Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PubCorp Integration Lecture PDF
PubCorp Integration Lecture PDF
Cases:
- Telecommunications power: LGU cannot give a franchise for
telecommunications or cable TV because that is a power not
devolved to LGUs rather it remains with the National
Telecommunications Commission
- Compliance with the building code: responsibility of LGU
When the law does not impose a limitation on the discretionary power of
LGUs then NGAs cannot impose such limitation, otherwise, it will amount
to control and will violate the local autonomy of local government units
• Source of powers: either CONSTITUTION, STATUTES and - Police power is not a constitutional power like eminent domain
respective CHARTERS and this power is sourced from the state and delegated to LGUs
How do we interpret LGU powers: Reason for delegation: dual agency role/ capacity of LGUS
- Follow the rules of interpretation when the law is ambiguous 1. Agents of the state
- LIBERAL in favor of local government when you talk about 2. Agents of the people
devolution, fiscal autonomy
- Before, police power is construed in favor of local governments. Hierarchy: between economic benefits and right to life, security and
Now because of the 2016 case, together with taxation and safety, the latter takes precedence
eminent domain, it is now STRICTLY construed against the LGUs
Requirements which must concur: lawful subject and lawful method
- LGUs cannot issue driver’s license because that power remains
- It is easier to comply with lawful subject rather than lawful method
with the LTO
Section 16 of LGC is a long provision that can be broken down into 2 - LGUs cannot issue franchises for all public utility vehicles
braches
because under the LGC what has been devolved is only
regulation of tricycles
1. General legislative branch: those powers expressly mentioned in - LGUs cannot regulate or tax jueteng because jueteng is a
the law. What LGUs does is just to apply what the la provides prohibited activity
juveniles.
- While it requires an executive action on the part of the Mayor/
o It should provide for the least restrictive means to achieve Governor/ Punong Barangay—filing the expropriation case, SC
the interest; provide adequate exceptions
said in 2016 that it is essentially LEGISLATIVE
o If you look at the Quezon City ordinance , it talks about - taking of private property or properties owned by local
the rights of the students, for school, church, legitimate governments in their proprietary capacity as distinguished from
non school, or non church, civic activities, political LGU properties in their governmental capacity (example: city hall)
RTC:
- Questions of fact
eminent domain
• Also Section 5 (Article X) that says other source of revenues
Reclassification is a special form of zoning. When you talk about • When LG FA it talks about source of money and how the LG will
reclassification you're changing agricultural land to non-agricultural land use these funds and again like FA there’s no absolutes
Of the 3, Conversion is by a national government agency (DAR) while all o 4th bullet important:
the three are local government powers. ▪ Fiscal autonomy does not leave LGUs with
unbridled discretion in the disbursement of
public funds. They remain accountable to their
constituency; City has fiscal responsibility to
ensure that barangay funds would not be released
to a person without proper authority
• National gov’t cannot limit LG Fiscal Acts, absent a statute
• The power to tax is constitutional power
o Eminent Domain
• Classic example would be the losses depending the financial o Police Power
capacity of a local government, here comes theThe DBM says 5k o Power to reclassify
for judges – clearly this undermines the of LGs expressly given to • However this power is not absolute, congress can impose
them which is unlimited by law limitation
• Fee – is to regulate
• The Local Government has share in the national tax, but not the
other way
o Government Agencies
o Public Utilities
Here is a chart telling that whether a particular entity is liable to tax or be
exempt from paying tax
2. You are a GI, nature of entity, GOCC you are liable, However
property outside commerce of men
duly deprived of their rightful share because the Consti does not make 2. those given by law which can be revoked and repealed.
any distinction between income tax and tariffs and customs.
*The way the law is written now it talks about a 40 percent share of all
LGUs for the collection of BIR 3 years preceeding
The Consti said that there should be sectoral representatives in local Local government Sanggunian, local legislative councils do 3 readings in
legislative bodies and that presupposes that local legislation is recognized one day because there is no such prohibition.
because all rules and local ordinances must not be inconsistent with
the Constitution, statutes, and their respective charters.
Local government units today cannot also issue subpoenas because
these power have not been given to them
Again they can only hold session, conduct business while in session. It's
either regular or in a special session.
it is important to note when an enabling instrument should be in Expropriation or reclassification, we have Supreme Court cases,
ordinance form or resolution form. more importantly because of the last because the law is clear, it says ordinance, then it must be in ordinance
column. all ordinances are subject to the veto authority of the local chief form. should it be in ordinance form or resolution form where the
executive except the punong barangay and all ordinances are subject to sangunian authorizes the mayor to sign a contract, if you recall, before,
review by the higher supervising entity. when there is a law which gives the mayor, or the punong barangay, or governor signs a contract, there
that supervising authority the power to review, in the case of resolutions, must be prior authorization, or absent a prior authorization, it can be
not all. only resolutions which adopts the local development plan or ratified either expressed or implied. the authorization, must it come in
public investment program. it can either be in ordinance form, or ordinance form or resolution form? a lot of local government units, their
resolution form, and subject to the review authority by the higher. Every practice is just resolution, but in a 2013 case, the sc said it must be in
time there is an appropriation, it must be an ordinance, every time there an ordinance, however, in 2015 that same case was dismissed by the
is a governmental power, it must be an ordinance. sc because of a technicality so clearly the 2013 case technically, no
longer exists, because that case was dismissed. so every time i give
advice to a local government unit, i say, maybe the prudent practice
would be, ordinance.
there 2 tests for a valid ordinance, again, the formal test, and the The operative fact rule means prior to the determination if a particular
substantive test. in a lot of cases, in terms of determining what can be ordinance is invalid, either by the court or the higher, then that ordinance
enacted by local governments, their criteria is couched in the negative. takes effect, however in one instance, and this is the national
not contradict the constitution, not be inconsistent, not discriminate, etc. telecommunications commission case, wherein the province of Batangas
issued a franchise for cable tv operator. Supreme Court said that was
void from the beginning. No rights were conferred to the private sector
proponent, but as a general rule, until declared illegal by the court or by
the higher supervising unit, then that particular ordinance becomes
effective.
Again, to date there are only 2 agencies the national government that Accountability - There are two types of accountability. Either the Juridical
have been given the power by congress to review and declare illegal Person which is the LGU or the National Person which is the Public
certain ordinances. Tax Ordinances [again not fees] by the DOJ and to Servant. Notwithstanding a law, a mayor cannot be the head of any
Appropriations Ordinances by the Department of Budget and other government entity. This was the case of SBMA president.
Management. Again, when the DOJ or the DBM review, it’s only a According to the SBMA act, the mayor of Olongapo city shall concurrently
question of law. Is it within the powers of the LGU to enact? It cannot be a be the SBMA head. Supreme Court said, no. Because one - that is not ex
question of fact. The DBM cannot say this is prejudicial to the public officio. And similar to the Funa v. Agra case. Okay.
welfare. The DOJ cannot say that the ordinance is excessive, confiscatory,
discriminatory.
Re-election once upon a time - during my time, If you have a pending
admin case and you're re-elected, that amounts to forgiveness. The last
person who benefitted from that was former mayor Binay. Now, whether
you have pending case, whether its criminal or administrative, election
would not save you.
Mayor dies - vice mayor becomes the mayor not just in an acting
capacity. Senior councilor becomes the vice mayor. And the senior
councilor if ever he/she is a member of a party, there may be a substitute
to fill up the vacancy will come from that party.
Mayor dies, what happens? Vice Mayor becomes the Mayor. Alam niyo in
this particular instance, napaka-swerte ni Vice Mayor. Why? Because that
Vice Mayor, that term now that he's the Mayor will not be considered a
term as Mayor. Why? Because he was not elected as Mayor. That would
also not be considered as term of Vice Mayor because, he did not fully
serve the 3 year term as mayor. That particular case, it was neither a term
as Mayor nor as Vice Mayor. Because according to the Supreme Court - in
order for it to be considered a term, you must have been elected to that
position and you must have fully served the term which is contrary to what
I learned in law school. Because even if you serve the term for one day, ah
sorry. 1 Day Tenure, you're still serving the term because the term is fixed
by law. By the way that rule is still a good rule for members of congress.
Again when you talk about serving the whole term and term here means
tenure then that only applies to local officials. So its a full term even if you
take a vacation, because involuntary renunciation does not break the What’s the difference between suspension and preventive suspension?
term. It's not a full term if their succession you won in the recall election,
you won in the election protest, because you did not fully serve the term. Suspension is a penalty. Meaning there must have been a proceeding, and
By the way if you're suspended or placed under preventive suspension normally it’s summary.
because once upon a time, people would say "have yourself placed under Preventive suspension is an administrative sanction prior to the final
preventive suspension so that it could bot be considered a term, so you determination of your palpability. In order to protect the witnesses and the
can run eventually every election". Maybe have a break for a month. But documents, you can be placed under preventive suspension. Let me just go
again the Supreme Court has said no to that rule. through the preventive suspension.
One, the higher supervising local chief executive, and two, the ombudsman.
The requirements are not the same. While the requirements for being placed
under preventive suspension by the higher local chief executive would be
there must be joinder of issues meaning an answer or responsive reading
has been done. The exception to that would be, despite the repeated
demands you don’t find your answer. You can now be placed under
preventive suspension. But for the ombudsman, there is no such requirement
of joinder. You can be placed under preventive suspension even the minute
after the complaint has been done, theoretically speaking.
• Here are some cases, for example, if you are under preventive
suspension, the Mayor cannot fully function as Mayor. That would
be use Usurpation.
▪ When we talk about personal liability, it talks about violation of these • Illegal dismissal: when is the Mayor liable, when is the local
laws by an elective official. government liable? If the dismissal is capricious, whimsical,
arbitrary and the LGU through the Sanggunian did not participate
in the dismissal, then the Mayor is PERSONALLY liable.
Atty. Agra: “If I become a Mayor (which will never happen), I’d like all
my acts to be ratified by the Sanggunian—that will be my defense to
make the LGU liable, not me.”