Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Legislations: Judge Harold Cesar C. Huliganga, LL.M

Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 15

LEGISLATIONS

Judge Harold Cesar C. Huliganga, Ll.M.


Types
• As to application
Prospective – operates after it takes effect
Retrospective – affects acts already committed before
• As to effect
Repealing – revokes or terminates another statute
Amendatory – addition to the original law for improvement
• As to scope
Special – particular persons, entities, things
Local – specific, within territorial limits
Parts
• Title – gives the general statement of the subject
matter
• Preamble – states the reason for, or the objects
of the; does not create nor grant a right, not an
essential part (Whereas)
• Enacting clause – indicates the authority which
promulgates the
• Body – contains the subject matter of the
statute, the contents
Parts
• Provisos – acting as a restraint upon, or as a
qualification of
• Interpretative clause – legislature defines its own
language
• Repealing clause – announces the legislative
intent to
• Saving clause – restricts a repealing act
• Separability clause – if for any reason, any section
or
Enactment
• TITLE must have only one subject to prevent hodge-podge
or log-rolling legislation, to prevent surprise or fraud, and
to fairly apprise the people of the subject of legislation
• Hodge-Podge – a mischievous legislative practice of
embracing in one bill several distinct matters, none of
which, perhaps, could singly obtain the assent of the
legislator, and then procuring its passage by a combination
of the minorities in favor of each of the measure into a
majority that will adopt them all. Objective: to unite the
legislators who favor any one of the subjects in support of
the whole act. VOID
Test
• The test of sufficiency of the title indicates in
broad but CLEAR terms in nature, scope and
consequences of the proposed law and its
operation
• In case of doubt as to the sufficiency of the
title, the presumption is in favor of the validity
of the acts
Lidasan vs. COMELEC
FACTS: RA 4790 An Act Creating the Municipality of Dianaton
in the Province of Lanao del Sur was signed into law
consisting of 21 barrios, 12 of which are from the
municipalities of Parang and Buldon, province of Cotabato.
The Office of the President recommended the COMELEC to
suspend the operation of the statute until clarified.
Notwithstanding, the COMELEC declared that the statute
should be implemented unless declared unconstitutional
by the SC. Hence, the petition for certiorari and prohibition
filed by Bara Lidasan, a resident and taxpayer of the
detached portion of Parang, Cotabato and qualified voter.
Lidasan vs. COMELEC
HELD: RA 4790 is unconstitutional because it violates
the provision that no bill which may be enacted into
law shall embrace more than one subject which shall
be expressed in the title thereof.
Two-pronged purpose combined in one statute: It
creates the municipality of Dianaton purportedly
from 21 barrios in the towns of Butig and Balabagan,
both in the province of Lanao del Sur; and it also
dismembers two municipalities in Cotabato, a
province different from Lanao del Sur.
People vs. Echavez
FACTS: Fiscal Ello filed separate informations
against 16 persons charging them with
squatting penalized by PD 772. The
informations were dismissed on the grounds
that (1) entry should be by force, intimidation
or threat and not through stealth and strategy
as alleged; (2) PD 772 does not apply to the
cultivation of a grazing land.
People vs. Echavez
HELD: The decree does not apply to pasture
lands because its preamble shows that it was
intended to apply to squatting in urban
communities or more particularly to illegal
constructions in squatting areas made by well-
to-do individuals. The squatting complained of
involves pasture lands in rural areas.
Aglipay vs. Ruiz
FACTS: Bishop Aglipay sought prohibition from the
court to prevent the Director of Posts from issuing
and selling postage stamps commemorative of the
33rd International Eucharistic Congress which
violates the provision that no public money or
property shall ever be appropriated, applied or
used, directly or indirectly, for the benefit or
support of any sect, church, denomination or the
principle of separation of church and state.
Aglipay vs. Ruiz
HELD: Petition denied. RA 4052 which
appropriates a sum of P60,000.00 for the said
stamps contemplates no religious purpose in
view. Stamps were not issued and sold for the
benefit of the Roman Catholic Church; nor
money derived from the sale given to that
church. Moreover, what is emphasized is not
the Eucharistic Congress itself but Manila as
the seat of that Congress.
How a bill becomes a law
i. Proposal to the committee
ii. 1st reading (in session, reading of the title, author,
synopsis)
iii. Referral to appropriate committee
iv. 2nd reading (debate, interpolation, amendment,
finalize)
v. Endorsement to plenary
vi. 3rd reading (Voting viva voce or roll-call, yeas or nays)
vii. If there’s a second committee (repeat steps 2-6)
How a bill becomes a law
• Harmonization of the bill, if necessary:
i. Parallel reading between house and senate –
bicameral conference committee (3rd house of
Congress)
ii. Enrolled bill
iii. Signed by the Senate President and Speaker of
the House
iv. Submit to President for approval
(approve/veto/lapse into law)
Distinction between civil and common law
systems
• Civil laws are written laws at the time it was
crafted while the latter are laws handed down
by elders through memory of men, originally
unwritten then codified. In the former, judges
only interpret the laws because the legislature
has the exclusive power of promulgating such;
while in the latter, judges may legislate.

You might also like