Bar Q and A #8

1.) In 1963, congress passed a law creating a government-owned corporation named Manila War Memorial Commission (MWMC), with the primary function of overseeing the construction of a massive memorial in the heart of Manila to commemorate victim of the 1945 Battle of Manila. The MWMC charter provided an initial appropriation of P1,000,000, empowered the corporation to raise funds in its own name, and set aside a parcel of land in Malate for the memorial site. The charter set the corporate life of MWMC at 50 years with a proviso that Congress may not abolish MWMC until after the completion of the memorial. Forty-five (45) years later, the memorial was only 1/3 complete and the memorial site itself had long been overrun by squatters. Congress enacted a law abolishing the MWMC and requiring that the funds raised by it be remitted to the National Treasury. The MWMC challenged the validity of the law, arguing that under its charter its mandate is to complete the memorial no matter how long it takes. Decide with reason.

The contention of MWMC is untenable. An implied limitation on legislative power is the prohibition against the passage of irrepealable laws. Such laws deprive succeeding legislatures of the authority to craft laws appropriate to the milieu (City of Davao v. Regional Trial Court 467 SCRA 280)

Textbox

2.) Suppose the President submits a budget which does not contain provisions for CDF (Countrywide Development Funds), popularly known as the pork barrel, and because of this Congress does not pass the budget. a. Will that mean paralization of government operations in the next fiscal year for lack of an appropriation law? b. Suppose in the same budget, there is a special provision in the appropriations for the Armed Forces authorizing the Chief of Staff, AFP, subject to the approval of the Secretary of National Defense, to use savings in the appropriations provided thereto to cover up whatever financial losses suffered by the AFP Retirement and Separation Benefits System (RSBS) in the last five (5) years due to alleged bad business judgment. Would you question the constitutionality validity of the special provision?

a.) NO, the failure of Congress to pass the budget will not paralyze the operations of the Section 25(7), Article VI of the Constitution provides: "If, by the end of any fiscal year, the Congress shall have failed to pass the general appropriations bill for the ensuing fiscal year, the general appropriations law for the preceding fiscal year shall be deemed reenacted and shall remain in force and effect until the general appropriations bill is passed by the Congress.

b.) Yes, the provision authorizing the Chief of Staff, with the approval of the Secretary of National Defense, to use savings to cover the losses suffered by the AFP Retirement and Separation Benefits System is Section 25(5], Article VI of the Constitution provides: "No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriation law for their respective offices from savings in other Items of their respective appropriations."

In Philippine Constitution v. Enriquez, 235 SCRA 506, 544, the Supreme Court held that a provision in the General Appropriation Act authorizing the Chief of Staff to use savings to augment the funds of the AFP Retirement and Separation Benefits Systems was unconstitutional. "While Section 25(5) allows as an exception the realignment of savings to augment items in the general appropriations law for the executive branch, such right must and can be exercised only by the President pursuant to a specific law."

Textbox

3.) Give the limitations on the power of the Congress to enact the General Appropriations Act? Explain your answer

The following are the limitations on the power of Congress to enact the GAA:

It must be devoted to a public purpose;
The sum authorized to be released must be determinate or at least determinable;
Congress may not increase appropriations recommended by the President for the operations of the government;
Form, content and manner of preparation of budget shall be provided by law;
No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the bill unless it releases specifically to some particular appropriations therein;
Procedure for approving appropriations for Congress shall be the same as that of other departments in order to prevent sub rosa appropriations by Congress; and
Prohibition against transfer of appropriations from one branch (judiciary, legislative, and executive) to another.

Textbox

4.) What are the limitations/restrictions provided by the Constitution on the power of Congress to authorize the President to fix tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues. Explain.

According to Section 28(2), Article VI of the Constitution, Congress may, by law, authorize the President to fix within specified limits, and subject to such limitations and restrictions it may impose, tariff rates, import and export quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues and other duties or imposts within the framework of the national development program of the Government.

Textbox

5.) Suppose that the forthcoming General Appropriations Law for Year 2002, in the portion pertaining to the Department of Education, Culture and Sports, will contain a provision to the effect that the Reserve Officers Training Course (ROTC) in all colleges and universities is hereby abolished, and in lieu thereof all male college students shall be required to plant ten (10) trees every year for two (2) years in areas to be designated by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources in coordination with the Department of Education, Culture and Sports and the local government unit concerned. It further provides that the same provision shall be incorporated in future General Appropriations Acts. There is no specific item of appropriation of funds for the purpose. Comment on the constitutionality of said provision.

The provision is unconstitutional, because it is a rider. Section 25(2), Article VI of the Constitution provides, "No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the general appropriations bill unless it relates specifically to some particular appropriation therein." The abolition of the Reserve Officers Training Course involves a policy matter. As held in Philippine Constitution Association v. Enriquez, 235 SCRA 506, this cannot be incorporated in the General Appropriations Act but must be embodied in a separate law.

Textbox

6.) The President signs into law the Appropriations Act passed by Congress but she vetoes separate items therein, among which is a provision stating that the President may not increase an item of appropriation by transfer of savings from other items. The House of Representatives chooses not to override this veto. The Senate, however, proceeds to consider two options: (1) to override the veto and (2) to challenge the constitutionality of the veto before the Supreme Court. (1) Is option (1) viable? If so, what is the vote required to override the veto? (2) Is option (2) viable? If not. why not? If viable, how should the Court decide the case?

1.) Option 1 is not viable in as much as the House of Representatives, from which the Appropriations Act originated and to which the President must have returned the law, is unwilling to override the presidential There is, therefore, no basis for the Senate to even consider the possibility of overriding the President's veto. Under the Constitution the vote of two-third of all the members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, voting separately, will be needed to override the presidential veto.

2.) It is not feasible to question the constitutionality of the veto before the Supreme In Gonzales v. Macaraig, 191 SCRA 152, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a similar veto. Under Article VI, Sec. 27(2) of the Constitution, a distinct and severable part of the General Appropriations act may be the subject of a separate veto. Moreover, the vetoed provision does not relate to any particular appropriation and is more an expression of a congressional policy in respect of augmentation from savings than a budgetary provision. It is therefore an inappropriate provision and it should be treated as an item for purposes of the veto power of the President. The Supreme Court should uphold the validity of the veto in the event the question is brought before it.

Textbox

7.) Ernest Cheng, a businessman, has no knowledge of legislative procedure. Cheng retains you as his legal adviser and asks enlightenment on the following matters: a. When does a bill become a law even without the signature of the President? b. When does the law take effect?

a.) Under Section 27(1), Article VI of the Constitution, a bill becomes a law even without the signature of the President if he vetoed it but his veto was overridden by two-thirds vote of all the members of both the Senate and the House of Representatives and If the President failed to communicate his veto to the House from which the bill originated, within thirty days after the date of receipt of the bill by the President.

b.) As held in Tanada v. Tuvera (146 SCRA 446), a law must be published as a condition for its effectivity and in accordance with Article 2 of the Civil Code, it shall take effect fifteen days following the completion of its publication in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation unless it is otherwise provided. (Executive Order No. 292, Revised Administrative Code of 1989)

Textbox

8.) Under the enrolled bill doctrine, the signing of a bill by both the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate and the certification by the secretaries of both Houses of Congress that the bill was passed on a certain date are conclusive on the bill's due enactment. Assuming there is a conflict between the enrolled bill and the legislative journal, to the effect that the enrolled bill signed by the Senate President and eventually approved by the President turned out to be different from what the Senate actually passed as reflected in the legislative journal. a. May the Senate President disregard the enrolled bill doctrine and consider his signature as invalid and of no effect? b. May the President thereafter withdraw his signature? Explain your answer.

a.) As held by the Court in Astorga v. Villegas (G.R. No. L-23475 April 30, 1974), conclusive proof of a bill's due enactment, required, it is said, by the respect due to a co- equal department of the government, is neutralized in this case by the fact that the Senate President declared his signature on the bill to be invalid and issued a subsequent clarification that the invalidation of his signature meant that the bill he had signed had never been approved by the Senate. Obviously this declaration should be accorded even greater respect than the attestation it invalidated, which it did for a reason that is undisputed in fact and indisputable in logic. As far as Congress itself is concerned, there is nothing sacrosanct in the certification made by the presiding officers. It is merely a mode of authentication. The lawmaking process in Congress ends when the bill is approved by both Houses, and the certification does not add to the validity of the bill or cure any defect already present upon its passage.

b.) The President can withdraw his signature. The journal of the proceedings of each House of Congress is no ordinary record. The Constitution requires it. The Court is not asked to incorporate such amendments into the alleged law, which admittedly is a risky undertaking, but to declare that the bill was not duly enacted and therefore did not become law. In the face of the manifest error committed and subsequently rectified by the President of the Senate and by the Chief Executive, for the Court to perpetuate that error by disregarding such rectification and holding that the erroneous bill has become law would be to sacrifice truth to fiction and bring about mischievous consequences not intended by the law-making body. (Astorga v. Villegas)

Textbox

9.) Sec. 26(2), Art. VI of the Constitution provides that no bill passed by either House of Congress shall become a law unless it has passed three readings on separate days and printed copies of it in its final form have been distributed to the Members of the House three days before its passage. Is there an exception to the provision? Explain your answer.

If a bill is certified as urgent by the President as to the necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency, the 3 readings can be held on the same day. [1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 26(2)]

Textbox

10.) What are the grounds for impeachment? Explain.

Under Section 2, Article XI of the Constitution, the grounds for impeachment are culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, and betrayal of public trust.

Textbox

The contention of MWMC is untenable. An implied limitation on legislative power is the prohibition against the passage of irrepealable laws. Such laws deprive succeeding legislatures of the authority to craft laws appropriate to the milieu (City of Davao v. Regional Trial Court 467 SCRA 280)

The following are the limitations on the power of Congress to enact the GAA:

It must be devoted to a public purpose;

The sum authorized to be released must be determinate or at least determinable;

Congress may not increase appropriations recommended by the President for the operations of the government;

Form, content and manner of preparation of budget shall be provided by law;

No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the bill unless it releases specifically to some particular appropriations therein;

Procedure for approving appropriations for Congress shall be the same as that of other departments in order to prevent sub rosa appropriations by Congress; and

Prohibition against transfer of appropriations from one branch (judiciary, legislative, and executive) to another.

If a bill is certified as urgent by the President as to the necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency, the 3 readings can be held on the same day. [1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 26(2)]

Under Section 2, Article XI of the Constitution, the grounds for impeachment are culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, and betrayal of public trust.