Ynoc vs IAC

FACTS:

Restituto Ynot filed a petition for review on certiorari for the constitutionality of amended
Executive Order No. 626-A issued by President Ferdinand Marcos.

The petitioner transported six carabaos in a pump boat from Masbate to Iloilo on January 13,
1984 when they were confiscated by the police station commander of Barotac Nuevo, Iloilo for the
violation of the said EO that prohibits the transport of carabaos and carabeef from one province to
another for the purpose of conserving those still fit for farm work or breeding and preventing their
improvident depletion.

The petitioner sued for recovery and the RTC issued a writ of replevin upon his filing of a
supersedeas bond of php 12,000, and questioned the constitutionality of the Executive Order which was
later denied by the court for lack of authority and also for its presumed validity.

The petitioner appealed to Intermediate Appellate Court which upheld the trial court.

The petitioner then, filed a petition for review on certiorari on the Supreme Court.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Executive Order 626-A as an exercise of the Republic’s police power is constitutional.

HELD:

NO. Though the Court affirmed that the slaughter of carabaos regardless of age will be another cause of
depletion, which is the very purpose why the said order was issued. The prohibition for the inter-
provincial transport is questionable, for the carabao can be slaughtered wherever. The manner of
confiscation was also held unconstitutional, for the measure struck at once and pounced without giving
the chance to be heard, thus denying people the right of due process. The Court also contest the last
portion of the said order, the confiscation of such government agencies and distribution to institutions “as
they may see fit” which may cause abuse of power and corruption, for there is no charter included for the
limits and requisites to such “as may see fit” provision. Hence, the challenged measure was an invalid
exercise of the police power and is declared unconstitutional. The decision of the Court of Appels being
reversed and the petitioner granting the cancellation of his bond and fine restored, so ordered.