G.R. No. 208566 Biraogo vs Phil.

Truth Commission
Belgica vs Executive Sec. Dec 7, 2010
Nov. 19, 2013
FACTS:
These are consolidated petitions taken under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, E.O No. 1 establishing the Philippine Truth Commission (PTC) of 2010 was
all of which assail the constitutionality of the Pork Barrel System. signed by President Aquino. The said PTC is a mere branch formed under the
Office of the President tasked to investigate reports of graft and corruption
FACTS: committed by third-level public officers and employees, their co-principals,
In July 2013, the National Bureau of Investigation was spawned by sworn accomplices and accessories during the previous administration and submit
affidavits of six (6) whistle-blowers who declared that JLN Corporation (Janet their findings and recommendations to the President, Congress and the
Lim Napoles) had swindled billions of pesos from lawmakers and various Ombudsman. However, PTC is not a quasi-judicial body, it cannot adjudicate,
government agencies ghost projects. Using dummy NGO’s. . Thus, Criminal arbitrate, resolve, settle or render awards in disputes between parties. Its job
complaints were filed before the Office of the Ombudsman, charging five (5) is to investigate, collect and asses evidences gathered and
lawmakers for Plunder, and three (3) other lawmakers for Malversation, Direct make recommendations. It has subpoena powers but it has no power to cite
Bribery, and Violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. people in contempt or even arrest. It cannot determine for such facts if
In August 2013, the Commission on Audit released the results of a three-year probable cause exist as to warrant the filing of an information in our courts of
audit investigation detailing the irregularities in the release of the PDAF from law.
2007 to 2009.
Whistle-blowers also alleged that at least P900 million from the Malampaya Petitioners contends the Constitutionality of the E.O.
Funds had gone into a dummy NGO.
Issue:
Issue:
Whether or not Executive Order No. 1 violates the principle of
Whether or not the 2013 PDAF Article and all other Congressional Pork Barrel separation of powers by usurping the powers of Congress to create and to
Laws similar thereto are unconstitutional considering that they violate the appropriate funds for public offices, agencies and commissions; Does the
principles of/constitutional provisionsamong others, non-delegability of creation of the PTC fall within the ambit of the power to reorganize as
legislative power? expressed in Section 31 of the Revised Administrative Code?

Held: Held:
Yes. 2013 PDAF Article and all other Congressional Pork Barrel Laws similar
thereto are unconstitutional. No. The creation of the PTC does not fall within the ambit of the
power to reorganize as expressed in Section 31 of the Revised Administrative
Non-delegability of Legislative Power. Code

Notably, the principle of non-delegability should not be confused as a Section 31 of the Revised Administrative Code contemplates “reorganization”
restriction to delegate rule-making authority to implementing agencies for the as limited by the following functional and structural lines: (1) restructuring the
limited purpose of either filling up the details of the law for its enforcement internal organization of the Office of the President Proper by abolishing,
(supplementary rule-making) or ascertaining facts to bring the law into actual consolidating or merging units thereof or transferring functions from one unit
operation (contingent rule-making).199 The conceptual treatment and to another; (2) transferring any function under the Office of the President to
limitations of delegated rule-making were explained in the case of People v. any other Department/Agency or vice versa; or (3) transferring any agency
Maceren200 as follows: under the Office of the President to any other Department/Agency or vice
The grant of the rule-making power to administrative agencies is a relaxation versa. Clearly, the provision refers to reduction of personnel, consolidation of
of the principle of separation of powers and is an exception to the offices, or abolition thereof by reason of economy or redundancy of functions.
nondelegation of legislative powers. Administrative regulations or "subordinate These point to situations where a body or an office is already existent but a
legislation" calculated to promote the public interest are necessary because of modification or alteration thereof has to be effected. The creation of an office
"the growing complexity of modern life, the multiplication of the subjects of is nowhere mentioned, much less envisioned in said provision.
governmental regulations, and the increased difficulty of administering the
law." Gr. No. 80916
xxxx C.T. Torres vs Hibionada
Nevertheless, it must be emphasized that the rule-making power must be Nov 9, 1990
confined to details for regulating the mode or proceeding to carry into effect
the law as it has been enacted. The power cannot be extended to amending FACTS:
or expanding the statutory requirements or to embrace matters not covered by As agent of Pleasantville Development Corp (Pleasantville), C.T. Torres
the statute. Rules that subvert the statute cannot be sanctioned. (Emphases Enterprises (Torres) sold a subdivision lot to Diongon. Having completed the
supplied) payments on installment, Diongon demanded the delivery of the certificate of
title to the subject land. However, neither Pleasantville nor Torres complied.
b. Application. This prompted Diongon to file a complaint for specific performance with the
RTC of Negros Occidental.
In the cases at bar, the Court observes that the 2013 PDAF Article, insofar as
it confers post-enactment identification authority to individual legislators, Torres filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the RTC had no jurisdiction
violates the principle of non-delegability since said legislators are effectively to entertain the case, as it was the HLURB, which was the competent body to
allowed to individually exercise the power of appropriation, which – as settled hear and decide the case.RTC denied the motion to dismiss on the premise
in Philconsa – is lodged in Congress.201 That the power to appropriate must that pursuant to BP 129, a complaint for specific performance with damages
be exercised only through legislation is clear from Section 29(1), Article VI of is a justiciable issue under the New Civil Code and jurisdiction to hear such
the 1987 Constitution which states that: "No money shall be paid out of the issue is vested in the regular courts.
Treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation made by law." To
understand what constitutes an act of appropriation, the Court, in Bengzon v. ISSUE
Secretary of Justice and Insular Auditor202 (Bengzon), held that the power of W/N the RTC has jurisdiction to hear and decide the case
appropriation involves (a) the setting apart by law of a certain sum from the
public revenue for (b) a specified purpose. Essentially, under the 2013 PDAF HELD
Article, individual legislators are given a personal lump-sum fund from which NO. The RTC failed to consider the express provisions of PD 1344 and related
they are able to dictate (a) how much from such fund would go to (b) a specific decrees and erred in supposing that only the regular courts can interpret and
project or beneficiary that they themselves also determine. As these two (2) apply the provisions of the Civil Code, to the exclusion of the quasi-judicial
acts comprise the exercise of the power of appropriation as described in bodies. The argument that only courts of justice can adjudicate claims
Bengzon, and given that the 2013 PDAF Article authorizes individual resoluble under the Civil Code is out of step with the fast changing times.
legislators to perform the same, undoubtedly, said legislators have been There are hundreds of admin bodies now performing this function by virtue of
conferred the power to legislate which the Constitution does not, however, a valid authorization from the legislature. This quasi-judicial function is
allow. Thus, keeping with the principle of non-delegability of legislative power, exercised by them as an incident of the principal power entrusted to them of
the Court hereby declares the 2013 PDAF Article, as well as all other forms of regulating certain activities falling under their expertise.
Congressional Pork Barrel which contain the similar legislative identification
feature as herein discussed, as unconstitutional. A statute may vest exclusive original jurisdiction in an admin agency over
certain disputes and controversies falling within the agency's special expertise.
Gr No. 192935 The very definition of an admin agency includes its being vested with quasi-
judicial powers. The ever increasing variety of powers and functions given to
admin agencies recognizes the need for the active intervention of the admin Issue: whether or not the POEA can promulgate rules by virtue of delegation
agencies in matters calling for technical knowledge and speed in countless of legislative power.
controversies which cannot possibly be handled by the regular courts.
Held:
Gr. No. 90482
Republic of the Phil. Vs CA Yes. The POEA can promulgate rules by virtue of delegation of legislative
Aug 5, 1991 power.

FACTS: The constitutional challenge of the rule-making power of the POEA-based on

impermissible delegation of legislative power had been, as correctly contented
On May 16, 1986 Republic Planters Bank (RPB) filed a complaint in the RTC by the public respondents, brushed aside by this Court in Eastern Shipping
for sum of money/delivery of personal property with restraining order and/or Lines, Inc. vs. POEA.
preliminary injunction against Philippine Sugar Commission (PHILSUCOM) The governing Board of the Administration (POEA) shall promulgate the
and the National Sugar Trading Corporation (NASUTRA). Before necessary rules and regulations to govern the exercise of the adjudicatory
PHILSUCOM and NASUTRA could answer, a compromise agreement was functions of the Administration (POEA).
submitted and was approved by the lower court. Three orders were issued: To many of the problems attendant upon present-day undertakings, the
First order – dismissed separate petitions for relief from judgment filed by legislature may not have the competence to provide the required direct and
different sugarassociations (National Federation of Sugar Cane Planters, efficacious not to say, specific solutions. These solutions may, however, be
Sugar Central Inc, IndependentSugar Planters) expected from its delegates, who are supposed to be experts in the particular
fields assigned to them.
Second order – granted a second motion to resolve a pending motion for While the making of laws is a non-delegable power that pertains exclusively to
issuance of a writof execution and allowed the issuance of an alias writ Congress, nevertheless, the latter may constitutionally delegate the authority
of execution to promulgate rules and regulations to implement a given legislation and
effectuate its policies, for the reason that the legislature finds it impracticable,
Third order – required officers of the RPB to appear before the court to explain if not impossible, to anticipate situations that may be met in carrying the law
why theyshould not be cited in contempt for defying the alias writ of execution into effect. All that is required is that the regulation should be germane to the
objects and purposes of the law; that the regulation be not in contradiction to
CA denied the petition for the nullification of the orders because RPB accepted but in conformity with the standards prescribed by the law. (Principle of
the appointment as Trustee whose obligation is to pay received benefits by Subordinate Legislation)
way of trustee’s fees and cannot question the right of private respondents to That the challenged resolution and memorandum circular, which merely
attorney’s fees. SRA may not lawfully bring action on behalf of the Republic further amended the previous Memorandum Circular No. 02, strictly conform
because EO 18 provides that PHILSUCOM remains a judicial entity for 3 years to the sufficient and valid standard of "fair and equitable employment
for the purpose of prosecuting and defending suits against it. Petition should practices" prescribed in E.O. No. 797 can no longer be disputed.
have been filed through the OSG and not through the OGCC; SRA cannot
lawfully represent the Government because it may only perform powers and GR No. 110120
functions as may be authorized by the laws which created them. SC required Laguna Lake Development Authority v CA
respondents to comment and issued TRO directing respondent Judge to March 16, 1994
desist and refrain from further proceeding in the civil case.
FACTS:
Issue: Whether or not Sugar Regulatory Administration may lawfully bring an
action on behalf of the Republic of the Philippines and that the Office of the The LLDA Legal and Technical personnel found that the City Government of
Government Corporate Counsel does have the authority to represent said Caloocan was maintaining an open dumpsite at the Camarin area without first
petitioner in this case. securing an Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) from the
Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) of the Department of Environment
Held: and Natural Resources, as required under Presidential Decree No. 1586, and
clearance from LLDA as required under Republic Act No. 4850 and issued a
No. Petitioners have no legal personality to initiate petition because SRA is CEASE and DESIST ORDER (CDO) for the City Government of Caloocan to
not a party in the case before the trial court. EO NO. 18 abolished stop the use of the dumpsite.
PHILSUCOM and created SRA but PHILSUCOM was allowed to continue as
a juridical entity for 3 years for the purpose of prosecuting and defending suits Issue:
by or against it, under the supervision of the SRA. Whether or not the LLDA have the power and authority to issue a "cease and
desist" order?
Sec 3, EO 18 does not specifically include the power to represent the Republic
nor the power to sue and be sued. Held:

Sec 4, EO 18 – specific functions does not include the power to represent the Yes. The LLDA have the power and authority to issue a "cease and desist"
Republic order. It must be recognized in this regard that the LLDA, as a specialized
administrative agency, is specifically mandated under Republic Act No. 4850
The Charter does not grant the SRA the power to represent the Republic in and its amendatory laws to carry out and make effective the declared national
Suits filed by or against it. SC says SRA is an administrative agency. As an policy of promoting and accelerating the development and balanced growth of
Administrative agency, only such powers as are expressly granted to it by law the Laguna Lake area and the surrounding provinces of Rizal and Laguna and
and those that are necessarily implied in the exercise; government body the cities of San Pablo, Manila, Pasay, Quezon and Caloocan with due
charged with administering and implementing particular legislation. regard and adequate provisions for environmental management and control,
preservation of the quality of human life and ecological systems, and the
Gr. No. 114714 prevention of undue ecological disturbances, deterioration and pollution.
The Conference of Maritime Manning Agencies vs POEA Under such a broad grant and power and authority, the LLDA, by virtue of its
April 21, 1995 special charter, obviously has the responsibility to protect the inhabitants of
the Laguna Lake region from the deleterious effects of pollutants emanating
FACTS: from the discharge of wastes from the surrounding areas. Pursuant to EO 927
Petitioner Conference of Maritime Manning Agencies, Inc., an incorporated Section 4 while it is a fundamental rule that an administrative agency has
association of licensed Filipino manning agencies, and its co-petitioners, all only such powers as are expressly granted to it by law , it is likewise a settled
licensed manning agencies which hire and recruit Filipino seamen for and in rule that an administrative agency has also such powers as are necessarily
behalf of their respective foreign ship-owner-principals, urge us to annul implied in the exercise of its ex press powers. In the exercise, therefore, of
Resolution No. 01, series of 1994, of the Governing Board" of the POEA and its express powers under its charter as a regulatory and quasi-judicial body
POEA Memorandum Circular No. 05. with respect to pollution cases in the Laguna Lake region, the authority of the
Petitioners contend that POEA does not have the power and authority to fix LLDA to issue a "cease and desist order" is, perforce, implied. NOTE:
and promulgate rates affecting death and workmen's compensation of Filipino HOWEVER, writs of mandamus and injunction are beyond the power of the
seamen working in ocean-going vessels; only Congress can. LLDA to issue.
Governing Board Resolution No. 1: the POEA Governing Board resolves to
amend and increase the compensation and other benefits as specified under
Part II, Section. C, paragraph 1 and Section L, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the
POEA Standard Employment Contract for Seafarers
Gr. No. 151908
Smart vs National Telecommunications Commission
August 12, 2003