Powers

Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Powers of Local Government Units (LGUs)

Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines derive their powers from Republic Act No. 7160, also known as the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC), as well as from other special laws and the Constitution. The grant of powers to LGUs is grounded in the principle of decentralization, which aims to allow them to exercise greater autonomy and to foster development through local governance. Below is a comprehensive discussion of the various powers of LGUs under Philippine law.


I. General Powers of Local Government Units

  1. Corporate Powers
    LGUs, as corporations, are given certain corporate powers that allow them to operate as quasi-private entities in some respects. These powers include the following:

    a. To Have Continuous Succession
    LGUs have continuous succession in their corporate name. They can sue and be sued, enter into contracts, and own and manage properties.

    b. To Enter into Contracts
    LGUs may enter into various contracts necessary for their operations, including public-private partnerships, joint ventures, and other arrangements with private entities, provided these contracts are authorized by their respective legislative bodies (Sanggunians).

    c. To Acquire and Hold Property
    LGUs can acquire and hold real and personal property. They can also dispose of their assets, subject to the rules and limitations provided in the Local Government Code.


II. Express Powers under the Local Government Code

  1. Police Power LGUs possess police power, which allows them to enact ordinances necessary to promote public health, safety, morals, general welfare, and convenience. This includes the regulation of business, maintenance of public order, sanitation, and the abatement of nuisances.

    LGUs’ exercise of police power must meet the following criteria:

    • It must be within their territorial jurisdiction.
    • It should not contravene the Constitution, existing laws, or public policy.
    • It must be necessary for the promotion of the general welfare.
  2. Power of Eminent Domain The power of eminent domain, or the right to expropriate private property for public use upon payment of just compensation, is expressly granted to LGUs. However, certain procedural and substantive requirements must be followed, such as:

    • The expropriation must be for a public purpose.
    • A prior valid ordinance must authorize the expropriation.
    • Payment of just compensation to the property owner must be made before taking possession.

    LGUs may only exercise eminent domain after the approval of an ordinance and should ensure that the property to be expropriated is within their territorial jurisdiction.

  3. Power to Tax, Levy Fees, and Other Impositions (Taxing Power) LGUs have the authority to impose taxes, fees, and charges. This power is granted under Section 129 of the Local Government Code and allows LGUs to generate their own revenue sources to finance their operations and projects.

    LGUs can levy the following:

    • Real property taxes
    • Business taxes
    • Fees for services
    • Franchise taxes
    • Community taxes
    • Other local taxes authorized by the LGC or other laws

    However, LGUs must strictly comply with the procedural requirements for the imposition of taxes, including public hearings and the publication of tax ordinances.

  4. Power to Reclassify Lands LGUs have the power to reclassify agricultural lands into residential, commercial, industrial, or other uses in accordance with their development plans and zoning ordinances. This power is crucial in facilitating local development and ensuring that land use is aligned with the needs of the community.

    Reclassification is limited by the following:

    • The land must not exceed a certain percentage of the total agricultural land of the LGU, as prescribed by the Department of Agrarian Reform.
    • The land must not be covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) unless authorized by law.
  5. Power to Grant Franchises, Licenses, and Permits LGUs may grant franchises, licenses, and permits for the operation of public utilities, businesses, and other activities within their jurisdiction. These powers allow LGUs to regulate economic activities within their territories and ensure public safety and order.

    Examples include:

    • Granting of franchises for transportation routes within the LGU
    • Issuance of business permits and building permits
    • Licensing of establishments such as restaurants, bars, and other commercial entities
  6. Power to Create and Dissolve Local Offices LGUs have the authority to create, divide, merge, or abolish offices or departments within their administrative structure, provided such actions comply with the Local Government Code and other pertinent laws. The LGUs’ legislative bodies have the power to create these positions through ordinances, subject to the availability of funds.


III. Implied Powers of LGUs

While most of the powers of LGUs are explicitly granted by law, certain powers are implied as necessary for carrying out their mandated functions. These implied powers include:

  • Power to Issue Orders and Implement Programs
    LGUs have implied authority to issue orders, circulars, and memoranda to implement their programs and projects, provided that these are consistent with national laws.

  • Power to Protect the Environment
    LGUs are tasked with promoting the ecological balance and protecting the environment within their territorial jurisdictions, as part of their mandate to ensure the general welfare. This includes regulating the disposal of waste, the use of natural resources, and the establishment of industries that may harm the environment.


IV. Limitations on the Powers of LGUs

The powers of LGUs are not absolute. They are subject to certain limitations:

  1. Compliance with National Laws and Policies LGUs must exercise their powers in accordance with the Constitution, laws, and national policies. Their ordinances, resolutions, and executive orders must not contravene national statutes or regulations issued by higher authorities.

  2. Territorial Jurisdiction LGUs can only exercise their powers within their respective territorial jurisdictions. Any action taken outside their geographical boundaries is ultra vires, or beyond their authority, unless expressly authorized by law.

  3. Administrative Oversight The President of the Philippines, through the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), exercises general supervision over LGUs to ensure that their actions are within the bounds of law. The President may suspend or remove local officials for abuse of authority, misconduct, or gross negligence in the performance of duty.

  4. Expropriation for Public Use The power of eminent domain is subject to constitutional requirements, such as the taking must be for public use, and just compensation must be provided. Additionally, the courts may review the necessity of expropriation.


V. Delegated Powers

LGUs are also vested with powers delegated to them by national agencies or Congress through special laws. Examples include:

  • Power to Regulate the Utilization of Natural Resources Special laws, such as the Philippine Mining Act, allow LGUs to exercise regulatory functions over the exploration and development of natural resources within their jurisdiction.

  • Implementation of National Programs
    Certain programs and projects, such as those under the Department of Health (DOH) or the Department of Education (DepEd), are devolved to LGUs, making them responsible for the implementation of these services.


VI. Autonomy and the Doctrine of Local Fiscal Autonomy

One of the fundamental principles behind the decentralization of power is fiscal autonomy, which allows LGUs to generate and manage their own financial resources, giving them the freedom to allocate funds for local projects without excessive dependence on the national government. The fiscal autonomy of LGUs is enhanced by the following:

  • Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA)
    Now known as the National Tax Allotment (NTA) under the Mandanas-Garcia ruling, it ensures a steady flow of financial resources to LGUs.
  • Own-source Revenues
    LGUs are empowered to raise their own funds through local taxes, fees, and other impositions, as mentioned earlier.

Conclusion

The powers of LGUs in the Philippines are broad and multi-faceted, encompassing corporate, police, taxation, eminent domain, and regulatory powers. These powers enable LGUs to effectively govern their jurisdictions, promote local development, and ensure the well-being of their constituents. However, these powers are subject to certain limitations, including compliance with national laws, territorial jurisdiction, and oversight by higher authorities. The overarching goal is to balance local autonomy with the need for national unity and policy coherence.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Ultra Vires Acts | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Ultra Vires Acts of Local Government Units (LGUs) – A Detailed Discussion

I. Introduction

In the context of Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines, the doctrine of ultra vires acts pertains to actions taken by an LGU or its officials that exceed the scope of their authority. The Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160) defines the general powers and limitations of LGUs. Acts beyond those expressly or impliedly granted by law are considered ultra vires, making them void or unenforceable.

This discussion will delve into the scope of LGU powers, the concept of ultra vires acts, the consequences of such acts, relevant jurisprudence, and exceptions or mitigating principles.


II. Powers of LGUs

Under the Local Government Code, LGUs are granted specific powers and responsibilities. These powers are classified into the following:

  1. Express Powers: Those explicitly provided by law (R.A. No. 7160) and the Constitution.
  2. Implied Powers: Powers necessary or incidental to the effective exercise of express powers.
  3. Delegated Powers: Powers that are devolved by national legislation to LGUs, such as the powers relating to taxation, enactment of ordinances, and control over local resources.

The inherent powers of LGUs include:

  • Police Power: The ability to enact laws and ordinances that promote the welfare of the community.
  • Power of Eminent Domain: The right to expropriate private property for public use, subject to due process and payment of just compensation.
  • Power of Taxation: The authority to impose local taxes, fees, and charges.

However, these powers must be exercised within the confines of the law and must follow prescribed procedures. Actions outside these bounds are considered ultra vires.


III. The Doctrine of Ultra Vires

The term ultra vires is a Latin phrase meaning “beyond the powers.” In the legal context, it refers to acts or decisions made beyond the legal authority of the entity or official performing them. For LGUs, an ultra vires act is an action that exceeds their statutory authority or violates limitations set by the Local Government Code or other relevant laws.

Key Legal Basis: Section 22(c) of the Local Government Code specifically provides that an LGU shall have “such other powers as are necessary, appropriate, or incidental to efficient and effective governance and those which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare.”

However, actions falling outside these parameters are not allowed.

Types of Ultra Vires Acts:

  1. Substantive Ultra Vires: Acts that LGUs do not have the authority to undertake at all. For example, passing an ordinance regulating a matter exclusively within national legislation.

  2. Procedural Ultra Vires: Acts that LGUs might have the authority to perform but are rendered ultra vires because they were done without following the proper procedures (e.g., failure to follow the required steps in passing an ordinance).


IV. Consequences of Ultra Vires Acts

An ultra vires act by an LGU or its officials results in the following consequences:

  1. Nullity of the Act: Ultra vires acts are void ab initio (from the beginning) and have no legal effect. This is a fundamental principle in administrative law.

  2. Personal Liability of Officials: LGU officials who engage in ultra vires acts may be held personally liable, especially if the act was done with malice, bad faith, or gross negligence. The doctrine of qualified political immunity may not shield them if their actions are ultra vires.

  3. Non-Ratifiability: Ultra vires acts cannot be ratified, even by the LGU itself, since the actions were beyond the scope of their legal authority to begin with.

  4. Injunctions or Declaratory Relief: Affected parties can seek judicial remedies, such as injunctions or declaratory relief, to nullify ultra vires acts.


V. Examples of Ultra Vires Acts

  1. Imposition of Unauthorized Taxes: An LGU imposes a tax that is not authorized by the Local Government Code, such as a tax on national government instrumentalities like the Bureau of Customs. This would be an ultra vires exercise of the LGU’s taxation power.

  2. Ordinances Inconsistent with National Law: LGUs passing ordinances that are inconsistent with or violate national laws are acting ultra vires. For instance, if an LGU enacts a traffic regulation that contradicts the Land Transportation and Traffic Code, such ordinance will be struck down.

  3. Unlawful Use of Eminent Domain: LGUs are given the power to expropriate property, but doing so without following proper procedures (such as the requirement to negotiate with the property owner before filing for expropriation) renders the act ultra vires.

  4. Overstepping Jurisdiction: If an LGU passes an ordinance or takes action that pertains to matters outside its territorial jurisdiction, such act is ultra vires. For example, a municipality cannot enact ordinances regulating businesses located outside its geographic boundaries.


VI. Jurisprudence on Ultra Vires Acts

Several cases have defined the boundaries of ultra vires acts by LGUs:

  1. Province of Cebu v. City of Cebu (G.R. No. 138043, 2001): The Supreme Court ruled that the city’s imposition of a franchise tax on the Province of Cebu’s water distribution system was ultra vires, as local governments cannot impose taxes on government instrumentalities.

  2. Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) v. Bel-Air Village Association (G.R. No. 135962, 2000): The Supreme Court held that the MMDA’s action of opening streets within a private subdivision without the necessary authority was an ultra vires act. While MMDA has certain supervisory powers, its actions must be within the parameters of the law.

  3. Paje v. Casino (G.R. No. 207257, 2014): The Supreme Court invalidated a municipal ordinance that sought to regulate the issuance of mining permits, ruling that the authority to regulate mining operations was vested exclusively in the national government under the Mining Act of 1995.


VII. Exceptions and Mitigating Principles

While ultra vires acts are generally void, there are instances where courts may not strictly apply the doctrine:

  1. De Facto Officer Doctrine: This doctrine protects the public and third parties who rely on the actions of an officer or official who is later found to have acted without authority. It allows for the validity of certain acts taken in good faith by a de facto officer, despite the lack of authority.

  2. Public Welfare Consideration: In some instances, courts may uphold acts that are ultra vires in nature if they were done for the benefit of the general welfare, provided there was no evident bad faith or malice.


VIII. Conclusion

The doctrine of ultra vires serves as a necessary limitation on the powers of Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines. While LGUs are given broad powers under the Local Government Code to govern and promote the general welfare, such powers are not without boundaries. Any act outside these boundaries—whether by overstepping the authority granted or failing to follow the proper procedures—is considered ultra vires, rendering the act void.

LGU officials must be mindful of the scope of their powers and ensure that their actions are in accordance with the law. Ultra vires acts can lead to the nullity of government actions, as well as personal liability for the officials involved, making it crucial for local governance to remain within the limits prescribed by law and jurisprudence.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Corporate Powers | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: CORPORATE POWERS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS (LGUs)

I. Introduction to Corporate Powers of LGUs

Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines, composed of provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays, are granted specific corporate powers under the 1987 Constitution and Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC). These corporate powers enable LGUs to function as corporate entities with distinct legal personalities, allowing them to enter into transactions, contracts, and agreements to carry out their mandates.

The corporate powers of LGUs are essential in empowering local governments to act in their proprietary capacity and achieve local autonomy. Section 22 of the LGC serves as the fundamental provision granting LGUs their corporate powers.

II. General Corporate Powers (Sec. 22, Local Government Code)

Section 22 of the Local Government Code delineates the corporate powers of LGUs as follows:

  1. To Have a Continuous Succession in its Corporate Name

    • LGUs have perpetual legal existence under their corporate names, ensuring that they can continue to function as legal entities even as their elected officials change through elections.
  2. To Sue and be Sued

    • LGUs can initiate legal actions and defend themselves in court. This power is essential for protecting their interests and enforcing their rights in legal matters, whether in proprietary or governmental capacity.
  3. To Have and Use a Corporate Seal

    • LGUs are authorized to adopt and use an official corporate seal, which symbolizes their identity as a legal entity. The corporate seal is affixed to official documents, contracts, and transactions.
  4. To Acquire and Convey Real or Personal Property

    • LGUs are empowered to acquire, purchase, hold, lease, or dispose of both real and personal properties. This corporate power allows them to manage public properties, including those necessary for providing public services.
  5. To Enter into Contracts

    • LGUs, acting through their local chief executives (e.g., governor, mayor), are authorized to enter into contracts necessary to carry out their governmental and proprietary functions. However, there are statutory and legal restrictions to this power, as LGUs must ensure that their contracts are within their powers, fiscally responsible, and compliant with relevant laws.

III. Limitations on the Corporate Powers of LGUs

While LGUs have broad corporate powers, they are also subject to specific limitations imposed by law, including:

  1. Subject to Legal Authority and Council Approval

    • Corporate acts, such as entering into contracts or acquiring property, must generally have the approval of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Sangguniang Panlungsod, or Sangguniang Bayan (depending on the level of LGU). The local chief executive (e.g., governor, mayor) is the authorized representative in entering contracts, but the legislative council must approve these actions.
  2. Comprehensive Financial Authority

    • The power to acquire property and contract obligations is subject to the availability of appropriations and the fiscal management rules. LGUs must operate within their annual budgets, and their contracts should not result in obligations beyond what their resources can sustain.
  3. Limitations on Borrowing and Indebtedness

    • LGUs are permitted to contract loans and borrow funds, but this power is heavily regulated by laws such as Republic Act No. 4860 (Foreign Borrowing Act), Republic Act No. 7180 (Local Borrowing Act), and relevant guidelines from the Department of Finance (DOF) and Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF). LGUs are subject to debt ceilings, and borrowing transactions must be approved by the Department of Finance.
  4. Expropriation Power

    • As part of its corporate powers, an LGU can exercise eminent domain, or the power to expropriate private property for public use, but only when a public purpose is established. The exercise of this power is also subject to due process and the payment of just compensation to the property owner.

IV. Specific Corporate Acts

1. Contracts and Agreements

  • LGUs are authorized to enter into contracts necessary for their operation. These include procurement contracts, public-private partnership (PPP) agreements, supply contracts, construction, leases, and joint ventures. However, all contracts must follow the procurement laws, such as Republic Act No. 9184 (Government Procurement Reform Act), and must be approved by the local legislature.

2. Public-Private Partnerships (PPP)

  • LGUs may enter into joint ventures or partnerships with private entities to undertake projects such as infrastructure, transportation, housing, and economic development. The framework for these agreements is governed by guidelines issued by the national government, such as the Public-Private Partnership Center.

3. Issuance of Bonds

  • LGUs are empowered to issue bonds, debentures, securities, and other forms of indebtedness to fund projects for economic development. The issuance of such instruments is regulated and requires approval from the Department of Finance to ensure that the LGU has the capacity to repay its debts.

4. Acquisition and Disposal of Property

  • LGUs can acquire real or personal property for public use or for their operations. They are also authorized to sell, lease, or dispose of surplus properties following proper legislative approval and processes.

5. Franchise and Licensing

  • LGUs may grant franchises, licenses, or permits in areas under their jurisdiction. These grants are typically for businesses, utilities, and services that operate within the locality, such as transport services, markets, and public utilities.

V. Powers in Relation to Economic Enterprises

In their proprietary capacity, LGUs may operate and manage economic enterprises, which generate income for the local government. Examples include public markets, slaughterhouses, parking lots, and public transport terminals. The income derived from these enterprises augments the resources available to LGUs and funds the delivery of basic services.

VI. Oversight and Regulatory Role of National Government

Although LGUs enjoy local autonomy, their corporate powers remain subject to oversight by the national government. Key regulatory bodies include:

  • Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG): Provides general supervision over LGUs, ensuring that their corporate powers are exercised in accordance with the law.
  • Commission on Audit (COA): Reviews and audits the financial transactions of LGUs to ensure that public funds are spent properly.
  • Department of Finance (DOF): Regulates borrowing and other financial activities of LGUs, ensuring that they do not become financially insolvent.

VII. Conclusion

The corporate powers of LGUs, as enshrined in the Local Government Code, are fundamental to their ability to operate both as government entities and as corporate entities. These powers enable LGUs to carry out their mandates, provide services to their constituents, and promote economic development within their jurisdictions. However, LGUs must exercise their corporate powers within the limits imposed by law, with the necessary checks and balances provided by the oversight of national government agencies and local legislative bodies.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Local Legislation | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Local Legislation under the Local Government Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 7160)

Local legislation refers to the authority of local government units (LGUs) to enact laws, referred to as ordinances, and to adopt resolutions that address the needs of the local community within the framework of the law. The powers and responsibilities of LGUs in relation to local legislation are primarily governed by the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC).

The LGUs include the following political subdivisions:

  • Provinces
  • Cities
  • Municipalities
  • Barangays

The legislative powers of these LGUs are vested in their respective local legislative bodies:

  • Sangguniang Panlalawigan (Provincial Board) for provinces
  • Sangguniang Panlungsod (City Council) for cities
  • Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council) for municipalities
  • Sangguniang Barangay (Barangay Council) for barangays

1. Scope of Local Legislation

Under Section 16 of the Local Government Code, LGUs have the power to legislate for the following purposes:

  • General Welfare Clause: The promotion of the health, safety, prosperity, and general welfare of the people within the LGU’s territorial jurisdiction. This broad provision grants LGUs flexibility to enact ordinances addressing diverse concerns, as long as these serve the general welfare.

  • Corporate Powers: LGUs, as legal entities, can create policies or rules relating to their proprietary functions. These powers include those that enable the LGU to enter into contracts, manage property, and engage in economic activities for income generation.

2. Legislative Process

The process of enacting ordinances and adopting resolutions involves several key stages:

  • Introduction of Ordinance or Resolution: A member of the sanggunian introduces a proposed ordinance or resolution.

  • Deliberations and Readings: The ordinance or resolution undergoes several readings and deliberations. This includes:

    • First Reading: Title of the ordinance is read, and it is referred to an appropriate committee for study and recommendation.
    • Second Reading: Deliberation on the ordinance, including amendments and discussions on its merits.
    • Third Reading: Final reading and approval or disapproval of the ordinance or resolution.
  • Approval by the Local Chief Executive (LCE):

    • The local chief executive (governor for provinces, mayor for cities and municipalities, and punong barangay for barangays) is given 10 days to approve or veto the proposed ordinance or resolution.
    • If approved, the ordinance is published or posted in public places and becomes law.
    • If vetoed, the sanggunian may override the veto with a two-thirds vote of all its members.

3. Veto Power of the Local Chief Executive

Under Section 55 of the LGC, the LCE may veto an ordinance or resolution within 10 days from receipt. The veto must be based on the following grounds:

  • The ordinance or resolution is ultra vires (beyond the powers of the sanggunian).
  • It is prejudicial to the public welfare.
  • It fails to comply with mandatory procedural requirements.

If the veto is overridden by a two-thirds vote of the sanggunian members, the ordinance becomes effective.

4. Powers of the Local Legislative Bodies

Each level of local government has specific powers granted to their legislative bodies under the LGC, as outlined below:

a. Sangguniang Panlalawigan (Provincial Board)

The Sangguniang Panlalawigan exercises legislative functions over the province. Its powers include:

  • Appropriation of funds: Enacting ordinances that authorize the annual budget and other appropriations.
  • Regulation of land use: Adopting measures that regulate the use of land within the province for agriculture, industry, and other purposes.
  • Imposition of taxes and fees: Levying taxes, fees, and charges, particularly those related to the operation of the provincial government.
  • Regulation of natural resources: Enacting ordinances that regulate the extraction and utilization of natural resources within the province.
b. Sangguniang Panlungsod (City Council)

The legislative authority of cities resides in the Sangguniang Panlungsod. In addition to the general powers granted under the LGC, cities have broader authority due to their status as independent or highly urbanized units. Their powers include:

  • Taxation and revenue generation: Cities can impose taxes, fees, and charges as allowed under the LGC and other laws.
  • Zoning ordinances: Cities can enact zoning ordinances to regulate the use and development of urban land.
  • Public utilities and enterprises: City councils have the power to regulate public utilities and franchises operating within their jurisdiction.
c. Sangguniang Bayan (Municipal Council)

The Sangguniang Bayan serves as the legislative body of the municipality. Its powers are similar to those of cities but are limited to the municipality's jurisdiction. These powers include:

  • Adopting ordinances for municipal development: Such as regulations on sanitation, waste management, and local economic enterprises.
  • Taxation: Imposing taxes and fees that apply to the municipality.
  • Issuance of permits and licenses: Municipal councils regulate local business operations through the issuance of permits and licenses.
d. Sangguniang Barangay (Barangay Council)

The Sangguniang Barangay, being the legislative body of the barangay, exercises more limited legislative functions, which include:

  • Enactment of barangay ordinances: Ordinances that directly affect the day-to-day activities of barangay residents, including peace and order, sanitation, and local community projects.
  • Issuance of barangay clearance: Barangays regulate small-scale local businesses and construction projects by issuing clearances and permits.

5. Limitations and Requirements on Local Legislation

While LGUs enjoy substantial legislative autonomy, their powers are subject to certain limitations, including:

a. Consistency with National Law

Local ordinances must be consistent with the Constitution and national laws. Under the principle of preemption, national law prevails over conflicting local ordinances.

b. Compliance with Procedural Requirements

Ordinances must go through the prescribed legislative process. Failure to comply with procedural requirements, such as public hearings for certain ordinances (e.g., zoning or taxation ordinances), renders the ordinances invalid.

c. Publication and Effectivity

For an ordinance to take effect, it must be published in a newspaper of general circulation or posted in prominent public places in the LGU, depending on the type of LGU and the ordinance involved (Section 59, LGC).

d. Judicial Review

Local ordinances are subject to judicial review. Courts may declare ordinances invalid if found to be beyond the powers of the LGU (ultra vires), unconstitutional, or in violation of statutory requirements.

6. Local Legislative Autonomy and Control

a. Autonomy

LGUs enjoy autonomy, particularly in the formulation of local policies through local legislation. This autonomy is enshrined in the Constitution and the Local Government Code, which recognize the right of LGUs to govern themselves and make laws for their local communities.

b. Supervisory Control

The President, through the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), exercises general supervision over LGUs to ensure that their actions are within the scope of their powers and in accordance with the law. Supervision does not extend to control, which means that the national government cannot directly interfere with the actions of LGUs unless these are illegal or outside the bounds of their authority.

7. Challenges in Local Legislation

LGUs often face various challenges in local legislation, including:

  • Limited financial resources that affect their ability to implement local ordinances.
  • Conflicting interests between local officials and their constituents.
  • Political pressures that may influence legislative decisions.

Conclusion

Local legislation is a critical component of governance in the Philippines, allowing LGUs to exercise self-governance and respond to the specific needs of their constituents. While LGUs are granted broad legislative powers, they must operate within the constraints of national law and constitutional principles. The Local Government Code provides the framework for the legislative process, and LGUs must ensure compliance with both substantive and procedural requirements for their ordinances to be valid and effective.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Closure and Opening of Roads | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Closure and Opening of Roads by Local Government Units (LGUs)

The power to open and close roads, streets, alleys, and other similar passageways is a significant function vested in Local Government Units (LGUs) under the Local Government Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 7160). This power is crucial as it directly affects the local community’s mobility, development, and public welfare. Below is a comprehensive legal discussion of this topic:


I. Legal Basis

The power of LGUs to open or close roads is provided under the following provisions of Republic Act No. 7160:

  • Section 21: Closure and Opening of Roads
  • Section 10: Limitations on Closure of Roads

These provisions outline the legal requirements and limitations that an LGU must observe in exercising this power.


II. Power to Open Roads

The Local Government Code grants LGUs the power to open new roads or other similar passageways as part of their general welfare functions and development programs. This includes the power to construct and maintain public roads and other infrastructure projects within their territorial jurisdiction.

  • Scope of Power: The opening of new roads generally involves the planning and development of new streets and passageways for public use, which can be necessary for urban expansion, access to public services, or promoting economic development.

  • Initiative Process: The LGU, through its legislative body (Sangguniang Bayan/Panlungsod/Barangay), may initiate the opening of a road. This action typically follows urban planning or development needs, or a public petition may request it.

  • Funding: The funds for opening new roads may come from the LGU’s development funds, national government subsidies, or external grants, provided they are consistent with national development priorities.


III. Power to Close Roads

The closure of roads, streets, alleys, or other passageways is more complex and subject to strict legal limitations. Closure can be permanent or temporary, depending on the reasons for closure.

1. Permanent Closure

Permanent closure refers to the cessation of a road’s status as public property and its conversion to private use or another form of public property use.

  • Section 21(a) of the Local Government Code: This provision outlines the general authority of the LGU to permanently close roads, streets, or alleys provided that they are no longer necessary for public use.

  • Procedure for Permanent Closure:

    1. Public Hearing: Before the permanent closure of any road, street, or alley, the LGU is required to conduct a public hearing with the residents of the community who may be affected by the closure. The public hearing ensures transparency and provides the community an opportunity to voice their concerns.

    2. Ordinance: After conducting the necessary public hearing, the local Sanggunian (Sangguniang Panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan) must enact an ordinance to authorize the closure of the road. The ordinance is the legal instrument that formalizes the closure.

    3. Concurrence of National Agencies: If the road in question is part of a national highway or otherwise falls under the jurisdiction of a national government agency (such as the Department of Public Works and Highways or the Department of Transportation), the LGU must secure the concurrence of the concerned national agency before closure.

  • Disposition of Property: Once closed, the property may be reclassified as patrimonial property, meaning the LGU can dispose of or use the property for another purpose (e.g., for housing projects, commercial developments, etc.). However, there is a restriction: the property may be sold only to the owners of the adjoining land at a reasonable price if it is no longer needed for public use.

2. Temporary Closure

Temporary closure is typically done for specific events or purposes and does not change the legal status of the road as public property.

  • Section 21(b) of the Local Government Code: This provision allows LGUs to temporarily close and regulate the use of any local street, road, or alley during public events like fiestas, parades, and other similar occasions.

  • Procedure for Temporary Closure:

    1. The LGU may pass a resolution or issue an executive order for the temporary closure of a road or street for a specific period.
    2. There is no requirement for a public hearing for temporary closure, but proper public notice should be provided to ensure minimal disruption to the community.
  • Common Uses for Temporary Closure:

    • Community events like fiestas, parades, and other celebrations.
    • Maintenance and repair work on roads and infrastructure.
    • Public safety concerns during emergencies or calamities.

IV. Limitations and Restrictions

While LGUs have the power to open and close roads, there are legal limitations and restrictions imposed to protect the public's interest and ensure accountability. These limitations are crucial to prevent arbitrary closures that could harm public welfare.

1. Necessity for Public Use (Section 21(a))

A road, street, or alley may be closed permanently only if it is no longer needed for public use. This criterion protects the public from being deprived of essential access routes, especially in densely populated areas where road space is scarce.

2. Requirement for Public Hearing

The mandatory public hearing for permanent closures ensures public participation and transparency in the decision-making process. The affected residents must be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard before the closure is finalized.

3. Compensation for Affected Parties

In cases where the closure of a road results in the impairment of access to a property or negatively impacts a business or residence, the LGU may be required to compensate the affected parties. This requirement stems from the constitutional provision that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation (Article III, Section 9 of the Philippine Constitution).

4. Restrictions on Sale of Closed Roads

Under Section 10 of the Local Government Code, if a permanently closed road is no longer required for public use, it may only be sold to owners of the adjacent properties. This limitation ensures that public property is not disposed of without due consideration of those who may be most affected by its closure.


V. Other Relevant Considerations

1. National vs. Local Roads

LGUs only have jurisdiction over local roads within their territorial boundaries. National roads, which are under the jurisdiction of the national government, may only be closed or modified with the consent of the appropriate national agency, such as the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).

2. Public Safety and Welfare

The closure or opening of roads must always consider public safety and welfare. Roads used for evacuation, emergency response, or essential public services should not be closed unless absolutely necessary, and alternative routes must be provided.

3. Judicial Review

Decisions to open or close roads are subject to judicial review. If an LGU’s action is deemed arbitrary, discriminatory, or in violation of due process, affected individuals or entities may challenge the closure or opening before the courts. LGUs must ensure that all actions comply with procedural and substantive due process requirements.


Conclusion

The power of Local Government Units to close and open roads is a significant tool for urban planning and development, but it is subject to several legal requirements and limitations. LGUs must ensure that closures and openings are conducted transparently, with due regard for public welfare, property rights, and procedural fairness. The legal framework provided by the Local Government Code of 1991 ensures that this power is exercised within a balanced system that respects both public and private interests.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Taxing Power | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Taxing Power of Local Government Units (LGUs) Under Political Law and Public International Law

Constitutional and Statutory Framework

The taxing power of Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines is derived primarily from Section 5, Article X of the 1987 Constitution, which grants LGUs the power to create their own sources of revenue. This is further elaborated in Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC), which provides the legal framework for the taxing power of LGUs.

The constitutional provision empowers LGUs to:

  1. Exercise their taxing power directly, subject to the limitations established by law;
  2. Create their own sources of revenue;
  3. Levy taxes, fees, and charges as provided under the Local Government Code;
  4. Allocate shares in the national taxes, through mechanisms such as the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA), now termed as the National Tax Allotment (NTA) under the Mandanas-Garcia ruling.

Scope and Limitations of LGU Taxing Power

1. General Rule on Taxation (Sec. 129, LGC)

LGUs are empowered to create their own sources of revenue and to levy taxes, fees, and charges within their territorial jurisdictions, subject to limitations outlined in the Local Government Code and other special laws.

2. Limitations on LGU Taxing Power

LGU taxing powers are not absolute. The Constitution and the Local Government Code place various limitations on the exercise of these powers, including:

  • Non-delegability: The power to tax cannot be delegated to private entities.
  • Uniformity and Equality: Taxes must be uniform and equitable within the LGU's jurisdiction.
  • Public Purpose Requirement: Taxes must be levied for a public purpose.
  • Constitutional and Statutory Prohibitions: LGUs are prohibited from levying certain taxes, such as those explicitly reserved for the national government (e.g., income tax, customs duties).
3. Specific Taxes that LGUs Can Levy

Sections 134 to 151 of the Local Government Code enumerate the specific taxes that LGUs are empowered to impose. These include:

  • Provinces:

    • Tax on transfer of real property ownership.
    • Tax on businesses engaged in the printing and publication of books and other materials.
    • Franchise taxes on businesses operating within the province.
    • Tax on sand, gravel, and other quarry resources.
    • Professional tax.
  • Cities:

    • Cities are granted broader taxing powers, allowing them to levy all the taxes that provinces and municipalities can impose, including additional revenue-generating mechanisms like amusement taxes.
  • Municipalities:

    • Tax on business establishments within their jurisdiction (such as manufacturers, retailers, and wholesalers).
    • Fees and charges on business registrations and services provided by the municipality.
  • Barangays:

    • Tax on stores or retailers with a gross sales of Php 50,000 or less within cities or Php 30,000 or less within municipalities.
    • Service fees for services rendered by barangay officials or employees.

Procedures and Requirements for Taxation by LGUs

The Local Government Code outlines the procedural requirements for LGUs when exercising their taxing powers:

  • Ordinance Requirement: Taxes can only be imposed through ordinances enacted by the sanggunian of the LGU concerned.
  • Publication and Public Hearing: Before the imposition of taxes, the proposed ordinance must be published, and a public hearing must be conducted to allow taxpayers to voice their concerns.
  • Tax Rates and Bases: The tax rates and bases are established by law, and LGUs may not exceed the statutory limits.

Taxation and Public International Law

Under public international law, LGUs must ensure that their taxing ordinances do not violate international treaties and obligations to which the Philippines is a party. For instance:

  • Non-Discrimination: LGUs cannot impose taxes that discriminate against foreign entities or individuals in violation of international treaties or agreements.
  • Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs): Taxation measures affecting foreign investors must comply with the protections provided in BITs, such as fair and equitable treatment and non-expropriation without compensation.

National Tax Allotment (NTA) and the Mandanas-Garcia Ruling

The Supreme Court decision in the Mandanas-Garcia case significantly affected the fiscal autonomy of LGUs by ruling that LGUs are entitled to a larger share of the national taxes. The Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) was reinterpreted to include all national taxes, not just internal revenue taxes. The implementation of this ruling, which began in 2022, increased the fiscal resources available to LGUs, thus impacting their capacity to deliver services and fund local projects, including those supported by their own taxing powers.

Collection and Remedies

1. Taxpayer Remedies:

Taxpayers who wish to contest the legality or validity of taxes imposed by LGUs can file:

  • Administrative appeals before the Secretary of Finance or the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), depending on the issue.
  • Judicial remedies via a petition for review in courts, typically starting at the Regional Trial Court.
2. LGU’s Power to Collect:

LGUs have the authority to enforce the collection of local taxes, fees, and charges through:

  • Issuance of warrants of distraint and levy;
  • Civil action for collection in courts;
  • Administrative remedies, including imposing interest and penalties for non-payment.

Autonomy and Fiscal Responsibility

While the taxing power of LGUs enhances local autonomy, they are also held to standards of accountability and fiscal responsibility:

  • Audit and Oversight: The Commission on Audit (COA) audits LGUs to ensure proper management and expenditure of locally generated funds.
  • Limitations on Borrowing and Debt Servicing: LGUs are subject to debt ceilings, and their capacity to borrow is contingent on their ability to generate revenues.

Conclusion

The taxing power of LGUs under the Philippine legal system is an essential component of local autonomy, allowing provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays to create their own revenue sources. This power is framed by constitutional, statutory, and regulatory guidelines to ensure proper, equitable, and responsible use. However, while LGUs enjoy broad taxing powers, these are subject to various limitations, including respect for national policies and international obligations.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Eminent Domain | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Eminent Domain: Local Government Units (LGUs) in the Philippines

Eminent domain refers to the inherent power of the State to take or expropriate private property for public use, upon payment of just compensation. Under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, this power is granted to various levels of government, including local government units (LGUs), subject to specific limitations and conditions.

Legal Framework

  1. Constitutional Basis
    The power of eminent domain is grounded in Section 9, Article III (Bill of Rights) of the 1987 Constitution, which provides:
    "Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation."

  2. Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160)
    The Local Government Code (LGC) expressly grants LGUs the power to exercise eminent domain. This power is provided for in Section 19 of the LGC, subject to certain requirements.

Requisites for the Exercise of Eminent Domain by LGUs

To validly exercise the power of eminent domain, the following conditions must be satisfied:

  1. Public Use or Purpose
    The taking of property must be for a public use or purpose. Public use has been broadly interpreted to include purposes that benefit the public at large, such as roads, parks, public buildings, and infrastructure projects. In Manapat v. CA (G.R. No. 110478, November 16, 1995), the Supreme Court affirmed that even if only a portion of the public is benefited, the requirement of public use can be satisfied.

  2. Necessity
    There must be a showing of genuine necessity for the taking of the property. The power of eminent domain is not a blanket authority to take property without regard to necessity. The taking must be indispensable to achieve the stated public purpose. In Moday v. CA (G.R. No. 107916, February 20, 1997), the Supreme Court ruled that necessity is a condition precedent in the exercise of eminent domain by LGUs.

  3. Ordinance of the Local Sanggunian
    The exercise of eminent domain by an LGU must be authorized by an ordinance enacted by the local sanggunian (legislative body). This requirement is stated in Section 19 of the Local Government Code. Without such an ordinance, any attempt to expropriate property will be considered invalid.

  4. Payment of Just Compensation
    Just compensation must be paid to the owner of the property taken. Just compensation is generally the fair market value of the property at the time of the taking. In National Power Corporation v. CA (G.R. No. 106804, August 12, 2004), the Supreme Court clarified that the determination of just compensation is a judicial function, and the courts have the final say on what constitutes just compensation.

  5. Judicial Intervention
    The power of eminent domain involves judicial intervention. If the owner of the property does not consent to the taking, the LGU must file an expropriation case before the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The court then determines whether the requisites for expropriation are present and fixes the amount of just compensation.

Procedure for Expropriation by LGUs

  1. Preliminary Steps

    • Authorization by Ordinance: The local sanggunian must pass an ordinance authorizing the expropriation of the property.
    • Good Faith Negotiation: Before proceeding with the filing of an expropriation case, the LGU is required to enter into a good faith negotiation with the property owner for the purchase of the property. This is a mandatory requirement under Section 19 of the Local Government Code.
  2. Filing of Complaint
    If no agreement is reached with the property owner, the LGU may file a complaint for expropriation in the RTC having jurisdiction over the property. The complaint must state the public use for which the property is being taken and other facts to justify the expropriation.

  3. Writ of Possession
    Upon filing the complaint and after depositing an amount equivalent to 15% of the fair market value of the property (based on the current tax declaration), the court may issue a writ of possession authorizing the LGU to take immediate possession of the property. This is allowed under Rule 67 of the Rules of Court, which governs expropriation proceedings.

  4. Hearing on the Expropriation Case
    The court will then conduct a hearing to determine whether the taking is for a public purpose and whether the requisites of eminent domain have been satisfied. If the court finds in favor of the LGU, the expropriation will proceed.

  5. Determination of Just Compensation
    After ruling on the propriety of the expropriation, the court will determine the just compensation due to the property owner. This is done by appointing commissioners who will assess the value of the property.

  6. Payment of Just Compensation
    The LGU must pay the amount determined by the court as just compensation. Payment of just compensation is a condition precedent to the transfer of ownership of the property to the LGU.

Limitations on the Power of Eminent Domain by LGUs

  1. Delegated Power
    The power of eminent domain, while inherent to the State, is merely delegated to LGUs. This means that LGUs can only exercise eminent domain within the bounds set by law, specifically the Local Government Code. Any expropriation beyond these bounds is ultra vires (beyond its powers) and invalid.

  2. Use of Public Property
    LGUs cannot exercise eminent domain to expropriate property that is already devoted to a public use unless there is a clear showing that the existing public use will not be interfered with or unless the property is no longer necessary for the public purpose for which it was originally intended.

  3. Specific Projects
    The courts have emphasized that the power of eminent domain must not be used arbitrarily. The LGU must identify specific projects or purposes for the taking of property. In Lagcao v. Judge Labra (G.R. No. 155746, October 13, 2004), the Supreme Court ruled that the LGU must sufficiently identify the public use or project that necessitates the exercise of eminent domain.

Notable Supreme Court Cases on Eminent Domain by LGUs

  1. Municipality of Paranaque v. V.M. Realty Corp. (G.R. No. 127820, July 20, 1998)
    In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the taking of private property for a public market, which was intended to promote the public welfare, was a valid exercise of the power of eminent domain by the Municipality of Parañaque. However, the Court emphasized the importance of a proper ordinance authorizing the expropriation.

  2. Moday v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 107916, February 20, 1997)
    This case involved the expropriation of private property for a resettlement project. The Supreme Court held that necessity is a condition precedent in the exercise of eminent domain. The LGU must show that the property is necessary for the public purpose it seeks to achieve.

  3. City of Manila v. Judge Lagdameo (G.R. No. L-25461, October 31, 1969)
    The Supreme Court ruled that the power of eminent domain must be exercised within the territorial jurisdiction of the LGU. In this case, the City of Manila attempted to expropriate property outside its territorial limits, which the Court declared invalid.

Conclusion

The power of eminent domain is a crucial tool for local governments in the Philippines, allowing them to take private property for public purposes, subject to stringent requirements and judicial oversight. LGUs must comply with constitutional and statutory limitations, such as ensuring public use, demonstrating necessity, providing just compensation, and securing proper authorization through a local ordinance. These safeguards protect property owners from arbitrary takings while enabling LGUs to pursue projects that benefit the community.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Police Power | Powers | LGUs | LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

LAW ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: POLICE POWER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS (LGUs)

I. Legal Basis for Police Power of LGUs

1. The 1987 Constitution
Article X, Section 5 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution grants Local Government Units (LGUs) the authority to exercise police power. It provides that “each local government unit shall have the power to create its own sources of revenues and to levy taxes, fees, and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy.”

2. Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160)
The Local Government Code (LGC) serves as the enabling law for the exercise of LGU powers, particularly police power.

  • Section 16 (General Welfare Clause) – It is the most important provision in the Local Government Code in relation to police power. This clause states:
    • "Every local government unit shall exercise the powers expressly granted, those necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance, and those which are essential to the promotion of the general welfare."
    • It continues, "LGUs shall ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-reliant scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among their residents, maintain peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their inhabitants."

This broad provision encapsulates the police power of LGUs, allowing them to enact ordinances to promote the general welfare of the community.

II. Nature and Scope of Police Power

1. Definition of Police Power
Police power is the inherent power of the state to regulate behavior and enforce order within its territory to ensure public welfare, health, safety, and morals. When exercised by LGUs, this power must be consistent with the local autonomy guaranteed by the Constitution and the limitations set by national law.

2. Scope of LGU’s Police Power
The exercise of police power by LGUs covers a wide range of regulatory measures that aim to promote the general welfare. These include, but are not limited to:

  • Public safety – Ordinances concerning traffic regulations, fire safety measures, regulation of public utilities, prevention of crimes, etc.
  • Public health – Regulations on sanitation, control of infectious diseases, garbage disposal, regulation of businesses affecting health (e.g., slaughterhouses, restaurants), quarantine measures.
  • Public morals – Ordinances against gambling, prostitution, and establishments that promote vice.
  • Public convenience – Regulations on transportation, market operations, and other services that affect the daily convenience of the residents.
  • Environmental protection – Ordinances that control pollution, protect ecological balance, and regulate the use of natural resources.

III. Requisites for a Valid Exercise of Police Power by LGUs

For an ordinance or regulation issued by an LGU to be considered a valid exercise of police power, it must meet the following requisites:

1. Lawful Subject
The subject of the ordinance must be within the scope of the LGU’s police power, meaning that it must pertain to public health, safety, morals, welfare, or convenience. The objective must align with the promotion of the general welfare of the local government unit.

2. Lawful Means
The ordinance or regulation must be reasonable and not oppressive. It must not unduly infringe on constitutional rights and should employ means that are reasonably necessary to achieve its purpose.

3. Territorial Application
An ordinance enacted under police power by an LGU can only have effect within its territorial jurisdiction. The power must be exercised within the geographical limits of the local government.

IV. Limitations on the Exercise of Police Power

Despite the wide latitude granted to LGUs, their exercise of police power is subject to several limitations:

1. Subordination to National Law
Ordinances or regulations passed by LGUs must not contravene national laws or policies. If there is a conflict between an ordinance and a national statute, the latter will prevail. For example, local ordinances that contradict the provisions of laws like the Clean Air Act (R.A. 8749) or Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act (R.A. 9262) will be deemed void.

2. Respect for Constitutional Rights
The exercise of police power must not infringe upon constitutional rights, such as the right to due process, equal protection, or freedom of speech. Any ordinance that violates these rights may be struck down by the courts.

3. Requirement of Due Process and Equal Protection
Ordinances must comply with the requirements of due process. This means that there must be sufficient public hearings or consultations, and affected individuals or entities must be given notice. The ordinance must also apply equally to all persons or entities similarly situated to avoid a violation of the equal protection clause.

V. Legislative and Executive Aspects of Police Power in LGUs

1. Legislative Power
The Sanggunians (Sangguniang Bayan, Sangguniang Panlungsod, Sangguniang Panlalawigan) are the legislative bodies of local governments. They are empowered under the Local Government Code to pass ordinances that regulate aspects of local life. Through these ordinances, the Sanggunian exercises police power on behalf of the LGU.

2. Executive Power
The Local Chief Executive (Governor, Mayor, or Barangay Captain) implements these ordinances. For instance, a mayor may issue executive orders to regulate traffic or market operations, which are considered part of police power when carried out pursuant to an ordinance or national law.

VI. Judicial Review of Police Power Ordinances

While LGUs enjoy a wide scope of discretion in the exercise of police power, their acts are subject to judicial review. Courts can strike down ordinances or executive actions that are:

  • Ultra vires (beyond the powers of the LGU),
  • Unreasonable or oppressive, or
  • In violation of constitutional rights or national statutes.

The courts will examine whether the ordinance serves a legitimate public interest, whether the means employed are reasonable, and whether the ordinance respects the fundamental rights of individuals.

VII. Specific Illustrations of LGU Police Power

  1. Traffic Regulations
    LGUs regularly pass ordinances regulating traffic, such as setting speed limits, prescribing routes for vehicles, or prohibiting certain types of vehicles from using specific roads. These ordinances aim to promote public safety.

  2. Sanitation Ordinances
    LGUs have the authority to regulate public markets, restaurants, slaughterhouses, and other establishments affecting public health. These regulations may include setting hygiene standards, waste disposal requirements, and health certificates for workers.

  3. Regulation of Business Establishments
    LGUs may require business permits and impose regulations on businesses within their jurisdiction. They can regulate the operation of entertainment venues, alcohol sale restrictions, or zoning ordinances that control where certain businesses can operate.

  4. Environmental Protection
    Some LGUs have passed ordinances banning the use of plastic bags or regulating waste disposal to protect the environment and promote public welfare. Such measures, when reasonable and in line with national environmental laws, are a valid exercise of police power.

VIII. Conclusion

The police power of Local Government Units is an indispensable part of their role in governance and in promoting the general welfare of their constituents. While broad in scope, this power is tempered by national law, the Constitution, and the requirements of reasonableness, equality, and fairness. Through ordinances and regulations, LGUs can address local concerns on public health, safety, morals, and convenience, all in the name of public interest and community welfare.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Powers | Judicial and Bar Council | Appointments to the Judiciary | JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

POLITICAL LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

XI. JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

D. Appointments to the Judiciary

2. Judicial and Bar Council (JBC)

b. Powers

The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) is a constitutionally created body under the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Its primary function is to assist the President in the appointment of members of the Judiciary. Under Section 8, Article VIII of the Constitution, the JBC is tasked with recommending appointees to the judiciary to ensure transparency, meritocracy, and insulation from political influence. The Council plays a pivotal role in maintaining the integrity and independence of the judicial branch.

Below is a detailed examination of the powers of the JBC:

1. Primary Function: Recommendation of Nominees

The principal function of the JBC is to submit a list of at least three (3) nominees to the President for every vacancy in the judiciary. The positions covered include:

  • Justices of the Supreme Court
  • Judges of lower courts (Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit Trial Courts)
  • Members of the Court of Appeals, Court of Tax Appeals, and Sandiganbayan
  • Other judicial positions created by law

The JBC ensures that those nominated possess the necessary qualifications as mandated by the Constitution and relevant laws. The President is mandatorily bound to appoint only from the list submitted by the JBC. This power is crucial in ensuring that political considerations do not unduly influence judicial appointments.

2. Screening of Applicants

The JBC has the authority to screen and evaluate applicants for judicial positions. This involves:

  • Application and Nomination Process: Individuals aspiring for judicial office may apply or be nominated by third parties. The JBC opens applications and nominations for every vacant position.
  • Public Interviews: The JBC conducts public interviews of the applicants, allowing both transparency and public scrutiny.
  • Psychological and Medical Examinations: The JBC subjects applicants to thorough psychological, psychiatric, and medical examinations to assess their fitness for the role.
  • Background Investigation: The JBC conducts an investigation of each applicant's background, including any pending criminal or administrative cases, character, and ethical standards.
  • Public Comments: The JBC also invites the public to submit any opposition, complaint, or comment on the applicants, ensuring that the selection process is inclusive and takes into account public sentiment.

3. Setting of Standards and Criteria

The JBC has the discretion to set criteria for the selection of judicial appointees, including:

  • Integrity, Competence, and Independence: The JBC gives high importance to the ethical integrity, legal competence, and independence of the applicants.
  • Seniority: For positions like the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, seniority among incumbent justices can also be considered, though it is not determinative.
  • Qualifications: The JBC ensures that applicants meet the constitutional qualifications for the judiciary, such as natural-born citizenship, age, and years of legal practice or judicial experience.

The JBC evaluates each applicant against these standards, considering factors like legal expertise, knowledge of jurisprudence, work ethic, and judicial temperament.

4. Investigative Powers

In the performance of its screening duties, the JBC has the power to investigate any allegations or complaints against applicants. This power includes:

  • Conducting hearings or meetings where witnesses may be presented
  • Issuing subpoenas and requiring the submission of documents pertinent to its investigation
  • Resolving and dismissing baseless or unfounded complaints

This investigative power allows the JBC to maintain the highest standards in the selection of nominees by ensuring that applicants are free from any allegations of misconduct or unfitness.

5. Rule-Making Power

The JBC has the authority to promulgate its internal rules of procedure for the effective performance of its functions. The JBC's Rules of Procedure, as currently implemented, outline its processes for accepting applications, conducting interviews, handling complaints, and submitting the shortlist to the President.

The JBC's rule-making power is essential for providing a clear and transparent framework for its operations, ensuring that its processes are fair, systematic, and aligned with its constitutional mandate.

6. Administrative Powers

In addition to its primary function of nominating judges, the JBC has the power to manage its administrative affairs, including:

  • The appointment of its own personnel
  • Management of its budget and resources
  • Overseeing its internal operations to ensure the efficient discharge of its duties

The JBC is an autonomous constitutional body and, as such, it operates independently from other government departments or agencies, including the Judiciary and the Executive.

7. Quasi-Judicial Powers

While primarily a recommending body, the JBC exercises certain quasi-judicial functions in relation to the evaluation and selection of candidates, particularly in:

  • Resolving oppositions and complaints: The JBC may act on formal oppositions to an applicant’s candidacy by weighing evidence and making determinations based on its investigation.
  • Disqualification of Applicants: The JBC has the power to disqualify candidates from being considered for judicial office based on findings of misconduct, lack of qualifications, or other reasons.

8. Submission of Shortlist to the President

After completing its evaluation process, the JBC submits a list of at least three (3) nominees for each vacancy to the President. The President is constitutionally required to choose from this list when making judicial appointments. Failure of the President to select from the list would constitute a breach of constitutional protocol, as the JBC's role is designed to prevent the arbitrary appointment of judges.

9. Independent Functioning

The JBC operates independently of both the Executive and Judicial branches. While it assists the President in judicial appointments, it is not subject to the President’s direct control or supervision. Similarly, the Supreme Court, while headed by the Chief Justice who serves as the ex-officio chairman of the JBC, does not exercise control over its functions.

10. Composition and Role in Ensuring Judicial Independence

The composition of the JBC as prescribed by Article VIII, Section 8(1) of the Constitution ensures a balanced and diverse body. It is composed of:

  • The Chief Justice as ex-officio chairman
  • The Secretary of Justice as ex-officio member
  • A representative from Congress (alternating between a Senator and a House member)
  • A representative of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
  • A professor of law
  • A retired member of the Judiciary
  • A representative of the private sector

This composition ensures that the JBC reflects a broad spectrum of interests and perspectives, while preventing the dominance of any one sector or branch of government. This design reinforces the principle of judicial independence and insulates the judiciary from political influence.

Conclusion

The JBC plays a critical role in ensuring that appointments to the judiciary are based on merit, integrity, competence, and independence. Its powers, including the ability to screen applicants, investigate complaints, and recommend nominees, are essential to preserving the impartiality and integrity of the judicial branch. By limiting the President’s choice to a shortlist of vetted candidates, the JBC acts as a safeguard against the politicization of the judiciary, ensuring that judges are chosen based on their qualifications rather than political affiliations or connections.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Powers | Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments | LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments: Powers under the Legislative Department

A. Electoral Tribunals

Electoral Tribunals are bodies established by the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines to resolve disputes involving the election, returns, and qualifications of members of Congress. Specifically, the Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) for Senators and the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) for members of the House of Representatives. These tribunals are vested with exclusive jurisdiction over electoral contests relating to their respective chambers.

1. Constitutional Basis
  • Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET) and House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET) are created under Article VI, Section 17 of the 1987 Constitution.

    • Section 17: The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each have an Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of their respective members.
    • Each tribunal is composed of nine members: three from the Supreme Court, designated by the Chief Justice, and six from the Senate or the House of Representatives, as the case may be, chosen based on proportional representation from the political parties and party-list organizations.
2. Powers and Functions of the Electoral Tribunals
  • Exclusive Jurisdiction: The Electoral Tribunals have the exclusive authority to hear and decide electoral contests concerning members of the Senate and the House of Representatives. No other entity can assume jurisdiction over these matters.

    • Senate Electoral Tribunal (SET): Exercises exclusive jurisdiction over all contests related to the election, returns, and qualifications of Senators.
    • House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal (HRET): Exercises exclusive jurisdiction over all contests related to the election, returns, and qualifications of members of the House of Representatives.
  • Judicial Function: The Tribunals function in a quasi-judicial capacity. They are independent of the legislative functions of Congress and act as quasi-judicial bodies that review evidence and legal arguments.

  • Scope of Authority:

    • The tribunals can inquire into the qualifications of candidates, such as citizenship, age, residency, and other eligibility requirements under the Constitution.
    • They review issues concerning the election process, including fraud, vote-buying, and errors in the counting and canvassing of votes.
    • Proclamation Disputes: They can invalidate the proclamation of a winning candidate if evidence shows irregularities.
  • Decisions: The decisions of the Electoral Tribunals are final and executory. These decisions are generally not appealable, except in cases of grave abuse of discretion, which may be subject to review by certiorari by the Supreme Court under its expanded judicial power (Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution).

3. Composition and Process
  • Three Justices of the Supreme Court, designated by the Chief Justice, and six members of the Senate or the House, selected based on proportional representation.

  • Impartiality: The tribunal members must act impartially, even though a majority are from the legislative body. A balance is maintained by the presence of justices from the Supreme Court.

  • Quorum and Decision: A majority of the members of the Electoral Tribunal constitutes a quorum for its meetings, and decisions are rendered by a majority vote of all its members.


B. Commission on Appointments

The Commission on Appointments (CA) is a constitutional body vested with the power to confirm certain appointments made by the President of the Philippines. It acts as a check on the executive branch by ensuring that presidential appointments meet the requirements of competence, integrity, and fitness for office.

1. Constitutional Basis
  • Article VI, Section 18 of the 1987 Constitution provides for the creation of the Commission on Appointments.

    • Section 18: The Commission on Appointments consists of the President of the Senate, as ex officio chairman, and twelve Senators and twelve members of the House of Representatives, elected by each House on the basis of proportional representation from the political parties or organizations therein. The Chairman of the Commission shall vote only in case of a tie.
2. Powers and Functions of the Commission on Appointments
  • Power of Confirmation: The primary power of the CA is to approve or disapprove certain appointments made by the President. The positions requiring confirmation include:

    • Heads of executive departments (i.e., Cabinet members).
    • Ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls.
    • Officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain.
    • Heads of government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs) or their subsidiaries, as provided by law.
  • Appointments that Do Not Require Confirmation: The following appointments do not require confirmation by the CA:

    • The Vice President (when appointed to a Cabinet position).
    • Judges and justices (whose appointments are under the purview of the Judicial and Bar Council, Article VIII, Section 9).
    • Career officials whose promotions are based on merit and seniority, as required by law.
  • Scope of Review: The CA reviews the qualifications and fitness of the appointees. This involves an assessment of the appointees' qualifications, ethical standards, track record, and integrity. Appointees must undergo confirmation hearings where they may be asked to answer questions about their background and qualifications.

  • Decision-Making Process:

    • The CA votes in plenary after hearings conducted by its committees. Appointees must receive a majority vote of all the members of the CA present in the session for their appointment to be confirmed.

    • Rejection of Appointments: The CA has the power to reject an appointment. Once rejected, the President may no longer reappoint the same individual to the same position unless the CA reverses its decision.

  • Voting and Powers of the Chair: The Senate President serves as the ex officio chairman of the Commission and votes only in the case of a tie.

3. Checks and Balances
  • The Commission on Appointments is an essential part of the checks and balances mechanism in the Philippine government. It ensures that the executive branch does not have unchecked power over appointments and that only qualified and competent individuals are appointed to sensitive positions in the government.
4. Confirmation Process
  • The Commission exercises its power through its committees, each of which handles specific categories of appointments (e.g., foreign affairs, defense, etc.). Appointees appear before these committees for public hearings, during which members of the Commission may question them about their qualifications and fitness for the position.
5. Decisions and Appeals
  • The decisions of the CA, like those of the Electoral Tribunals, are final and binding. Once the CA confirms or rejects an appointment, the decision is effective immediately. There is no higher authority to appeal CA decisions on confirmations.

C. Interrelationship and Key Jurisprudence

  • The Supreme Court has consistently upheld the independence of both the Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments as essential mechanisms of checks and balances.

  • The Electoral Tribunals are considered quasi-judicial bodies, and their decisions can only be reviewed by the Supreme Court under the narrow ground of grave abuse of discretion (e.g., Cayetano v. Monsod and Francisco v. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal).

  • The Commission on Appointments, on the other hand, is a political body, and its decisions, especially on the rejection of appointments, are generally considered political questions and are not subject to judicial review.

D. Conclusion

Both the Electoral Tribunals and the Commission on Appointments play critical roles in the Philippine constitutional system. They serve as independent entities that ensure the proper functioning of the democratic processes related to elections and appointments in government. These bodies safeguard against abuses of power and uphold the constitutional principles of checks and balances.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.