JEJOMAR C. BINAY v. EUFEMIO DOMINGO, GR No.

92389, 1991-09-11

FACTS

The Municipality of Makati approved Resolution No. 60 which confirms and ratifies the ongoing
Burial Assistance Program initiated by the Mayor. Under the program, bereaved families of
Makati whose gross family income does not exceed Php 2,000.00 a month shall be its qualified
beneficiaries and shall receive an amount of Php 500.00 as relief.

When the resolution was referred to the Commission on Audit, the latter disapproved the same
and disallowed in audit the disbursement of funds for the implementation of the program. In
denying the Mayor’s letters of consideration, the COA establsihed that there is no relation
between the objective sought by the Resolution and the alleged general welfare of the people of
Makati. It opined that there must always be an obvious and real connection between the actual
provisions of a police regulation and its avowed purpose, and the regulation adopted must be
reasonable adapted to accomplish it. Further, it asserted that it should be for the benefit of the
whole not only a few individuals.

Despite reaffirming the resolution, the COA stayed the program which constrained the
petitioners to file a special civil action for certiorari.

ISSUE
Whether or not Resolution No. 60 as re-enacted by the Municipality of Makati is a valid exercise
of police power under the general welfare clause.

RULING
The Court ruled in favor of the petitioners. First, although the COA suggested that there is no
connection between the objective of the resolution and the alleged public safety or general
welfare of the inhabitants of Makati, the Court ruled that police power is not capable of exact
definition but has been veiled to underscore its all-comprehensiveness. The police power of
Municipal Corporation is broad and said to be commensurate with, but shall not exceed, the duty
to provide the real needs of the people in their health, safety, comfort and convenience.
Second, public purpose is not unconstitutional merely because it incidentally benefits a limited
number of persons. As pointed by the Solicitor-General, the social welfare legislations geared
towards the promotion of general welfare, social justice and human dignity and respect for
human rights. It has been held by the Court that the support for the poor has been an accepted
exercise of police power in the promotion of common good. Resolution No. 60 is a program
towards social justice which relieves the poor from the painful experience of bereavement.
Hence, it vivifies that those who have less in life should have more in law.

Petition is GRANTED. Decision of the COA is SET ASIDE.