STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION Statutory Construction is essentially
Part I: Definition of Statutory
Construction and the Court’s Duty
What is Statutory Construction?
• It is the art of seeking the intention of
the legislation in enacting a statute
and applying of it to a given state of
facts. (Martin, 1984)
• It is the art or process of discovering
and expounding the meaning and
intention of the authors of the law
with respect to its application to a
given case, where that intention is
rendered doubtful, amongst others, by
reason of the fact that the given case
is not explicitly provided for in the
law. (Rodriguez, 1994; Agpalo, 2009)
• NOTE: Only statutes with an
ambiguous or doubtful meaning may
be the subject of statutory
construction.
What is an ambiguous statute?
• A statute is ambiguous when it is
capable of being understood by
reasonably well-informed person in
either two (2) senses. (Agpalo, 2009)
• Again, the province of construction
lies wholly within the domain of
ambiguity. (Ibid.)
Construction vs. Interpretation
• Interpretation is said to be the act of
finding the true sense and meaning of
words, whereas construction is the
drawing of conclusions respecting
subjects that lie beyond the direct
expression of the text. (Sibal, 1994)
• In other words, one who “interprets”
does not go outside of the context of
the statute, while one who
“constructs” has to go outside of the
language of the statute and seek help
of extrinsic aide. (Ibid.)
judicial
• Although it is true under proper
circumstances that some aid may be
derived from executive or legislative
construction of statutes, it is
ultimately the court’s province and
duty to construe laws enacted by the
legislature. (Rodriguez, 1994)
Court’s Primary Duty id to Apply the
Law
• When the law is clear, the court
cannot disregard or circumvent the
same. The remedy lies within the
legislature if it could be convinced of
the necessity of amending the law.
(Silva v. Cabrera, 1951)
• The first and fundamental duty of the
courts is to apply the law.
Construction and interpretation come
only after it has been demonstrated
that application is impossible or
inadequate without them. (People v.
Mapa, 1967)
• Where the language of the law is clear
and the intent of the legislature is
equally plain, there is no room for
interpretation and construction of the
statute. (Unite Christian Missionary
v. Social Security Commission, 1969)
CASE ASSIGNMENT:
• Chavez v. Judicial and Bar Council
G.R. No. 202242 July 17, 2012
• Bolos v. Bolos G.R. No. 186400
October 20, 2010
• Biraogo v. The Philippine Truth
Commission G.R. No. 192935
December 7, 2010