EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-24693. July 31, 1967.]

ERMITA-MALATE HOTEL AND MOTEL OPERATORS ASSOCIATION, INC., HOTEL DEL MAR,
INC. and GO CHIU INC., v s THE HONORABLE CITY MAYOR OF MANILA and VICTOR
ALABANZA
FERNANDO, J:

Topic: Zoning and Regulatory Ordinances

Principle: Police power is the power to prescribe regulations to promote the health, morals, peace,
good order, safety and general welfare of the people. In view of the requirements of due process, equal
protection and other applicable constitutional guaranties, however, the power must not be
unreasonable or violative of due process.

Facts
Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, and one of its members Hotel del Mar Inc.
petitioned for the prohibition of Ordinance 4670 on June 14, 1963 to be applicable in the city of Manila.
They claimed that the ordinance was beyond the powers of the Manila City Board to regulate due to
the fact that hotels were not part of its regulatory powers. They also asserted that Section 1 of the
challenged ordinance was unconstitutional and void for being unreasonable and violative of due
process insofar because it would impose P6,000.00 license fee per annum for first class motels and
P4,500.00 for second class motels; there was also the requirement that the guests would fill up a form
specifying their personal information.
There was also a provision that the premises and facilities of such hotels, motels and lodging
houses would be open for inspection from city authorities. They claimed this to be violative of due
process for being vague. The law also classified motels into two classes and required the maintenance
of certain minimum facilities in first class motels such as a telephone in each room, a dining room or,
restaurant and laundry. The petitioners also invoked the lack of due process on this for being arbitrary.
It was also unlawful for the owner to lease any room or portion thereof more than twice every 24 hours.
There was also a prohibition for persons below 18 in the hotel. The challenged ordinance also caused
the automatic cancellation of the license of the hotels that violated the ordinance. The lower court
declared the ordinance unconstitutional. Hence, this appeal by the city of Manila.

Issue
Whether Ordinance No. 4760 of the City of Manila is violative of the due process clause.
Ruling
No. There is no question but that the challenged ordinance was precisely enacted to minimize
certain practices hurtful to public morals, particularly fornication and prostitution. Moreover, the increase
in the licensed fees was intended to discourage "establishments of the kind from operating for purpose
other than legal" and at the same time, to increase "the income of the city government." Police power
is the power to prescribe regulations to promote the health, morals, peace, good order, safety and
general welfare of the people. In view of the requirements of due process, equal protection and other
applicable constitutional guaranties, however, the power must not be unreasonable or violative of due
process. There is no controlling and precise definition of due process. It has a standard to which the
governmental action should conform in order that deprivation of life, liberty or property, in each
appropriate case, be valid. What then is the standard of due process which must exist both as a
procedural and a substantive requisite to free the challenged ordinance from legal infirmity? It is
responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice. Negatively put,
arbitrariness is ruled out and unfairness avoided.

Conclusion: Wherefore, the judgment of the lower court is reversed.