"Necessary in The Interest of Law and Order" Is A Standard Held Sufficient

RUBI v.
THE PROVINCIAL BOARD OF MINDORO | 1
EN BANC
RUBI v. THE PROVINCIAL BOARD OF MINDORO
G.R. No. L-14078; March 7, 1919; 39 Phil 660
Malcom J.
TOPIC: Constitutional Law: Article VI, Sec. 1 (Legislative Power; Non-Delegation)

DOCTRINE: Delegation of Legislative Powers to Local Governments. An exception to the general rule
against the delegation of legislative power sanctioned by immemorial practice permits the
central legislative body to make such delegation to local authorities.
“Necessary in the interest of law and order" is a standard held sufficient.
FACTS:
 The case is an application for habeas corpus in favor of Rubi and other Manguianes of the Province of
Mindoro. It is alleged that the Maguianes are being illegally deprived of their liberty by the provincial
officials of that province. Rubi and his companions are said to be held on the reservation established at
Tigbao, Mindoro, against their will, and one Dabalos is said to be held under the custody of the provincial
sheriff in the prison at Calapan for having run away from the reservation.
 The provincial governor of Mindoro and the provincial board thereof directed the Manguianes in question to
take up their habitation in Tigbao, a site on the shore of Lake Naujan, selected by the provincial governor
and approved by the provincial board. The action was taken in accordance with section 2145 of the
Administrative Code of 1917, and was duly approved by the Secretary of the Interior as required by said
action.
 Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917 reads as follows: “Establishment of non-Christian upon
sites selected by provincial governor. — With the prior approval of the Department Head, the provincial
governor of any province in which non-Christian inhabitants are found is authorized, when such a course is
deemed necessary in the interest of law and order, to direct such inhabitants to take up their habitation on
sites on unoccupied public lands to be selected by him an approved by the provincial board.”
 Petitioners, however, challenge the validity of this section of the Administrative Code. This, therefore,
becomes the paramount question which the court is called upon to decide.
ISSUE: Whether Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917 constitute an unlawful delegation of
legislative power by the Philippine Legislature to a provincial official and a department head,
therefore making it unconstitutional.
RULING:
No. The Philippine Legislature has here conferred authority upon the Province of Mindoro, to be
exercised by the provincial governor and the provincial board. In determining whether the delegation of
legislative power is valid or not, the distinction is between the delegation of power to make the law, which
necessarily involves a discretion as to what it shall be, and conferring an authority or discretion as to its
execution, to be exercised under and in pursuance of the law. The first cannot be done; to the later no valid
objection can be made. Discretion may be committed by the Legislature to an executive department or official.
The Legislature may make decisions of executive departments of subordinate official thereof, to whom it has
committed the execution of certain acts, final on questions of fact. The growing tendency in the decision is to
give prominence to the "necessity" of the case.
In enacting the said provision of the Administrative Code, the Legislature merely conferred upon the
provincial governor, with the approval of the provincial board and the Department Head, discretionary authority
as to the execution of the law. This is necessary since the provincial governor and the provincial board, as the
official representatives of the province, are better qualified to judge “when such as course is deemed
necessary in the interest of law and order”. As officials charged with the administration of the province and the
protection of its inhabitants, they are better fitted to select sites which have the conditions most favorable for
improving the people who have the misfortune of being in a backward state.
CONCLUSION:
WHEREFORE, the action pursuant to section 2145 of the Administrative Code does not deprive a
person of his liberty without due process of law and does not deny to him the equal protection of the laws, and
that confinement in reservations in accordance with said section does not constitute slavery and involuntary
servitude. The Court further of the opinion that section 2145 of the Administrative Code is a legitimate exertion
of the police power, somewhat analogous to the Indian policy of the United States. Section 2145 of the
Administrative Code of 1917 is constitutional. Hence, Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917 is not
an unlawful delegation of legislative power by the Philippine Legislature to provincial official and a department
head. Petitioners are not unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of their liberty. Habeas corpus can, therefore, not
issue. This is the true ruling of the court. Costs shall be taxes against petitioners. So ordered.

"Necessary in The Interest of Law and Order" Is A Standard Held Sufficient

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

"Necessary in The Interest of Law and Order" Is A Standard Held Sufficient

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

"Necessary in The Interest of Law and Order" Is A Standard Held Sufficient

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RUBI v.

THE PROVINCIAL BOARD OF MINDORO | 1

TOPIC: Constitutional Law: Article VI, Sec. 1 (Legislative Power; Non-Delegation)

You might also like