Source: https://ru.scribd.com/document/79627729/z-Local-Government-Law
Timestamp: 2020-01-22 04:42:36
Document Index: 301426669

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art.14', 'Art. 2189', 'Art. 24', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 2180', 'Art. 2189', 'Art. 2189', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 124']

z Local Government Law | Eminent Domain | Local Government
z Local Government Law
сохранитьСохранить «z Local Government Law» для последующего чтения
Chapter II. CREATION and DISSOLUTION of LGUs
Public Corporations a. Concept (1)Distinguished from GovernmentOwned or Controlled Corporations (GOCCs)
As to purpose A municipal corporation in its strict sense is the body politic constituted by the inhabitants of a city or town for the purpose of local government thereof. It is the body politic established by law particularly as an agency of the State to assist in the civil government of the country chiefly to regulate the local and internal affairs of the city or town that is incorporated. Non-municipal corporations, on the other hand, are public corporations created as agencies of the State for limited purposes to take charge merely of some public or state work other than community government. [National Waterworks & Sewerage Authority v. NWSA Consolidated Unions (1964)]
Coconut Corporation (1956)] By becoming a stockholder in the National Coal Company, the Government divested itself of its sovereign character so far as respects the transactions of the corporation. . . . Unlike the Government, the corporation may be sued without its consent, and is subject to taxation. Yet the National Coal Company remains an agency or instrumentality of government. [Bacani v. National Coconut Corporation (1956)]
Nature and Status
A Local Government Unit (LGU) is a political subdivision of the State which is constituted by law and possessed of substantial control over its own affairs. Remaining to be an intra sovereign subdivision of a sovereign nation, but not intended to be an imperium in imperio, the LGU is autonomous in the sense that it is given more powers, authority, responsibilities and resources. [Alvarez vs Guingona (1996)] Local government is interchangeable with municipal corporation. The City of Manila, being a mere municipal corporation, has no right to impose taxes. [Basco vs PAGCOR (1991)] b. Classifications (1) Quasi-Corporations (2) Municipal Corporations Municipal Corporation vs Quasi-municipal corporation A municipal corporation exists by virtue of, and is governed by, its charter. A quasimunicipal corporation operates directly as an agency of the state to help in the administration of public functions. [Singco, (1955)]
As to personality (The National Coconut Corporation) was given a corporate power separate and distinct from our government, for it was made subject to the provisions of our Corporation Law in so far as its corporate existence and the powers that it may exercise are concerned. [Bacani v. National Coconut Corporation (1956)] It is an independent agency of the government although it is placed, for administrative purposes, under the Department of Public Works and Communications. It has continuous succession under its corporate name and may sue and be sued in court. It has corporate powers to be exercised by its board of directors; it has its own assets and liabilities; and it may charge rates for its services. [National Waterworks & Sewerage Authority v. NWSA Consolidated Unions (1964)] The mere fact that the Government happens to be a majority stockholder does not make it a public corporation. [Bacani v. National
LGC Sec. 14. Beginning of Corporate Existence
The election and qualification of chief executive AND majority of the members of the Sanggunian unless some other time is fixed therefore by the law or ordinance creating it.
Note: Art.14 applies when the law creating it is SILENT as to the beginning of its corporate existence. a. Elements of a Municipal Corporation 1. A LEGAL creation or incorporation 2. A CORPORATE NAME by which the artificial or legal entity is known and in which all corporate acts are done 3. INHABITANTS constituting the population who are invested with the political and corporate powers which are executed through duly constituted officers and agents 4. A place or TERRITORY within which the local civil government and corporate functions are exercised. b. Nature and Functions Dual Nature Sec. 15, LGC. Every local government unit created or recognized under this Code is a body politic and corporate endowed with powers to be exercised by it in conformity with law. As such, it shall exercise powers as a political subdivision of the National Government and as a corporate entity representing the inhabitants of its territory. The obligations of the old City of Manila survives the cession of the Phil. to the U.S. because of the corporate nature of the city. [Villas vs Manila (1921)] As a body politic with governmental functions, the LGU has the duty to ensure the quality of the environment (S16, LGC). It cannot claim exemption from PD 158 which imposes the same duty. [Republic vs Davao (2002)]
Political subdivision of the national government AND Corporate entity representing the inhabitants of its territory
A municipal corporation performs twin functions. Firstly, it serves as an instrumentality of the State in carrying out the functions of a government. Secondly, it acts as an agency of the community in the administration of local affairs. It is in the latter character that it is a separate entity acting for its own purposes and not a subdivision of the state. [Lidasan v COMELEC (1967)] The holding of a town fiesta is a proprietary function, though not for profit, for which a municipality is liable for damages to 3rd persons ex contractu or ex delicto. [Torio v Fontanilla (1978)]
Difference Between the Political Nature and Corporate Nature of LGUs Political/ Governmental Political subdivision of national government Includes the legislative, judicial, public and political LGU cannot be held liable except: o If statute provides otherwise Art. 2189, Civil Code Corporate/ Municipal Corporate entity representing inhabitants of its territory Includes those which are ministerial, private and corporate Can be held liable ex contractu or ex delicto
LGC Sec. 15. Political and Corporate Nature of Local Government Units Local government unit created or recognized under this Code is a Body politic AND Corporate endowed with powers to be exercised by it in conformity with law Exercise of power (as a):
Examples: Regulations against fire, disease Preservation of public peace Maintenance of municipal plaza Establishmen t of schools, post offices, etc.
Examples: Municipal waterworks Slaughterhouse s Markets Stables Bathing establishments Wharves Fisheries Maintenance of parks, golf courses, cemeteries, airports
1) Metropolitan Subdivisions Political
Sec. 11. The Congress may, by law, create special metropolitan political subdivisions, subject to a plebiscite as set forth in Section 10 hereof. The component cities and municipalities: shall retain their basic autonomy and shall be entitled to their own local executive and legislative assemblies. The jurisdiction of the metropolitan authority that will thereby be created shall be limited to basic services requiring coordination.
2) Highly Urbanized Cities and Independent Component Cities
Sec.12. Cities that are highly urbanized, as determined by law, and component cities whose charters prohibit their voters from voting for provincial elective officials, shall be independent of the province. The voters of component cities within a province, whose charters contain no such prohibition, shall not be deprived of their right to vote for elective provincial officials.
(1) Creation/Conversion (Art. X, 1987 Consti.)
Sec. 10. No province, city, municipality, or barangay may be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary substantially altered, except: in accordance with the criteria established in the Local Government Code and subject to approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly affected. Sec. 13. Local government units may: group themselves, consolidate or coordinate their efforts, services, and resources for purposes: commonly beneficial to them in accordance with law. Sec. 14. The President shall provide for regional development councils or other similar bodies composed of local government officials, regional heads of departments and other government offices, and representatives from non-governmental organizations within the regions: for purposes of administrative decentralization to strengthen the autonomy of the units therein and to accelerate the economic and social growth and development of the units in the region.
Sec. 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras consisting of provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical areas sharing common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and social structures, and other relevant characteristics within the framework of this Constitution and the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines. Sec. 16. The President shall exercise general supervision over autonomous regions to ensure that laws are faithfully executed. Sec. 17. All powers, functions, and responsibilities not granted by this Constitution or by law to the autonomous regions shall be vested in the National Government. Sec.18. The Congress shall enact an organic act for each autonomous region with the assistance and participation of the regional consultative commission composed of representatives appointed by the President from a list of nominees from multi-sectoral bodies. The organic act shall define the basic structure of government for the region consisting of the executive department and legislative assembly, both of which shall be elective and representative of the constituent political units. The organic acts shall likewise provide for special courts with personal, family, and property law jurisdiction consistent with the provisions of this Constitution and national laws.
Authority to Create Local Government Units
LGC, Sec. 6
A local government unit may be o created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundaries substantially altered either by law enacted by Congress in the case of a province, city, municipality, or any other political subdivision, OR by ordinance passed by the sangguniang panlalawigan or sangguniang panlungsod concerned in the case of a barangay located within its territorial jurisdiction, o subject to such limitations and requirements prescribed in this Code.
in creation; legal existence has been recognized and acquiesced publicly and officially. Requisites: (LACA) (a) valid law authorizing incorporation; (b) attempt in good faith to organize it; (c) colorable compliance with law; and (d) assumption of corporate powers.
The authority to create municipal corporations is essentially legislative in nature [Pelaez v. Auditor General (1965)]
The Municipality of Sinacban1 possesses legal personality. Where a municipality created as such by executive order is later impliedly recognized and its acts are accorded legal validity, its creation can no longer be questioned. Sinacban has attained de jure status2 by virtue of the Ordinance appended to the 1987 Constitution, apportioning legislative districts throughout the country, which considered Sinacban part of the Second District of Misamis Occidental. Above all, Sec. 442(d) of the LGC of 1991 must be deemed to have cured any defect in the creation of Sinacban. Since Sinacban had attained de facto status at the time the 1987 Constitution took effect on February 2, 1987, it is not subject to the plebiscite requirement. This requirement applies only to new municipalities created for the first time under the Constitution. Attack Against Validity of Incorporation
The SC held that sec. 19 of RA 9054 insofar as it grants ARMM Regional Assembly the power to create provinces and cities is void. (Constitution allows delegation of creating municipalities and barangays only.) [Bai Sema v. COMELEC (2008)] Creations under Sec. 68, Admin Code The alleged power of the President to create municipalities under Sec. 68 of the Admin Code amounts to an undue delegation of legislative power. The authority to create municipal corporations is essentially legislative in nature. The power of control of the President over executive departments, bureaus or offices implies no more than the authority to assume directly the functions thereof or to interfere in the exercise of discretion by its officials. It does not include the authority either to abolish or create such. [Pelaez v. Auditor General (1965)] Effect if created under Sec 68, Admin Code: The municipality is non-existent. It cannot be a party to any civil action [Mun. of Kapalong v. Moya (1988)] De Facto Corporations De facto municipal corporation: There is defect
Sinacban was created by EO 258 of then President Elpidio Quirino, pursuant to Sec. 68 of the Revised Administrative Code of 1917.
De jure: by virtue of the ordinance appended to the 1987 Constitution; Sec. 442 (d), LGC curative. Sec. 442(d), LGC: Municipalities existing as of the date of the effectivity of this Code shall continue to exist and operate as such. Existing municipal districts organized pursuant to presidential issuances or executive orders and which have their respective set of elective municipal officials holding office at the time of the effectivity of this Code shall henceforth be considered as regular municipalities.
The enactment of a LGC is not a condition sine qua non for the creation of a municipality, and before the enactment of such code, the power remains plenary except that the creation should be approved by the people concerned in a plebiscite called for the purpose. [Torralba v. Sibagat (1987)]
There can be no color of authority in an unconstitutional statute. An unconstitutional act confers no rights, imposes no duties, affords no protection, and creates no office. However, even if the EO was invalid, it does not mean that the acts done by the municipality of Balabagan in the exercise of its corporate powers are a nullity. This is because the existence of the EO is an operative fact which cannot justly be ignored. [Malabanan v Benito (1969)]
When the inquiry is focused on the legal existence of a body politic, the action is reversed to the state in a proceeding for quo warranto or any other direct proceeding. Collateral attacks shall not lie. Proceeding must be: (RST) 1. Brought in the name of the Republic of the Philippines 2. Commenced by the Sol Gen or the fiscal when directed by the president 3. Timely raised [Municipality of San Narciso v Mendez (1994)] The municipality can still be considered to have attained at least a status closely approximating that of a de facto corporation despite the invalidity of the EO creating it. This is because the State itself recognized the continued existence of San Andres when it classified it as a 5th class municipality. And, more importantly, Sec. 442(d) of the LGC cured whatever defect there was in its creation. [Municipality of San Narciso v. Mendez]
Municipal Corporation by Prescription Existence is presumed where the community has claimed and exercised corporate functions with the knowledge and acquiescence of the legislature, and without interruption or objection for a period long enough to afford title by prescription. [Martin, Public Corporations (1977)] The municipality was created under a void law (S68, AC). But it should be considered a de jure personality because it existed 1 year before the Pelaez case, and various governmental acts indicate the States recognition of its existence. [Mun. of Candijay v. CA (1995)]
Compliance attested to by: Department of Finance (DOF) National Statistics Office (NSO) Lands Management Bureau (LMB) of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
A. Requirements 1. In accordance with the criteria established in the LGC 2. Majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the political units directly affected.
Purpose of plebiscite: to prevent gerrymandering (i.e. the practice of creating legislative districts to favor a particular candidate or party) and creation or abolition of units for purely political purposes.
Illustrations The requirement on metes and bounds was meant merely as a tool in the establishment of LGUs. So long as the territorial jurisdiction of a city may be reasonably ascertained, the intent behind the law (i.e., the determination of the territorial jurisdiction over which governmental powers may be exercised) has been sufficiently served. A cadastral type description is not necessary. [Mariano v. COMELEC (1995)] NOTE: The ruling in Mariano is an exception to the general rule of proper identification because of its peculiar facts: (1) the legislature deliberately omitted the description in metes and bounds because of the pending litigation between Makati and Taguig over Fort Bonifacio; (2) RA 7854 provided that the territory of the City of Makati will be the same as that of the Municipality of Makati, thus making the territorial jurisdiction of Makati ascertainable (subject, of course, to the result of the unsettled boundary dispute).
Criteria LGC, Sec. 7 As a general rule, the creation of a local government unit or its conversion from one level
Compliance with population OR land area, in addition to income, is sufficient to satisfy the requirements in the creation of a
to another level shall be based on verifiable indicators of viability and projected capacity to provide services, to wit: (IPL) 1. Income. - must be sufficient, based on acceptable standards, to provide for all essential government facilities and services and special functions commensurate with the size of its population. 2. Population. - total number of inhabitants within the territorial jurisdiction of the local government unit concerned. 3. Land Area. - must be: Contiguous o unless it comprises two or more islands or is separated by a LGU independent of the others; Properly identified by metes and bounds with technical descriptions; and Sufficient to provide for such basic services and facilities to meet the requirements of its populace.
city. [Samson v. Aguirre (1999)]
Internal Revenue Allocations (IRAs) form part of the income of LGUs. The funds generated from local taxes, IRAs and national wealth utilization proceeds accrue to the general fund of the LGU and are used to finance its operations subject to specified modes of spending the same as provided for in the LGC and its implementing rules and regulations.
shall be conducted in the political units directly affected, it means that the residents of the political entity who would be economically dislocated by the separation of a portion thereof have the right to vote in said plebiscite. What is contemplated by the phrase political units directly affected is the plurality of political units which would participate in the plebiscite. [Padilla v. COMELEC (1992)]
As such, for purposes of budget preparation, which budget should reflect the estimates of the income of the LGU, among others, the IRAs and the share in the national wealth utilization proceeds are considered items of income. [Alvarez v. Guingona (1996)] NOTES: For provinces and cities, the income requirement must be satisfied; and EITHER population OR territory. In the creation of barangays, there is no minimum requirement for area and income. As to the income requirement, average annual income shall include the income accruing to the general fund, exclusive of special funds, transfers, and nonrecurring income.
Effects of downgrading: (ART) (a) the city mayor will be placed under the Administrative supervision of the governor; (b) resolutions and ordinances will have to be Reviewed by the provincial board; (c) Taxes will have to be shared with the province. [Miranda v. Aguirre (1999)]
LGC, Sec. 10 No creation, division, merger, abolition, or substantial alteration of boundaries of local government units shall take effect unless there is: Law or ordinance Approved by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite called for the purpose in the political unit or units directly affected. Said plebiscite shall be conducted by the commission on elections (COMELEC) - Within one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of effectivity of the law or ordinance effecting such action, unless said law or ordinance fixes another date. Illustrations When the law states that the plebiscite
The creation of a separate congressional district of Mandaluyong is not a subject separate and distinct from the subject of its conversion into a highlyurbanized city but is a natural and logical consequence of its conversionThe Court found no need for the people of San Juan to participate in the plebiscite. They had nothing to do with the change of status of neighboring Madaluyong. [Tobias v. Abalos (1994)]
Beginning of Corporate Existence
LGC, Sec. 14
Sec. 14. When a new local government unit is created, its corporate existence o shall commence upon the election and qualification of its chief executive and a majority of the members of its sanggunian, o unless some other time is fixed therefor by the law or ordinance creating it.
The downgrading of Santiago City from an ICC to a component city falls within the meaning of creation, division, merger, abolition, or substantial alteration of boundaries; hence, ratification in a plebiscite is necessary. There is material change in the political and economic rights of the LGUs directly affected as well as the budget preparation, which budget should reflect the estimates of people therein. It is therefore but reasonable to require the consent of the people to be affected.
Summary: Creation of Specific LGUs3 Requirements Income Province LGC 460-461 Average annual income, as certified by the Department of Finance, of not less than P20,000,000 based on 1991 constant prices 250,000 inhabitants City RA 9009 (2001) Average annual income, as certified by the Department of Finance, of at least P100,000,000 for the last 2 consecutive years based on 2000 constant prices 150,000 inhabitants Municipality LGC 441-442 Average annual income, as certified by the provincial treasurer, of at least P2,500,000.00 for the last two consecutive years based on 1991 constant prices 25,000 inhabitants Barangay LGC 385-386 No minimum requirement for income
contiguous territory of at least 2,000 km2 territory need not be contiguous if it comprises 2 or more islands or is separated by a chartered city or cities which do not contribute to the income of the province
contiguous territory of at least 100 km2 requirement on land area shall not apply where the city proposed to be created is composed of 1 or more islands; the territory need not be contiguous if it comprises 2 or more islands By an Act Congress of
contiguous territory of at least 50 km2 requirement on land area shall not apply where the municipality proposed to be created is composed of 1 or more islands; territory need not be contiguous if it comprises 2 or more islands By an Act of Congress
Territory need not be contiguous if it comprises 2 or more islands
By an Act Congress
By law or by an ordinance of the sangguniang panlalawigan or panlungsod; In case of the creation of barangays by the sangguniang panlalawigan, the recommendation of the sangguniang bayan concerned shall be necessary
For creation of specific LGUs, please check LGC 385386, 441442, 449450, 460461
2,000 inhabitants 5,000 inhabitants, in cities and municipalities within MM and other metropolitan political subdivisions or in highly urbanized cities No minimum requirement for area
Province LGC 460-461
City RA 9009 (2001)
Municipality LGC 441-442
Plebiscite (in LGUs directly affected)
(2) Division and Merger; Abolition
LGC, Sec. 8. Division and merger of existing local government units shall comply with the same requirements herein prescribed for their creation: Provided, however, That such division shall not reduce the income, population, or land area of the local government unit or units concerned to less than the minimum requirements prescribed in this Code: Provided, further, That the income classification of the original local government unit or units shall not fall below its current classification prior to such division. The income classification of local government units shall be updated within six (6) months from the effectivity of this Code to reflect the changes in their financial position resulting from the increased revenues as provided herein. Effects of Merger
1. 2. 3. Legal existence of LGU to be annexed is dissolved Laws and ordinance of the annexing LGU prevails The right of office in the annexed LGU is terminated
Title to property is acquired by the annexing LGU Debts are assumed by the annexing LGU [Martin, supra]
Effects of division 1. The legal existence of the original municipality is extinguished 2. Property, rights and powers are acquired by the dividing LGUs [Martin, supra]
LGC, Sec. 9 A local government unit may be abolished: when its income, population, or land area has been irreversibly reduced to less than the minimum standards prescribed for its creation under Book III of this Code, as certified by the national agencies mentioned in Section 7 hereof to Congress or to the sangguniang concerned, as the case may be. The law or ordinance abolishing a local government unit shall specify the province, city, municipality, or barangay with which the local government unit sought to be abolished will be incorporated or merged. When there is no dissolution 1. Non-user or surrender of charter
Approval must be by majority of the votes cast; except otherwise provided in the Act of Congress, the plebiscite shall be held within 120 days from effectivity of the law or ordinance effecting such action
Barangay LGC 385-386 By an Act of Congress, to enhance the delivery of basic services in the indigenous cultural communities Approval must be by majority of the votes cast; plebiscite shall be held within such period of time as may be determined by the law or ordinance creating said barangay.
2. officers 3. 4.
Change of sovereignty Change of name
1) Principles of Local Government Law
A. State Policy, Decentralization Art. X, 1987 Constitution
Sec. 2. The territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy local autonomy. Sec. 3. The Congress shall enact a local government code which shall o provide for a more responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a system of decentralization with effective mechanisms of recall, initiative, and referendum, o allocate among the different local government units their powers, responsibilities, and resources, o and provide for the qualifications, election, appointment and removal, term, salaries, powers and functions and duties of local officials, o and all other matters relating to the organization and operation of the local units. Sec. 4. The President of the Philippines shall exercise general supervision over local governments. Provinces with respect to component cities and municipalities, and cities and municipalities with respect to component barangays shall ensure that the acts of their component units are within the scope of their prescribed powers and functions. Sec. 5. 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. Such taxes, fees, and charges shall accrue exclusively to the local governments. Local Government Code (RA 7160) Sec. 2 (c) It is likewise the policy of the State to require all national agencies and offices to
conduct periodic consultations with: appropriate local government units, nongovernmental and people's organizations, and other concerned sectors of the community before any project or program is implemented in their respective jurisdictions.
B. Local Autonomy The principle of local autonomy under the 1987 Constitution simply means decentralization (discussed below). [Basco vs PAGCOR (1991)]
Illustrations The CSC cannot declare the provision upon recommendation of the local chief executive concerned as merely directory. Such provision is in consonance with local autonomy. [San Juan vs CSC (1991)] An A.O. may not compel LGUs to reduce their total expenditures. Supervising officials may not lay down or modify the rules. These rules were made in furtherance of local autonomy. [Pimentel vs Aguirre (2000)] HOWEVER, the Constitution did not intend, for the sake of local autonomy, to deprive the legislature of all authority over LGUs, in particular, concerning discipline. [Ganzon vs CA (1991)]
C. Decentralization NOTE: Decentralization is a means to achieve local autonomy.
Autonomy is either (1) decentralization of administration or (2) decentralization of power. There is decentralization of administration when the central government delegates administrative powers to political subdivisions in order to broaden the base of government power. Purpose: to relieve the central government of the burden of managing local affairs and enable it to concentrate on national concerns. The President exercises "general supervision" over them, but only to
"ensure that local affairs are administered according to law." He has no control over their acts in the sense that he can substitute their judgments with his own. [Limbona v. Mangelin (1989)] Cf. Decentralization of power is the abdication of political power in favor of LGUs declared to be autonomous. There is self-immolation where autonomous government is accountable, not to the central government, but to its constituents. (Note: not allowed by our Constitution.) Sec. 1 of AO 372 (Adoption of Economy Measures in Government for FY 1998), insofar as it directs LGUs to reduce expenditures by at least 25%, is a valid exercise of the Presidents power of general supervision over LGUs as it is advisory only. Supervisory power, when contrasted with control, is the power of mere oversight over an inferior body; it does not include any restraining authority over such body. [Pimentel v. Aguirre, supra]
C. Devolution (asked in 1999) Refers to the act by which the national government confers power and authority upon the various local government units to perform specific functions and responsibilities (Sec. 17, LGC); the transfer of power and authority from the National Government to LGUs to enable them to perform specific functions and responsibilities (Art. 24, IRR of the LGC).
Powers of Local Government Units (LGUs)
Powers in General Sources of Powers of LGUs 1987 Consti., Sec. 25, Art. II ; Sec. 5-7, Art. X Statutes, e.g. LGC Charter (particularly of cities) Doctrine of the right of self-government, but applies only in States which adhere to the doctrine Classification of Powers of LGUs Express, Implied, Inherent Public or Governmental, Private or Proprietary Intramural, Extramural Mandatory, Directory; Ministerial, Discretionary Execution of Powers Where statute prescribes the manner of exercise, the procedure must be followed Where statute is silent, LGUs have discretion to select reasonable means and methods of exercise LGC Sec.18 Local government units shall have the power and authority to generate and apply resources Establish an organization responsible for implementation of development plans, program objectives, and priorities. Own sources of revenues (Sec.5, Art. X, Constitution; Sec.18 LGC) which include: Power to create own sources Levy taxes, fees and charges o Shall accrue exclusively for their own use and disposition o Limitation: guidelines Congress may provide Just share in national taxes (Sec.6, Art. X, Constitution; Sec.18 LGC) o Determined by law o Automatically and directly released Equitable share in utilization and development of national
wealth (Sec.7, Art. X Constitution; Sec.18 LGC) o Within respective territorial jurisdictions o In the manner provided by law o Sharing with inhabitants by way of direct benefits Acquire, develop, lease, encumber, alienate, or otherwise dispose of property (Sec.18 LGC) o Real or personal property o Made in a proprietary capacity
Preservation of peace and order within respective regions (Sec.21, Art. X, Constitution) 1. Responsibilities of local police agencies 2. Local police shall be organized, maintained, supervised and utilized in accordance with applicable laws. Defense and security of regions (Sec.21, Art. X, Constitution) o Responsibility of National Government General Welfare Clause (Sec.16 LGC) 1. Powers expressly granted 2. Powers necessarily implied 3. Powers necessary, appropriate or incidental for efficient and effective governance 4. Powers essential to the promotion of general welfare 5. Shall ensure and support: Preservation and enrichment of culture Promotion of health and safety Enhancement of the right of the people to a balance ecology Development of self reliant scientific and technological capabilities Improvement of public morals
Apply resources and assets (Sec.18 LGC) o Purpose: productive, development, or welfare purposes o In the exercise of their governmental or proprietary powers and functions
Economic prosperity and social justice Promotion of full employment among residents Maintenance of peace and order Preservation of the comfort and convenience of inhabitants Nature
1. The General Welfare Clause cannot be used to justify an act that is not specifically authorized by law. 2. Powers of the LGUs under the general welfare clause (LGC Sec.16) Powers expressly granted to the LGU Power necessarily implied therefrom Powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance 3. For ordinance to be valid exercise of police power [Tatel v. Mun. of Virac (1992)]: 1. Not contrary to the Constitution and/or statute 2. Not unfair or oppressive 3. Must not be partial or discriminatory 4. Not prohibit but may regulate trade 5. General and consistent with public policy 6. Not unreasonable Illustrations: Police Power Applies A municipal ordinance prescribing the zonification and classification of merchandise and foodstuff sold in the public market [Eboa v Municipality of Daet (1950)] A proclamation reserving parcels of the public domain for street widening and parking space purposes [Republic v Gonzales] Condemnation and demolition of buildings found to be in a dangerous or ruinous condition within the authority provided for by municipal ordinances [Chua Huat vs CA (1991)] Regulation and operation of tricyclesfor-hire and to grant franchises for the operation thereof. However, this power is still subject to the guidelines prescribed by the DOTC. Moreover, the newly delegated powers pertain to the franchising and regulatory powers therefore exercised by the LTFRB. [LTO vs City of Butuan (2000)] The declaration of an area as a commercial zone through a municipal ordinance. Corollary thereto, the state may interfere with personal liberty with property, business, and occupations. [Patalinhug vs CA (1994)]
To constitute public use: The public in general should have equal or common rights to use the land or facility involved on the same terms The number of users is not the yardstick in determining whether property is properly reserved for public use or public benefit [Republic v. Gonzales]
2 Branches of the GWC The General Welfare Clause has 2 branches: (1) the general legislative power which authorizes municipal councils to enact ordinances and make regulations not repugnant to law as may be necessary to carry into effect and discharge the powers and duties conferred upon it by law; (2) the police power, which authorizes the municipality to enact ordinances as may be proper and necessary for the health and safety, prosperity, morals, peace, good order, comfort and convenience of the municipality and its inhabitants, and for the protection of their property. Here, the ordinances imposing the licenses and permits for any business establishments, for purposes of regulation enacted by the municipal council of Makati, falls under the 1st branch. [Rural Bank of Makati, Inc v Municipality of Makati (2004)]
The police power of a municipal corporation extends to all the great public needs, and, in a broad sense includes all legislation and almost every function of the municipal government. Public purpose is not unconstitutional merely because it incidentally benefits a limited number of persons. The drift is towards social welfare legislation geared towards state policies to provide adequate social services, the promotion of general welfare and social justice [Binay v Domingo (1991)]
Demolition of stalls causing traffic and deteriorated sanitation [Villanueva vs Castaneda (1987)] Deny an application for permit or avoid the injury to the health of residents. [Technology Developers vs CA (1991)] Provide for burial assistance to the poor. [Binay vs Domingo, supra] Abatement of a public because stored inflammable created a danger to the people neighbourhood [Tatel vs Mun. (1992)] nuisance materials within the of Virac
LGC Sec.19 Eminent Domain -- It is the ultimate right of the sovereign power to appropriate not only public but private property of citizens within the territorial sovereignty to public purpose [Charles River Bridge vs. Warren Bridge, (1837)] Requisites for a Valid Exercise of Eminent Domain (COP-JO) a. Through the Chief Executive of LGU b. Acting pursuant to an ordinance c. For the purposes of: Public use or welfare For the benefit or the poor and the landless d. Payment of just compensation Amount determined by proper court Based on fair market value at the time of the taking e. Valid and definite offer made Right by the State to immediately take possession: Upon filing of expropriation proceedings Upon deposit with proper court of at least 15% of the fair market value of the property Article 35 IRR of LGC Offer to buy private property for public use or purpose shall be in WRITING. It shall specify the property sought to be acquired, the reasons for the acquisition, and the price offered. If the owners accept the offer in its entirety, a contract of sale shall be executed and payment made If the owner/s are willing to sell their property but at a price higher than that offered to them, the local chief executive shall call them to a conference for the purpose of reaching an agreement on the selling price. The chairman of the appropriation or finance committee of the Sanggunian, or in his absence, any member of the Sanggunian duly chosen as its representative, shall participate in the conference. When an agreement is reached by the parties, a contract of sale shall be drawn and executed. The contract of sale shall be supported by the following documents:
Rescind contracts [Tamin vs CA (1994)]
Illustrations: Police Power Does Not Apply The LGU has no power to prohibit the operation of night clubs, a lawful trade or pursuit of occupation. It may only regulate. [De La Cruz vs Paras (1983)] Anxiety, uncertainty and restiveness among stallholders and traders cannot be a ground to revoke the mayors permit. The General Welfare claim is too amorphous. [Greater Balanga vs Mun. of Balanga (1994)] Butuan city board passes an ordinance requiring that the sale of tickets to movies, exhibitions or other performances to children between 7-12 years of age should be at half price. The said ordinance was declared void. The theater operators are merely conducting their legitimate business. There is nothing immoral or injurious in charging the same price for both children and adults. In fact, no person is under compulsion to purchase a ticket. [Balacuit v CFI (1988)]
The power of the municipal government to issue fishing privileges is only for revenue purposes. BUT the power of the LLDA to grant permits is for the purpose of effectively regulating and monitoring activities in the lake region and is in the nature of police power. [Laguna Lake Development Authority v. CA (1995)]
Enforcement of fishery laws in municipal waters including the conservation of mangroves. [Tano vs Socrates (1997)]
Resolution of the Sanggunian authorizing the local chief executive to enter into a contract of sale. The resolution shall specify the terms and conditions to be embodied in the contract. Ordinance appropriating the amount specified in the contract, and Certification of the local treasurer as to availability of funds together with a statement that such fund shall not be disturbed or spent for any purpose other than to pay for the purchase of the property involved. Illustrations of Eminent Domain There is no need to get DAR approval before expropriation [Camarines Sur vs CA (1993)] There must be genuine necessity of a public character. There is no genuine necessity if another road more ideal is available. [Meycauyan vs IAC (1988)] The ordinance which requires cemeteries to set aside a portion of their lots to paupers is not an exercise of police power, but a taking without compensation. [QC vs Ericta (1983)] Eminent domain may be exercised over easements (property rights), not just lands or personal property. [NPC vs Jocson (1992)] Necessity does not contemplate the economic relief of a few families devoid of any other public advantage [Manila vs Arellano (1950)] Eminent domain requires an ordinance, not just a resolution. Res judicata does not apply to expropriation cases [Paranaque vs VM Realty (1998)] Just compensation shall be determined at the time of taking, NOT at the time of filing complaint Although the general rule in determining just compensation in eminent domain is the value of the property as of the date of filing of the complaint, the rule admits of an exception: where the SC fixed the value of the property as of the date it was taken and not at the date of the commencement of the expropriation proceedings. Finally, while sec.4, Rule 67 of the Rules of Court provides that just compensation shall be determined at the time of the filing of the complaint for expropriation, such law cannot prevail over the Local Government Code, which is substantive law. [Cebu vs Apolonio (2002)]
It is possible that the purpose for expropriation is changed after such is granted. [Republic vs CA (2002)]
Immediate Entry by the LGU Requisites for immediate entry of LGU: 1. Filing of complaint for expropriation sufficient in form and substance 2. The deposit of the amount equivalent to 15% of the fair market value of the property to be expropriated based on the current tax declaration [Bardilion v Masili (2003)] Upon compliance with the requirements for immediate entry, the issuance of a writ of possession becomes ministerial. No hearing is required for the issuance of the writ. The LGC did not put a time limit as to when a LGU may immediately take possession of the property. As long as the expropriation proceedings have been commenced and the deposit made, the LGU cannot be barred from praying for the issuance of writ of possession. [City of Iloilo v Legaspi (2004)] Socialized Housing The UDHA and the Expropriation by the LGUs i.e. Sec.9 of the Urban Land and Housing Act, which speaks of PRIORITIES in acquisition) should be read in connection with Sec.10 (MODES of acquisition). If the land sought to be expropriated is located in urban areas and fall under the UDHA, the LGU must allege compliance with Secs. 9 and 10 for their suit to prosper. Otherwise, it would be premature. Cases Under the Urban Land and Housing Act, there is a priority in expropriation of which the properties of the government or any of its subdivision rank number one and privately owned properties ranked last. Also, the said act provides that expropriation should be the last alternative, giving way to other modes of acquisition like community mortgage and swapping. Otherwise it would be deprivation of property. [Filstream International Inc v CA (1998)] The UDHA introduced a limitation on the size of the land sought to be expropriated for socialized housing. It exempted small property owners. The elements of small
property owners are: 1. Those owners of real property which consists of residential lands with an area of not more than 300 sq. meters in highly urbanized cities (800 in other urban cities); 2. They do not own real property other than the same. [City of Manadaluyong v Aguilar (2001)]
c. Power to Generate Revenue
LGC Sec.18 Sources of LGU funds: (O-TIU) 1. Own sources of revenues 2. Taxes, fees and charges: which shall accrue exclusively for their use and disposition and which shall be retained by them 3. Just share in national taxes which shall be automatically and directly released to them without need for any further action (Internal Revenue Allotments) 4. Equitable share in the proceeds from the utilization and development of the national wealth and resources within their respective territorial jurisdictions including sharing the same with the inhabitants by way of direct benefits Fundamental principles governing the exercise of the taxing and other revenue-raising powers of LGUs LGC Sec. 130 (PE-PUB) 1. Taxation shall be uniform in each LGU; 2. Taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall be equitable and based as far as practicable on the taxpayers ability to pay; levied and collected only for public purposes; not unjust, excessive, oppressive, or confiscatory; not contrary to law, public policy, national economic policy, or in restraint of trade; 3. The collection of local taxes, fees, charges and other imposition shall in no case be left to any private person; 4. The revenue shall inure solely to the benefit of, and be subject to disposition by, the LGU, unless otherwise specifically provided herein; and 5. Each LGU shall, as far as practicable, evolve a progressive system of taxation. Common Limitations on the Taxing Powers of LGUs Sec. 133 LGC 1. Income tax (except when levied on banks and financial institutions) 2. Documentary stamp tax 3. Estate tax
4. Customs duties, registration fees of vessels and all other kinds of customs fees and charges 5. Taxes, fees and charges and other impositions upon goods carried in or out of, or passing through, the territorial jurisdiction of local government units in the guise of charges for wharfage, tolls for bridges or otherwise, or other taxes, fees or charges in any form whatsoever upon such goods or merchandise 6. Taxes, fees or charges on agricultural and aquatic products when sold by marginal farmers or fishermen 7. Taxes on business enterprises certified by the BOI as pioneer or non-pioneer for a period of 6 and 4 years, respectively, from date of registration 8. Excise taxes 9. Percentage taxes or VAT 10. Taxes on the gross receipts of transportation contractors and persons engaged in the transportation of passengers or freight, and common carriers 11. Taxes on premiums paid by way of reinsurance or retrocession 12. Taxes, fees, charges for the registration of motor vehicles and for the issuance of all kinds of licenses or permits for the driving thereof, except tricycles 13. Taxes, fees, or other charges in Phil. products actually exported, except as otherwise provided therein 14. Taxes, fees or charges, on Countryside and Barangay Enterprises and cooperatives duly registered under RA 6810 and the Cooperative Code 15. Taxes, fees, or charges of any kind on the National Government, its agencies and instrumentalities Fundamental principles governing the financial affairs, transactions and operations of LGUs LGC Sec. 305 1. No money shall be paid out of the local treasury except in pursuance of an appropriations ordinance or law; 2. Local government funds and monies shall be spent solely for public purposes; 3. Local revenue is generated only from sources expressly authorized by law or ordinance, and collection thereof shall at all times be acknowledged properly; 4. All monies officially received by a local government officer in any capacity or on any occasion shall be accounted for as local funds, unless otherwise provided by law; 5. Trust funds in the local treasury shall not be paid out except in fulfillment of the purpose
Sec. 234 withdrew all exemptions from real property taxes, even GOCCs when the beneficial use of the property has been granted to a taxable person for consideration or otherwise. MCIAA is a GOCC and an instrumentality, therefore, RPT exemption granted under its charter is withdrawn [MCIAA vs Marcos (1997)] Tax exemption of property owned by the Republic refers to properties owned by the Government and by its agencies which do not have separate and distinct personalities (unincorporated entities). The properties of NDC belong to the Government. [NDC vs Cebu, (1992)] LGUs, in addition to administrative autonomy, also enjoy fiscal autonomy. LGUs have the power to create their own sources and revenue, in addition to their equitable share in the national taxes as well as the power to allocate resources in accordance with their own priorities. A basic feature of local fiscal autonomy is the automatic
Permanently close or open Ordinance: Vote of at least 2/3 of all members of the Sanggunian When necessary, an adequate substitute for the public facility should be provided Make provision for public safety If permanently withdrawn from public use May be used or conveyed for any purpose for which other real property belonging in LGU may be lawfully used or conveyed Freedom park: must have provision for relocation to new site Temporary close or open Ordinance May be done: During actual emergency Fiesta celebrations Public rallies Agricultural or industrial fairs Undertaking of public works and highways, telecommunications, and waterworks projects Duration specified in written order by local chief executive If for athletic, cultural, or civic activities: must be officially sponsored, recognized, or approved by LGU. Temporary closure and regulation of any local street, road, thoroughfare, or any other public place By any city, municipality, or barangay
for which the trust was created or the funds received; Every officer of the LGU whose duties permit or require the possession or custody of local funds shall be properly bonded, and such officer shall be accountable and responsible for said funds and for the safekeeping thereof in conformity with the provisions of law; Local governments shall formulate sound financial plans, and the local budgets shall be based on functions, activities, and projects, in terms of expected results; Local budgets shall operationalize approved local development plans; LGUs shall ensure that their respective budgets incorporate the requirements of their component units and provide for equitable allocation of resources among these component units; National planning shall be based on local planning to ensure that the needs and aspirations of the people as articulated by the local government units in their respective local development plans are considered in the formulation of budgets of national line agencies or offices; Fiscal responsibility shall be shared by all those exercising authority over the financial affairs, transactions, and operations of the local government units; and The LGU shall endeavor to have a balanced budget in each fiscal year of operation
release of the shares of the LGUs in the national internal revenue. This is mandated by no less than the constitution. Any retention is prohibited. [Pimentel v Aguirre (2000)]
d. Closure and Opening of Roads LGC Sec.21 What roads are jurisdiction of LGU Local road Alley Park Square subject, those within
Where shopping malls, Sunday, flea or night markets, or shopping areas may be established Where goods, merchandise, foodstuffs, commodities, or articles of commerce may be sold Illustrations A public street is property for public use hence, outside the commerce of man. It may not be the subject of lease or other contract. Such leases are null and void for being contrary to law. The right of the public to use the city street may not be bargained away through contract. The authorization given for the use of the city street as a vending area for stallholders who were granted licenses by the City Government contravenes the general law that reserves city streets and roads for public use. It may not infringe upon the vested right of the public to use city streets for the purpose they were intended to serve. [Dacanay vs Asistio (1992)] The provincial council has the authority to determine whether or not a certain property (in this case a provincial road) is still necessary for public use [Cabrera vs CA (1991)] The power of the LGU to enact zoning ordinances for the general welfare prevails over the deed of restrictions. [Sangalang vs IAC(1989)] The closure of roads under police power is not eminent domain. No grant of damages are awarded. [Cabrera vs CA (1991)] Effect: The determination of the location of the camino vecinal through an ordinance will defeat the testimonies of witnesses as to the location of said passageway. [Pilapil vs CA (1992)] The MMDA does not have police power, but the LGUs do. There should have been an ordinance by the LGU to effect an opening of roads. [MMDA vs Bel Air (2000)] e. Legislative Power LGC Sec. 48-59 Exercised by (Sec.48) Sangguniang panlalawigan for the province Sangguniang panglungsod for the city Sangguniang bayan for the municipality Sangguniang barangay for the barangay
Presided by (Sec.49): Vice-governor or vice-mayor or punong barangay will vote only in case of a tie because he is not a member of the Sanggunian. [Perez vs Dela Cruz (1969)]
The incumbent local chief executive acting as the chief executive may not preside over the sessions of the Sanggunian. Why? To ensure better delivery of public services and provide a system of checks and balances between the executive and legislative. [Gamboa vs Aguirre] Inability of the above: members present and constituting a quorum shall elect from among themselves a temporary presiding officer Who shall certify within 10 days from the passage of the ordinances enacted and resolutions adopted by the sanggunian in the session over which he temporarily presided
Internal Rules of Procedure (Sec. 50): Adopted/update on the 1st regular session following election of its members- within 90 days Provides for: Organization of the Sanggunian and the election of its officers Standing Committees o Creation (Including the committees on appropriations, women and family, human rights, youth and sports development, environmental protection, and cooperatives; the general jurisdiction of each committee o Election of the chairman and members of each committee Order and calendar of business for each session Legislative process Parliamentary procedures (including the conduct of members during sessions) Discipline of members for disorderly behavior and absences
(without justifiable cause for 4 consecutive sessions) Penalty: censure, reprimand, or exclusion from the session, suspension for not more than 60 days or expulsion o Suspension or expulsion: requires concurrence of at least 2/3 vote of all Sanggunian members o A member convicted by final judgment to imprisonment of at least 1 year for any crime involving moral turpitude shall be automatically expelled from the Sanggunian Other rules as the Sanggunian may adopt Quorum (Sec.53) Quorum. Majority of all members of the Sanggunian who have been elected and qualified Questions of quorum is raised: the presiding officer shall immediately proceed to call the roll of the members and announce the results No quorum: the presiding officer may declare a recess until such time as a quorum is constituted OR a majority of the members present may adjourn from day to day and may compel the immediate attendance of any member absent without justifiable cause by arresting the absent member and present him at the session No business shall be transacted Sessions (Sec.52) Regular sessions: fixed by resolution on 1st day of the session immediately following the election of its members Minimum numbers of regular sessions: once a week (panlalawigan, panlungsod, bayan) and twice a month for the Sangguniang Barangay Special session: may be called by the local chief executive or by a majority of the members of the Sanggunian-cause: when public interest demands Written notice: served personally at the members usual place of residence at least 24 hours before the session Unless otherwise concurred in by 2/3 vote of the Sangguniang
members present, there being a quorum, no other matters may be considered except those stated in the notice Open to the public UNLESS a closed-door session is ordered by an affirmative vote of a majority of the members present (there being a quorum) In the public interest or for reasons of secrecy, decency or morality No 2 sessions may be held in a single day Journal and record of its proceedings which may be published upon resolution of the Sanggunian concerned
How many votes required General Rule: Majority of the members constituting a quorum When the enactment itself specifies the number of votes required, such requirement will govern over the general rule specified in the charter or the LGC, when such enactment is to be amended. Why? Because the municipal authorities are in a better position to determine the votes required. [Casino vs CA (1991)] Approval, Veto and Review of Ordinances Every ordinance shall be presented to the governor or mayor, as the case may be Approves: affix his signature on each and every page Disapproves: veto it and return the same with his objections to the Sanggunian o Override: 2/3 vote of all its members making the ordinance effective even without the approval of the local chief executive concerned o Veto communicated to the Sanggunian within 15 days in the case of a province, and 10 days in the case of a city or a municipality; otherwise, the ordinance shall be deemed approved Veto (Sec. 55): local chief executive may veto any ordinance on the ground that it is ultravires or prejudicial to the public welfare, stating his reasons for writing
Veto an ordinance or resolution only once Local chief executive (except the punong barangay) power to veto any particular item or items o An appropriations ordinance o Ordinance or resolution adopting a local development plan and public investment program o Ordinance directing the payment of money or creating liability o (where the veto shall not affect the item or items which are not subjected to) Review of (component) City or Municipal Ordinances o Within 3 days after approval, the secretary shall forward to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan for review, copies of approved ordinances and the resolutions approving the local development plans and public investment programs formulated by the local development councils o Within 30 days after the receipt of copies, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan shall examine the documents or transmit them to the provincial attorney, or if there be none, to the provincial prosecutor for examination. Provincial attorney or prosecutor shall: within 10 days from receipt, inform the Sanggunian in writing of his comments or recommendations Finding: beyond the power conferred, it shall declare such ordinance or resolution invalid in
Summary of Review of Ordinances
whole or in part--action entered in the minutes and shall advise the corresponding city or municipal authorities of the action(sec 58). Any attempt to enforce any ordinance or any resolution approving the local development plan and public investment program, after the disapproval, shall be sufficient ground for the suspension or dismissal of the official or employee o No action within 30 days after submission: presumed consistent with the law and valid Ordinance enacted by the Sangguniang barangay shall upon approval by the majority of all its members, be signed by the punong barangay Review by Sangguniang Panglungsod or Bayan o Within 10 days after its enactment, the sangguniang barangay shall furnish copies to o The sangguniang panglungsod or sangguniang bayan concerned for review as to whether the ordinance is consistent with law and city or municipal ordinances o No action for 30 days from receipt: ordinance shall be deemed approved o Finding: inconsistent with law or city or municipal ordinancesthe sanggunian shall, within 30 days from receipt, return the same with its comments and recommendations to the sangguniang barangay for adjustment, amendment, or modification Effectivity: suspended until such time as the revision called for is effected
Component City or Municipality Ordinances and Resolutions Sangguniang panlalawigan
Barangay Ordinances Sangguniang panglungsod sangguniang bayan or
Furnish copies of ordinances or resolution within
3 days after approval of ordinance or resolution approving the local development plans and public investment programs formulated by the local development councils
10 days after enactment of ALL ordinances
Period to documents
Ground to invalidate ordinance or resolution
Ordinance is inconsistent with law and city or municipal ordinances In such case, the sangguniang barangay may adjust, amend or modify the ordinance within 30 days from receipt from the sangguniang panglungsod or sangguninang bayan
Effectivity of Ordinances or Resolutions Sec. 59 General rule: the same shall take effect after 10 days from the date a copy is posted Exception: unless otherwise stated in the ordinance or the resolution approving the local development and public investment program Ordinances with penal sanctions: gist shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the province where the local legislative body concerned belongs Absence of any newspaper: posting shall be made in all municipalities and cities of the province where the sanggunian of origin is situated. Highly urbanized and independent component cities: the main features of the ordinance or resolution in addition to being posted, shall be published in a local newspaper of general circulation within the city
Absence of local newspaper: any newspaper of general circulation
Full disclosure of Financial and Business Interests of Sanggunian Members * Conflict of interest Sec. 50 Upon assumption of office, make a full disclosure of: His business and financial interests Professional relationship or any relation by affinity or consanguinity within the fourth civil degree Which he may have with any person, firm, or entity affected by any ordinance or resolution which relationship may result in conflict of interest including: Ownership of stock or capital, or investment, in the entity or firm to which the ordinance or resolution may apply
30 days after receipt of copies, after which the ordinance or resolution is presumed valid if no action is taken. Within 30 days, it may also be transmitted to the provincial attorney or prosecutor for examination; said atty. or prosecutor shall give his written recommendations within 10 days from receipt of document Ordinance or resolution is beyond the power conferred upon the Sanggunian concerned
30 days after receipt of copies, after which ordinance is presumed valid if no action is taken
Contracts or agreements with any person or entity which the ordinance or resolution under consideration may affect conflict of interest. TEST: One where it may be reasonably deduced that a member of a sanggunian may not act in the public interest due to some private, pecuniary, or other personal considerations that may tend to affect his judgment to the prejudice of the service or the public
Within 10 days after approval Certified true copies of all provincial, city, or municipal tax ordinances or revenue measures Published in full for 3 consecutive days In a newspaper of local circulation Where no such newspaper: posted in at least 2 conspicuous and publicly accessible places Ordinance with penal sanctions Sec At prominent places in the provincial capitol, city, municipal or barangay hall Minimum period: 3 consecutive weeks Publication In a newspaper of a general circulation Within territorial jurisdiction Except: barangay ordinances Effectivity: unless otherwise provided on the day following its publication or at the end of period of posting, whichever is later Violation by public officer or employee o May be meted administrative disciplinary action o Without prejudice to filing of appropriate civil or criminal action Duty of Secretary of Sanggunian: o Shall transmit official copies to the chief executive of Official Gazette o Within 7 days following approval of ordinance o Purpose for publication o If with penal sanction: for archival and reference purposes
Disclosure shall be made in writing and submitted to the secretary of the sanggunian Form part of the record of the proceedings and shall be made in the following manner: Made before the member participates in the deliberations on the ordinance or resolution under consideration o If the member did not participate during the deliberations, the disclosure shall be made before voting on the ordinance or resolution on second and third readings o Made when a member takes a position or makes a privilege speech on a matter that may affect the business interest, financial connections, or professional relationship Updated rules, the rules of the previous year may be used. The signature of the mayor is not a mere ministerial act, but involves the exercise of discretion on the part of the local chief executive. [Delos Reyes v Sandiganbayan (1997)]
Judicial Intervention Rules of Court, Rule 63, Sec.4 Actions involving the validity of a local government ordinance: Prosecutor or attorney of the LGU involved shall be notified and entitled to be heard; Alleged to be unconstitutional: Solicitor General shall also be notified and entitled to be heard.
Incidents of Law-Making (Legislative) Power: Posting and Publication of: Tax ordinances and Revenue measures Sec188
Cases The LGC does not mandate that no other business may be transacted on the first regular session except to take up the matter of adopting or updating rules. All that the law requires is that on the 1 regular sessionthe sanggunian concerned shall adopt or update its existing rules or procedures. Until the completion of the adopted or updated rules, the rules of the previous year may be used. [Malonzo v Zamora (1999)]
The failure of the SolGen to appear in the lower court to defend the constitutionality of an ordinance is not fatal to the case. The determination of the question of WON the SolGen should be required to appear in any action involving the validity of any treaty, law, executive order, rule or regulation is a matter left to the discretion of the Court. Inasmuch as the said requirement is not mandatory, but discretionary, noncompliance therewith affected neither the jurisdiction of the trial court nor the validity of the proceedings. [Homeowners Association of the Phil. Inc. v Municipal Board of Manila (1968)] (1) Requisites For ordinance to be valid exercise of police power [Tatel v. Mun. of Virac (1992)]: 7. Not contrary to the Constitution and/or statute 8. Not unfair or oppressive 9. Must not be partial or discriminatory 10. Not prohibit but may regulate trade 11. General and consistent with public policy 12. Not unreasonable (2) Local Initiative and Referendum A. Definition NOTE: Garcia v COMELEC (1994): Both a resolution and an ordinance may be the proper subjects of an initiative or a referendum (Based on LGC Sec. 120-127 and RA 6735: AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A SYSTEM OF INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM) Initiative: legal process whereby the registered voters of a LGU may directly propose, enact, or amend any ordinance Referendum: legal process whereby the registered voters of the LGUs may approve, amend or reject any ordinance enacted by the sanggunian. Who may exercise all registered voters of the provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays
a. Referendum or initiative affecting a resolution or ordinance passed by the legislative assembly of a province or city: o petition must be signed by at least 10% of the registered voters in the province or city, o of which every legislative district must be represented by at least 3% of the registered voters therein; o Provided, however, that if the province or city is composed only of 1 legislative district, then at least each municipality in a province or each barangay in a city should be represented by at least 3% of the registered voters therein. b. Referendum or initiative on an ordinance passed in a municipality: petition must be signed by at least 10% of the registered voters in the municipality, of which every barangay is represented by at least 3% of the registered voters therein c. Referendum or initiative on a barangay resolution or ordinance: must be signed by at least 10% of the registered voters in said barangay
C. Procedure a. Not less than 1,000 registered voters in case of provinces and cities, 100 in case of municipalities, and 50 in case of barangays, may file a petition with the local legislative body, respectively, proposing the adoption, enactment, repeal, or amendment, of any law, ordinance or resolution b. If no favorable action thereon is made by local legislative body within 30 days from its presentation, the proponents through their duly authorized and registered representative may invoke their power of initiative, giving notice thereof to the local legislative body concerned c. 2 or more propositions may be submitted in an initiative d. Proponents shall have 90 days in case of provinces and cities, 60 days in case of municipalities, and 30 days in case of barangays, from notice mentioned in subsection (b) hereof to collect the required number of signatures e. The petition shall be signed before the Election Registrar, or his designated representative, in the presence of a representative of the proponent, and a representative of the regional assemblies
and local legislative bodies concerned in a public place in the LGU f. If the required number of signatures are obtained, the COMELEC shall then set a date for the initiative for approval of the proposition within 60 days from the date of certification by the COMELEC in case of provinces and cities, 45 days in case of municipalities, and 30 days in case of barangays B. Effectivity of Local Propositions If the proposition is approved by a majority of the votes cast, it shall take effect 15 days after certification by the COMELEC E. Limitations on Initiatives (a) The power of local initiative shall not be exercised more than once a year. (b) Initiative shall extend only to subjects or matters which are within the legal powers of the local legislative bodies to enact. (c) If at any time before the initiative is held, the local legislative body shall adopt in toto the proposition presented, the initiative shall be cancelled. However, those against such action may, if they so desire, apply for initiative in the manner herein provided. F. Limitations Upon Local Legislative Bodies Any proposition or ordinance or resolution approved through the system of initiative and referendum as herein provided shall: a. not be repealed, modified or amended, by the local legislative body concerned within 6 months from the date therefrom, and b. may be amended, modified or repealed by the local legislative body within 3 years by a vote of 3/4 of all its members: c. Provided, however, that in case of barangays, the period shall be 18 months after the approval. Local Referendum Any local legislative body may submit to the registered voters of autonomous region, provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays for the approval or rejection, any ordinance or resolution duly enacted or approved. Courts are not precluded from declaring null and void any proposition approved for violation of the Constitution or want of capacity of the local legislative body to enact the said measure.
f. Corporate Powers LGC Sec. 22 Every LGU, as a corporation has the following powers: (SC-PCSO) a. To have continuous succession in its corporate name b. To sue and be sued c. To have and use a corporate seal d. To acquire and convey real or personal property e. To enter into contracts f. To exercise such other powers as are granted to corporations Limitations: as provided in LGC and other laws Corporate Seal LGUs may continue using, modify, or change their existing corporate seals Newly established LGUs or those without corporate seals May create own corporate seals Registered with the DILG Change of corporate seal shall be registered with the DILG
(a) Requisites of Contracts entered into by local chief executive on behalf of LGU Prior authorization by Sanggunian Legible copy of contract posted at a conspicuous place in the Provincial capitol or
A resolution may be the subject of an initiative or referendum. [Garcia vs COMELEC (1994)] Initiative: power of the people to propose bills and laws, and to enact or reject them at the polls independent of the legislative assembly. Referendum is the right reserved to the people to adopt or reject any act or measure which has been passed by a legislative body and which in most cases would without action on the part of electors become law. These law-making powers belong to the people and the COMELEC only exercises administration and supervision of the process. Hence, COMELEC cannot control or change the substance or the content of the legislation. COMELEC should have prepared for an initiative, not a referendum. [SBMA v. COMELEC (1996)]
City, municipal or barangay hall
The authority of a municipality to fix and collect rents for water supplied by its waterwork system is expressly granted by law. However, even without these provisions the authority of the municipality to fix and collect fees from its waterworks would be justified from its inherent power to administer what it owns privately. [NAWASA v Dator (1967)]
A public street is property for public use hence, outside the commerce of man. It may not be the subject of lease or other contract. Such leases are null and void for being contrary to law. [Dacanay vs Asistio (1992)] g. Liability of LGUS A. Specific Provisions making LGUs Liable LGC, Sec. 24 LGUs and their officials are not exempt from liability for death or injury to persons or damage to property. Civil Code, Art. 34 When a member of a city or municipal police force refuses or fails to render aid or protection to any person in case of danger to life or property, such peace officer shall be primarily liable for damages, and the city or municipality shall be subsidiarily responsible therefor. Civil Code, Art. 2180, par. 6 The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for ones own acts or omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is responsible. X X X The State is responsible in like manner when it acts through a special agent; but not when the damage has been caused by the official to whom the task done properly pertains, in which case what is provided in Article 2176 shall be applicable. Civil Code, Art. 2189 Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be liable for damages for the death of, or injuries suffered by, any person by reason of the defective condition of roads, streets, bridges, public buildings, and other public works under their control or supervision.
LGC Sec.23
Who may negotiate: Local Chief Executive (upon authority of Sanggunian) What are negotiated Financial grants or donations in kind in support of basic services or facilities From local and foreign assistance agencies Approval by national agency concerned No necessity of securing clearance from national agency IF with national security implications Shall be approved by national agency concerned Failure to act on request for approval within 30 days from receipt: deemed approved Reporting duty: local chief executive shall report to both Houses of Congress and the President Nature Amount Terms Within 30 days upon signing of grant agreement or deed of donation
B. Liability for Torts, Violation of the Law and Contracts
WHEN LGU IS LIABLE
CASE (1) If the LGU fails to perform a governmental function (e.g., maintenance of roads under CC Art. 2189, rendering aid and protection under CC Art. 34) (2) If engaged in proprietary functions, DEFENSE Exercise of due diligence in the selection and supervision is not a defense.
Defense of due diligence in the selection and
If the property is owned by the municipality in its public and governmental capacity, the property is public and Congress has absolute control over it; if the property is owned in its private or proprietary capacity, then it is patrimonial and Congress has no absolute control. In which case, the municipality cannot be deprived of it without due process and payment of just compensation. [Province of Zamboanga v City of Zamboanga (1968)]
POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER supervision available only if the function involved is a corporate function. RATIO: because this defense is available only to private employers. WHEN LGU IS NOT LIABLE If damage resulted from an act of LGU in the performance of governmental functions
(e.g. policemen) [Guillergan v Ganzon (1966)] 3. By Express Provision of Law Article 2189, CC o When a person falls in an open manhole in the city streets [Manila vs Teotico (198)] o When a person steps on a rusted nail in a flooded public market [Jimenez vs Manila (150 S 510)] o When accidents are caused by defective roads even if the road does not belong to the LGU as long as it exercises control or supervision over said road [Guilatco vs Dagupan (171 S 382)] o Damages suffered through accidents in national roads under the control and supervision of an LGU (cause is unsafe road conditions, especially when there is gross negligence [Municipality of San Juan v. CA (2005)] o Also exemplary damages may be granted when public officials acted with gross negligence [Quezon City v Dacana (2005)] Article 2180, CC o When the State acts through a special agent [Merritt vs Government (34 P 311)] 4. On Violation of Law When the Mayor refused to abide by a TRO issued by the court, he may be held in contempt [Moday v CA (1997)] When the LGU does not pay the statutory minimum wage (mandated by law) even if there is lack of funds [Racho vs Ilagan, Isabela (198)] C. Personal Liability of Public Official RULE: The public official is personally liable if he acts beyond the scope of his powers OR if he acts with bad faith Illustrations Mayor exceeding authority in vetoing a resolution passed by the Sanggunian [Pilar v Sangguniang Bayan ng Dasol (1984)] o [Note that under CC27, a public servant is personally liable for damages for his
Illustrations 1. On Contract RULE: The LGU is liable only for contracts that are intra vires. The Doctrine of Implied Municipal Liability provides that an LGU may become obligated upon an implied contract to pay reasonable value of the benefits accepted by it as to which it has the general power to contract [Cebu vs IAC (147 S 447)] BUT the LGU may not be estopped in order to validate a contract which the LGU is not authorized to make EVEN IF it has accepted the benefits thereunder [San Diego vs Mun. Of Naujan (107 P 112)] A private individual who deals with a LGU is imputed with constructive knowledge of the extent of the power or authority of the LGU to enter into contracts. Thus, ordinarily, the doctrine of estoppel does not lie against the LGU. 2. On Tort If in the performance of a governmental function, the LGU is NOT liable o The prosecution of crimes, even if injury occurs [Palafox vs Ilocos Norte (1958)] If in the performance of a proprietary function, the LGU is liable o The improper grant of a ferry service franchise [Mendoza vs de Leon (1916)] o NOTE: Municipal corporations liability to private persons for the wrongful exercise of the corporate powers is the same as that of a private corporation or individual [Mendoza vs de Leon (1916)] o Deaths caused by a collapsed stage in a town fiesta [Torio vs Fontanilla (1978)] o Back pay or wages of employees illegally dismissed, including those involving primary governmental functions
refusal or neglect to perform his official duty] When the officials incorrectly ordered the construction of a drug rehabilitation center [Angeles vs CA (21 S 90)] When officials illegally dismiss an employee [Rama vs CA (148 S 49)] When the official defies an order of reinstatement of an illegally dismissed employee [Correa vs CFI (92 S 312)] o The Mayor pays for the back salaries of an illegally dismissed employee [Nemenzo vs Sabillano (25 S 1)] o The Governor pays for moral damages for refusing the reinstatement of an employee [San Luis vs CA (1989] A public officer, whether judicial, quasijudicial or executive, is not personally liable to one injured in consequence of an act performed within the scope of his official authority, and in line of his official duty. [Tuzon v. CA (1992)] The holding of a town fiesta is a proprietary function, though not for profit, for which a municipality is liable for damages to 3rd persons ex contractu or ex delicto.; o that under the principle of respondeat superior the principal is liable for the negligence of its agents acting within the scope of their assigned tasks; and o that the municipal councilors have a personality distinct and separate from the municipality, [ Torio v. Fontanilla (1978)]
Jurisdictional Responsibility for Settlement of Boundary Dispute
LGC, Sec. 118 If the LGUs involved are: two (2) or more barangays in the same city or municipality two (2) or more municipalities within the same province municipalities component cities different provinces or of Boundary disputes shall be referred for settlement to: sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang bayan concerned. sangguniang panlalawigan concerned. jointly referred to the sanggunians of the provinces concerned. jointly referred settlement to respective sanggunians of parties. for the the
a component city or municipality on the one hand and a highly urbanized city on the other; or two (2) or more highly urbanized cities,
In the event the sanggunian fails to effect an amicable settlement within sixty (60) days from the date the dispute was referred thereto, it shall issue a certification to that effect. Thereafter, the dispute shall be formally tried by the sanggunian concerned which shall decide the issue within sixty (60) days from the date of the certification referred to above.
Hence, as a rule they are not co-responsible in an action for damages for tort or negligence unless they acted in bad faith or have directly participated in the commission of the wrongful act.
LGC, Sec. 119. Within the time and manner prescribed by the Rules of Court, any party may elevate the decision of the sanggunian concerned to the proper Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the area in dispute. The Regional Trial Court shall decide the appeal within one (1) year from the filing thereof. Pending final resolution of the disputed area prior to the dispute shall be maintained and continued for all legal purposes.
h. Settlement of Boundary Disputes (asked in 2005) LGC, Sec. 118-119 Boundary disputewhen a portion or the whole of the territorial area of an LGU is claimed by two or more LGUs. Policy: Boundary disputes between or among LGUs shall, as much as possible, be
IRR of LGC, Sec. 18
Chapter II. CREATION and DISSOLUTION of LGUs ranking. Office of the Punong Barangay Highest ranking sanggunian barangay member; In case of his permanent inability, the 2nd highest ranking sanggunian member.
Pending final resolution of the dispute: status of the affected area prior to the dispute shall be maintained and continued for all purposes. The power of provincial boards to settle boundary disputes is limited to implementing the law creating a municipality. Thus, provincial boards do not have the authority to approve agreements which in effect amend the boundary stated in the creating statute [Municipality of Jimenez v. Baz (1996)] The conduct of plebiscites, to determine whether or not a barangay is to be created, should be suspended or cancelled in view of a pending boundary dispute between two local governments. Precisely because territorial jurisdiction is an issue raised in the pending boundary dispute, until and unless such issue is resolved with finality, to define the territorial jurisdiction of the proposed barangays would only be an exercise in futility. [City of Pasig v. COMELEC(1999)]
A tie between/ among the highest ranking sanggunian members is resolved by drawing of lots. Successors under S44, LGC serve only for the unexpired terms of their predecessors. The ranking in the sanggunian is based on the immediately preceding local election:
Votes obtained by the winning candidate -------------------------------------------Total number of registered voters in each district
Succession of Elective Officials
Rules on Succession
1 Successors in permanent vacancies in 1
office of local chief executive. Sec. 44, LGC: (Asked in 1995, 1996, 2002, 2008) Permanent vacancy entails that an elective local official: DR VaReReQI fills a higher vacant office; refuses to assume office; fails to qualify; dies; is removed from office; voluntarily resigns; or is otherwise permanently incapacitated to discharge the functions of his office.
Who Succeeds into Office Vice-governor Vice-mayor Highest ranking sanggunian member; In case of his permanent inability, the 2nd highest ranking sanggunian member; Subsequent vacancies are filled automatically by the other sanggunian members according to their
Office where Permanent Vacancy Occurs Governor Mayor Office of the governor or [and] vice-governor, mayor or [and] vicemayor
Chapter III. GENERAL POWERS and ATTRIBUTES of LGUs
1 Permanent vacancies in the sanggunian. 1
Sec. 45, LGC (Asked in 1996, 2002) If automatic succession as provided in S44 does not apply, vacancy is to be filled in by appointment made as follows:
Who Succeeds into Office Person appointed by the President, through the Executive Secretary
1 Temporary vacancy in the office of the local 1
chief executive. Sec. 46, LGC. (Asked in 2002) Examples of local chief executives temporary incapacity to perform duties for physical/legal reasons: leave of absence; travel abroad; suspension from office. General rule: Vice-governor, city/ municipal vice-mayor, or the highest ranking sangguniang barangay member shall automatically exercise the powers and perform the duties and functions of the local chief executive. Exception: The power to appoint/suspend/dismiss employees can be exercised only if the period of temporary incapacity exceeds 30 working days. If the local chief executive is traveling within the country but outside his territorial jurisdiction for a period not exceeding 3 consecutive days, he may designate in writing the officer-in-charge. General rule: The local chief executive cannot authorize any local official to assume the powers/duties/functions of his office, other than the vice-governor, city/municipal vice-mayor, or highest ranking sangguniang barangay member. The authorization shall specify the powers and functions that the officer-in-charge shall exercise. Exception: The power to appoint, suspend and dismiss employees. If the local chief executive fails/refuses to issue the authorization, the vice-governor, city/municipal vice-mayor, or highest ranking sangguniang barangay member has right to assume the powers, duties, and functions of the office on the 4th day of absence. Exception: The power to appoint/suspend/dismiss employees. Who Temporarily Succeeds into Office Vice-governor (automatically) Vice-mayor (automatically) Highest ranking sanggunian
Representation of the youth and the barangay in the sanggunian
General Rule: The appointee under Sec. 45 must be a nominee of the political party under which the sanggunian member (whose elevation to the position next higher in rank created the vacancy) had been elected. Conditions sine qua non: There must be a nomination and certificate of membership from the highest official of the political party or else the appointment is: null and void ab initio; and a ground for administrative action against the responsible official. If sanggunian member who caused vacancy does not belong to any political party, the local chief executive shall appoint a qualified person, upon recommendation of the sanggunian. The appointee under S45 serves the unexpired term of the vacant office. Exception: Sangguniang barangay. If the vacancy pertains to barangay or youth representation in the sanggunian, the vacancy is automatically filled by the official next in rank of the organization concerned.
Office where Temporary Vacancy Occurs Governor Mayor Punong
Office where Permanent Vacancy Occurs Member of Sanggunian Panlalawigan or Sangguniang Panlungsod of highly urbanized cities and independent component cities Member of Sangguniang Panlungsod of component cities and the Sangguniang Bayan Member of the Sangguniang Barangay
Person appointed by the governor Person appointed by the mayor, upon recommendation of the Sangguniang Barangay concerned Official next in rank of the organization concerned
barangay Local chief executive traveling within the country but outside his territorial jurisdiction for a period not exceeding three (3) consecutive days
The governor has the power to fill a vacancy in the Sangguniang Bayan caused by a member not belonging to any political party. It is the same manner as where the member belonged to a political party. Where there is no political party to make the nomination, the Sanggunian where the vacancy occurs must be considered authority for making the recommendation. The appointing authority is limited to the appointment of those recommended to his office. The recommendation is a condition sine qua non for the validity of the appointment. [Farias v. Barba (1996)]
1 Termination of the Temporary Incapacity: 1
Upon submission to the sanggunian of a written declaration that he has reported back to office. If the temporary incapacity is due to legal causes, he must also submit the necessary documents showing that the legal causes no longer exist.
1 Approval of Leaves of Absence. 1
Sec. 47, LGC.
member (automatically) 1) Person designated in writing by the said local chief executive Authorization shall specify the powers and functions that the designate will exercise, except the power to appoint, suspend, or dismiss employees 2) Vice-governor, vicemayor or highest Sangguniang Barangay member, if the local chief executive fails or refuses to designate In this case, assumption into office shall be on the 4th day of absence of the local chief executive (automatically)
The LGC is silent on the mode of succession when there is a temporary vacancy in the office of the vice-governor. In this case, there was a vacancy when the vice-governor automatically assumed the governorship pending the determination of who is the local chief executive. Because of such circumstances, the President, through the Secretary of Local Government, may make the temporary appointment. [Menzon v. Petilla (1991)]
A vice-governor who is concurrently an acting governor is actually a quasi-governor. Being the acting governor, the vice-governor can no longer continue to simultaneously exercise the duties of the latter office, since the nature of the duties of the governor hinders him from discharging his duties for such office. Hence, there is an inability on the part of the regular presiding officer, the vice-governor, to preside during the sanggunian sessions, which calls for the election of a temporary presiding officer. [Gamboa v. Aguirre (1999)]
for sangguniang barangay members
If the application for LOA is not acted upon within 5 working days after receipt, the application is deemed approved.
Discipline of Local Officials
AO 23, as amended by AO 159 (1994) and AO 66 (1999): Prescribing the Rules and Procedures on the Investigation of Administrative Disciplinary Cases Coverage: administrative disciplinary charges against the governors, and members of the sangguniang panlalawigan; the mayors, vice mayors, and members of the sangguniang panlungsod of highly urbanized cities, independent component cities, and component cities; and the mayors, vice mayors, and members of the sangguniang panlungsod or bayan of cities or municipalities in Metropolitan Manila
(a) Grounds for administrative action (discipline, suspension, removal): MAD-VAD-CO 1. Disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines; 2. Culpable violation of the Constitution; 3. Dishonesty, oppression, misconduct in office, gross negligence, or dereliction of duty; 4. Commission of any offense involving moral turpitude or any offense punishable by at least prision mayor, which is from 6 years and 1 day to 12 years imprisonment; 5. Abuse of authority; 6. Unauthorized absence for 15 consecutive working days in case of local chief executives and 4 consecutive sessions in the case of members of the sanggunian; 7. Application for, or acquisition of, foreign citizenship or residence of the status of an immigrant of another country; and 8. Such other grounds as may be provided by the Local Government Code of 1991; Republic Act No. 6713; Republic Act No. 3019; Administrative Code of 1987; Revised Penal Code; and all other applicable general and special laws. How Initiated 1. by any private individual or any government officer or employee by filing a sworn written complaint (verified) 2. by the Office of the President or any government agency duly authorized by law to ensure that LGUs act within their prescribed powers and functions
LOCAL OFFICIAL for governors; mayors of 1)highly urbanized cities or 2)independent component cities for vice-governors; for city/municipal vice-mayors for city/municipal mayors of component cities/municipalities for the sanggunian panlalawigan, panlungsod and pambayan members; its employees for punong barangays
LOA APPROVED BY: The President or his duly authorized representative
The governor The Vice-governor or city/municipal vicemayor
Disciplining Authority The President, who may act through the Executive Secretary May still constitute a Special Investigating Committee in lieu of the DILG Secretary; Nothing shall prevent the President from assuming jurisdiction at any stage of the proceedings over cases to be preliminarily investigated by the DILG; in such an event, the same shall immediately be forwarded to the Special Investigating Committee after it may have been constituted by the Disciplining Authority. Investigating Authority DILG Secretary o may constitute an Investigating Committee in the DILG for the conduct of investigation
POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER Elective Official against whom Administrative Complaint is Filed Provincial or city official Municipal official Barangay official Where to File Complaint Office of the President Sangguniang Panlalawigan Sangguniang Panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan
Chapter III. GENERAL POWERS and ATTRIBUTES of LGUs Preventive Suspension under RA 6770 Requirements: Preventive Suspension under the LGC Requirements: 1 1 there is reasonable ground to believe that the respondent has committed the act or acts complained of 1 the evidence of 1 culpability is strong 1 the gravity of the 1 offense so warrants; or 1 the continuance in 1 office of the respondent could influence the witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity of the records and other evidence
Maximum period: 60 days
Power of Tribunals
The Ombudsman (Asked in 1999, 2003)
The Ombudsman and the Office of the President have concurrent jurisdiction to conduct administrative investigations over local elective officials. The LGC did not withdraw the power of the Ombudsman under RA 6770. [Hagad v. Gozo-Dadole (1993)]
It is not only the Ombudsman, but also his Deputy, who may sign an order preventively suspending officials. Also, the length of the period of suspension within the limits provided by law and the evaluation of the strength of the evidence both lie in the discretion of the Ombudsman. It is immaterial that no evidence has been adduced to prove that the official may influence possible witnesses or may tamper with the public records. It is sufficient that there exists such a possibility. [Castillo-Co v. Barbers (1998)] The Courts
RA 3019 The term office in Sec. 13 of RA 3019 (pertaining to mandatory preventive suspension) applies to any office which the officer might currently be holding and not necessarily the particular office in relation to which the official is charged. The imposition of the suspension, though mandatory, is not automatic or selfoperative. A pre-condition is the existence of a valid Information, determined at a presuspension hearing. [Segovia v. Sandiganbayan (1999)]
Supervision and discipline. The President is not devoid of disciplinary powers because he merely has supervisory powers under the Constitution. Supervision is not incompatible with disciplining authority. [Ganzon vs CA (1991)] Valid delegation. Under AO 23, the delegation of the power to investigate to the Sec of Interior is valid. What cannot be delegated is the power to discipline. [Joson vs Torres (290 S 279)] Prejudicial question? The administrative investigation can proceed even during the pendency of an appeal of audit findings to the Commission on Audit [Salalima vs Guingona (257 S 55)]
evidence of guilt is strong; AND 2. that any of the following circumstances are present: o the charge against the officer or employee should involve dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the performance of duty; o the charges should warrant removal from office; or o the respondents continued stay in office would prejudice the case filed against him Maximum period: 6 months
Sandiganbayan PD 1606, as amended by RA 8249
of a component city, who is under formal administrative investigation by the Office of the President. 6. May be imposed at any time after the issues are joined (after respondent has answered the complaint) 7. No preventive suspension shall be imposed within 90 days immediately prior to any local election. If the preventive suspension has been imposed prior to the 90-day period immediately preceding a local election, it shall be deemed automatically lifted upon the start of the period Grounds for Preventive Suspension: when the evidence of guilt is strong and, given the gravity of the offense, there is a great probability that the continuance in office of the respondent could influence the witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity of the records and other evidence Period: Any single preventive suspension of local elective officials shall not extend beyond 60 days; Provided that, in the event that several administrative cases are filed against an elective official: he cannot be preventively suspended for more than 90 days within a single year on the same ground or grounds existing and known at the time of the first suspension. Expiration: the suspended elective official shall be deemed reinstated in office without prejudice to the continuation of the proceedings against him [which shall be terminated within 120 days from formal notice of the case]. However, if the delay in the proceeding of the case is due to his fault, or request, other than the appeal duly filed, the duration of such delay shall not be counted in computing the time of termination of the case. (sec. 63 (c)) Compensation: officer shall receive no salary or compensation during such suspension; but, upon subsequent exoneration and reinstatement, he shall be paid his full salary or compensation,
It is the officials grade that determines his or her salary, and not the other way around. An officials grade is not a matter of proof but a matter of law which the court must take judicial notice. Under Sec. 444(d) of the LGC, the municipal mayor shall receive a minimum monthly compensation corresponding to SG 27. Thus, the cases filed against the petitioner are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. [Llorente v. Sandiganbayan (2000)] If the law states that a certain officer is within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, the fact that the officer's SG is below 27 does not divest jurisdiction. [Inding v. Sandiganbayan (2004)] RA 8249 provides that as long as one of the accused is an official of the executive branch occupying the position otherwise classified as SG 27 and higher, the Sandiganbayan exercises exclusive original jurisdiction. To vest Sandiganbayan with jurisdiction, public office must be an element of the crime OR that without the public office, the crime could not have been committed. [Rodriguez v. Sandiganbayan (2004)]
(c) Preventive Suspension Sec. 63, LGC (Asked in 1990, 1996) 3. Sole Objective: to prevent the accused official from hampering the investigation with his influence and authority over possible witnesses and keep him off the records and other evidence. [Ganzon v. CA, (1991)] [cf. suspension as a penalty] 4. It may be imposed by the Disciplining Authority in cases where the respondent is an elective official:
Local Elective Official of: provinces highly urbanized cities independent component cities municipalities component city barangay Who may impose: President, through the DILG Secretary
Provincial Governor Mayor
5. The governor shall, upon the direct order of the Disciplining Authority, preventively suspend an elective official
including such emoluments accruing during such suspension. (sec. 64) The provincial governor is authorized to preventively suspend the municipal mayor any time after the issues have been joined and any of the following grounds were shown to exist: o When there is reasonable ground to believe that the respondent has committed the act or acts complained of o When the evidence of culpability is strong o When the gravity of the offense so warrants o When the continuance in office of the respondent could influence the witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity of the records and other evidence. There is nothing improper in suspending an officer before the charges are heard and before he is given an opportunity to prove his innocence. Preventive suspension is allowed so that respondent may not hamper the normal course of the investigation through the use of his influence and authority over possible witnesses. When a local government official believes that he has been wrongfully suspended, the proper procedure is to exhaust administrative remedies, i.e. seek relief from the DILG Secretary, and not to file a case in court. [Espiritu v. Melgar (1992)] Piecemeal suspensions should not be issued. If there are several administrative cases against a public official, these cases should be consolidated for the purpose of ordering preventive suspension, instead of issuing an order of suspension for each case. Elective local officials should be given the benefit of simultaneous service of suspension. [Ganzon v. CA (1991)] NOTE: The ruling in this case as to simultaneous service of suspension is more of an exception than the rule, because of the following circumstances: o Three separate orders of 60-day preventive suspension were issued against Ganzon o Another order of preventive suspension was issued before the SC promulgated the decision ruling that suspension should not be issued piecemeal o The simultaneous service of suspension will lessen the harsh effects of whatever ill motive may be behind the successive suspension orders issued Rights of the Respondent Official Full opportunity to:
Appear and defend himself in person or by counsel Confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him Require attendance of witnesses and the production of documentary evidence in his favor through subpoena or subpoena duces tecum. (sec. 65)
Due process. The petitioner has the right to a formal investigation under AO 23. Where the Sec denied the motion for a formal investigation and decided the case on the basis of position papers, the right of the petitioner was violated. [Joson vs Torres (290 S 279)] Form and Notice of Decision Shall be terminated within 90 days from start thereof. Office of the President or Sanggunian concerned to render decision Within 30 days from end of investigation In writing Stating clearly facts and reasons Furnish copies to respondent and interested parties. (sec. 66 a)
NOTE: Any abuse of the exercise of the power of preventive suspension shall be penalized as abuse of authority (Nachura).
Limitations: The penalty of suspension: shall not exceed the unexpired term of the respondent shall not exceed a period of 6 months for every administrative offense shall not be a bar to the candidacy of the respondent so suspended as long as he meets the qualifications required for the office. (Sec. 66, LGC) When the respondent has been meted 2 or more penalties of suspension for 2 or more administrative offenses, such penalties shall be served successively (AO No. 159, Amending AO 23, Prescribing the Rules and Procedures on the Investigation of Administrative Disciplinary Cases Against Elective Local Officials, 1994)
(d) Removal An elective local official may be removed by order of the proper court. (sec. 60) The penalty of removal from office as a result of administrative investigation shall be considered a bar to the candidacy of the respondent for any elective position. (sec. 66 c) [cf. effect of penalty of suspension]
Proper court order
Local legislative bodies and/or the Office of the President cannot validly impose the penalty of dismissal or removal from service on erring local elective officials. It is clear from Sec. 60 of LGC that an elective local official may be removed from office on the grounds enumerated above only by order of the proper court. Art. 124 (b), Rule XIX of the Rules and Regulations Implementing the LGC, which states that an elective local official may be removed from office by order of the proper court or the Disciplining Authority whichever first acquires jurisdiction to the exclusion of the other is void for being repugnant to Sec. 60, LGC. But remember if its appointive, OP may remove. [Pablico v. Villapando (2002)] Petitioners contest the administrative action as being violative of Sec. 60, which mandates that an elective local official may be removed from office only by order of the court, since the duration of the suspension being 12-20 months exceeded their remaining terms. The suspension was allegedly tantamount to a removal. Held: An administrative offense means every act or conduct or omission which amounts to, or constitutes, any of the grounds for disciplinary action. The offenses for which suspension may be imposed are enumerated in Section 60. Assuming for the moment that the Office of the President is correct in its decisions in each of the subject four administrative cases: It committed no grave abuse of discretion in imposing the penalty of suspension, although the aggregate thereof exceeded six months and the unexpired portion of the petitioners term of office. What is important is that the suspension imposed for each administrative offense did not exceed six months. [Salalima v. Guingona (1996)]
(e) Administrative Appeals Sec. 67 Within 30 days from receipt of decisions:
Decisions of: Sangguniang Panglungsod of component cities May be appealed before: Sangguniang Panlalawigan
Sangguniang Bayan Sangguniang Panlalawigan Sangguniang Panglungsod of: highly urbanized cities independent component cities Office of the President
Subsequent re-election cannot be deemed a condonation if there was already a final determination of his guilt before the re-election [Reyes v. COMELEC (1996)]
[final and executory; may not be appealed]
The appointing authority is generally the disciplining authority. Disciplinary Jurisdiction (sec. 87) [Except as otherwise provided by law], the local chief executive may impose: Removal from service (cf. elective officials) Demotion in rank Suspension for not more than 1 year w/o pay - If not more than 30 daysnot appealable - If more than 30 daysappealable to the CSC Fine not exceeding 6 months salary Reprimand Or otherwise discipline subordinate officials and employees under his jurisdiction.
Sec. 68 of the LGC merely provides that an appeal shall not prevent a decision from becoming final or executory. As worded, there is room to construe the provision as giving discretion to the reviewing officials to stay the execution of the appealed decision. [Berces v. Guingona (1995)] The phrase final or executory in Secs. 67 and 68 simply means that administrative appeal will not prevent the enforcement of the decision. [Mendoza vs Lacsina (2003)]
1 Effect of Re-election 1
Re-election renders the administrative complaint against the local official moot and academic. A public official cannot be removed for administrative misconduct committed during a prior term, since the reelection to office operates as a condonation of the officers previous misconduct to the extent of cutting off the right to remove him therefore. But this rule is applicable only to administrative cases, not to criminal cases. (Asked in 2000) [Aguinaldo v. Santos (1992)] (f) Doctrine of Condonation When re-election considered a condonation: if the proceedings are abated due to elections. In this case, there is no final determination of misconduct [Malinao v. Reyes (1996)]
An appeal shall not prevent a decision from becoming final or executory. If respondent wins the appeal: o He shall be considered as having been placed under preventive suspension during the pendency of the appeal. o If condoned, he shall be paid his salary and other emoluments during the pendency of appeal. (sec. 68)
No remedy of appeal if the decision of the administrative case exonerated the officer or employee. Party adversely affected in PD 807 or The Philippine Civil Service Law only refers to the government employee against which the case is filed. [Mendez v. CSC (1991)] The City Treasurer has authority to discipline his subordinates. The power to discipline is specifically granted by the Revised Administrative Code to heads of departments, agencies and instrumentalities, provinces, and cities. The power to commence administrative proceedings against subordinate officers is granted by the Omnibus Rules to the secretary of department, head of office, head of LGU, chief of agency, regional director, or person with sworn written complaint. The City treasurer may also motu proprio institute disciplinary proceedings against subordinates. These rules must be reconciled with the LGC, which gives the mayor the authority to institute administrative and judicial proceedings against any official or employee of the city. In cases involving the employees of the city treasurers office, the mayor must file his complaint with the treasurers office or with the DOF. [Garcia v. Pajaro (2002)] [Sangguniang Bayan of San Andres v. CA (1998)]: Requisites to constitute resignation: 1.Intention to relinquish a part of the term 2.Act of relinquishment 3.Acceptance by the proper authority (Asked in 2000) Removal Essential elements of abandonment: 1. Intent to abandon 2. Overt act by which the intention is to be carried into effect
In interpreting its own rules as it did, the CSC was acting within its constitutionally delegated power to interpret its own rules. The CSC, by ruling that the employee took an automatic leave of absence, was merely interpreting its own rule on requirement of approved leave. [City Government of Makati City v. CSC (2002)]
k. Recall Sec. 69-75, LGC (Asked in 2002) Recall is a mode of removal of a public official by the people before the end of his term of office. [Garcia v. COMELEC, (1993)]
Who has the power of recall: Power of recall for loss of confidence is exercised by the registered voters of the LGU. [S69, LGC] Effectivity: Upon the election and proclamation of a successor in the person of the candidate receiving the highest number of votes cast during the election on recall. Thus, if the official sought to be recalled receives the highest number of votes, confidence in him is affirmed and he shall continue in office. [S72, LGC] Prohibition on resignation: An Elective local official sought to be recalled is not allowed to resign while the recall process is in progress. [S73, LGC] Expenses: The Annual General Appropriations Act contains a provision for a contingency fund at the disposal of the COMELEC. [S75, LGC] RA 9244: An Act Eliminating the Preparatory Recall Assembly as a Mode of Instituting Recall of Elective Local Government Officials, Amending for the Purpose sec. 70-71 of the LGC of 1991.
Sec. 70. Initiation of the Recall Process (PCPVA) Petition of a registered voter in the LGU concerned, supported by a percentage of registered voters during the election in which the local official sought to be recalled was elected. (Percentage decreases as population of people in area increases. Also, the supporting voters must all sign the petition)
Within 15 days after filing, the COMELEC must certify the sufficiency of the required number of signatures. Failure to obtain the required number automatically nullifies the petition. Within 3 days from certification of sufficiency, COMELEC provides the official with a copy of the petition and causes its publication for 3 weeks (once a week) in a national newspaper and a local newspaper of general circulation. Petition must also be posted for 10 to 20 days at conspicuous places. PROTEST SHOULD BE FILED AT THIS POINT and ruled with finality 15 days after filing. COMELEC verifies and authenticates the signatures. COMELEC candidates announces acceptance of
Sec. 71. Election on Recall COMELEC sets election within 30 days upon completion of previous section in barangay/city/municipality proceedings (45 days in case of provinces) Officials sought to be recalled are automatically candidates
Cases A petition for recall that is signed only by the petitioner but does not bear the names of the citizens who have allegedly lost confidence in the official should be dismissed. [Angobung vs Comelec (1997)] Whether or not the electorate of the municipality has lost confidence in their incumbent mayor is a political question. Loss of confidence is the formal withdrawal by the electorate of their trust in a persons ability to discharge his office previously bestowed on him by the same electorate. [Evardone v. COMELEC (1991)] Recall is a mode of removal of a public official by the people before the end of his term of office. The peoples prerogative to remove a public official is an incident of their sovereign power and in the absence of constitutional restraint, the power is implied in all governmental operations. Such power has been held to be indispensable for the proper administration of public affairs. [Garcia v. COMELEC (1993)] The Liga ng mga Barangay and the Preparatory Recall Assembly are entirely different entities even if they may have the same members. [Malonzo vs Comelec (1997)] NOTE: Under RA9244, the Congress removed the Preparatory Recall Assembly as a mode of recall. A Regular local election is necessary in order to replace the local elective official who is sought to be recalled. This does not include SK elections. [Paras v. COMELEC (1996)] Limitations on the Holding of Recalls Sec. 74. .a Any elective official may be the subject of a recall election only once during his term of office for loss of confidence. .b No recall shall take place: 1. Within 1 year from the date of assumption of office of the official concerned Rationale: to provide a reasonable basis for judging the performance of an elective local official 2. Within 1 year immediately preceding a regular local election
Rationale: a recall election is potentially disruptive of the normal working of the LGU necessitating additional expenses
representatives are elected in the next regular congressional elections and qualified Vacancy in the offices occupied by incumbent elected officials or resulting from expiration of their terms of office in case of a negative vote in the plebiscite results: by appointment of the President; appointees shall hold office until their successors are elected in the regular local elections following the plebiscite After conversion of the newly-created province, President shall appoint: Governor Vice-governor Members of the sangguniang panlalawigan who shall hold office until their successors are elected in the next regular local elections and qualified. Qualified appointive officials and employees in the career service of the subprovinces at the time of their conversion into regular provinces shall continue in office in accordance with civil service law, rules and regulations. and
Term Limits (Asked in 1995, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2008) All elective local officials, except barangay officials (Sec. 8, Art. X, Constitution; Sec. 43 LGC) Term of office: 3 years from noon of June 30, 1992 or the date provided by law All local officials first elected during the local elections immediately following the ratification of the 1987 Constitution shall serve until noon of June 30, 1992; No official shall serve for more than 3 consecutive terms for the same position; Voluntary renunciation of the office for any length of time is not an interruption in the continuity of his service for the full term for which he was elected Barangay officials and members of the Sangguniang Kabataan (Sec. 43 LGC) Term of office: 3 years After the regular election of barangay officials on the second Monday of May 1994 Existing sub-provinces converted into regular provinces (Sec. 462 LGC) New legislative districts continue to be represented in Congress by the dulyelected representatives of the original districts out of which the new provinces or districts were created until their own
RA 9164: Synchronized Barangay Sangguniang Kabataan Elections (2002)
Sec. 2 Term of Office Term of office of barangay and sangguniang kabataan officials: 3 years No barangay elective official shall serve for more than 3 consecutive terms in the same position Reckoned from the 1994 barangay elections Voluntary renunciation of office for any length of time shall not be considered as an interruption RA 9006 Fair Election Act (2001) Sec. 14 An elective official running for any office other than the one which he is holding in a permanent capacity, is no longer considered ipso facto resigned from his office upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy. Note: Sec. 14 of RA 9006 expressly repealed Sec. 67 of BP 881 or the Omnibus Election Code which states that any
Recall, as used in par. b, sec. 74 prescribing the 1-year limitation, refers to the election itself (not the process of initiating the recall proceedings). The purpose of the 1-year limitation from assumption is to prevent premature action without having sufficient time to evaluate the officials performance. As long as the election is held outside the 1-year period, the preliminary proceedings to initiate recall can be held even before the end of 1 year from assumption. The 1-year period before regular local election does not include the campaign period. [Claudio v. COMELEC (2000)]
elective official, whether national or local, running for any office other than the one which he is holding in a permanent capacity, except for President and Vice-President, shall be considered ipso facto resigned from his office upon the filing of his certificate of candidacy. Section 14 of RA 9006 did not repeal Section 66 of the Omnibus election Code, leaving intact Section 66 thereof which imposes a limitation to appointive officials and considers them ipso facto resigned from office upon filing of their certificate of candidacy
holding political offices, are obviously expressly allowed to take part in political and electoral activities.
By repealing Section 67 but retaining Section
66 of the Omnibus Election Code, the legislators deemed it proper to treat these two classes of officials differently with respect to the effect on their tenure in the office of the filing of the certificates of candidacy for any position other than those occupied by them. Since the classification justifying Section 14 of Rep. Act No. 9006, i.e., elected officials vis-a-vis appointive officials, is anchored upon material and significant distinctions and all the persons belonging under the same classification are similarly treated, the equal protection clause of the Constitution is, thus, not infringed. What constitutes term of office?
Farias v. Executive Secretary (2003): By the repeal of Section 67, an elective official who runs for office other than the one which he is holding is no longer considered ipso facto resigned therefrom upon filing his certificate of candidacy. Elective officials continue in public office even as they campaign for reelection or election for another elective position. On the other hand, Section 66 has been retained; thus, the limitation on appointive officials remains - they are still considered ipso facto resigned from their offices upon the filing of their certificates of candidacy. elective officials and appointive officials. The former occupy their office by virtue of the mandate of the electorate. They are elected to an office for a definite term and may be removed therefrom only upon stringent conditions. On the other hand, appointive officials hold their office by virtue of their designation thereto by an appointing authority. Some appointive officials hold their office in a permanent capacity and are entitled to security of tenure while others serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority.
Substantial distinctions clearly exist between
The Constitution contemplates service by local officials for three consecutive terms as a result of an election. The term limits for elective local officials must be taken to refer to: 1) the right to be elected and 2) the right to serve in the same elective position. Consequently, it is not enough that an individual has fully served three consecutive terms in an elective local office. He must also have been elected to the same position for the same number of times before the disqualification can apply. [Borja v. COMELEC (1998)] Effect of judicial declaration that the officials proclamation is void: His assumption of office in 1995 cannot be deemed to have been by reason of a valid election. Also, he did not fully serve the 1995-98 mayoral term by reason of involuntary relinquishment of office as he was ordered to vacate his post before the expiration of the term. Although he served the greater portion of the said term, he should not be considered disqualified because he did not serve three full consecutive terms. [Lonzanida v. COMELEC (1999)] Effect of Recall Elections: An official has served for three consecutive terms. He was elected in the recall election
Another substantial distinction between the
two sets of officials is that under Section 55, Chapter 8, Title I, Subsection A. Civil Service Commission, Book V of the Administrative Code of 1987 (Executive Order No. 292), appointive officials, as officers and employees in the civil service, are strictly prohibited from engaging in any partisan political activity or take part in any election except to vote. Under the same provision, elective officials, or officers or employees
for the term of his predecessor. There was no violation of the 3-term rule. The Constitution does not require that the interruption be a full term of 3 years. The clear intent of the framers of the law is that interruption for any length of time is sufficient to break an elective local officials continuity of service. [Socrates v. COMELEC (2002)]
Effect of Conversion of the LGU: The mayor of a municipality held his post for three terms. During his last term, the municipality became a city and he was declared hold-over mayor by the charter. The said mayor should not be allowed to run again. If he were allowed to do so, he would have served the same people for a term more than what is allowed by law [Latasa v. COMELEC (2003)]
- end of Local Government Law - end of Political Law
Документы, похожие на «z Local Government Law»
105 Marcelo v. Bungubung 552 SCRA 589
wildflower hall report
MAPEH-9-PRE-TEST.docx
ROselle Mae Noval Lopez