit is invalid since it
was created purely by the Commission, thus extending the law which created it.
The original rules was repealed by an EO, and the age limit was removed. It can
be presumed that the president did not think it fit to reinstate such a rule. The
Rules of the CSC were invalid as well because it was never published in the
Official Gazette or any newspaper.
CIR vs. CA An EO was promulgated declaring a one-time tax amnestry on unpaid income
taxes invluding estate and donor’s taxes for the taxable year 1981-1985. The CIR
created a memorandum which construed that the coverage includes
assessments issued by the BIR after the promulgation of the EO. The Memo is
invalid since it tried to override the law, and is not consistent and in harmony
with it.
Land Bank vs. CA A law allowed the payment for a parcel of land by the DAR in cash or LBP Bonds.
The DAR created an AO which allowed banks to pay the original owners through
a trust fund. The AO is invalid because the mode of payment was explicitly stated
in the original law.
GMCR vs Bell
Association of Phil. Coconut vs. Phil. Coconut
Authority
Ople vs. Torres
Phil Bank of Communications vs. CIR
China Banking Corp vs. Members of Board of
Trustees
GMA vs. COMELEC
Maxima Realty vs. Parkway Real Estate
Lokin vs. COMELEC
Bartolome vs. SSS