Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 24 views

    Statcon PDF

    Uploaded by

    Clarence Francis Yap Polido

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Statcon PDF

    Uploaded by

    Clarence Francis Yap Polido
    24 views233 pages

    Original Title

    STATCON.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    24 views233 pages

    Statcon PDF

    Uploaded by

    Clarence Francis Yap Polido

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 233
    Statutory Construction JUDGE NOLIC. Diaz Presiding Judge, Regione! Til Court ‘Branch 38, Manilo: Former Presiding ude, Metropoiten Tro Court {ranch 0, Muntnupa Cty: Foumer Third assistant City sco of Mania Professerfl Lecturer, Collegeof tow: Pamantasen ng Lungsod ng Moynil, ond Univers of Sonto Toma. Facuty of Cl aw; ‘Meme, Philpine Association of Low Professors Member, Phlppine Judges Association Author The ow on Sates 9 Espounde by lorsprudence, and Transportation Lows Notes and Coses FIFTH EDITION 2016, ‘TasLE of Contents cuarrer PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS Statutory Construction, Dene Construction and tntergetation, Distingehied Situs of Construction and Interpretation Duty ofthe Courts to Cansrue an Interpret the Laws Requises Alustraive Cases: Lito Corps vs, People of he Philippines Dizector of Lands os Cott of Appeal Secretary of the Department of Public Works ‘and Highways ard Ditict Engineer Cele {ino R. Contreras a, Spouses Hevecle se Ramona Tecson Puople of the Pailzpines va Maco. Mapa Mepuiong ‘People ofthe Pilprnes vs. Pateco Amigo Dilferent Kinds of Construction and Interpretation Subjects of Construction and Interpetation B CHAPTER I ‘STATUTES. egistative Procedures vo How does a Bill Becomes « Law — Step Constitutional Test inthe Pasrage of 2B Ihusrative Cases: ‘Remman Enterprises, Ine. and Chatnber of Real Eolate end Duilers’ Associaton vs. Proes- sional Regulatory Board of fel Estat Service And Profesional Feguation Commission Pans of Staite ~ ——— a 18 1s 6 ” a 2 ‘Taste oe Conrenns station Repslic Aet No, 7309 a ‘nds of States os = Concept of Vague Statutes Repeal of Statue may’ be Expressed or implied ‘Test of Vaid Ordinance Reason Why an Ontinance shovld not Contravene & Role of Foreign Jurisprudence : ‘Alustrative Case: Norma A. Del Socorro os, Ernst Johan Brickman Van Wile nsec = CHAPTER ut [BASIC GUIDELINES IN THE CONSTRUCTION ‘AND INTERPRETATION OF LAWS. Lexiiative Intent on Mlusratve Case: Socorro Ramirez ve Hen, Court of Appeals and Eter 5. Garcia. aaa Verb Legis usr Cases Request of Court af Appeals Justices Vicente ‘BP. Valor, Angeita A, Gacttan ad Ree: Gos A. Salazar Fernando for Computaton/ ‘Adjseat of Longevity Pay eo ‘love Mackay Coble ane Rao Corporation +. National Labor Relstons, Commission aad Innlda Salzer : Felicito Basbaclo Us Ofce of the Secreiay, Department of Justice Statutes ae Whole 22 39 37 a 0 ry “e ” 32 ‘TOL OF Contes uspative Cases ‘JNM Promotions and Menagement, Ino. us National Labor Relations Comasston std Uipiano L Delos Santor Denil, Duncene ee Hon, Sandignnbayan {2% Division) and Hon. Ofce af the Special Spin ad Purpose ofthe Law Musnatve Cases: Manuel 7. De Quia ve Commisson on Elec: lena Salenilas and Bernardino Salenllas vs Hon. Cour of Appeal, a B/Gen. Jove Commendader, ot ol os Oe Renato 8.De Vil : Irpieat 008 ‘lusiraive Cases yea ©. Chus vs. The Civil Servise Comin sion, The National eigation Administration (City of Manila and City Treasurer. Jodge “amador B. Gomes ofthe CFL of Mana and SSO Philippines, ne Ca8U8 One88 ustndve Case «People ofthe Phipines vs. Gullerma Saran Stare Deine o Mlutrative Case: IM Tusson and Co, tne et ah vs Hon, Her mini C. Mariano, Male Acuial, Masia ‘ial, Sps. dose 8. Cordova and Saturnia e'Coraora FRonmel C. Amado vs. Commission on Elec ‘ons and Flarante Capital » 63 66 70 8 74 76 82 ry ‘Hsu oF Conners cuarrer (CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF "WORDS AND PHRASES When the Law Does not Distinguish, Courts should not Dissnguiee Iusrae Cases ‘Republi of te lippnes Represented by the ‘Armed Forces of the Pallppines,Fance Center (AFPFO) is. Daisy Yon \Juanito Par vs, Commission on Eleetot. People of the Philippines vx Hon. Judge Anio- ‘lo C. Bvangeista and Gullo 8. Tagenon Exceptions the State Ihasratoe Case Cecio de Villa v3, Court af Appeals Geneva and Special Tatns ‘Atusrative Case Colgate:Pamove Phils, Ine, 1s. Hon, Pedro 1M Cimeses at Auditor General General Terms Following Special Terms (Eitsder Generis} norso vn ustative Cases Republic ofthe Fe. ve Mon, Butopio Migrine a Tron Peso . ‘The People af th Philippines vs Hon. Vicente 'B Behaver. ut etal . ‘AltaVista Golf asd Country Club vs. The Ci ‘of Cebu, Hon. Mayor Tomas R. Ose, His Capacity as Mayor af Cebu, avd Tere ©. Camerila, in Her Capacity ax the Cy [Express Mention and Implied Exclusion (Espressio ‘Unius st Evctusio Aeris, g 8a 38 je) 100 103 104 107 109 12 | | ‘THsce oF comes Municipaity of Maeva ee, flocos Nore, rep. Uy is Municipal Mayor, Caroline Arsson Gansia ts. Municipality the construction and. interpretation of legal writings. (Black's Legal Dictionary, Centennial ed). Dr. Lieber in hia worl on Hermencutics gives the following classification of the diferent Kinds of interpretation. Close interpretation is adopted if just reasons connected with the character and formation of the text induce as to take the words in their narrowest meaning ‘This specie of interpretation is also generally calle “literal” Extensive interpretation, also called liberal interpretation, adopts « more comprehensive signification of the words, Extravagant interpretation i that whieis substisutes & ‘meaning evidently beyond the tue one. It is therefore not {genuine interpretation, Free of unrestricted interpretation proceeds simply on. the general principles of interpretation in gnod falth, not bound by any specific oF superior principle Limited or resticted interpretation is when we are Jnfluenced by other principles than the strictly hermeneutic Predestined interpretation tekes place ifthe interpreter, laboring under a strong bias of mind, makes the text subservient to his preconceived. views. and desires. This include artful interpretation by which the interpreter seeks to give a meaning (0 the text other than the one he knows to have been intended. (Lieber, Hermeneutics, 4-50) Jn our jurisdiction, we do nos deal so mach on the sbove kinds of interpretations bat they are incorporated in 16 Suan Conemucron the diferent rules on statutory construction. More often, our laws are interpreted either literally, strictly or liberally, and prospectively or retrospectively. Strict and liberal construction and interpretation of statutes will be diseussed in Chapter VIIl of thie book with illustrative jurisprudence. Prospective and retrospective, Which is more on the application of laws rather than interpretation, will be presented on Chapter IX and titeral interpretation was disquseed and presented earlier in this ‘chapter a5 well asin other chapters ofthis book SUBJECT’ OF CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION Authorities hold that the most common subjects of construction and interpretation are the constitution and statutes which include ordinances. But we may also add resolutions, exccutive orders and department ciecilars CHAPTER II STATUTES [LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES ‘The power to make laws i lodged in the legislative ‘department of the government. Our Constitution is explicit fon this matter. "The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives” It has the authority to make laws and to alter or repeal the sare A statute starts with a bill, A “Bill is the draft of a proposd law fom the time of its introduction ina legislative body through all the various stages in both houses. The draft isthe form of a proposed law before i is enacted into law by a vote ofthe legislative body. AR “Act” the appropriate term Yor it after it has been acted on and passed by the legislature. It then becomes a statute, the ‘written Wil of the legislature solemnly expressed according to the form necessary to constitute it as the law of the state (Black's Law Dictionary, Centennial ea). “Statute Law" is & term oten used interchangeably with the word “statute.” Statute Law, however, i broader in meaning since it Includes not only statute But also the judicial interpretation land application of the enactment. (Cratford, Construction of ‘Statues, p. 2} ‘OW DOES A BILL BECOMES A LAW —STEPS Whether in a parliamentary or presidential system, a bil before it becomes a law must pass the strict \ 8 SearoronyConsnucrane this chapter. These requirements are explicit both in the 1973 Constitution and the 1987 Constitution, We will find out after this short discussion that the enactment of law is faster and smoother in the parliamentary form of government, Let us take the passage of a bill in « parliamentary system (anicameral assembly). A member of the National Assembly may introduce the proposed bill to the Secretary of the National Assembly. ‘ho will calendar the same for the frst reading, Of course the proponent must affix his signature in the proposed bill stating hie purpose bln the first reading, the bill is read by ite umber and title only. fc. After the first reading, the bill is referred by the ‘Speaker to the appropriate committee for study. At this Stage, the appropriste committee will conduct public hearings. It must call all the necessary parties, persons, ‘organizations or sectors of societies involved to obtain their reactions and feelings on the proposed bil, ‘Then after the public hearing, the committee shall decide whether or net to report the bill favorably or whether ‘a substitute Bl should be considered, NOTE: Should there te an unfavorable report of the ‘committee, then the proposed bill is deed. d. Upon favorable action by the appropriate committee, the bill is returned to the National Assembly and shall he calendared for the second reading. ‘© In the second reading, the bills read in its entirety. Immediately after the second reading, the bil is set for open debates where members of the assembly may propose amendments and insertions to the proposed Bll NOTE: After the amendments and insertions to the proposed bil, the ideal bill as conceived by the author may ho longer be an ideal bill or vice versa, Le, it may become a Detter bill ater deliberations and debates which should be the proper case nes 39 After the approval of the bill in its second reading and at least three (3} calendar days before its Ginal passage, the, bill sprinted in it final form and copies. thereof Aistributed ‘to each of the members of the National Assembly, unless the Prime Minister [President under the Present system) certifies in writing as to the necessity of the ‘immediste enactment of the bill o meet a public calamity oF emergency. (See Art. Vil, See. 19[2), 1973 Constitution and At. VI, See. 26/2}, 1987 Constitution 1h. The bill is then calendared for the third and final teading, At this stage, no amendment shall be allowed, Only the tile of the bills read and the National Aaserbiy will, then vote on the bill. The yeas or nays are entered in the Journal. (Art. VUL, Ses. 19[2), 1973 Constitution, Art. Vl, ‘Sec. 2, 1987 Constitution). It appears that only a majrity of the members present constniting 8 quorum i= sulicent to pass the bill NOTE: Quorum is © sufficient number of members of National Assembly cr Congress to transact its dally business. Usually, itis fifty-one percent of the number of the body or fly percent ps one depending” on thee sternal rales NOTE: Ifthe NO votewins, the proposed bil js deed. AL thls stage lies the difference beeween the porliamentary system enshrined in the 1973 Constitution And the present 1987 Constitition. Under our present set up, after the third and final reading at one House where the bill originated, it will go to the other House ‘where ie wil undergo the same process, meaning another three readings fon separate days. Moreover, if there is variance in the proposed bill by the Mouse of Representatives and the Senate version of the bil it may pass through the powerful bicameral conference committee which ean introduce amendments to suit both houses of Congress. This ls also known as the compromise bill 20 Seavurony Consume NOTE: ‘There can also_be a simultaneous parallel discussion of bill by both houses of congress, which ‘usually happens on urgent legialative measure NOTE: At this stage, the original bill conceived by the Original author may no longer be his proposed bil. After the bill has been finally passed, it will be submitted to the Prime Minister (President) for his approval he approves the same, he shall sig it, otherwise, he shall eto ie and return the same with his objections t0 the National Assembly (House where it originated) andy if approved by two-thirds of all its members, shall become a law. See Art. VII, See.20, 1973 Constitution) Under the present setup, the house where the bill originated ean proceed to reconsider the vetoed bill After uch reconsideration, if two-thirds of all the members of such house shall agiee to pass the bill, shall be sent, {ogether with the objections, to the other house by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if tis approved by two: thirds of all the members of that House, it shall become s law. In all such cases, the wotes of each House shall be determined by yeas and nays and the names of the members voting for oF agaist shall be entered in its journal, Every bill passed by Congress ahall be acted upon by the President within thirty [80) days from receipt thereof Otherwise, it shall become a law as if he had wigned it (Art. M1, Sec. 27[1}, 1987 Constitution). In other words, there can bbe no presidential inaction oF pocket veto under our Constitution (CONSTITUTIONAL TEST IN THE PRSSAGE OF & BILL ‘There are numerous constitutional limitations or prohibitions in the enactment of a statute such as no ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted, ete Insofar as the mechanical procedure in the paseage of bil | concerned, there are three (3) very important consti- tutional requirements, Seams a |. Bvery bill passed by Congress shall embrace only fone subject which’ shall be expressed in the title thereof (art. Vi, See. 26[1), 1587 Constitution) ‘The purposes of this constitutional requirement are 1, To prevent hedge-podge or logrolling legislation; 2. To prevent surprise or fraud upon the legislature; and 3, To fairly apprise the people, through such publications of legislaive proceedings as is usually made, of the subjects of legsiation that are being considered, in order ‘that they may have opportunity of being heard thereon by petition of otherwiee, if they shall so desire. (Cooley, Constitutional Limitations, p. 32, 6h ed). In Alaiayan vs. National Power Corporation, 24 SCRA 172 (1968), the Supreme Court dealing on this particular istue declared “This provision is similar to thowe find in many American State Coneieutons. It is aime aginst the fle of the so-ealed omntiae bile snd logroing Tegslotion ae ‘wel as surrepedous of unconaidered tnactments. Where the aubjett of «all limited fo a parucular matter, tie lawmakers along with the poople Should be informed ofthe subject of proposed legislative measures. This cons'itutional provision thus precludes the insertion of riders in tegslation, der being a provision not germane tothe subject mater ofthe bill” ILLUSTRATIVE CASE, ‘The requirement that the subject of an act shall be expressed in its title should receive a reasonable and not a technical construction. It is sufflclent if the title ‘be comprehensive enough reasonably to include the general object which a statute seeks to effect, without ‘expressing each and every end and means necessary oF ‘convenient for the accomplishing of that object. 2 Stary Covsuen [REWMAN ENTERPRISES, INC. AND CHAMBER OF REAL ESTATE ‘AND BUILDERS! ASSOCIATION, 3. PROFESSIONAL REGULATORY 'BoARD OF ReAl ESTATE SERVICE AND PROFESSIONAL ‘REGULATION Comssion G.R No, 197676, February 04, 2014 FACTS: RA. No. 9646, otherwise known a8 the “Real Estate Service Act of the Philippines" was signed into law on ‘June 29, 2009 by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. It ‘sims to professionalize the real estate service sector Under & equlatory scheme of licensing, registration and supervision of teal estate service practitioners (eeal estate brokers, sppraisers, assessors, consultants and salespersons) in the country. Prior to its enactment, real estate service practitioners were under the supervision of the Department (of Trade and Industry (DT) through the Bureau of Trade Regulation “and Consumer Protection (BTRCP}, in_the exercise of its consumer regulation functions. Such authority is now transferred to the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC). through the Professional Regulatory Board of Real Estate Service (PRERES) created under the hhew law. The implementing ules and regulations (IRR) of R.A. No. 9646 were promulgated on July 21, 2010 by the PRC and PRERES under Resolution No. 02, Series of 2010. On December 7, 2010, herein petitioners Remman Enterprises, Ine. (RED and! the Chamber of Real Estate and Builders’ Association (CREBA} instituted Civil Case No, 10- 126776 in the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 42 Petitioners sought to declare aa void and umeonstitutional According to petitioners, the new law ig constitutionally Intirm because it violates Article VI, Section 26 (J) of the 1987 Philippine Constitution which mandates that “every Dill passed ‘by Congress shall embrace only one subject ‘whieh shall be expressed in the ttle thereat” On July 12, 2OL1, the trial court rendered its Decision denying tae petition. The tral court held that the assailed provisions are felevant to the title of the law as they are intended to regulate the practice of rea) estate service in the country by fensuring that those who engage in it shall either be a licensed realestate broker, or under the latter's supervision, somone B ISSUE: Whether or not [R.A. No, 9646] is unconstitutional for being violative of the ‘one ttle-one subject” rule under Article VI, Section 26 (I) ofthe Philippine Constitution, HELD: R.A, No. 9646 is entitled “An Act Regulating the Practice of Real Estate Service in the Philippines, Creating for the Purpose a Professional Regulatory Board of Real Estate Service, Appropriate Funds therefor and for other Purposes." Section 26(1}, Article VI ofthe Constitution states: SEC. 26 (1) Every bill passed by the Congress shat embrace’ only ane. sijech, whith Shall be (pressed in the te here ‘To determine whether there has been compliance with the constieatonal requirement that the subject of an act Shall be expressed in ite title, the Court laid down the rule that — constitutional provisions relating to the subject matter and titles of statutes should not be so narrowly onstrued as to cripple or impede the power of legislation ‘The requirement that the subject of an act shall be ‘expressed in its tile should receive a reasonable and not a technical construction. [¢ is sulficient if the title be Comprenensive enough reasonably o include the general object which a statute seeks to effect, without expressing teach and every end and means necessary ar convenient for the accomplishing of that object. Mere details need not be set forth, The ttle need not be sn abstract oF index of the Act The Cou-t has previously ruled that the one-subject requirement under the Constitution is satistied if all the parts of the statute are related, and are germane to the ‘subject matter expressed in the ttl, or as long as they are not inconsistent with of foreign to the general subject arid title. An act having a single general subject, indicated inthe title, may contain any number of provisions, na matter how diverse they may be, So long as they are not inconsistent with or Torega to’ the general subject, and tay be 2 taro Conseaueren considered in furtherance of such subject by providing for ‘the method and meahs of carrying out the general abject. It is also well-settled that the “one title-one subject” rule does not require the Congress to employ in the tie of the enactment language of sueh: precision as to mirror, fully index or catalogue all the contents and the minute details therein. The rule is sufficiently complied with if te file is comprehensive enough as 10 include the general object, Which the statute seeks to effect. Indeed, this Court has Invariably adopted a” liberal rather than technical Cconsiruction of the rule “so as not to cripple or impede legislation.” IIL No bill pessed by either House shall become a Iaw luntess it has passed three readings on separate days, and printed copies thezeot in its final form have been distributed to each member three days before its passage, except when the President certiies t9 the necessity of ite immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency. Upoe the last reading of @ bill, no amendment thereto shall be allowed, and the vote thereon shall be taken immediately thereafter, and the yeas and nays entered in the journal (art VI Sec. 26(2}, 1987 Constitution) ‘The above mechanical procedure is also Jenown as the “three reading” and ‘no amendment” rules. The powers of the bicamersi conference committee of adding or deleting provisions in the House bill and Senate bill after these had passed three readings is not a circumvention of the “ne amendment” rule. In the earlier cases of Phiippine Judges [Association ws, Prado, 227 SCRA 703, November 11, 1993, fand Tolentino vs. Sceretary of Finance, 235 SCRA 620, [Auigust 25, 1994, the Court held that it #8 within the power ff conference committe to include in ite report an entirely ‘new provision that ie not found either in the House bill ori the Senate bill Ifthe committee can propose an amendment consisting of one or two provisions, there is no reason why it tannot propose several provisiona, collectively considered as fan ‘amendment in the nature of a substitute," so long as such amendment is germane to the subject of the bills sossures 2 before the committee, Afterall, its report was not final but needed the approval af bath houses of Congrees to become Valid as an aet of the legislative department. The charge that in this case the Conference Commitice acted as a third legislative chamber is thus without any basis, ‘Thus, in the recent case of Abakada Guro Party List vs. Ermita, 469 SCRA 1, September 1, 2005 held that 1 Reidoner’ argument that the practise where a bicameral conference committee ia allowed to 2d of Gelete prvisions in the Hume bal sd Senate bil er these ‘had passed three readings. ie in. effect a {reumeenton ofthe *no amendment rue" [See 262), ‘Arc Vi ofthe 1987 Constitusion), fas to convince the Court te deviate fom ity ruling in the Tolentino case ‘hat "ors there any reson far ruiring chat the Com= imiver's Beport in these eases must have undergine three reacings in each ofthe two houses. If that be te fave, there sruld be no end to negotiation since each house tay ecek woufestion of the compro bil Art. VI, Sec. 26(2) must, therefore, be construed referring only to bills introduced for the first time in fither house of Congress, not to the conference committee report, (Emphasie supplied) The Court reiterates here that the “no amendment rule” ‘refers only to the procedure to be followed by each house of Congress with regard 2 bis initiated in cach of sald respective houses, befor: said bills transmit to the other house for its concurrence or amendment. Verily, to construe said provision in a way as to prescribe any further changes to a bill after ane Rouse has vated on it would lead to AbsU- ality as this would mean that the other house of Congres ‘would be deprived of its constitutional power to amend oF introduce changes to said bill, Thus, Art. VI, Sec. 26(2) of the Constituion cannot be taken to mean that the introduction by the Bicameral Conference Committee. of amendments end modification to disagrocing provisions in 26 Sraruroey Constant bis that have been acted upon by both houses of Congress is prohibited, and eee ‘Reason for “three readings” and “no amendment.” This constitutional requirement is mandatory and even explicit both in the 1988 and 1973 Philippine Constisutons, ‘The rule is designed to prevent hasty and improvident legislation and alford the. legislators time to study and eliberate the measures. The only exception to the rule is when the President certifies the necessity of the immediate enactment of the bill to meet a public calamity or emergency. Til, Bvery bill passed by the Congress shall, before it becomes @ lai, be presented to the President. If he approves the same, he shall sign it; otherwise, he shall veto tt and retum the same with his objections to the House where it originated, which shall enter the objection at large in its journal ‘end proceed to reconsider it. Il, after, such Teconsideration, two-thirds of all the members of such House shall agree to pase the bil, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other’ House by which it sball likewise be reconsidered, ad if approved by two-thirds ofall the members of that House, it shall become a law. In all such cases, the votes of each House shall be determined by yeas or nays, and the names of the members voting for ot ‘against shall be entered sn ite journal. The President shall communicate his veto of any ill to the House where it originated within thirty days after the date of receipt thereof, otherwise, it shall become a law asi he had signed i. ‘The executive approval and veto power of the President | the third important constitutional requirement in the mechanical passage ofa bil. This requirement is mandatary. (See above discussion on steps of a passage of bill and ‘can be considered as part ofthe checks and balance principle. seams _p PARTS OF STATUTE {a}. Title — The tte of a statute ig the heading on the preliminary part, furnishing the name by which the act Is {Individually known. It is usually prefixed to the statate in the form af a brief summary of its contents; as "An Act providing @ special procedure for the feconstications of ‘Torrens Certificate of Title lost or destroyed” (0) Preamble — That part of a statute explaining the reasons for its enactment and the objects sought t0 be Accomplished. Usually, it starts with the word "whereas Gerierally, © preamble is a declaration by the legislature of the reasons for the passage of the statute and is helpful in the interpretation of any ambiguities within the statute to ‘which {tls prefixed. (See People vs. Purisima, 86 SCRA 542 he7ep. (9) Bracting Clause — That part of the statute which declares its enactment and serves to identify it as an act of legislation proceeding from the proper legislative authority, "Be it enacted” is the usual formula used to start this clause. (@)_ Body — The main and operative part of the statute containing its substantive and even procedural provisions. Provisos and exceptions may also be found in the body of the statutes after enacting clause “interpretation clause.” (0) Repeating Claise — That part of the statute which announces the prior statutes oF specifies provisions which hhave been abrogated by reason of the enactment of the new (9 Saving Clause — A restriction in a repeating act, Which is intended to save rights, pending proceedings, penalties, ete. from the annihilation which would result from an unrestricted repeal {e) Separabilty Clause -~ That part of the statute ‘which provides that in the event that one or more provisions fare declared void or unconstitutional, the remaining provisions shall sil bein Tore. 28 SrarrmonyConstnucron, (h)_Effecivity Clause — That part ofthe statute which announces the effective dave of the law. ILLUSTRATION: RePuaLic Act No, 7309 AN ACT CREATING A BOARD OF CLAIMS UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF UNJUST IMPRISONMENT OR DETENTION AND VICTIMS OF VIOLENT CRIMES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of ‘Representatives ofthe Philppines in Congress assembled. SECTION 1. Creation and Composition ofthe Board— ‘There is hereby created a Board of Cais under the Department of Justice, hcenater referred toa the Board, to be composed af one 1) Chatman and eo (2) members beppointed by the Secretary ofthe sid departsent SEC. 2. Pavers and Auncons of the Board—The Board shall have the olin powers ant finetions | to receive, evaluate, process and lnvetene application for claims tinder this Act we ®) to conduct an independent administrative hearing and resolve appliation for Game, grantor deny the suey €) to depuise appropriate goverament agencies In order to etetivly implement scion; and <4) te promulgate rulea and repuatons in order to carey ot he ajectves of this Ace SEC. 3. Who may Fle Coins —he flowing may Hle claims for compensation before te Hoare 1) any person who was unjustly accsed, convicted and imprisoned but subanquenty released by vue of Fidgmene of acquit, any petson who was unjustly detained and release vithout beng charge sara 2» any victim of arbitrary or illegal detention by the authorities as defined in che Revised Pensl Code under 3 final judgment of the oourt; and 4) any person who is a victim of violent crimes. For purposes of this Act, violent crimes shall include rape and ‘hall likewise refer t6aflenses committed with malice whieh resulted in death or eerious physical and/or psychological injuries, permanent incapacity or disability, insanity, abortion, serious trauma, oF committed with torture, cruelty or barbariy, SEC. 4. Award Celling-—For victims of unjust imprisonment or detention, the compensation shall’ be fbased on the mumber of monthe of imprisonment ot detention and every fraction thereo! shall be considered one ‘month; Provided, however, That in no case shall such ‘compensation exceed Ine Thoweand pesos (P1,000.00) per month In all other eases, the maximum amount for which the Board may approve a claim shall not exceed Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00} or the amount necessary to reimburse the. clarmant the expenses incurred for hospitalization, ‘medical treatment, lo of wage, loss of suppart or other expenses directly relssed to injury, whichever is lower. This is without prejudice t the nght of the claimant to seek other remedies under existing las SBC. 5. When to File Claims—Any person entitled to ‘compensation under this Act must, within six (6) months fher being released ftom imprisonment or detention, or from the date the victim suffered damage or injury, file hie

    You might also like