REVIEWER ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT LAW

Alberto C. Agra
Professor of Laws, Political Law Bar Reiewer
Ate!eo Law "c#ool
$%raft as of &' Noe(ber )'&)*
Part &. LOCAL GOVERNMENT"................................................&
Nat+re of Local Goer!(e!t ,!its.......................................&
T-.es of Local Goer!(e!t ,!its........................................./
Creatio! of Local Goer!(e!t ,!its....................................0
Part ). LOCAL A,TONOM1......................................................2
,!itar-, !ot 3e%eral, 3or(..................................................2
Local A+to!o(-.................................................................4
5eol+tio! a!% 5eco!ce!tratio!.........................................6
E7ec+tie "+.erisio!.......................................................&'
Legislatie Co!trol...........................................................&)
Part /. POWER" O3 LOCAL GOVERNMENT"............................&/
5elegatio! a!% I!ter.retatio! of Powers...........................&/
Police Power....................................................................&8
E(i!e!t 5o(ai!...............................................................&4
Reclassi9catio! of La!%....................................................)'
Local Legislatio!..............................................................)'
Ot#er Goer!(e!tal a!% Cor.orate Powers.......................)8
Part 0. LOCAL A,TONOM1 AN5 LOCAL "O,RCE" O3 3,N5". . .)2
"o+rces of 3+!%s..............................................................)2
3iscal A+to!o(-...............................................................)2
I!ter!al Ree!+e Allot(e!t..............................................)4
"#are i! Natio!al Wealt# Procee%s....................................)6
Power of Ta7atio!.............................................................)6
Part 8. LOCAL GOVERNMENT O33ICIAL"................................/'
Legislatie Co!trol oer "tr+ct+re...................................../'
Ter( of O:ce.................................................................../'
Powers of Local O:cials.................................................../&
Power to A..oi!t............................................................../)
Ba! o! ;ol%i!g 5+al Positio!s.........................................../)
Vaca!cies.........................................................................//
Part 2. ACCO,NTABILIT1 O3 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ,NIT" AN5
O33ICIAL"........................................................................../0
"+abilit- a!% Liabilit-......................................................./0
Liabilit- of Local Goer!(e!t ,!its.................................../0
Liabilit- of Local O:cials................................................../8
A%(i!istratie Procee%i!gs............................................../4
Pe!alties........................................................................./6
Pree!tie "+s.e!sio!...................................................../6
E<ect of Re=Electio!.........................................................0'
Part 4. PEOPLE>" PARTICIPATION..........................................0'
Ve!+es for Po.+lar Partici.atio!.......................................0'
Prior Ma!%ator- Co!s+ltatio!............................................0'
I!itiatie a!% Refere!%+(................................................0&
Local ".ecial Bo%ies.........................................................0&
Part!ers#i.s a!% Assista!ce.............................................0)
Recall..............................................................................0)
"ectoral Re.rese!taties..................................................0)
Part &. LOCAL GOVERNMENT"
Nature of Local Government Units
1. Under the 1987 Constitution, local governments or local government units (LGUs) are
referred to as olitical and territorial su!divisions" (#ection 1, $rticle %, 1987
Constitution).

1.1 $n LGU is a u!lic cororation and is classi&ed as a municial cororation
roer.
a. 'he four elements of an LGU are( (1) legal creation) (*) cororate name)
(+) inha!itants) and (,) lace or territor- (.u!lic Cororations, /uerto G.
0artin, 1981).
!. 'he- are esta!lished for the government of a ortion of the #tate (.u!lic
Cororations, /uerto G. 0artin, 1981).
c. $n LGU can onl- e2ercise its o3ers 3ithin its territorial !oundar- or
4urisdiction. 5ts o3ers are intramural. $s an e2cetion, an LGU can
e2ercise its o3ers outside the su!division (e2tramural) in three
occasions) namel-, (1) rotection of 3ater sul-) (*) revention of
nuisance) and (+) olice uroses. (.u!lic Cororations, /uerto G. 0artin,
1981).
1.* Local governments are administrative agencies and agencies of Government
distinguished from the 6ational Government 3hich refers to the entire
machiner- of the central government (#ections * 7,8 and 7*8, 1987
$dministrative Code).
1.+ .u!lic cororations created !- local governments are referred to as 9uasi:
municial cororations (.u!lic Cororations, /uerto G. 0artin, 1981).
1., Local governments are distinguished from 9uasi:cororations. ;uasi:
cororations are created !- the #tate, either !- la3 or !- authorit- of la3, for
a seci&c governmental urose (.u!lic Cororations, /uerto G. 0artin,
1981).
a. $ government:o3ned and :controlled cororation (G<CC) must !e
organi=ed either as a stoc> or non:stoc> cororation. (05$$ vs. C$, G./.
6o. 111?1@, Aul- *@, *@@?).

i. $ G<CC is vested !- la3 3ith a legal ersonalit- searate and distinct
from those acting for and in its !ehalf and, in general, from the eole
comrising it (05$$ vs. C$, G./. 6o. 111?1@, Aul- *@, *@@?).
ii. $ G<CC created through secial charter must meet the t3o conditions,
namel-( (a) it must !e esta!lished for the common good) and (!) it
must meet the test of economic via!ilit- (#ection 1?, $rticle %55, 1987
Constitution).
718
iii. B2amles of G<CCs are( G<CCs incororated under the Cororation
Code, su!sidiaries of G<CCs, Government Cinancial 5nstitutions (GC5s),
Dater Eistricts, government:ac9uired asset cororation (05$$ vs. C$,
G./. 6o. 111?1@, Aul- *@, *@@?).
!. $ government instrumentalit- (G5) is neither a stoc> nor a non:stoc>
cororation (05$$ vs. C$, G./. 6o. 111?1@, Aul- *@, *@@?).
i. $ G5, 3hich is oerationall- autonomous, remains art of the 6ational
Government machiner- although not integrated 3ith the deartment
frame3or> (05$$ vs. v. C$, G./. 6o. 111?1@, Aul- *@, *@@?).
ii. B2amles of G5s are( Fang>o #entral ng
.iliinas, .hiliine /ice /esearch 5nstitute, Laguna La>e Eeveloment
$uthorit-, Cisheries Eeveloment $uthorit-, Fases Conversion
Eeveloment $uthorit-, .hiliine .orts $uthorit-, Caga-an de <ro
.ort $uthorit-, #an Cernando .ort $uthorit-, Ce!u .ort $uthorit-, and
.hiliine 6ational /ail3a-s (05$$ vs. v. C$, G./. 6o. 111?1@, Aul- *@,
*@@?).
*. 'he character of LGs is t3o:fold, i.e., governmental or u!lic, and rorietar- or rivate
(Cit- of 0anila vs. 5ntermediate $ellate Court, G./. 6o. 71119, 6ovem!er 11, 1989).
*.1 Governmental o3ers are those e2ercised in administering the o3ers of the
state and romoting the u!lic 3elfare and the- include the legislative,
4udicial, u!lic and olitical. B2amles are( deliver- of sand for a municial
road (0unicialit- of #an Cernando, La Union vs. Cirme, G./. 6o. L:1*179, $ril
8, 1991), local legislation, control over olice and a!atement of nuisance.
*.* .rorietar- o3ers, on the other hand, are e2ercised for the secial !ene&t
and advantage of the communit- and include those 3hich are ministerial,
rivate and cororate (0unicialit- of #an Cernando, La Union vs. Cirme, G./.
6o. L:1*179, $ril 8, 1991). B2amles are( u!lic cemeteries, mar>ets, ferries
and 3ater3or>s.
*.+ 'herefore, the urose of LGs is also t3o:fold, i.e., LGs are agents of the #tate
in the e2ercise of government or u!lic o3ers, and are agents of the
communit- and eole in the e2ercise of rorietar- or rivate o3ers (Lina,
Ar. vs. .aGo, G./. 6o. 1*9@9+, $ugust +@, *@@1) 0agta4as vs. .r-ce .roerties
and .hiliine $musements and Gaming Cororation, G./. 6o. 111@97, Aul-
*@, 199,) Fasco vs. .hiliine $musements and Gaming Cororation, G./. 6o.
91?,9, 0a- 1,, 1991).
'he rule on cororate succession alies to local governments.
+.1 'he- have the o3er of continuous succession under its cororate name. (#ection **,
Local Government Code of 1991 or 1991 LGC).
+.* Dhen there is a erfected contract e2ecuted !- the former Governor, the succeeding
Governor cannot revo>e or renounce the same 3ithout the consent of the other art-
(Government #ervice 5nsurance #-stem vs. .rovince of 'arlac, G./. 6o. 1178?@, Eecem!er 1,
*@@+).
7*8
Congress in enacting the 1991 LGC and charters of articular LGs allocates among the
diHerent LGs their o3ers, resonsi!ilities, and resources and rovide for the 9uali&cations,
election, aointment and removal, term, salaries, o3ers and functions and duties of local
oIcials, and all other matters relating to the organi=ation and oeration of the local units
(#ection +, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
,.1 <ne such o3er is the o3er to aoint oIcials. Dhile the Governor has the
authorit- to aoint oIcials and emlo-ees 3hose salaries are aid out of the rovincial
funds, this does not e2tend to the oIcials and emlo-ees of the sangguniang anlala3igan
!ecause such authorit- is lodged 3ith the Jice:Governor ($tien=a vs. Jillarosa, G./. 6o.
1?1@81, 0a- 1@, *@@1).
,.* 'he authorit- to aoint casual and 4o! order emlo-ees of the sangguniang
anlala3igan !elongs to the Jice:Governor. 'he authorit- of the Jice:Governor to aoint
the oIcials and emlo-ees of the sangguniang anlala3igan is anchored on the fact that
the salaries of these emlo-ees are derived from the aroriation seci&call- for said local
legislative !od-. $ccordingl-, the aointing o3er of the Jice:Governor is limited to those
emlo-ees of the sangguniang anlala3igan, as 3ell as those of the <Ice of the Jice:
Governor, 3hose salaries are aid out of the funds aroriated for the sangguniang
anlala3igan ($tien=a vs. Jillarosa, G./. 6o. 1?1@81, 0a- 1@, *@@1).
,.+ 5n allocating local o3ers, Congress ma- rovide for a s-stem of chec>s and
!alances.
'he s-stem of chec>s and !alances under the current s-stem is statutoril-, not
constitutionall- (unli>e the three !ranches of Government), rescri!ed.
Under the 198+ Local Government Code, the local chief e2ecutive erformed dual functions K
e2ecutive and legislative, heLshe !eing the residing oIcer of the sanggunian. Under the
1991 LGC, the union of legislative and e2ecutive o3ers in the oIce of the local chief
e2ecutive has !een dis!anded, so that either deartment no3 comrises diHerent and non:
intermingling oIcial ersonalities 3ith the end in vie3 of ensuring a !etter deliver- of u!lic
service and rovide a s-stem of chec> and !alance !et3een the t3o ($tien=a vs. Jillarosa,
G./. 6o. 1?1@81, 0a- 1@, *@@1).
Types of Local Government Units
'here are &ve levelsL >inds of olitical and territorial su!divisions, namel-( (1) $utonomous
/egions) (*) .rovinces) (+) Cities) (,) 0unicialities) and (1) Faranga-s (#ection 1, $rticle %,
1987 Constitution).
1.1 'he Constitution identi&es t3o $utonomous /egions, i.e., 0uslim 0indanao and
Cordilleras (#ection 11, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
$utonomous /egions consist of rovinces, cities, municialities, and geograhical areas
3hich share common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage, economic and social
structures, and other relevant characteristics (#ection 11, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
$utonomous /egions are under the general suervision of the .resident (#ection 1?, $rticle
%, 1987 Constitution).
7+8
#ection *@, $rticle % of the 1987 Constitution enumerates the irreduci!le legislative o3ers
of autonomous regions( Dithin its territorial 4urisdiction and su!4ect to the rovisions of this
Constitution and national la3s, the organic act of autonomous regions shall rovide for
legislative o3ers over( (1) $dministrative organi=ation) (*) Creation of sources of revenues)
(+) $ncestral domain and natural resources) (,) .ersonal, famil-, and roert- relations) (1)
/egional ur!an and rural lanning develoment) (?) Bconomic, social, and tourism
develoment) (7) Bducational olicies) (8) .reservation and develoment of the cultural
heritage) and (9) #uch other matters as ma- !e authori=ed !- la3 for the romotion of the
general 3elfare of the eole of the region.
/eu!lic $ct 6o. ?7+, or the <rganic $ct of the $utonomous /egion of 0uslim 0indanao
($/00) is constitutional and is not violative of the 'rioli $greement since the former is a
later enactment. Curther, the 'rioli $greement must conform 3ith national la3s such as the
<rganic $ct. ($!!as vs. Commission on Blections, G./. 6o. 89?11, 6ovem!er 1@, 1989).
'he single le!iscite contemlated !- the Constitution and /.$. 6o. ?7+, 3ill !e
determinative of( (1) 3hether there shall !e an autonomous region in 0uslim 0indanao) and
(*) 3hich rovinces and cities, among those enumerated in /.$. 6o. ?7+,, shall comrise it
($!!as vs. Commission on Blections, G./. 6o. 89?11, 6ovem!er 1@, 1989).
Dhile the- are classi&ed as statutes, the <rganic $cts are more than ordinar- statutes
!ecause the- en4o- aIrmation !- a le!iscite. Mence, the rovisions thereof cannot !e
amended !- an ordinar- statute 3ithout !eing aroved in a le!iscite (Eisomangco vs.
#ecretar- of .u!lic Dor>s and Migh3a-s, G./. 6o. 1,98,8, 6ovem!er *1, *@@,).

$n act of the /egional $ssem!l- of $/00 cannot amend the <rganic $ct nor can it amend
the 1991 LGC. 'he 1991 LGC and the 1987 $dministrative Code cannot amend the <rganic
$ct (.andi vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 11?81@, $ril 11, *@@*).
'he $utonomous /egion of the Cordilleras has not !een incororated since in the le!iscite
held, the creation has !een re4ected !- all the covered rovinces and cit-, save one
rovince. 'here can !e no autonomous region consisting of onl- one rovince (Fadua vs.
Cordillera Fodong $dministration, G./. 6o. 9*?,9, Ce!ruar- 1,, 1991) <rdillos vs.
Commission on Blections, G./. 6o. 9+@1,, Eecem!er ,, 199@).
Mo3ever, the .resident can create the Cordillera $dministrative /egion (C$/). 'he B2ecutive
<rder does not create the autonomous region for the Cordilleras. 'he C$/( (1) is not a
territorial and olitical su!division) (*) is not a u!lic cororation) (+) does not have a
searate 4uridical ersonalit-) (,) is su!4ect to control and suervision of the .resident) and
(1) is merel- a regional consultative and coordinative council (Cordillera Froad Coalition vs.
Commission on $udit, G./. 6o. 7991?, Aanuar- *9, 199@).
1.* 'here are three su!:t-es of cities, namel-( (1) highl-:ur!ani=ed) (*) indeendent
cities) and (+) comonent cities.
'he highl-:ur!ani=ed cities and indeendent comonent cities are not under the suervision
of rovinces and their voters are not 9uali&ed to vote for rovincial oIcials (#ection 1*,
$rticle %, 1987 Constitution) #ection *9, 1991 LGC). 'hese cities are under the direct
suervision of the .resident (#ection *1, 1991 LGC).
Comonent cities are under the suervision of rovinces and their voters elect rovincial
oIcials (#ection 1*, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
7,8
Creation of Local Government Units
<nl- Congress and, !- authorit- of la3, local legislative councils, can create seci&c LGs.
Creation is a legislative act. 'he ena!ling la3 is referred to as the charter of the LGU.
1.1 'he .resident or the B2ecutive Franch of Government has no o3er to create local
governments (Camid vs. <Ice of the .resident, G./. 6o. 1?1,1,, Aanuar- 17, *@@1).
0unicialities created !- e2ecutive &at !ut 3hose e2istence 3ere not 4udiciall- nulli&ed and
3hich continue to oerate and e2ist after 199* are considered regular municialities. 'he
1991 LGC is thus a curative legislation. 5f 4udiciall- annulled in a 9uo 3arranto case, the
1991 LGC 3ill have no curative eHect (#ection ,,*7d8, 1991 LGC).
$n LGU created !- e2ecutive &at 3hich oerated or functioned 3ithout interrution is
considered a municialit- !- rescrition (0unicialit- of Aimene= vs. Fa=, G./. 6o. 1@17,?,
Eecem!er *, 199?).
1.* Congress can rovide for the incororation of $utonomous /egions identi&ed under
the 1987 Constitution. 5t has not o3er to create other $utonomous /egions other than in
0uslim 0indanao and Cordilleras.
'he <rganic $ct shall de&ne the !asic structure of government for the region consisting of
the e2ecutive deartment and legislative assem!l-, !oth of 3hich shall !e elective and
reresentative of the constituent olitical units. 'he organic acts shall li>e3ise rovide for
secial courts 3ith ersonal, famil-, and roert- la3 4urisdiction consistent 3ith the
rovisions of this Constitution and national la3s (#ection 18, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
'he creation of the autonomous region shall !e eHective 3hen aroved !- ma4orit- of the
votes cast !- the constituent units in a le!iscite called for the urose, rovided that onl-
rovinces, cities, and geograhic areas voting favora!l- in such le!iscite shall !e included
in the autonomous region (#ection 18, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
'he .resident cannot create a state") i.e., Fangsamoro Auridical Bntit- esta!lished under a
0emorandum of $greement, 3hose relationshi 3ith the government is characteri=ed !-
shared authorit- and resonsi!ilit-. 5t is a state in all !ut name as it meets the criteria of
statehood( (1) a ermanent oulation) (*) a de&ned territor-) (+) a government) and (,) a
caacit- to enter into relations 3ith other states (.rovince of 6orth Cota!ato vs.
Government of the /eu!lic of the .hiliines .eace .anel on $ncestral Eomain, G./. 6o.
18+191, <cto!er 1,, *@@8).
1.+ Congress can create rovinces, cities, municialities and !aranga-s su!4ect to the
criteria seci&ed under the 1991 LGC (#ection 1@, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution) and secial
la3s such as /eu!lic $ct 6o. 9@@9 (conversion of municialities to comonent cities).
Congress, !- secial la3, can rovide for diHerent re9uirements other than those seci&ed in
the 1991 LGC (League of Cities of the .hiliines v. Commission on Blections, G./. 6os.
17?911, 177,99 and 178@1?, $ril 1*, *@11).
'he imlementing rules and regulations cannot rovide diHerent re9uirements other than
3hat is rovided !- la3. B2emtion !- administrative regulation from land re9uirement
718
3hen the rovince to !e created is comosed of one or more islands is invalid (6avarro vs.
Brmita, G./. 6o. 18@@1@, $ril 1*, *@11).
'he sangguniang anlala3igan and sangguniang anlungsod can create !aranga-s (#ection
?, 1991 LGC). 'he sangguniang !a-an has no such authorit- under the 1991 LGC.
1., $n LGU is deemed created on the da- its charter ta>es eHect.
5t is deemed incororated on the da- the charter is aroved !- a ma4orit- of the votes cast
in a le!iscite in the olitical units directl- aHected (#ection 1@, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution)
#ection 1@, 1991 LGC).

Dhen a municialit- is slit into t3o, all the !aranga-s of the original municialit- must
vote. 'he le!iscite electorate includes those 3ho 3ill !e economicall- dislocated and !ased
on luralit- of units (.adilla vs. Commission on Blections, G./. 6o. 1@++*8, <cto!er 19,
199*).
$ le!iscite is re9uired 3hen a municialit- is converted into an indeendent comonent
cit- and 3hen the latter is later converted to a comonent cit- as there 3as an ugrade"
and do3ngrade" articularl- insofar as ta2es and suervision are concerned (0iranda vs.
$guirre, G./. 6o. 1++@?,, #etem!er 1?, 1999).
$ !oundar- disute resents a re4udicial 9uestion to a le!iscite and thus must !e resolved
rior to the conduct of an- le!iscite (Cit- of .asig vs. Commission on Blections, G./. 6o.
1*1?,?, #etem!er 1@, 1999).
'he Commission on Blections, not the regular courts, has 4urisdiction over le!iscite rotest
cases (Fuac vs. Commission on Blections, G./. 6o. 111811, Aanuar- *?, *@@,).
'he cororate e2istence of an LGU shall commence uon the election and 9uali&cation of its
chief e2ecutive and a ma4orit- of the mem!ers of its sanggunian, unless some other time is
&2ed therefor !- the la3 or ordinance creating it (#ection 1,, 1991 LGC).
'he re9uirements for creation of local governments are( (1) oulation) (*) income) and (+)
land area.
*.1 Under the 1991 LGC, these are seci&c re9uirements for ever- t-e or su!:t-e of
LGU (#ections ,?1, ,1@, ,,*, +8?, 1991 LGC)(
/e9uireme
nt
.rovince Cit- 0unicialit- Faranga-
5ncome *@ million *@ million CC
1@ million
MUC
1@@ million
0 to CC
*.1 million :::
.oulation *1@,@@@ 11@,@@@ CC
*@@,@@@ MUC
*1,@@@ *,@@@
1,@@@ 0etro
Land $rea *,@@@ >m
*
1@@ >m
*
1@ >m
*
Contiguous
*.* Cor uroses of creation, onl- the land area is material. 'he la3 is clear.
7?8
'he aggregate territor- 3hich includes 3aters is not the criteria for creation under the 1991
LGC (#ection 1+1 7r8).
$ charter states the !oundaries of the local government. $reas or !aranga-s not mentioned
are e2cluded (0unicialit- of 6ueva Bra vs. 0unicialit- of 0arcos, G./. 6o. 1?9,+1,
Ce!ruar- *7, *@@8).
*.+ $ charter need not mention the oulation census ('o!ias vs. $!alos, G./. 6o.
11,78+, Eecem!er 8, 199,).
*., Cailure to state the seat of government in the charter is not fatal (#amson vs. $guirre,
G./. 6o. 1++@7?, #etem!er **, 1999).
*.1 5ncome under the 1991 LGC ertains to all funds of the LGU including the 5nternal
/evenue $llotment ($lvare= vs. Guingona, G./. 6o. 118+@+, Aanuar- +1, 199?). Mo3ever,
under /.$. 9@@9 3hich deals 3ith the conversion of a municialit- to a comonent cit-, the
funds must !e internall-:generated.
*.? 'he re9uirements for the creation of a comonent cit- and an indeendent
comonent cit- are the same.
*.7 Eeending on the t-e of LGU created, the resence of all the re9uirements of
.oulation (.), Land $rea (L$) and 5ncome (N) ma- var- (#ections ,?1, ,1@, ,,*, +8?, 1991
LGC)(
Faranga- . and L$ 0unicialit- . and L$ and N
Cit- . and N, or N and L$ MUC . and N
.rovince . and N, or N and L$
Dhen a municialit- is converted to a cit-, the latter ac9uires a distinct legal ersonalit-
from the former. 'here is material change in the olitical and economic rights of the t3o LGs
(Latasa vs. Commission on Blections, G./. 6o. 11,8*9, Eecem!er 1@, *@@+).
Part ). LOCAL A,TONOM1
Unitary, not Federal, Form
1. 'he form of LGU !ureaucrac- is unitar-, not federal (0agta4as vs. .r-ce .roerties and
.hiliine $musements and Gaming Cororation, G./. 6o. 111@97, Aul- *@, 199,).
1.1 LGs as olitical and territorial su!divisions are units of the #tate. Feing so, an-
form of autonom- granted to LGs 3ill necessaril- !e limited and con&ned
3ithin the e2tent allo3ed !- the central authorit- (0agta4as vs. .r-ce
.roerties and .hiliine $musements and Gaming Cororation, G./. 6o.
111@97, Aul- *@, 199,).
1.* LGs are not sovereign units 3ithin the #tate. 'he- are not emires 3ithin an
emire (Lina, Ar. vs. .aGo, G./. 6o. 1*9@9+, $ugust +@, *@@1) 0agta4as vs.
778
.r-ce .roerties and .hiliine $musements and Gaming Cororation, G./.
6o. 111@97, Aul- *@, 199,).
1.+ $utonom- does not contemlate ma>ing mini:states out of LGs (Gan=on vs.
Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 9+*1*, $ugust 1, 1991).
1., 'he 1987 Constitution does not contemlate an- state in this 4urisdiction other
than the .hiliine #tate, much less does it rovide for a transitor- status that
aims to reare an- art of .hiliine territor- for indeendence (.rovince of
6orth Cota!ato vs. Government of the /eu!lic of the .hiliines .eace .anel
on $ncestral Eomain, G./. 6o. 18+191, <cto!er 1,, *@@8).
1.1 Cederalism imlies some measure of decentrali=ation, !ut unitar- s-stems
ma- also decentrali=e. Eecentrali=ation diHers intrinsicall- from federalism in
that the su!:units that have !een authori=ed to act (!- delegation) do not
ossess an- claim of right against the central government (Eisomangco vs.
#ecretar- of .u!lic Dor>s and Migh3a-s, G./. 6o. 1,98,8, 6ovem!er *1,
*@@,).
Local Autonomy
1. Local autonom- means a more resonsive and accounta!le local government structure
instituted through a s-stem of decentrali=ation (#ection +, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution)
#ection *7a8, 1991 LGC) Gan=on vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 9+*1*, $ugust 1, 1991).
1.1 Under a unitar- set:u, local autonom- does not mean a!solute self:
governance, self:rule or self:determination (.u!lic Cororations, /uerto G.
0artin, 1981). LGs cannot e2ercise a o3er contrar- to the 1987 Constitution,
the 1991 LGC, statutes and their resective charters.
1.* $utonom- is not meant to end the relation of artnershi and
interdeendence !et3een the central administration and LGs, or other3ise, to
usher in a regime of federalism (Gan=on vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 9+*1*,
$ugust 1, 1991).
*. 'here are t3o levels of decentrali=ation. Local autonom- is either decentrali=ation of
administration or decentrali=ation of o3er (Lim!ona vs. 0angelin, G./. 6o. 8@+91,
Ce!ruar- *8, 1989).
*.1 'here is decentrali=ation of administration 3hen the central government
delegates administrative o3ers to olitical su!divisions in order to !roaden
the !ase of government o3er and in the rocess to ma>e local governments
more resonsive and accounta!le, and ensure their fullest develoment as
self:reliant communities and ma>e them more eHective artners in the ursuit
of national develoment and social rogress. (Lim!ona vs. 0angelin, G./. 6o.
8@+91, Ce!ruar- *8, 1989).
*.* Eecentrali=ation of o3er, on the other hand, involves an a!dication of
olitical o3er in favor of local government units declared to !e autonomous.
'he autonomous government is free to chart its o3n destin- and shae its
788
future 3ith minimum intervention from central authorities (Lim!ona vs.
0angelin, G./. 6o. 8@+91, Ce!ruar- *8, 1989).
Eecentrali=ation of
$dministration
Eecentrali=ation of
.o3er
Eelegation of administrative
and regulator- o3ers
$!dication of olitical o3er
/elieves state from !urden of
managing local aHairs
Chart o3n destin-
B2ecutive suervision B2ecutive suervision)
minimal intervention
$ccounta!ilit- to central
government
$ccounta!ilit- to eole) self:
immolation
$lies to rovinces, cities,
municialities and !aranga-s
$lies to autonomous
regions
+. 'he $/00 en4o-s olitical autonom- (Lim!ona vs. 0angelin, G./. 6o. 8@+91, Ce!ruar-
*8, 1989) Cordillera Froad Coalition vs. Commission on $udit, G./. 6o. 7991?, Aanuar-
*9, 199@). 'he creation of autonomous regions contemlates the grant of olitical
autonom- i.e., an autonom- 3hich is greater than the administrative autonom- granted
to (other) LGs (Eisomangco vs. #ecretar- of .u!lic Dor>s and Migh3a-s, G./. 6o.
1,98,8, 6ovem!er *1, *@@,).
+.1 /egional autonom- is the degree of self:determination e2ercised !- the LGU
vis:O:vis the central government. /egional autonom- refers to the granting of
!asic internal government o3ers to the eole of a articular area or region
3ith least control and suervision from the central government (Eisomangco
vs. #ecretar- of .u!lic Dor>s and Migh3a-s, G./. 6o. 1,98,8, 6ovem!er *1,
*@@,).
+.* 'he aim of the 1987 Constitution is to e2tend to the autonomous eoles, the
eole of 0uslim 0indanao in this case, the right to self:determination, i.e., a
right to choose their o3n ath of develoment) the right to determine the
olitical, cultural and economic content of their develoment ath 3ithin the
frame3or> of the sovereignt- and territorial integrit- of the .hiliine /eu!lic
(Eisomangco vs. #ecretar- of .u!lic Dor>s and Migh3a-s, G./. 6o. 1,98,8,
6ovem!er *1, *@@,).
,. 'he B2ecutive Eeartment violates local autonom- 3hen it ignores the statutor-
authorit- of rovince to nominate !udget oIcials (#an Auan vs. Civil #ervice Commission,
G./. 6o. 9**99, $ril 19, 1991).
1. Dhere a la3 is caa!le of t3o interretations, one in favor of centrali=ed o3er and the
other !ene&cial to local autonom-, the scales must !e 3eighed in favor of autonom-
(#an Auan vs. Civil #ervice Commission, G./. 6o. 9**99, $ril 19, 1991).
?. LGUs have !road o3ers in the follo3ing areas( (1) .olice .o3er) (*) .o3er of 'a2ation)
(+) .o3er to 5mose Cees and Charges) (,) #ources of Local /evenues) (1) Cororate
.o3ers) and (?) Local Legislation. 'he 1991 LGC in these areas does not rovide an
e2clusive listing of o3ers. 5t ma- !e said that LGUs have residual o3ers. 'his is
consistent 3ith the li!eral vie3 of autonom- 3hich rovides that LGUs can e2ercise( (1)
798
those o3ers e2ressl- given to them) (*) those o3ers imlied from the e2ress
o3ers) (+) those o3ers not given to the 6ational Government or an- governmental
agenc- or instrumentalit- !- la3) (,) those o3ers not rohi!ited or for!idden !- the
Constitution and statutes) (1) rovided the o3ers are necessar- for the carr-ing out of
the mandates and duties entrusted to LGUs 3ith the end in vie3 of romoting the
general 3elfare in resonse to local concerns and as agents of the communities.
Devolution and Deconcentration
1. Eevolution refers to the act !- 3hich the national government confers o3er and
authorit- uon the various LGs to erform seci&c functions and resonsi!ilities (#ection
177e8, 1991 LGC). 'he national government shall, si2 (?) months after the eHectivit- of
the 1991 LGC, eHect the deconcentration of re9uisite authorit- and o3er to the
aroriate regional oIces or &eld oIces of national agencies or oIces 3hose ma4or
functions are not devolved to LGUs (#ection 1*8, 1991 LGC).
1.1 'he o3er to regulate and resonsi!ilit- to deliver !asic services are the
functions devolved to LGs. B2amles are (#ection 177e8, 1991 LGC)(
6ational Government Fasic #ervices /egulator- .o3ers
Eeartment of
$griculture
$gricultural e2tension
and on:site research
5nsection of meat
roducts
Eeartment of
Bnvironment and
6atural /esources
Communit-:!ased
forestr- ro4ects
Bnforcement of
environmental la3s
Eeartment of Mealth Mealth and hosital
services
;uarantine
Eeartment of
'ransortation and
Communications
<eration of 'ric-cles
Eeartment of .u!lic
Dor>s and Migh3a-s
.u!lic 3or>s locall-
funded
Bnforcement of 6ational
Fuilding Code
1.* Eevolution also includes the transfer of ersonnel. Eevolved ersonnel
(former emlo-ees of the national government) ma- !e reaointed !- cit-
ma-or (.la=a vs. Cassion, G./. 6o. 1+?8@9, Aul- *7, *@@,).
*. Eevolution is a legislative act. $s to 3hat state o3ers should !e decentrali=ed and 3hat
ma- !e delegated to LGs remains a matter of olic-, 3hich concerns 3isdom. 5t is
therefore a olitical 9uestion (Fasco vs. .hiliine $musements and Gaming Cororation,
G./. 6o. 91?,9, 0a- 1,, 1991).
+. 'here are t3o levels of decentrali=ation, i.e., administrative or deconcentration, and
olitical or devolution (Eisomangco vs. #ecretar- of .u!lic Dor>s and Migh3a-s, G./.
6o. 1,98,8, 6ovem!er *1, *@@,) #ections 17 and 1*8, 1991 LGC).
$dministrative Eecentrali=ation .olitical Eecentrali=ation
Eeconcentration Eevolution
.o3ers to !e transferred not .o3ers to !e transferred are
71@8
$dministrative Eecentrali=ation .olitical Eecentrali=ation
seci&ed seci&ed
'ransfer is from national
government agencies to its &eld
oIces
'ransfer is from national
government agencies to local
governments
'ransfer is mandator- 'ransfer is mandator- on the
devolving national government
agenc- and the receiving local
government
$dministrative in character .o3ers, resonsi!ilities, ersonnel
and resources
?:month deadline from Aanuar- 1,
199*
?:month deadline from Aanuar- 1,
199*
,. Eevolution entails the transfer of o3ers from national government agencies (transferor)
source of o3er) to LGs (transferee) reciient of o3ers). .o3ers not devolved are
retained !- or remains 3ith the relevant national government agenc-.
,.1 'he regulator- functions of the 6ational .ollution Control Commission 3ere
devolved to LGs. .ursuant to such devolution, LGs ma- conduct insections at
reasona!le times, 3ithout doing damage, after due notice to the o3ners of
!uildings, to ascertain comliance 3ith noise standards under the la3s and
order comliance there3ith, or susend or cancel an- !uilding ermits or
clearance certi&cates after due hearing ($C Bnterrises vs. Cra!elle .roerties
Cororation, G./. 6o. 1??7,,, 6ovem!er *, *@@?).
,.* 'he o3er to issue ermits and locational clearances for locall-:signi&cant
ro4ects is no3 lodged 3ith cities and municialities 3ith a comrehensive
land use lans. 'he o3er of the Mousing Land Use /egulator- Foard (MLU/F)
to issue locational clearance is no3 limited to ro4ects considered to !e of vital
and national or regional economic or environmental signi&cance. 'he o3er to
act as aellate !od- over decisions and actions of local and regional lanning
and =oning !odies and deuti=ed oIcial of the !oard 3as retained !- the
MLU/F. (5loilo Cit- Poning Foard of $d4ustment and $eals vs. Gegato:$!ecia
Cuneral Momes, 5nc., G./. 6o. 117118, Eecem!er 8, *@@+).
,.+ Cities no3 have the o3er to regulate the oeration of tric-cles:for:hire and to
grant franchises for the oeration thereof. 'he devolved o3er ertains to the
franchising and regulator- o3ers e2ercised !- the Land 'ransortation
Cranchising and /egulator- Foard (L'C/F) and not its function to grant
franchises to other vehicles, and not the functions of the Land 'ransortation
<Ice relative to the registration of motor vehicles and issuances of licenses
for the driving thereof (Land 'ransortation <Ice vs. Cit- of Futuan, G./. 6o.
1+111*, Aanuar- *@, *@@@).
,., 'he Eeartment of Bnvironment and 6atural /esources retains the o3er to
con&scate and forfeit an- conve-ances utili=ed in violation of the Corestr-
Code or other forest la3s, rules and regulations (.aat vs. Court of $eals,
G./. 6o. 1111@7, Aanuar- 1@,1997).
7118
,.1 'he authorit- to grant franchises for the oeration of 4ai:alai frontons lies 3ith
Congress, 3hile the regulator- function is vested 3ith the Games and
$musement Foard (Lim vs. .ac9uing, G./. 6o. 111@,,, Aanuar- *7, 1991).
Executive Supervision
1. 'he #tate shall ensure the autonom- of local governments (#ection *1, $rticle 55, 1987
Constitution).
*. 'he .resident of the .hiliines shall e2ercise general suervision over LGs. .rovinces
3ith resect to comonent cities and municialities, and cities and municialities 3ith
resect to comonent !aranga-s shall ensure that the acts of their comonent units are
3ithin the scoe of their rescri!ed o3ers and functions (#ection ,, $rticle %, 1987
Constitution) #ection *1, 1991 LGC).
*.1 'he .resident e2ercises direct suervision over autonomous regions, rovinces
outside autonomous regions, highl-:ur!ani=ed cities, indeendent comonent
cities.
*.* 'he .resident e2ercises general or indirect suervision over rovinces 3ithin
autonomous regions, comonent cities, municialities, and !aranga-s.
*.+ .rovinces e2ercise direct suervision over comonent cities and
municialities, and indirect suervision over !aranga-s.
*., Cities and municialities e2ercise direct suervision over !aranga-s.
'he .resident or the higher" local government has no o3er of control over LGs and
lo3er" LGs, resectivel- (Erilon vs. Lim, G./. 6o. 11*,97, $ugust ,, 199,) #ocial Austice
#ociet- vs. $tien=a, G./. 6o. 11?@1*, Ce!ruar- 1+, *@@8) Le-nes vs. Commission on $udit,
G./. 6o. 1,+19?, Eecem!er 11, *@@+).
+.1 Control is the o3er of an oIcer to alter or modif- or set aside 3hat a su!ordinate
oIcer had done in the erformance of hisLher duties and to su!stitute the 4udgment of the
former for the latter. $n oIcer in control la-s do3n the rules in the doing of an act. 5t the-
are not follo3ed, heLshe ma-, in hisLher discretion, order the act undone or re:done !-
hisLher su!ordinate or heLshe ma- even decide to do it himselfLherself (Erilon vs. Lim, G./.
6o. 11*,97, $ugust ,, 199,) #ocial Austice #ociet- vs. $tien=a, G./. 6o. 11?@1*, Ce!ruar-
1+, *@@8) Le-nes vs. Commission on $udit, G./. 6o. 1,+19?, Eecem!er 11, *@@+).
+.* #uervision is the o3er of a suerior oIcer to see to it that lo3er oIcers erform
their functions is accordance 3ith la3. 'he suervisor or suerintendent merel- sees to it
that the rules are follo3ed, !ut heLshe himselfLherself does not la- do3n such rules, nor
does heLshe have the discretion to modif- or relace them. 5f the rules are not o!served,
heLshe ma- order the 3or> done or re:done !ut onl- to conform to the rescri!ed rules.
MeLshe ma- not rescri!e hisLher o3n manner for the doing of the act. MeLshe has no
4udgment on this matter e2cet to see to it that the rules are follo3ed (Erilon vs. Lim, G./.
6o. 11*,97, $ugust ,, 199,) #ocial Austice #ociet- vs. $tien=a, G./. 6o. 11?@1*, Ce!ruar-
1+, *@@8) Le-nes vs. Commission on $udit, G./. 6o. 1,+19?, Eecem!er 11, *@@+).
#uervision Control
71*8
<verseeing
Bnsure that suervised unit follo3s
la3L rules
$llo3s interference if suervised
unit acted contrar- to la3
<ver actor and act
'here must !e a la3
<nl- involves 9uestions of la3
(declare legal or illegal)) not
3isdom or olic-
La-s do3n rules in doing of an act
5mose limitations 3hen there is
none imosed !- la3
Eecide for su!ordinate or change
decision
#u!stitute 4udgment over that made
!- su!ordinate
$lter 3isdom, la3:conforming
4udgment or e2ercise of discretion
Eiscretion to order act undone or re:
done
.rescri!e manner !- 3hich act is
done
#uervision involves the o3er to revie3 of e2ecutive orders and ordinances, i.e., declare
them ultra vires or illegal (#ections +@, 1? and 17, 1991 LGC)) the o3er to disciline
(#ection ?1, 1991 LGC)) the o3er to integrate develoment lans and =oning ordinances
(#ections ,,7, ,18 and ,?7, 1991 LGC)) the o3er to resolve !oundar- disutes (#ection
118, 1991 LGC)) the o3er to arove leaves (#ection ,7, 1991 LGC), accet resignations
(#ection 8*, 1991 LGC) and &ll:u vacancies in the sanggunian (#ection ,,, 1991 LGC)) and
the o3er to augment !asic services (#ection 17, 1991 LGC).
$n LGU can(
1.1 Grant and release the dis!ursement for the hositali=ation and health care insurance
!ene&ts of rovincial oIcials and emlo-ees 3ithout an- rior aroval from the .resident
since there is no la3 re9uiring rior aroval. Curther, $dministrative <rder 6o. 1@+ does not
cover local governments (6egros <ccidental vs. Commission on $udit, G./. 6o. 18*17,,
#etem!er *8, *@1@).
1.* .rovide allo3ances to 4udges, su!4ect to availa!ilit- of local funds. 'he Eeartment of
Fudget of 0anagement cannot imose a ca on the allo3ance since there is no la3 3hich
limits the amount, other3ise, this 3ill amount to control (Le-nes vs. Commission on $udit,
G./. 6o. 1,+19?, Eecem!er 11, *@@+).
1.+ .rovide for additional allo3ances and other !ene&ts to national government oIcials
stationed or assigned to a municialit- or cit-, rovided that the grant of !ene&ts does not
run in conQict 3ith other statutes (Jillarena vs. Commission on $udit, G./. 6o. 1,1+8+:8,,
$ugust ?, *@@+).
1., Bnact ta2 ordinances, su!4ect to revie3 !- the #ecretar- of Austice, to ascertain the
constitutionalit- or legalit- thereof. 'he #ecretar- ho3ever, has no the right to declare the
ta2 measure un4ust, e2cessive, oressive or con&scator-, or direct the su!stitution of
rovisions since this 3ill amount to control (Erilon vs. Lim, G./. 6o. 11*,97, $ugust ,, 199,).
1.1 B2roriate agricultural land 3ithout securing aroval from the Eeartment of
$grarian /eform (E$/) since there is no la3 3hich re9uires this. E$/Rs authorit- is con&ned
to the conversion of agricultural lands (Camarines #ur vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 171?@,,
#etem!er 18, *@@9).
71+8
1.? /eclassif- lands from residential to non:agricultural lands 3ithout E$/ aroval as
there is no la3 mandating such aroval (.asong Fa-a!as Carmers $ssociation vs. Court of
$eals, G./. 6o. 1,*+19 L 1,*98@, 0a- *1, *@@,).
1.7 Blect reresentatives to the 6ational Liga ng mga Faranga-. 'he Eeartment of
5nterior and Local Government cannot aoint an interim careta>er to manage and
administer the aHairs of the Liga as this 3ould violate local autonom- (6ational Liga ng mga
Faranga- vs. .aredes, G./. 6os. 1+@771L 1+19+9, #etem!er *7, *@@,).
Mo3ever, an LGU cannot(
?.1 Go !e-ond the re9uirements set forth in the Coc>&ghting La3 desite the fact that
coc>&ghting is a devolved o3er. Curther, the Coc>&ghting La3 has not !een reealed ('an
vs. .erena, G./. 6o. 1,97,+, Ce!ruar- 18, *@@1).
?.* $uthori=e the cit- administrator to act on violations of the 6ational Fuilding Code
since under the la3, onl- the cit- engineer, as the !uilding oIcial, has the e2clusive
authorit- to act on matters relating to the issuance of demolition ermits or the revocation
or susension thereof (.eole of the .hiliines vs. #andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 1,,119,
#etem!er *9, *@@,).
?.+ /egulate the su!scri!er rates charged !- Ca!le 'elevision oerators 3ithin its
territorial 4urisdiction since this o3er is vested 3ith the 6ational 'elecommunications
Commission (6'C) to the e2clusion of other !odies (Fatangas C$'J vs. Court of $eals, G./.
6o. 1+881@, <cto!er *@, *@@,).
?., 5n the a!sence of constitutional or legislative authori=ation, grant franchises to ca!le
television oerators as this o3er has !een delegated to the 6'C (Poom=at vs. .eole of the
.hiliines, G./. 6o. 1+11+1, Ce!ruar- 1,, *@@1).
5nsofar as the .resident, B2ecutive Franch, 6ational Government $gencies and ;uasi:
Cororations are concerned(
7.1 'he .resident has the o3er to disciline erring local elective oIcials. 'he o3er to
disciline is not incomati!le 3ith suervision (Aoson vs. 'orres, G./. 6o. 1+1*11, 0a- *@,
1998). #uervision and investigation are not inconsistent terms. 5nvestigation does not
signif- control, a o3er 3hich the .resident does not have (Gan=on vs. Court of $eals,
G./. 6o. 9+*1*, $ugust 1, 1991).
7.* he .hiliine $musement and Gaming Cororation (.$GC</) then can set u casinos
even 3ithout the aroval of the LGs as the charter of .$GC</ emo3ers it to centrali=e
gam!ling (0agta4as vs. .r-ce .roerties and .hiliine $musements and Gaming
Cororation, G./. 6o. 111@97, Aul- *@, 199,).
7.+ 'he Laguna La>e Eeveloment $uthorit- (LLE$), ursuant to its charter, can order
the dismantling of &shens. Laguna de Fa- therefore cannot !e su!4ected to fragmented
concets of management olicies 3here la>eshore LGs e2ercise e2clusive dominion over
seci&c ortions of the la>e 3ater (Laguna La>e Eeveloment $uthorit- vs. Court of $eals,
G./. 6o. 1*@8?1:71, Eecem!er 7, 1991).
7., 'he LLE$, ursuant to its mandate, can issue cease and desist orders against LGs to
sto the duming of its gar!age in an oen dumsite (Laguna La>e Eeveloment $uthorit-,
G./. 6o. 11@1*@, 0arch 1?, 199,).
71,8
Leislative Control
'he #tate shall ensure the autonom- of local governments (#ection *1, $rticle 55, 1987
Constitution).
Congress retains control of the local governments although in signi&cantl- reduced degree
no3 than under revious Constitutions. 'he o3er to create still includes the o3er to
destro-. 'he o3er to grant still includes the o3er to 3ithhold or recall. 'he 6ational
Legislature is still the rincial of the LGs, 3hich cannot def- its 3ill or modif- or violate its
la3s (0agta4as vs. .r-ce .roerties and .hiliine $musements and Gaming Cororation,
G./. 6o. 111@97, Aul- *@, 199,).
Under the 1987 Constitution, Congress has the o3er to(
+.1 $llocate among the diHerent local government units their o3ers, resonsi!ilities,
and resources, and rovide for the 9uali&cations, election, aointment and removal, term,
salaries, o3ers and functions and duties of local oIcials, and all other matters relating to
the organi=ation and oeration of the local units (#ection +, $rticle %).
+.* .rescri!e guidelines and limitations sources of local government revenues and local
o3er to lev- ta2es, fees, and charges rovided these are consistent 3ith the !asic olic- of
local autonom- (#ection 1, $rticle %).
+.+ Eetermine the 4ust share in the national ta2es of local governments (#ection ?, $rticle
%).
+., .rovide the manner !- 3hich local governments receive their e9uita!le share in the
roceeds of the utili=ation and develoment of the national 3ealth 3ithin their resective
areas (#ection 7, $rticle %).
+.1 #et the term limits of !aranga- oIcials (#ection 8, $rticle %).
+.? .rescri!e the manner !- 3hich sectoral reresentatives shall !e installed in local
legislative !odies (#ection 9, $rticle %).
+.7 Ee&ne the criteria for the creation, division, merger, a!olition and su!stantial
alteration of !oundaries of local governments (#ection 1@, $rticle %).
+.8 .ass the organic act of the autonomous regions (#ection 18, $rticle %).
Congress e2ercises control over the roerties of LGs.
,.1 $rticle ,*, of the Civil Code la-s do3n the !asic rinciles that roerties of the
u!lic dominion devoted to u!lic use and made availa!le to the u!lic in general are
outside the commerce of men (ersons) and cannot !e disosed of or leased !- the LGU to
rivate ersons (0acasiano vs. Eio>no, G./. no. 977?,, $ugust 1@, 199*).
,.* .ursuant to the /egalian doctrine, an- land that has never !een ac9uired through
urchase, grant or an- other mode of ac9uisition remains art of the u!lic domain and is
7118
o3ned !- the #tate. LGs cannot aroriate to themselves u!lic lands 3ithout rior grant
from the government (/ural Fan> of $nda vs. /oman Catholic $rch!isho of Linga-en:
Eaguan, G./. 6o. 111@11, 0a- *1, *@@7).
,.+ $ lot comrising the u!lic la=a is roert- of u!lic dominion) hence, not
susceti!le to rivate o3nershi !- the church or !- the municialit- (/oman Catholic
Fisho of Sali!o, $>lan vs. 0unicialit- of Furuanga, $>lan, G./. 6o. 1,91,1, 0arch +1,
*@@?).
,., $ cit- can validl- reconve- a ortion of its street that has !een closed or 3ithdra3n
from u!lic use 3here Congress has seci&call- delegated to such olitical su!division,
through its charter, the authorit- to regulate its streets. #uch roert- 3ithdra3n from
u!lic servitude to !e used or conve-ed for an- urose for 3hich other roert- !elonging
to the cit- ma- !e la3full- used or conve-ed (Ciguracion vs. Li!i, G./. 6o. 111?88 6ovem!er
*8, *@@7).
Part /. POWER" O3 LOCAL GOVERNMENT"
Deleation and !nterpretation of "o#ers
LGs have constitutional, statutor- and 4urisrudential o3ers.
1.1 'he sources of o3ers of LGs are the 1987 Constitution, the 1991 LGC, statutes,
charters of LGs and 4urisrudence or case la3.
1.* 'he o3er to ta2 is a constitutional (#ection 1, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution) and
statutor- o3er (#ection 18, 1991 LGC). <ther than the 1991 LGC, /eu!lic $ct 6o. 7+@1 or
the 0agna Carta for .u!lic Mealth Dor>ers, /eu!lic $ct 6o. 788+ or the Faranga- Mealth
Dor>ersR Fene&ts and 5ncentives $ct of 1991, among others, are the statutes that govern
LGs. 'he #ureme Court in the case of .imentel vs. $guirre (G./. 6o. 1+*988, Aul- 19, *@@@)
declared that LGs have &scal autonom-.
1.+ Constitutional o3ers cannot !e reealed or modi&ed !- Congress save in a
constitutional amendment. #tatutes can !e reealed or modi&ed !- Congress. .o3ers
de&ned or interreted !- the #ureme Court can !e re:de&ned and re:interreted !- it.
1., 'here are other classi&cations of LGU o3ers( (1) governmental (e.g. o3er to
legislate) and rorietar- (e.g. oerating a u!lic mar>et)) (*) codal:1991 LGC (e.g. o3er to
close local roads) and non:codal (e.g. o3er of oerational control over olice under
/eu!lic $cts 6os. ?971 and 8111) devolution of training services under the 'echnical
Bducation and #>ills Eeveloment $uthorit- ursuant to /eu!lic $ct 6o. 779?)) (+) state:
delegated (e.g. olice o3er) and devolved (e.g. !aranga- da-care centers)) (,) e2ress
(e.g. o3er to create an oIce) and imlied (e.g. o3er to a!olish that oIce) (1) e2ecutive
(e.g. o3er to veto an ordinance) and legislative (e.g. o3er to enact an ordinance)) (?)
general legislative (e.g. o3er to issue !usiness ermits) and olice o3er roer (e.g.
o3er to imose a curfe3)) (7) intramural (e.g. o3er of eminent domain) and e2tramural
(e.g. olice uroses)) (8) mandator- (e.g. o3er to deliver !asic services as art of
devolution) and discretionar- (e.g. o3er to e2roriate a iece of roert-)) (9) internal
(e.g. o3er to adot the sanggunian internal rules of rocedure) and e2ternal (e.g. o3er to
71?8
enact a =oning ordinance)) and (1@) seci&c to an LGU (e.g. o3er to legislate) and inter:LGU
(e.g. o3er to enter into a colla!orative alliance 3ith other LGs).
Congress allocate7s8 among the diHerent local government units their o3ers,
resonsi!ilities, and resources, and rovide for the 9uali&cations, election, aointment and
removal, term, salaries, o3ers and functions and duties of local oIcials, and all other
matters relating to the organi=ation and oeration of the local units" (#ection +, $rticle %,
1987 Constitution).
'he follo3ing are the rules of interretation of the o3ers of LGs(
+.1 Dhere a la3 is caa!le of t3o interretations, one in favor of centrali=ed o3er and
the other !ene&cial to local autonom-, the scales must !e 3eighed in favor of autonom-
(#an Auan vs. Civil #ervice Commission, G./. 6o. 9**99, $ril 19, 1991).
+.* $n- rovision on a o3er of an LGU shall !e li!erall- interreted in its favor, and in
case of dou!t, an- 9uestion thereon shall !e resolved in favor of devolution of o3ers and of
the lo3er LGU (#ection 17a8, 1991 LGC).
+.+ $n- fair and reasona!le dou!t as to the e2istence of the o3er shall !e interreted in
favor of the LGU concerned (#ection 17a8, 1991 LGC).
Considering that the o3ers of the Eeartment of Bnerg- regarding the .andacan
'erminals" are not categorical, an- dou!t as to the validit- of a =oning ordinance disallo3ing
the maintenance of such terminals must !e resolved in favor of the ordinanceRs validit-
(#ocial Austice #ociet- vs. $tien=a, G./. 6o. 11?@1*, Ce!ruar- 1+, *@@8).
Dhile the la3 did not e2ressl- vest on rovincial governments the o3er to a!olish that
oIce, a!sent, ho3ever, an- contrar- rovision, that authorit- should !e deemed em!raced
!- imlication from the o3er to create it (Aavier vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. L:,9@?1,
Aune, 1, 199,).
'he rovision in the cit- charter on the local o3er to rovide for the maintenance of
3ater3or>s for sul-ing 3ater to the inha!itants of the cit- does not carr- 3ith it the right
and authorit- to aroriate 3ater. (Fuendia vs. Cit- of 5ligan, G./. 6o. 1+**@9, $ril *9,
*@@1).
#tatutes conferring the o3er of eminent domain to olitical su!divisions cannot !e
!roadened or constricted !- imlication (.rovince of Camarines #ur vs. Court of $eals,
G./. 6o. 171?@,, #etem!er 18, *@@9).
+., 5n case of dou!t, an- ta2 ordinance or revenue measure shall !e construed strictl-
against the LGU enacting it, and li!erall- in favor of the ta2a-er. $n- ta2 e2emtion,
incentive or relief granted !- an- LGU ursuant to the rovisions of this Code shall !e
construed strictl- against the erson claiming it (#ection 17!8, 1991 LGC).
+.1 'he general 3elfare rovisions in the 1991 LGC shall !e li!erall- interreted to give
more o3ers to LGs in accelerating economic develoment and ugrading the 9ualit- of life
for the eole in the communit- (#ection 17c8, 1991 LGC).
+.? /ights and o!ligations e2isting on the date of eHectivit- of the 1991 LGC and arising
out of contracts or an- other source of resentation involving an LGU shall !e governed !-
7178
the original terms and conditions of said contracts or the la3 in force at the time such rights
3ere vested (#ection 17d8, 1991 LGC).
+.7 5n the resolution of controversies arising under the 1991 LGC 3here no legal rovision
or 4urisrudence alies, resort ma- !e had to the customs and traditions in the lace 3here
the controversies ta>e lace (#ection 17e8, 1991 LGC).
+.8 5n interreting statutor- rovisions on municial &scal o3ers, dou!ts 3ill have to !e
resolved in favor of municial cororations (#an .a!lo Cit- vs. /e-es, G./. 6o. 1*77@8,
0arch *1, 1999).
+.9 5n case of dou!t, an- ta2 ordinance or revenue measure shall !e construed strictl-
against the local government unit enacting it, and li!erall- in favor of the ta2a-er. $n- ta2
e2emtion, incentive or relief granted !- an- local government unit ursuant to the
rovisions of 1991 Local government Code shall !e construed strictl- against the erson
claiming it. (#ection 17!8, 1991 LGC)
'he general 3elfare rovisions in the 1991 Local Government Code shall !e li!erall-
interreted to give more o3ers to local government units in accelerating economic
develoment and ugrading the 9ualit- of life for the eole in the communit-. (#ection 17c8,
1991 LGC)
"olice "o#er
.olice o3er of local governments is a statutor- delegated o3er under #ection 1? of the
1991 LGC. 'he general 3elfare clause is the delegation in statutor- form of the olice o3er
of the #tate to LGs (0anila vs. Laguio, G./. 6o. 1181*7, $ril 1*, *@@1) Brmita:0alate Motel
and 0otel <erations $ssociation, 5nc., vs. 0a-or of 0anila, G./. 6o. L:*,?9+, Aul- +1, 19?7).
'he General Delfare Clause under the 1991 LGC states( Bver- local government unit shall
e2ercise the o3ers e2ressl- granted, those necessaril- imlied therefrom, as 3ell as
o3ers necessar-, aroriate, or incidental for its eIcient and eHective governance, and
those 3hich are essential to the romotion of the general 3elfare. Dithin their resective
territorial 4urisdictions, local government units shall ensure and suort, among other things,
the reservation and enrichment of culture, romote health and safet-, enhance the right of
the eole to a !alanced ecolog-, encourage and suort the develoment of aroriate
and self:reliant scienti&c and technological caa!ilities, imrove u!lic morals, enhance
economic roserit- and social 4ustice, romote full emlo-ment among their residents,
maintain eace and order, and reserve the comfort and convenience of their inha!itants"
(#ection 1?).
Cor a valid e2ercise of olice o3er, t3o re9uisites must concur( (1) La3ful #u!4ect
(su!stantive due rocess) e9ual rotection) u!lic interest re9uires interference)) and (*)
La3ful 0ethod (rocedural due rocess) reasona!le means to achieve the urose) (Lucena
Grand Central 'erminal vs. A$C Liner, G./. 6o. 1,8++9, Ce!ruar- *+, *@@1).
1.1 $n LGU is considered to have roerl- e2ercised its olice o3ers onl- 3hen the
follo3ing re9uisites are met( (1) the interests of the u!lic generall-, as distinguished from
those of a articular class, re9uire the interference of the #tate) and (*) the means
emlo-ed are reasona!l- necessar- for the attainment of the o!4ect sought to !e
accomlished and are not undul- oressive. 'he &rst re9uirement refers to the e9ual
rotection clause, and the second to the due rocess clause of the Constitution (.ara-no vs.
7188
Aovellanos, G./. 6o. 1,8,@8 Aul- 1,, *@@?) Lucena Grand Central 'erminal vs. A$C Liner, G./.
6o. 1,8++9, Ce!ruar- *+, *@@1).
1.* 'he o3er to esta!lish =ones for industrial, commercial and residential uses is
derived from the olice o3er itself and is e2ercised for the rotection and !ene&t of the
residents of a localit- (#ocial Austice #ociet- vs. $tien=a, G./. 6o. 11?@1*, Ce!ruar- 1+,
*@@8).
1.+ $ municialit- failed to coml- 3ith the due rocess clause 3hen it assed a
/esolution ordering the closureLtransfer of a gasoline station 3here it did not even attemt
to determine if there 3as an actual violation of a =oning ordinance (.ara-no vs. Aovellanos,
G./. 6o. 1,8,@8 Aul- 1,, *@@?).
1., $n ordinance aimed at relieving traIc congestion meets the &rst standard. Mo3ever,
declaring !us terminals as nuisance er se or u!lic nuisances and ordering their closure or
relocation contravenes the second standard. 'erminals are not u!lic nuisances. 'heir
oeration is a legitimate !usiness 3hich, !- itself, cannot !e said to !e in4urious to the rights
of roert-, health, or comfort of the communit- (Lucena Grand Central 'erminal vs. A$C
Liner, G./. 6o. 1,8++9, Ce!ruar- *+, *@@1).
'he general 3elfare clause has t3o !ranches (/ural Fan> of 0a>ati vs. 0unicialit- of
0a>ati, G./. 6o. 11@7?+ Aul- @*, *@@,).
*.1 'he &rst, >no3n as the general legislative o3er, authori=es the local legislative
council to enact ordinances and ma>e regulations not reugnant to la3, as ma- !e
necessar- to carr- into eHect and discharge the o3ers and duties conferred uon the local
legislative council !- la3 (/ural Fan> of 0a>ati vs. 0unicialit- of 0a>ati, G./. 6o. 11@7?+
Aul- @*, *@@,).
*.* 'he second, >no3n as the olice o3er roer, authori=es the local government to
enact ordinances as ma- !e necessar- and roer for the health and safet-, roserit-,
morals, eace, good order, comfort, and convenience of the municialit- and its inha!itants,
and for the rotection of their roert- (/ural Fan> of 0a>ati vs. 0unicialit- of 0a>ati, G./.
6o. 11@7?+ Aul- @*, *@@,).
5n the e2ercise of olice o3er, an LGU can(
+.1 5ssue =oning classi&cation. $ =oning ordinance is de&ned as a local cit- or municial
legislation 3hich logicall- arranges, rescri!ed, de&nes and aortions a given olitical
su!division into seci&c land uses as resent and future ro4ection of needs (.asong
Fa-a!as Carmers $ssociation vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6os. 1,*+19L 1,*98@, 0a- *1,
*@@,).
+.* .rohi!it the e2ansion of a hosital !ased on the aroved a ne3 =oning ordinance
identif-ing another =one for hositals, !ut 3hich allo3ed e2isting structures to continue in
their resent location (Eel&no vs. #t. Aames Mosital, 5nc., G./. 6o. 1??7+1, 6ovem!er *+,
*@@7).
+.+ /estrict the use of roert- since contractual restrictions on the use of roert- could
not revail over the reasona!le e2ercise of olice o3er through =oning regulations (United
FC Momes vs. Cit- 0a-or of .arana9ue, G./. ,1@1@, Ce!ruar- @7, *@@7) <rtigas T Co. vs.
Ceati Fan> and 'rust Co., G./. 6o. L:*,?7@, Eecem!er 1,, 1979).
7198
+., /egulate the construction of 3arehouses 3herein inQamma!le materials are stored
3here such 3arehouses are located at a distance of *@@ meters from a !loc> of houses and
not the construction er se of a 3arehouse ('atel vs. 0unicialit- of Jirac, G./. 6o. ,@*,+,
0arch 11, 199*).
+.1 <rder the closure and adloc>ing of a lant causing ollution 3hen the closure 3as in
resonse to comlaints of residents, after an investigation 3as conducted, 3hen there 3as
no !uilding ermit from the host municialit-, and 3hen the temorar- ermit to oerate !-
the 6ational .ollution Control Commission has e2ired ('echnolog- Eeveloers, 5nc. vs. Court
of $eals, G./. 6o. 9,719, Aanuar- *1, 1991).
Mo3ever, an LGU cannot(
,.1 .rohi!it the oeration of sauna and massage arlors, >arao>e !ars, !eerhouses, night
clu!s, da- clu!s, suer clu!s, discothe9ues, ca!arets, dance halls, motels, inns or order their
transfer or conversion 3ithout infringing the constitutional guarantees of due rocess and
e9ual rotection of la3s not even under the guise of olice o3er (Brmita:0alate Motel and
0otel <erations $ssociation, 5nc., vs. 0a-or of 0anila, G./. 6o. L:*,?9+, Aul- +1, 19?7).
,.* Bnact an ordinance reventing motels from oHering 3ash rates and renting out a
room more than once a da- is an unreasona!le e2ercise of olice o3er 3here the !ehavior
3hich the ordinance see>s to curtail (i.e., rostitution, use of illicit drugs) is alread-
rohi!ited and can !e curtailed !- al-ing e2isting la3s (Dhitelight Cororation vs. Cit- of
0anila, G./. 6o. 1**8,?, Aanuar- *@, *@@9).
,.+ .rohi!it the oeration of nightclu!s. 'he- ma- !e regulated, !ut not revented from
carr-ing on their !usiness (Eela Cru= vs. .aras, G./. 6os. L:,*171:7*, Aul- *1, 198+).
,., 0odif- the terms of an alication for a u!lic assem!l- ermit 3ithout even
indicating ho3 the cit- ma-or arrived at such a decision against the standard of the clear
and resent danger test (5ntegrated Far of the .hiliines vs. $tien=a, G./. 6o. 171*,1,
Ce!ruar- *,, *@1@).
,.1 5mose an a!solute !an on u!lic assem!lies. $ ma-or, ho3ever, can den- the
issuance of a rall- ermit on the ground of clear and resent danger to u!lic order, u!lic
safet-, u!lic convenience, u!lic morals or u!lic health (Fa-an vs. Brmita, G./. 6o.
1?98+8, $ril *1, *@@?).

,.? /egulate the ractice of a rofession, li>e that of otometr-, through the issuance of
a ermit. #uch a function is 3ithin the e2clusive domain of the administrative agenc-
seci&call- emo3ered !- la3 to suervise the rofession, i.e., .rofessional /egulations
Commission and the Foard of B2aminers in <tometr- ($ce!edo <tical vs. Court of
$eals, G./. 6o. 1@@11* 0arch +1, *@@@).
,.7 Cause the summar- a!atement of concrete osts 3here the osts did not ose an-
ha=ard to the safet- of ersons and roert- !ut merel- osed an inconvenience to the
u!lic !- !loc>ing the free assage of eole to and from the national road. 'he ost is not
nuisance er se ('elmo vs. Fustamante, G./. 6o. 18*1?7, Aul- 1+, *@@9).

,.8 Cause the destruction of 9uonset !uilding 3here cora is stored since this is a
legitimate !usiness. F- its nature, it cannot !e said to !e in4urious to rights of roert-, of
health or of comfort of the communit-. 5f it is a nuisance er accidens it ma- !e so roven in
7*@8
a hearing conducted for that urose (Bstate Crancisco vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 91*79,
Aul- *?, 1991).
,.9 <rder the closure of a !an> for non:a-ment of ta2es since the aroriate remedies
to enforce a-ment of delin9uent ta2es or fees are rovided in #ection ?* of the Local 'a2
Code. Closure is not a remed- (/ural Fan> of 0a>ati vs. 0unicialit- of 0a>ati, G./. 6o.
11@7?+, Aul- @*, *@@,).
6o comensation is needed to !e aid !- the LGU as there is no comensa!le ta>ing in the
condemnation of rivate roert- under olice o3er. .roert- condemned under olice
o3er is usuall- no2ious or intended for a no2ious urose (Eidiio Barth:#aversR 0ulti:
.urose $ssociation vs. Go=un, G./. 6o. 11788*, 0arch +@, *@@?).
1.1 5n the e2ercise of olice o3er, roert- rights of rivate individuals are su!4ected to
restraints and !urdens in order to secure the general comfort, health, and roserit- of the
state. Dhere a roert- interest is merel- restricted !ecause the continued use thereof
3ould !e in4urious to u!lic 3elfare, or 3here roert- is destro-ed !ecause its continued
e2istence 3ould !e in4urious to u!lic interest, there is no comensa!le ta>ing (Eidiio
Barth:#aversR 0ulti:.urose $ssociation vs. Go=un, G./. 6o. 11788*, 0arch +@, *@@?).
1.* 5n the e2ercise of its olice o3er regulation, the state restricts the use of rivate
roert-, !ut none of the roert- interests in the !undle of rights 3hich constitute
o3nershi is aroriated for use !- or for the !ene&t of the u!lic (Eidiio Barth:#aversR
0ulti:.urose $ssociation vs. Go=un, G./. 6o. 11788*, 0arch +@, *@@?).
Eminent Domain
Bminent Eomain is a statutor- o3er of LGs. 'he 1991 LGC de&nes the o3er and
enumerates the re9uirements, to 3it( $ local government unit ma-, through its chief
e2ecutive and acting ursuant to an ordinance, e2ercise the o3er of eminent domain for
u!lic use, or urose or 3elfare for the !ene&t of the oor and the landless, uon a-ment
of 4ust comensation, ursuant to the rovisions of the Constitution and ertinent la3s(
.rovided, ho3ever, 'hat the o3er of eminent domain ma- not !e e2ercised unless a valid
and de&nite oHer has !een reviousl- made to the o3ner, and such oHer 3as not acceted(
.rovided, further, 'hat the local government unit ma- immediatel- ta>e ossession of the
roert- uon the &ling of the e2roriation roceedings and uon ma>ing a deosit 3ith
the roer court of at least &fteen ercent (11U) of the fair mar>et value of the roert-
!ased on the current ta2 declaration of the roert- to !e e2roriated( .rovided, &nall-,
'hat, the amount to !e aid for the e2roriated roert- shall !e determined !- the roer
court, !ased on the fair mar>et value at the time of the ta>ing of the roert-." (#ection 19,
1991 LGC).
'he o3er of eminent domain delegated to LGs is in realit- not eminent !ut inferior."
Congress is still the rincial of LGs, and the latter cannot go against the rincialVs 3ill or
modif- the same (Feluso vs. 0unicialit- of .ana-, G./. 6o. 11+97,, $ugust @7, *@@?).
5n the e2ercise of the o3er of eminent domain, it is !asic that the ta>ing of rivate roert-
must !e for a u!lic urose (#ection 19, 1991 LGC).
7*18
+.1 .u!lic use is de&ned as 3hatever is !ene&ciall- emlo-ed for the communit-
(Faranga- #indalan, #an Cernando vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 11@?,@, 0arch **, *@@7).
+.* 5f the intended feeder road 3ill onl- !ene&t the residents of a rivate su!division,
then there is no valid urose (Faranga- #indalan, #an Cernando vs. Court of $eals, G./.
6o. 11@?,@, 0arch **, *@@7).
+.+ 'he ordinance must sho3 3h- the su!4ect roert- 3as singled out for e2roriation
or 3hat necessit- imelled the articular choice or selection (Lagcao vs. La!ra, G./. 6o.
1117,?, <cto!er 1+, *@@,).
'o 4ustif- the a-ment of 4ust comensation, there must !e comensa!le ta>ing. 'he
e2roriated roert- must !e used after ta>ing (Eidiio Barth:#aversR 0ulti:.urose
$ssociation vs. Go=un, G./. 11788*, 0arch +@, *@@?).
,.1 Dhen a roert- interest is aroriated and alied to some u!lic urose, there is
comensa!le ta>ing.

'he derivation of use can in fact !e total and it 3ill not constitute
comensa!le ta>ing if no!od- else ac9uires use of the roert- or an- interest therein. 5f,
ho3ever, in the regulation of the use of the roert-, some!od- else ac9uires the use or
interest thereof, such restriction constitutes comensa!le ta>ing (Eidiio Barth:#aversR
0ulti:.urose $ssociation vs. Go=un, G./. 11788*, 0arch +@, *@@?).
,.* <rdering a articular t-e of !usiness to 3ind u, transfer, relocate or convert to an
allo3a!le t-e of !usiness in eHect ermanentl- restricts the use of roert- and thus goes
!e-ond regulation. Aust comensation is therefore re9uired (0anila vs. Laguio, G./. 6o.
1181*7, $ril 1*, *@@1).
'he foundation of the right to e2ercise eminent domain is genuine necessit- and that
necessit- must !e of u!lic character (#ection 19, 1991 LGC).
1.1 Government ma- not cariciousl- or ar!itraril- choose 3hich rivate roert- should
!e e2roriated. 'he condemnor must sho3 the necessit- (Aesus is Lord Christian #chool
Coundation vs. .asig, G./. 6o. 11**+@, $ugust @9, *@@1) 0e-cau-an vs. 5ntermediate
$ellate Court, G./. 6o. 7*1*?, Aanuar- *9, 1988).
1.* 'he claim of the LGU that the iece of roert- is the shortest and most suita!le
access road" and that the lot has !een surve-ed as the !est ossi!le ingress and egress"
must !e roven !- a sho3ing of a reonderance of evidence (Aesus is Lord Christian #chool
Coundation vs. .asig, G./. 6o. 11**+@, $ugust @9, *@@1).
1.+ 'he right to ta>e rivate roert- for u!lic uroses necessaril- originates from the
necessit- and the ta>ing must !e limited to such necessit-. 'here is no genuine necessit-
3hen ta>ing of rivate roert- is done for the !ene&t of a small communit- 3hich see>s to
have its o3n sorts and recreational facilit-, not3ithstanding the fact that there is a
recreational facilit- onl- a short distance a3a- (0asi>i vs. Cit- of .asig, G./. 6o. 1+?+,9,
Aanuar- *+, *@@?).
'he ena!ling instrument for the e2ercise of eminent domain is an ordinance, not a resolution
(#ection 19, 1991 LGC).
?.1 $ resolution 3hich merel- e2resses the sentiment of the municial council 3ill not
suIce (Feluso vs. 0unicialit- of .ana-, G./. 6o. 11+97,, $ugust @7, *@@?) .arana9ue vs.
J0 /ealt- Cororation, G./. 6o. 1*78*@ Aul- *@, 1998).
7**8
?.* 5n a resolution, there is no ositive act of instituting the intended e2roriation
roceedings ($ntonio vs. Geronimo, G./. 6o. 1*,779, 6ovem!er *9, *@@1).
?.+ 'he enactment of the ordinance must recede the &ling of the e2roriation
comlaint (#aguitan vs. 0andalu-ong Cit-, G./. 6o. 1+1@87, 0arch 1,, *@@@).
'here must !e a valid and de&nite oHer (#ection 19, 1991 LGC).
7.1 /easona!le eHorts must !e e2hausted in ac9uiring the roert- voluntaril- (Aesus is
Lord Christian #chool Coundation vs. .asig, G./. 6o. 11**+@, $ugust @9, *@@1).
7.* $n LGU has the !urden of roving comliance 3ith the mandator- re9uirement of a
valid and de&nite oHer to the o3ner of the roert- !efore &ling its comlaint and the
re4ection thereof !- the latter.

5t is incum!ent uon the condemnor to e2haust all reasona!le
eHorts to o!tain the land it desires !- agreement.

Cailure to rove comliance 3ith the
mandator- re9uirement 3ill result in the dismissal of the comlaint (Aesus is Lord Christian
#chool Coundation vs. .asig, G./. 6o. 11**+@, $ugust @9, *@@1).
7.+ 'he oHer must !e comlete, indicating 3ith suIcient clearness the >ind of contract
intended and de&nitel- stating the essential conditions of the roosed contract.

$n oHer
3ould re9uire, among other things, a clear certaint- on !oth the o!4ect and the cause or
consideration of the envisioned contract. 'here is no valid oHer 3hen the letter sent !- the
LGU to the o3ner is a mere invitation to a conference to discuss the ro4ect and the rice
(Aesus is Lord Christian #chool Coundation vs. .asig, G./. 6o. 11**+@, $ugust @9, *@@1).
5n the e2ercise of this o3er, the Constitution and other ertinent la3s must !e follo3ed
(#ection 19, 1991 LGC).
8.1 .rivate lands ran> last in the order of riorit- for uroses of sociali=ed housing.
B2roriation roceedings are to !e resorted to onl- after the other modes of ac9uisition
have !een e2hausted under /eu!lic $ct. 6o. 7*79, the Ur!an Eeveloment and Mousing
$ct of 199* (Bstate of Meirs of Late B2:Austice Aose F.L. /e-es vs. 0anila, G./. 6o. 1+*,+1L
1+71,?, Ce!ruar- 1*, *@@,) Cilstream 5nternational vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 1*1*18 L
1*8@77, Aanuar- *+, 1998).
'he authorit- of the suervising:higher LGU in e2ercising its revie3 authorit- over
ordinances of suervised:lo3er LGU is limited to 9uestions of la3Llegal 9uestions, i.e.,
3hether or not the ordinances are 3ithin the o3ers of suervised:lo3er LGU to enact)
3hether or not ultra vires) and 3hether or not rocedures 3ere follo3ed. 'he o3er to
revie3 does not e2tend to choice of roert- to !e e2roriated (0oda- vs. Court of
$eals, G./. 6o. 1@791? Ce!ruar- *@, 1997).
'he aroval of the Eeartment of $grarian /eform (E$/) is not re9uired !efore an LGU can
e2roriate an agricultural land (.rovince of Camarines #ur vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o.
171?@,, #etem!er 18, *@@9).
Audicial revie3 of the e2ercise of eminent domain is limited to the follo3ing areas of
concern( (1) the ade9uac- of the comensation) (*) the necessit- of the ta>ing) and (+) the
u!lic use character of the urose of the ta>ing (0asi>i vs. Cit- of .asig, G./. 6o. 1+?+,9,
Aanuar- *+, *@@?).
7*+8
11.1 $n e2roriation suit is incaa!le of ecuniar- estimation. $ccordingl-, it falls 3ithin
the 4urisdiction of /egional 'rial Courts, regardless of the value of the su!4ect roert-. $n
e2roriation suit does not involve the recover- of a sum of mone- !ut involves the
governmentRs authorit- to e2roriate (Fardillon vs. 0asili, G./. 6o. 1,?88?, $ril +@, *@@+).
11.* 'he re9uisites for authori=ing immediate entr- in the e2ercise of an LGURs right of
eminent domain are as follo3s( (1) the &ling of a comlaint for e2roriation suIcient in
form and su!stance) and (*) the deosit of the amount e9uivalent to 11U of the fair mar>et
value of the roert- to !e e2roriated !ased on its current ta2 declaration. Uon
comliance 3ith these re9uirements, the issuance of a 3rit of ossession !ecomes
ministerial (5loilo Cit- vs. Legasi, G./. 6o. 11,?1,, 6ovem!er *1, *@@,).
Cor a 3rit of ossession to issue, onl- t3o re9uirements are re9uired( (1) the suIcienc- in
form and su!stance of the comlaint) and (*) the re9uired rovisional deosit. 6o hearing is
re9uired for the issuance of a 3rit of ossession. 'he suIcienc- in form and su!stance of
the comlaint for e2roriation can !e determined !- the mere e2amination of the
allegations of the comlaint (5loilo Cit- vs. Legasi, G./. 6o. 11,?1,, 6ovem!er *1, *@@,).
'he la3 does not ma>e the determination of a u!lic urose a condition recedent to the
issuance of a 3rit of ossession (Crancia vs. 0e-caua-an, G./. 6o. 17@,+*, 0arch *,, *@@8).
'he re9uired deosit is !ased on the roert-Rs current ta2 declaration (Snecht, 5nc. vs.
0unicialit- of Cainta, G./. 1,1*1,, Aul- 17, *@@?).
11.+ 'he o3ner of the e2roriated roert- has certain remedies.
'he o3ner ma- &le a mandamus case against the LGU in order to comel its sanggunian to
enact another aroriation ordinance relacing a revious one 3hich charged the a-ment
for 4ust comensation to a non:e2istent !an> account (<rtega vs. Cit- of Ce!u, G./. 6o.
1811?*:?+, <cto!er *, *@@9).
Dhere a municialit- fails or refuses, 3ithout 4usti&a!le reason, to eHect a-ment of a &nal
mone- 4udgment rendered against it, the claimant ma- avail of the remed- of mandamus in
order to comel the enactment and aroval of the necessar- aroriation ordinance, and
the corresonding dis!ursement of municial funds therefore (0a>ati vs. Court of $eals,
G./. 6o. 898998:89, <cto!er @1, 199@) Nu4uico vs. $tien=a, G./. 6o. 1?,*8*, <cto!er 1*,
*@@1).
'he non:&ling of an e2roriation case 3ill not necessaril- lead to the return of the roert-
to its o3ner. /ecover- of ossession can no longer !e allo3ed 3here the o3ner 3as guilt-
of estoel and, more imortantl-, 3here 3hat 3as constructed on the roert- 3as a u!lic
road. Dhat is left to the o3ner is the right to 4ust comensation (Buse!io vs. Luis, G./. 6o.
1?*,7,, <cto!er 11, *@@9).
$eclassi%cation of Land
/eclassi&cation is the act of secif-ing ho3 agricultural lands shall !e utili=ed for non:
agricultural (residential, industrial, commercial) as em!odied in the land use lan, su!4ect to
the re9uirements and rocedure for land use conversion (#ection *@, 1991 LGC).
7*,8
1.1 Conversion is diHerent from reclassi&cation. Conversion is the act of changing the
current use of a iece of agricultural land into some other use as aroved !- the
Eeartment of $grarian /eform (E$/). $ccordingl-, a mere reclassi&cation of agricultural
land does not automaticall- allo3 a lando3ner to change its use and thus cause the
e4ectment of the tenants. MeLshe has to undergo the rocess of conversion !efore heLshe is
ermitted to use the agricultural land for other uroses (/os vs. E$/, G./. 6o. 1+*,77,
$ugust +1, *@@1).
Bminent Eomain Poning /eclassi&cation Conversion
Comensa!le 'a>ing .olice .o3er $dministrative $dministrative
Change of <3ner
(rivate to LGU)
6o change of o3ner 6o change of o3ner 6o change of o3ner
$n- land $n- land $gricultural to non:
$gricultural
$gricultural to non:
$gricultural
Change actual use 6o change 6o change Change actual use
$ll LGUs <riginates from
CitiesL
0unicialities)
.rovince integrates
CitiesL 0unicialities Eeartment of
$grarian /eform
6o hearing
mandated
6o hearing
mandated
.u!lic hearing
re9uired
6o hearing
mandated
Local Leislation
Local legislative o3er is the o3er of LGUs through their local legislative councils to enact,
reeal, amend, modif- ordinances and issue resolutions.
1.1 Local legislative o3er shall !e e2ercised !- the sangguniang anlala3igan for the
rovince) the sangguniang anlungsod for the cit-) the sangguniang !a-an for the
municialit-) and the sangguniang !aranga- for the !aranga- (#ection ,8, 1991 LGC).
Local legislation is referred to as su!ordination legislation.
*.1 Local olitical su!divisions are a!le to legislate onl- !- virtue of a valid delegation of
legislative o3er from the national legislature e2cet onl- that the o3er to create their o3n
sources of revenue and to lev- ta2es is conferred !- the Constitution itself. 'he- are mere
agents vested 3ith 3hat is called the o3er of su!ordinate legislation. $s delegates of
Congress, LGUs cannot contravene !ut must o!e- at all times the 3ill of their rincial. $n
enactment local in origin cannot revail against a decree, 3hich has the force and eHect of a
statute (0anila vs. Laguio, G./. 6o. 1181*7, $ril 1*, *@@1).
*.* $n ordinance in conQict 3ith a state la3 of general character and state3ide
alication is universall- held to !e invalid. 'he rincile is fre9uentl- e2ressed in the
declaration that municial authorities, under a general grant of o3er, cannot adot
ordinances 3hich infringe uon the sirit of a state la3 or reugnant to the general olic- of
the state. 5n ever- o3er to ass ordinances given to a municialit-, there is an imlied
restriction that the ordinances shall !e consistent 3ith the general la3 (Fatangas C$'J vs.
Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 1+881@, <cto!er *@, *@@,).
7*18
*.+ 'he delegate cannot !e suerior to the rincial or e2ercise o3ers higher than those
of the latter (Lagcao vs. La!ra, G./. 6o. 1117,?, <cto!er 1+, *@@,).
*., $ roviso in an ordinance directing that the real roert- ta2 !e !ased on the actual
amount reQected in the deed of conve-ance or the revailing Fureau of 5nternal /evenue
=onal value is invalid not onl- !ecause it mandates an e2clusive rule in determining the fair
mar>et value !ut more so !ecause it dearts from the esta!lished rocedures stated in the
Local $ssessment /egulations 6o. 1:9* ($llied Fan>ing vs. ;ue=on Cit-, G./. 6o. 11,1*?,
<cto!er 11, *@@1).
Local legislative acts are referred to as denominated ordinances. Cor an ordinance to !e
valid, it must not onl- !e 3ithin the cororate o3ers of the LGU to enact and must !e
assed according to the rocedure rescri!ed !- la3, it must also conform to the follo3ing
su!stantive re9uirements( (1) must not contravene the Constitution or an- statute) (*) must
not !e unfair or oressive) (+) must not !e artial or discriminator-) (,) must not rohi!it
!ut ma- regulate trade) (1) must !e general and consistent 3ith u!lic olic-) and (?) must
not !e unreasona!le (Lagcao vs. La!ra, G./. 6o. 1117,?, <cto!er 1+, *@@,).
<rdinances enacted !- LGUs en4o- the resumtion of constitutionalit-. 'o overthro3 this
resumtion, there must !e a clear and une9uivocal !reach of the Constitution, not merel- a
dou!tful or argumentative contradiction. 5n short, the conQict 3ith the Constitution must !e
sho3n !e-ond reasona!le dou!t. Dhen dou!t e2ists, even if 3ell:founded, there can !e no
&nding of unconstitutionalit- ('ano vs. #ocrates, G./. 6o. 11@*,9, $ugust *1, 1997).
$ void legislative act such an ordinance granting a franchise to ca!le television oerators, a
o3er vested on the 6ational 'elecommunications Commission, does not confer an- right
nor vest an- rivilege (Poom=at vs. .eole of the .hiliines, G./. 6o. 1+11+1, Ce!ruar- 1,,
*@@1).
<rdinances assed in the e2ercise of the general 3elfare clause and devolved o3ers of
LGUs need not !e aroved !- the devolving agenc- in order to !e eHective a!sent a
seci&c rovision of la3 ('ano vs. #ocrates, G./. 6o. 11@*,9, $ugust *1, 1997).
'here are no unla3ful dis!ursements of u!lic funds 3hen dis!ursements are made
ursuant to a re:enacted !udget. 0one- can !e aid out of the local treasur- since there is a
valid aroriation (Jillanueva vs. <le, G./. 6o. 1?11*1, <cto!er 18, *@@1).
Local legislative councils enact ordinances and issue resolutions.
8.1 Legislative actions of a general and ermanent character shall !e enacted in the form
of ordinances, 3hile those 3hich are of temorar- character shall !e assed in the form of
resolutions. 0atters relating to rorietar- functions and to rivate concerns shall also !e
acted uon !- resolution ($rt. 1@7, 5mlementing /ules and /egulations of the 1991 LGC)
<rdinances /esolutions
B9uivalent to La3 B2ression of #entiment or
<inion
.u!lic or Governmental .rivate or .rorietar-
0ore or Less .ermanent 'emorar-
$s a general rule, must undergo
+ readings
$s a general rule, onl- undergoes
* readings
$ll ordinances su!4ect to JetoL <nl- some resolutions su!4ect to
7*?8
/evie3 JetoL /evie3 (i.e., local
develoment lan and u!lic
investment rogram)
LGUs can enter into contracts su!4ect to certain re9uirements (#ection **7a8718, 1991 LGC).
9.1 Unless other3ise rovided in the 1991 LGC, no contract ma- !e entered into !- the
local chief e2ecutive in !ehalf of the LGU 3ithout rior authori=ation !- the sanggunian
concerned. $ legi!le co- of such contract shall !e osted at a consicuous lace in the
rovincial caitol or the cit-, municial or !aranga- hall (#ection **7c8, 1991 LGC).
9.* $ ma-or validl- entered into a Contract of Legal #ervices 3here the sanggunian
unanimousl- assed a resolution authori=ing hisLher to hire a la3-er of hisLher choice to
reresent the municialit-Rs interest (0unicialit- of 'i3i vs. Fetito, G./. 6o. 17187+, Aul- 9,
*@1@).
9.+ 'he rior authori=ation ma- !e in the form of an aroriation ordinance assed for
the -ear 3hich seci&call- covers the ro4ect, cost or contract to !e entered into !- the LGU
(;uisum!ing vs. Garcia, G./. 6o. 1711*7, Eecem!er 8, *@@8).
9., $ loan agreement entered into !- the rovincial governor 3ithout rior authori=ation
from the sangguniang anlala3igan is unenforcea!le. 'he sanggunianRs failure to imugn
the contractRs validit- desite >no3ledge of its in&rmit- is an imlied rati&cation that
validates the contract (<camo vs. .eole, G./. 6os. 11?1,7:11 L 11?+8*:81, Ce!ruar- ,,
*@@8).
9.1 'he authorit- of the .unong Faranga- to accet a donation on !ehalf of the !aranga-
is deemed rati&ed 3hen through the -ears, the sanggunian !aranga- did not reudiate the
accetance of the donation and 3hen the !aranga- and the eole of the !aranga- have
continuousl- en4o-ed the material and u!lic service !ene&ts arising from the
infrastructures ro4ects ut u on the su!4ect roert- (Eolar vs. Faranga- Lu!lu!, G./. 6o.
11*??+, 6ovem!er 18, *@@1).
9.? $ local chief e2ecutive has the authorit- to &le suits for the recover- of funds and
roert- on !ehalf of the LGU, even 3ithout the rior authori=ation from the sanggunian.
6o3here in the enumerated o3ers and duties of the sanggunian

can one &nd the
re9uirement of such rior authori=ation in favor of the local chief e2ecutive for the urose
of &ling suits on !ehalf of the LGU (Cit- of Caloocan vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 1,1@@,,
0a- @+, *@@?).
'he local legislative rocess has the follo3ing stagesLstes( (1) sonsorshi) (*) 1
st
reading)
(+) committee deli!erations) (,) committee reort) (1) *
nd
reading (interellation and
amendments)) (?) +
rd
readings, attestation) (7) transmittal to local chief e2ecutive) (8)
aroval or veto) (9) u!licationL osting) (1@) eHectivit-) and (11) revie3 !- the
suervising:higher sanggunian.
$ sanggunian is a collegial !od-.
11.1. Legislation re9uires the articiation of all its mem!ers so that the- ma- not onl-
reresent the interests of their resective constituents !ut also hel in the ma>ing of
decisions !- voting uon ever- 9uestion ut uon the !od- (Pamora vs. Ca!allero, G./. 6o.
1,77?7, Aanuar- 1,, *@@,).
7*78
11.* 'he acts of onl- a art of the sanggunian done outside the arameters of the legal
rovisions are legall- in&rm. $ll such acts cannot !e given !inding force and eHect for the-
are considered unoIcial acts done during an unauthori=ed session (Pamora vs. Ca!allero,
G./. 6o. 1,77?7, Aanuar- 1,, *@@,).
11.+ $ ma4orit- of all mem!ers of the sanggunian 3ho have !een elected and 9uali&ed
shall constitute a 9uorum to transact oIcial !usiness. 'he determination of the e2istence of
a 9uorum is !ased on the total num!er of mem!ers of the sanggunian 3ithout regard to the
&ling of a leave of a!sence (Pamora vs. Ca!allero, G./. 6o. 1,77?7, Aanuar- 1,, *@@,).
11., $ sanggunian ma- rovide for a vote re9uirement diHerent from that rescri!ed
under the la3 (i.e., generall-, ma4orit- vote) for certain (!ut not all) ordinances as in
amending a =oning ordinance. (Casino vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 9119*, Eecem!er *,
1991).
11.1 'he sanggunianRs ver!al concurrence is not the concurrence envisioned under the
la3. 'he sanggunian, as a legislative !od-, acts through a resolution or an ordinance,
adoted in a legislative session (0ontuerto vs. '-, G./. 6o. 1777+?, <cto!er ?, *@@8).
11.? 'here is nothing in the language of the la3 that restricts the matters to !e ta>en u
during the &rst regular session merel- to the adotion or udating of the house rules. $
sulemental !udget ma- !e assed on the &rst session da- of the sanggunian (0alon=o vs.
Pamora, G./. 6o. 1+7718, Aul- *7, 1999).
11.7 'here is nothing in the la3 3hich rohi!its the conduct of three readings of a
roosed ordinance from !eing held in 4ust one session da- (0alon=o vs. Pamora, G./. 6o.
1+7718, Aul- *7, 1999).
11.8 $!sent a la3, local legislative councils have no contemt and su!oena o3ers
(6egros <riental 55 Blectric Cooerative 5nc. vs. #angguniang .anlungsod of Eumaguete, G./.
6o. 7*,9*, 6ovem!er @1, 1987).
Governors and ma-ors have the o3er to arove or veto ordinances. 'he local chief
e2ecutive ma- veto an- ordinance of the sanggunian anlala3igan, sangguniang
anlungsod, or sanggunian !a-an on the ground that it is ultra vires or re4udicial to the
u!lic 3elfare, stating his reasons therefor in 3riting (#ection 117a8, 1991 LGC).
1*.1 'he governor or ma-or has the o3er to veto the entire ordinance or articular items
thereof. 'he local chief e2ecutive, e2cet the unong !aranga-, shall have the o3er to veto
an- articular item or items of an aroriations ordinance, an ordinance or resolution
adoting a local develoment lan and u!lic investment rogram, or an ordinance directing
the a-ment of mone- or creating lia!ilit- (#ection 117!8, 1991 LGC).
1*.* 'he local chief e2ecutive ma- veto an ordinance or resolution onl- once. 'he
sanggunian ma- override the veto of the local chief e2ecutive concerned !- t3o:thirds (*L+)
vote of all its mem!ers, there!- ma>ing the ordinance eHective even 3ithout the aroval of
the local chief e2ecutive concerned (#ection 117c8, 1991 LGC).
1*.+ 'he grant of the veto o3er confers authorit- !e-ond the simle act of signing an
ordinance or resolution as a re9uisite to its enforcea!ilit-. #uch o3er accords the local chief
e2ecutive the discretion to sustain a resolution or ordinance in the &rst instance or to veto it
7*88
and return it 3ith hisLher o!4ections to the sanggunian (Eelos /e-es vs. #andigan!a-an, G./.
6o. 1*1*11, 6ovem!er 1+, 1997).
1*., $n aroriation ordinance signed !- the local chief e2ecutive authori=es the release
of u!lic funds. 'he ma-orVs signature aroving the !udget ordinance 3as hisLher assent to
the aroriation of funds. 5f heLshe did not agree 3ith such allocation, heLshe could have
vetoed the item (Caloocan Cit- vs. $llarde, G./. 6o. 1@7*71, #etem!er 1@, *@@+).
1*.1 $ municial ma-or cannot issue a ma-orRs ermit to oerate a coc>it 3ithout an
ena!ling ordinance. $ general ordinance emo3ering a ma-or to issue ermits cannot !e
used to 4ustif- the issuance of a license. $ ma-or cannot also !e comelled to issue such a
license since this 3ould constitute an undue encroachment on the ma-orVs administrative
rerogatives (Canet vs. Eecena, G./. 6o. 111+,,, <cto!er *@, *@@,).
/evie3 is a reconsideration or re:e2amination for uroses of correction. 'he o3er of
revie3 is e2ercised to determine 3hether it is necessar- to correct the acts of the
su!ordinate and to see to it that suervised unit erforms the duties in accordance 3ith la3
(Casino vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 9119*, Eecem!er *, 1991).
$n LGU has t3o !ranches of government, i.e. e2ecutive and legislative. 'he Governor for the
.rovinces, 0a-ors for Cities and 0unicialities, and the .unong Faranga- for Faranga-s are
the local chief e2ecutives, 3hile the Jice:Governor and Jice:0a-or are the vice:local chief
e2ecutives. 'he 1991 LGC does not rovide for the osition of Jice:.unong Faranga-.
Local Chief B2ecutive Jice:Local Chief B2ecutive
B2ecutive Legislative and B2ecutive (as vice)
Jeto or $rove .reside over sessions
$oint Bmlo-ees of the B2ecutive
Franch and Legislative Franch funded
!- B2ecutive Franch
$oint Bmlo-ees of #anggunian and
<Ice of Jice:0a-or funded from
#anggunian and <JLCB
$roves Eis!ursements and Jouchers
for B2ecutive Franch
$roves Eis!ursements and Jouchers
for Legislative Franch
$roriations( 0a- Jeto, 5f aroved,
must release funds
Bnact $roriations <rdinance
Jeto /evie3
$rove or disarove /econsideration or re:e2amination for
uroses of correction
5ntra:LGU (3ithin the LGU) 5nter:LGU (* LGUs)
B2ecutive .o3er Legislative .o3er
Local Chief B2ecutive #uervising:Migher #anggunian
Ultra Jires (!e-ond the o3ers of the
LGU) or .re4udicial to .u!lic Delfare of
la3 and factL 3isdom
Ultra Jires
5nvolves 9uestion of la3 and
factL3isdom
5nvolves 9uestion of la3 onl-
.eriod to e2ercise( .rovince (11 da-s))
Cit-L 0unicialit- (1@ da-s)
+@ da-s
6o Jeto in Faranga-s 6o /evie3 of .rovincial <rdinances
7*98
Jeto /evie3
/eversal !- <verride or Audicial /evie3
(reversal !- courts)
Audicial /evie3 (reversal onl- !- courts)
'he 1991 LGC allo3s for revie3 of certain ordinances.
11.1 'he la3 re9uires that a dissatis&ed ta2a-er 3ho 9uestions the validit- or legalit- of
a ta2 ordinance must &le its aeal to the #ecretar- of Austice 3ithin +@ da-s from eHectivit-
thereof. 5n case the #ecretar- decides the aeal, a eriod of +@ da-s is allo3ed for an
aggrieved art- to go to court. Fut if the #ecretar- does not act thereon, after the lase of
?@ da-s, a art- could alread- roceed to see> relief in court (/e-es et. al. vs. Court of
$eals, G./. 6o. 118*++, Eecem!er 1@, 1999) #ection 187, 1991 LGC).
Cailure to aeal to the #ecretar- of Austice 3ithin +@ da-s from the eHectivit- date of the
ta2 ordinance as mandated !- #ection 187 of the 1991 LGC is fatal (Aardine Eavies vs.
$liosa, G./. 6o. 1189@@, Ce!ruar- *7, *@@+).
11.* 'he Eeartment of Fudget and 0anagement shall revie3 ordinances authori=ing the
annual or sulemental aroriations of rovinces, highl-:ur!ani=ed cities, indeendent
comonent cities, and municialities 3ithin the 0etroolitan 0anila $rea (#ection +*?, 1991
LGC).
11.+ <rdinances !anning the catching of certain secies of &shes and corals need not !e
aroved !- the Eeartment of Bnvironment and 6atural /esources !efore the- can !e
eHective !ecause in the e2ercise of devolved o3er, such aroval is not necessar- ('ano
vs. #ocrates, G./. 6o. 11@*,9, $ugust *1, 1997).
11., 'he <Ice of the .resident, Eeartment of 5nterior and Local Government, and other
e2ecutive deartments are not given the o3er to revie3 under the 1991 LGC.
'he constitutionalit- and legalit- of ordinances and resolutions ma- !e raised !efore the
courts on 4udicial revie3.
1?.1 $ etition for certiorari &led against a sanggunian the legalit- of an ordinance 3ill not
lie since the sanggunian does not fall 3ithin the am!it of tri!unal, !oard, or oIcer e2ercising
4udicial or 9uasi:4udicial functions. 'he enactment of an ordinance 3as done in the e2ercise
of legislative and e2ecutive functions of the sanggunian and ma-or resectivel- and do not
arta>e of 4udicial or 9uasi:4udicial functions (Liga ng mga Faranga- 6ational vs. 0anila, G./.
6o. 11,199, Aanuar- *1, *@@,).
1?.* 'he aroriate remed- is a etition for declarator- relief. 'he re9uisites of an action
for declarator- relief are( (1) the su!4ect matter of the controvers- must !e a deed, 3ill,
contract or other 3ritten instrument, statute, e2ecutive order or regulation, or ordinance)
(*) the terms of said documents and the validit- thereof are dou!tful and re9uire 4udicial
construction) (+) there must have !een no !reach of the documents in 9uestion) (,) there
must !e an actual 4usticia!le controvers- or the riening seeds" of one !et3een ersons
3hose interests are adverse) (1) the issue must !e rie for 4udicial determination) and (?)
ade9uate relief is not availa!le through other means or other forms of action or roceeding.
'hus, an action for declarator- relief 9uestioning t3o resolutions and an ordinance !- a
sanggunian anlungsod is remature 3here said issuances merel- endorsed favora!l- to the
Mousing Land Use and /egulator- Foard (MLU/F) an alication to develo a memorial ar>.
7+@8
'he sanggunian has not -et acted on the alication 3ith &nalit-. 'he MLU/F, !eing the sole
regulator- !od- for housing and land develoment, has the &nal sa- on the matter. Under
the doctrine of rimar- administrative 4urisdiction, courts cannot or 3ill not determine a
controvers- 3here the issues for resolution demand the e2ercise of sound administrative
discretion, re9uiring the secial >no3ledge, e2erience, and services of the administrative
tri!unal to determine technical and intricate matters of fact (Cerrer, Ar. vs. /oco, Ar., G./. 6o.
17,1*9, Aul- 1, *@1@).
1?.+ 'he #ureme Court can onl- revie3, revise, reverse, modif- on aeal or certiorari
&nal 4udgments and orders of lo3er courts in all cases in 3hich the constitutionalit- or
validit- of, among other things, an ordinance is in 9uestion (<rtega vs. ;ue=on Cit-, G./. 6o.
1?1,@@, #etem!er @*, *@@1).
1?., 5t is a general rule that the regularit- of the enactment of an oIciall- romulgated
statute or ordinance ma- not !e imeached !- arol evidence or oral testimon- either of
individual oIcers and mem!ers, or of strangers 3ho ma- !e interested in nullif-ing
legislative action (/e-es et. al. vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 118*++, Eecem!er 1@, 1999).
&t'er Governmental and Corporate "o#ers
'he cororate o3ers of LGUs are enumerated in the 1991 LGC !ut the listing is not
e2clusive.
1.1 Bver- LGU, as a cororation, shall have the follo3ing o3ers to( (1) have continuous
succession in its cororate name) (*) sue and !e sued) (+) have and use a cororate seal) (,)
ac9uire and conve- real or ersonal roert-) (1) enter into contracts) and (?) e2ercise such
other o3ers as are granted to cororations, su!4ect to the limitations rovided in the 1991
LGC and other la3s (#ection **, 1991 LGC).
$side from e2ress o3ers, LGUs also have imlied o3ers (i.e. those o3ers imlied from
e2ress o3ers and state olicies).
*.1 Dhile the la3 did not e2ressl- vest on LGUs the o3er to a!olish that oIce, a!sent,
ho3ever, an- contrar- rovision, that authorit- should !e deemed em!raced !- imlication
from the o3er to create it (Aavier vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. L:,9@?1, Aune, 1, 199,).
*.* LGUs cannot use u!lic funds for the 3idening and imrovement of rivatel-:o3ned
side3al>s. Under the la3, no u!lic mone- shall !e aroriated or alied for rivate
uroses ($l!on vs. Cernando, G./. 6o. 1,8+17, Aune +@, *@@?).
*.+ $n LGU must coml- 3ith the legal conditions imosed on a donation (Cit- of $ngeles
vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 9788*, $ugust *8, 199?).
Part 0. LOCAL A,TONOM1 AN5 LOCAL "O,RCE" O3 3,N5"
7+18
Sources of Funds
1. LGUs have constitutional and statutor- sources of funds.
1.1 Under the 1987 Constitution, the sources of funds of local governments are
their share in national ta2es, share in the roceeds of the utili=ation and
develoment national 3ealth, local ta2es, fees and charges, other sources of
revenues (#ections 1,? and 7, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
1.* Under the 1991 LGUs raise funds from loans (#ections +@@ and +@1, 1991
LGC), donations and grants (#ection *+, 1991 LGC), Qoat !onds (#ection *99,
1991 LGC), e2ercise of rorietar- functions (#ction **7d8. 1991 LGC), and
credit:&nancing schemes such as Fuild:<erate:'ransfer schemes (/.$. 6o.
7718 amending /.$. 6o. ?917).
Fiscal Autonomy
1. Local autonom- includes !oth administrative and &scal autonom- (.rovince of Fatangas
vs. /omulo, G./. 6o. 11*77,, 0a- *7, *@@,) .imentel vs. $guirre, G./. 6o. 1+*988, Aul-
19, *@@@).
1.1 LGUs en4o- &scal autonom-. 'he constitutional !asis of &scal autonom- is
#ection 1, $rticle % of the 1987 Constitution (.imentel vs. $guirre, G./. 6o.
1+*988, Aul- 19, *@@@).
1.* Ciscal autonom- means that LGUs have the( (1) o3er to create their o3n
sources of revenue in addition to their e9uita!le share in the national ta2es
released !- the national government, as 3ell as the (*) o3er to allocate their
resources in accordance 3ith their o3n riorities. (+) 5t e2tends to the
rearation of their !udgets, and local oIcials in turn:have to 3or> 3ithin the
constraints thereof (.imentel vs. $guirre, G./. 6o. 1+*988, Aul- 19, *@@@).
1.+ Local &scal autonom- does not ho3ever rule out an- manner of national
government intervention !- 3a- of suervision, in order to ensure that local
rograms, &scal and other3ise, are consistent 3ith national goals (.imentel
vs. $guirre, G./. 6o. 1+*988, Aul- 19, *@@@).
*. $s a conse9uence of &scal autonom-(
*.1 'he Eeartment of Fudget and 0anagement cannot imose a limitation not
found in the la3 such as setting a ca on the amount of allo3ances for 4udges
(Eadole vs. Commission on $udit, G./. 6o. 1*1+1@, Eecem!er @+, *@@*).
*.* 5n revie3ing ta2 ordinances, the Eeartment of Austice can onl- declare a ta2
measure unconstitutional and illegal. 'he #ecretar- cannot amend, modif- or
reeal the ta2 measure or declare it e2cessive, con&scator- or contrar- to
u!lic 3elfare (Erilon vs. Lim, G./. 6o. 11*,97, $ugust ,, 199,).
*.+ 'he restrictive and limited nature of the ta2 e2emtion rivileges under the
1991 LGC is consistent 3ith the #tate olic- of local autonom-. 'he o!vious
7+*8
intention of the la3 is to !roaden the ta2 !ase of LGUs to assure them of
su!stantial sources of revenue (.hiliine /ural Blectric Cooeratives
$ssociation vs. E5LG, G./ 6o. 1,+@7?, Aune 1@, *@@+).
*., Dith the added !urden of devolution, it is even more imerative for
government entities to share in the re9uirements of local develoment, &scal
or other3ise, !- a-ing ta2es or other charges due from them (6ational .o3er
Cororation vs. Ca!anatuan Cit-, G./. 6o. 1,911@, $ril @9, *@@+).
*.1 5n interreting statutor- rovisions on municial &scal o3ers, dou!ts 3ill
have to !e resolved in favor of LGUs (#an .a!lo Cit- vs. /e-es, G./. 6o.
1*77@8, 0arch *1, 1999).
!nternal $evenue Allotment
1. LGUs shall have a 4ust share, as determined !- la3, in the national ta2es 3hich shall !e
automaticall- released to them (#ection ?, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
1.* $t resent, all LGUs have a ,@U share in the national internal revenue ta2es
!ased on the collection of the third &scal -ear receding the current &scal
-ear (#ection *8,, 1991 LGC).
1.+ <f the ,@U, rovinces and cities are entitled to *+U each) municialities,
+,U) and !aranga-s, *@U. 'he share of a articular local government shall !e
!ased on this formula( oulation, 1@U) land area, *1U) and e9ual sharing,
*1U (#ection *81, 1991 LGC).
1., 5n the event that the national government incurs an unmanagea!le u!lic
sector de&cit, the .resident of the .hiliines is here!- authori=ed, uon the
recommendation of #ecretar- of Cinance, #ecretar- of 5nterior and Local
Government and #ecretar- of Fudget and 0anagement, and su!4ect to
consultation 3ith the residing oIcers of !oth Mouses of Congress and the
residents of the liga", to ma>e the necessar- ad4ustments in the internal
revenue allotment of local government units !ut in no case shall the allotment
!e less than thirt- ercent (+@U) of the collection of national internal revenue
ta2es of the third &scal -ear receding the current &scal -ear (#ection *8,,
1991 LGC).
1.1 'he 5nternal /evenue $llotment (5/$) of LGUs( (1) forms art of the income of
local government units) (*) forms art of the gross accretion of the funds of
the local government units) (+) regularl- and automaticall- accrues to the
local treasur- 3ithout need of further action on the art of the LGU) (,) is a
regular and recurring item of income) (1) accrues to the general fund of the
LGUs) (?) is used to &nance local oerations su!4ect to modes rovided !- the
1991 LGC and its imlementing rules) and (7) is included in the comutation
of the average annual income for uroses of conversion of LGUs ($lvare= vs.
Guingona, G./. 6o. 118+@+, Aanuar- +1, 199?).
1.? 'he share of each LGU shall !e released, 3ithout need of an- further action,
directl- to the rovincial, cit-, municial or !aranga- treasurer, as the case
ma- !e, on a 9uarterl- !asis 3ithin &ve (1) da-s after the end of each 9uarter,
7++8
and 3hich shall not !e su!4ect to an- lien or hold!ac> that ma- !e imosed !-
the national government for 3hatever urose (#ection *8?, 1991 LGC).
a. 'he .resident cannot 3ithhold 1@U of the 5/$ 3ithout coml-ing 3ith the
re9uirements under #ection *8, of the 1991 LGC. 'his 3ould !e violative
of local autonom- and &scal autonom- (.imentel vs. $guirre, G./. 6o.
1+*988, Aul- 19, *@@@).
!. 'he General $roriation $ct cannot lace a ortion of the 5/$ in an
Unrogrammed Cund onl- to !e released 3hen a condition is met, i.e., the
original revenue targets are reali=ed ($lternative Center vs. Pamora, G./.
6o. 1,,*1?, Aune 8, *@@1).
c. 'he rovisions in the General $roriation $ct creating the Local
Government #ecial B9uali=ation Cund and authori=ing the non:release of
the full ,@U to all LGUs are inaroriate rovisionsLriders. Curther, an
aroriations act cannot amend a su!stantive la3, i.e., 1991 LGC
(.rovince of Fatangas vs. /omulo, G./. 6o. 11*77,, 0a- *7, *@@,).
d. $ no reort, no release" olic- ma- not !e validl- enforced against oIces
vested 3ith &scal autonom-. 'he automatic release rovision found in the
Constitution means that LGUs cannot !e re9uired to erform an- act to
receive the 4ust share" accruing to them from the national coHers (Civil
#ervice Commission vs. Eeartment of Fudget and 0anagement, G./. 6o.
118791, Aul- **, *@@1).
S'are in National (ealt' "roceeds
1. LGUs shall !e entitled to an e9uita!le share in the roceeds of the utili=ation and
develoment of the national 3ealth 3ithin their resective areas, in the manner rovided
!- la3, including sharing the same 3ith the inha!itants !- 3a- of direct !ene&ts (#ection
7, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
1.1 LGUs shall have a ,@U share of gross collection derived !- the national
government from the receding &scal -ear from mining ta2es, ro-alties,
forestr- and &sher- charges, and such other ta2es, fees, or charges, including
related surcharges, interests, or &nes, and from its share in an- co:roduction,
4oint venture or roduction sharing agreement in the utili=ation and
develoment of the national 3ealth 3ithin their territorial 4urisdiction (#ection
*9@, 1991 LGC).
1.* 'he host rovince shall !e entitled to *@U) comonent municialit-L cit-, ,1U
(5f highl-:ur!ani=ed or indeendent cit-, ?1U), and !aranga-, +1U (#ection
*9*, 1991 LGC).
"o#er of Taxation
7+,8
1. Bach LGU shall have the o3er to lev- ta2es, fees, and charges su!4ect to such
guidelines and limitations as the Congress ma- rovide, consistent 3ith the !asic olic-
of local autonom-. #uch ta2es, fees, and charges shall accrue e2clusivel- to the LGUs
(#ection 1, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution).
1.1 'he o3er to ta2 is rimaril- vested in the Congress) ho3ever, in our
4urisdiction, it ma- !e e2ercised !- local legislative !odies, no longer merel-
!- virtue of a valid delegation as !efore, !ut ursuant to direct authorit-
conferred !- #ection 1, $rticle % of the 1987 Constitution.

'he e2ercise of the
o3er ma- !e su!4ect to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress ma-
rovide 3hich, ho3ever, must !e consistent 3ith the !asic olic- of local
autonom- (0actan Ce!u 5nternational $irort $uthorit- vs. 0arcos, G./. 6o.
1*@@8*, #etem!er 11, 199?)
1.* 'he list of ta2es under Foo> 55 of the 1991 LGC is not e2clusive. LGUs ma-
e2ercise the o3er to lev- ta2es, fees or charges on an- !ase or su!4ect( (1)
not other3ise seci&call- enumerated herein or ta2ed under the rovisions of
the 6ational 5nternal /evenue Code, as amended, or other alica!le la3s(
.rovided, 'hat the ta2es, fees, or charges shall( (*) not !e un4ust, e2cessive,
oressive, con&scator- or contrar- to declared national olic-( .rovided,
further, 'hat the( (+) ordinance lev-ing such ta2es, fees or charges shall( (,)
not !e enacted 3ithout an- rior u!lic hearing conducted for the urose
(#ection 18?, 1991 LGC).
.rovinces Cities 0unicialities Faranga-s
'a2 on 'ransfer of
/eal .roert-
<3nershi
'a2 on Fusiness of
.rinting and
.u!lication
Cranchise 'a2
'a2 on #and, Gravel
and <ther ;uarr-
/esources
.rofessional 'a2
$musement 'a2
$nnual Ci2ed 'a2 for
Bver- Eeliver-
'a2 on 'ransfer of
/eal .roert-
<3nershi
'a2 on Fusiness of
.rinting and
.u!lication
Cranchise 'a2
'a2 on #and,
Gravel and <ther
;uarr- /esources
.rofessional 'a2
$musement 'a2
$nnual Ci2ed 'a2
for Bver- Eeliver-
Fusiness 'a2 on
0anufacturers
Fusiness 'a2 on
Dholesalers,
Eistri!utors, or
Eealers
Fusiness 'a2 on
/etailers
Fusiness 'a2 on
B2orters, and on
0anufacturers,
Dholesalers and
/etailers of
Bssential
'a2 on #tores or
/etailers 3ith
&2ed !usiness
esta!lishments
7+18
.rovinces Cities 0unicialities Faranga-s
'ruc> or Jan of
0anufacturers or
.roducers,
Dholesalers of,
Eealers, or
/etailers in, Certain
.roducts
/eal .roert- 'a2
#ecial Bducation
Cund Lev-
$d Jalorem 'a2 on
5dle Lands
#ecial Lev- on
Land Fene&ted !-
.u!lic Dor>s
'ruc> or Jan of
0anufacturers or
.roducers,
Dholesalers of,
Eealers, or
/etailers in,
Certain .roducts
Fusiness 'a2 on
0anufacturers
Fusiness 'a2 on
Dholesalers,
Eistri!utors, or
Eealers
Fusiness 'a2 on
/etailers
Fusiness 'a2 on
B2orters, and on
0anufacturers,
Dholesalers and
/etailers of
Bssential
Commodities
Fusiness 'a2 on
Contractors
Fusiness 'a2 on
Fan>s
Fusiness 'a2 on
.eddlers
Fusiness 'a2 on all
other Fusinesses
Communit- 'a2
/eal .roert- 'a2
#ecial Bducation
Cund Lev-
$d Jalorem 'a2 on
5dle Lands
#ecial Lev- on
Land Fene&ted !-
.u!lic Dor>s
Commodities
Fusiness 'a2 on
Contractors
Fusiness 'a2 on
Fan>s
Fusiness 'a2 on
.eddlers
Fusiness 'a2 on all
other Fusinesses
Communit- 'a2
/eal .roert- 'a2
for 0etro:0anila
0unicialities
#ecial Bducation
Cund Lev-
$d Jalorem 'a2 on
5dle Lands
#ecial Lev- on
Land Fene&ted !-
.u!lic Dor>s
Part 8. LOCAL GOVERNMENT O33ICIAL"
Leislative Control over Structure
1. 'he 1987 Constitution does not enumerate the local oIcials of the &ve >indsLlevels of
LGUs.
7+?8
*. Congress shall rovide for the 9uali&cations, election, aointment and removal, term,
salaries, and o3ers and functions and duties of local oIcials (#ection +, $rticle %, 1987
Constitution). Congress e2ercises legislative control over structure of LGUs.
Term of &)ce
1. 'he term of oIce of elective local oIcials, e2cet !aranga- oIcials, 3hich shall !e
determined !- la3, shall !e three -ears and no such oIcial shall serve for more than
three consecutive terms. Joluntar- renunciation of the oIce for an- length of time shall
not !e considered as an interrution in the continuit- of his service for the full term for
3hich he 3as elected (#ection 8, $rticle %, 1987 Constitution). Under /.$. 6o. 91?,, the
current term of oIce of elective !aranga- oIcials is three -ears.
1.1 Cor the +:term rule to al-, t3o conditions must concur( (1) the oIcial
concerned has !een elected for three consecutive terms in the same local
government ost) and (*) heLshe has full- served three consecutive terms. $
municial councilor 3ho 3as elected for three consecutive terms !ut 3ho had
to assume the osition of vice:ma-or on hisLher second term in vie3 of the
incum!entRs retirement is not deemed to have full- served three consecutive
terms (0onte!on vs. Comelec, G./. 6o. 18@,,,, $ril @8, *@@8).
1.* MeLshe must also have !een elected to the same osition for the same
num!er of times !efore the dis9uali&cation can al-. 'he &rst re9uisite is
a!sent 3hen a roclamation 3as su!se9uentl- declared void since there 3as
no roclamation at all. Dhile a roclaimed candidate ma- assume oIce on
the strength of the roclamation of the Foard of Canvassers, heLshe is onl- a
resumtive 3inner 3ho assumes oIce su!4ect to the &nal outcome of the
election rotest. 'he second re9uisite is not resent 3hen the oIcial vacates
the oIce not !- voluntar- renunciation !ut in comliance 3ith the legal
rocess of 3rit of e2ecution issued !- the Commission on Blections (Lon=anida
vs. Comelec, G./. 6o. 1+111@, Aul- *8, 1999).
1.+ 'he term limit for elective local oIcials must !e ta>en to refer to the right to
!e elected as 3ell as the right to serve in the same elective osition.
Conse9uentl-, it is not enough that an individual has served three consecutive
terms in an elective local oIce, heLshe must also have !een elected to the
same osition for the same num!er of times !efore the dis9uali&cation can
al-. 'hus, the term of a vice:ma-or 3ho !ecame the ma-or !- succession is
not considered a term as ma-or for uroses of the +:term rule (For4a vs.
Comelec, G./. 6o. 1++,91, #etem!er @+, 1998).
1., .reventive susension, !- its nature, does not involve an eHective interrution
of a term and should therefore not !e a reason to avoid the +:term limitation.
Fecause it is imosed !- oeration of la3, reventive susension does not
involve a voluntar- renunciation) it merel- involves the temorar- incaacit-
to erform the service that an elective oIce demands ($ldovino, Ar. vs.
Commission on Blections, G./. 6o. 18,8+?, Eecem!er *+, *@@9).
1.1 $ erson 3ho has run for three consecutive terms ma- run in a recall election
so long as the said candidate is not running for immediate reelection follo3ing
hisLher three consecutive terms. 'erm limits should !e construed strictl- to
give the fullest ossi!le eHect to the right of the electorate to choose their
7+78
leaders. 'hus, the +:term limit for local elected oIcials is not violated 3hen a
local oIcial 3ins in a recall election for ma-or after serving three full terms as
ma-or since said election is not considered immediate reelection (#ocrates vs.
Comelec, G./. 6o. 11,11*, 6ovem!er 1*, *@@*).
1.? $ erson 3ho served for t3o consecutive terms for ma-or and thereafter lost
in the succeeding elections, can run in the ne2t election since the +:term rule
3as not violated ($dormeo vs. Comelec, G./. 6o. 1,79*7, Ce!ruar- @,, *@@*).
1.7 $ unong !aranga- serving hisLher third term of oIce 3ho ran, 3on and
assumed oIce as sanggunian !a-an mem!er is deemed to have voluntaril-
relin9uished hisLher oIce as unong !aranga- for uroses of the three:term
rule (Folos vs. Comelec, G./. 6o. 18,@8*, 0arch 17, *@@9).
1.8 $ +:term ma-or of a municialit- converted into a cit- on the +
rd
term of the
ma-or cannot see> oIce as a cit- ma-or in the 1
st
elections of cit- oIcials
considering the area and inha!itants of the localit- are the same and that the
municial ma-or continued to hold oIce until such time as cit- elections are
held. 'here 3as no involuntar- renunciation on the art of the municial
ma-or at an- time during the three terms. Dhile the cit- ac9uired a ne3
cororate e2istence searate and distinct from that of the municialit-, this
does not mean that for the urose of al-ing the constitutional rovision on
term limitations, the oIce of the municial ma-or 3ould !e construed as
diHerent from that of the oIce of the cit- ma-or (Latasa vs. Comelec, G./. 6o.
11,8*9, Eecem!er 1@, *@@+).
1.9 $ unong !aranga- 3ho has served for three consecutive terms 3hen the
!aranga- 3as still art of a municialit- is dis9uali&ed from running for a ,
th
consecutive term 3hen the municialit- 3as converted to a cit- !ecause the
osition and territorial 4urisdiction are the same (Laceda vs. Lumena, G./. 6o.
18*8?7, 6ovem!er *1, *@@8).
1.1@ 5n case of failure of elections involving !aranga- oIcials, the incum!ent
oIcials shall remain in oIce in a hold:over caacit- ursuant to #ection 1 of
/eu!lic $ct 6o. 91?, ($da vs. Comelec, G./. 6o. 1?198,, Ce!ruar- *1,
*@@7).
"o#ers of Local &)cials
1. 'he o3ers of local government oIcials are de&ned under the 1991 LGC.
*. 'he o3ers and resonsi!ilities of the .rovincial Governor are enumerated under #ection
,?1 of the 1991 LGC. $mong others, the Governor shall e2ercise general suervision and
control over all rograms, ro4ects, services, and activities of the rovincial government)
enforce all la3s and ordinances relative to the governance of the rovince) reresent the
rovince in all its !usiness transactions and sign in its !ehalf all !onds, contracts, and
o!ligations, and such other documents uon authorit- of the sangguniang anlala3igan
or ursuant to la3 or ordinance) ensure that all e2ecutive oIcials and emlo-ees of the
rovince faithfull- discharge their duties and functions as rovided !- la3 and the 1991
LGC) ensure that the acts of the comonent cities and municialities of the rovince and
of its oIcials and emlo-ees are 3ithin the scoe of their rescri!ed o3ers, duties and
7+88
functions) and ensure that all ta2es and other revenues of the rovince are collected, and
that rovincial funds are alied to the a-ment of e2enses and settlement of
o!ligations of the rovince, in accordance 3ith la3 or ordinance.
+. 'he o3ers and resonsi!ilities of the Cit-L0unicial 0a-or are listed under #ections ,11
and ,,, of the 1991 LGC, resectivel-. $mong others, the 0a-or shall e2ercise general
suervision and control over all rograms, ro4ects, services, and activities of the
municial government) enforce all la3s and ordinances relative to the governance of the
municialit-) uon authori=ation !- the sangguniang anglungsodL!a-an, reresent the
municialit- in all its !usiness transactions and sign on its !ehalf all !onds, contracts,
and o!ligations, and such other documents made ursuant to la3 or ordinance) ensure
that all e2ecutive oIcials and emlo-ees of the cit-Lmunicialit- faithfull- discharge
their duties and functions) solemni=e marriages) ensure that the acts of the
cit-Lmunicialit-Vs comonent !aranga-s and of its oIcials and emlo-ees are 3ithin the
scoe of their rescri!ed o3ers, functions, duties and resonsi!ilities) issue licenses
and ermits and susend or revo>e the same for an- violation of the conditions uon
3hich said licenses or ermits had !een issued, ursuant to la3 or ordinance) and ensure
the deliver- of !asic services and the rovision of ade9uate facilities.
,. 'he o3ers and resonsi!ilities of the .unong Faranga- are enumerated under #ection
+89 of the 1991 LGC. $mong others, the .unong Faranga- shall enforce of all la3s and
ordinances 3hich are alica!le 3ithin the !aranga-) romote the general 3elfare of the
!aranga-) negotiate, enter into, and sign contracts for and in !ehalf of the !aranga-,
uon authori=ation of the sangguniang !aranga-) maintain u!lic order in the !aranga-)
call and reside over the sessions of the sangguniang !aranga- and the !aranga-
assem!l-, and vote onl- to !rea> a tie) uon aroval !- a ma4orit- of all the mem!ers
of the sangguniang !aranga-, aoint or relace the !aranga- treasurer, the !aranga-
secretar-, and other aointive !aranga- oIcials) administer the oeration of the
>atarungang am!aranga-) and e2ercise general suervision over the activities of the
sangguniang >a!ataan.
"o#er to Appoint
1. 'he Local Chief B2ecutive and the Jice:Local Chief B2ecutive have the o3er to aoint.
1.1 $s a general rule, aointments made !- defeated local candidates after the
elections are rohi!ited to avoid animosities !et3een outgoing and incoming
oIcials, to allo3 the incoming administration a free hand in imlementing its
olicies, and to ensure that aointments and romotions are not used as
tools for olitical atronage or as re3ard for services rendered to the outgoing
local oIcials. Mo3ever, such aointments ma- !e allo3ed if the follo3ing
re9uisites concur relative to their issuance( (1) 'he aointment has gone
through the regular screening !- the .ersonnel #election Foard (.#F) !efore
the rohi!ited eriod on the issuance of aointments as sho3n !- the .#F
reort or minutes of its meeting) (*) 'he aointee is 9uali&ed) (+) 'here is a
need to &ll u the vacanc- immediatel- in order not to re4udice u!lic service
andLor endanger u!lic safet-) and (,) 'he aointment is not one of those
mass aointments issued after the elections (6a=areno vs. Cit- of
Eumaguete, G./. 6o. 1?8,8,, Aul- 1*, *@@7).
7+98
1.* Dhere a municial ma-or orders the susension or dismissal of a municial
emlo-ee on grounds heLshe !elieves to !e roer, !ut hisLher order is
reversed or nulli&ed !- the Civil #ervice Commission or the Court of $eals,
heLshe has the right to contest such adverse ruling. MisLher right to aeal
Qo3s from the fact that hisLher o3er to aoint carries 3ith it the o3er to
remove. Feing chief e2ecutive of the municialit-, heLshe ossesses this
discilinar- o3er over aointive municial oIcials and emlo-ees
(Eagadag vs. 'ongna3a, G./. 6o. 1?11??:?7, Ce!ruar- @+, *@@1).
1.+ 'he cit- legal oIcer has no discilinar- authorit- over the chief of the Legal
$Hairs and Comlaint #ervices of the Eivision of Cit- #chools. 5nasmuch as
the said oIcial 3as aointed !- and is a su!ordinate of the regional director
of the Eeartment of Bducation, Culture and #orts, heLshe is su!4ect to the
suervision and control of said director ($guirre vs. Ee Castro, G./. 6o.
1*7?+1, Eecem!er 17, 1999).
*an on +oldin Dual "ositions
1. 6o (local) elective oIcial shall !e eligi!le for aointment or designation in an- caacit-
to an- u!lic oIce or osition during hisLher tenure (#ection 77!8, $rticle 5%7F8, 1987
Constitution).
1.1 $ cit- ma-or cannot !e aointed to the osition of chairerson of the #u!ic
Fa- 0etroolitan $uthorit- since such oIce is not an e2:oIcio ost or
attached to the oIce of the ma-or. 'his rovision e2resses the olic-
against the concentration of several u!lic ositions in one erson, so that a
u!lic oIcer or emlo-ee ma- serve full:time 3ith dedication and thus !e
eIcient in the deliver- of u!lic services (Clores vs. Erilon, G./. 6o. 1@,7+*,
Aune **, 199+).
1.* .ursuant to #ection 7(8), $rticle 55 of the Guidelines in the Conduct of Blectric
Cooerative Eistrict Blections, e2:oIcio sanggunian mem!ers are dis9uali&ed
from !ecoming !oard mem!ers of electric cooeratives (6ational
Blectri&cation $dministration vs. Jillanueva, G./. 6o. 1?8*@+, 0arch 9, *@1@).
,acancies
1. 'here are ermanent and temorar- causes of vacancies in local elective ositions under
the 1991 LGC. 'he grounds are(
.ermanent 'emorar-
Eeath
Joluntar- resignation
Conviction
B2iration of term
.ermanent disa!ilit-
Cills a higher vacant oIce
/efuses to assume oIce
Cails to 9ualif-
Leave of a!sence
'ravel a!road
#usension from oIce
.reventive susension
#ic>ness
'emorar- disa!ilit-
7,@8
/emoved from oIce
Cailure of elections
1.1 Dhere a ermanent vacanc- occurs due to dis9uali&cation in the oIce of
ma-or, the roclaimed vice:ma-or shall succeed as ma-or, ursuant to
#ection ,, of the 1991 LGC (.undaoda-a vs. Commission on Blections, G./.
6o. 179+1+, #etem!er 17, *@@9).
1.* Dhen a ma-or is ad4udged to !e dis9uali&ed, a ermanent vacanc- 3as
created for failure of the elected ma-or to 9ualif- for the oIce. 5n such
eventualit-, the dul- elected vice ma-or shall succeed as rovided !- la3. 'he
second lacer cannot !e declared as ma-or ('oral Sare vs. Comelec, G./. 6os.
1171*? L 1171*7, $ril *8, *@@,).
1.+ 5n case there is a ermanent vacanc- caused !- a sanggunian mem!er
!elonging to a olitical art-, it shall !e the .resident acting through the
e2ecutive secretar- 3ho shall aoint the relacement, uon the certi&cation
and nomination of the olitical art- from 3here the relaced mem!er comes
from, for the sangguniang anlala3igan and sangguniang anglungsod of a
highl- ur!ani=ed or indeendent comonent cit-. Cor the sangguniang
anglungsod of comonent cities and it shall !e the governor 3ho shall ma>e
the aointment uon the certi&cation and nomination of the olitical art-
from 3here the relaced mem!er comes from. 5n case the vacanc- is caused
!- a mem!er 3ho does not come from an- olitical art-, aointment shall
!e done !- the oIcials mentioned uon the recommendation of the
sanggunian concerned, 3ithout, ho3ever, need of the nomination or
certi&cation from an- olitical art-. Cor sangguniang !aranga- mem!ers, it is
the ma-or 3ho aoints uon recommendation of the sangguniang !aranga-
(Carinas vs. Far!a, G./. 6o. 11?7+, $ril 19, 199?).
1., 5n case of vacanc- in the sangguniang !a-an, the nominee of the art- under
3hich the mem!er concerned 3as elected and 3hose elevation to the higher
osition created the last vacanc- 3ill !e aointed. 'he last vacanc- refers to
that created !- the elevation of the councilor as vice:ma-or. 'he reason
!ehind the rule is to maintain art- reresentation (6avarro vs. Court of
$eals, G./. 6o. 1,1+@7, 0arch *8, *@@1).
1.1 Cor uroses of succession in the &lling u of vacancies under #ection ,, of
1991 LGC, the ran>ing in the sanggunian shall !e determined on the !asis of
the roortion of votes o!tained !- each 3inning candidates to the total
num!er of registered voters in each district in the immediatel- receding local
election, not the num!er of voters 3ho actuall- voted (Jictoria vs. Comelec,
G./. 6o. 1@9@@1, Aanuar- 1@, 199,).
1.? 'he highest:ran>ing municial councilorRs succession to the oIce of vice:
ma-or cannot !e considered a voluntar- renunciation of hisLher oIce as
councilor since it occurred !- oeration of la3 (0onte!on vs. Comelec, G./.
6o. 18@,,,, $ril @8, *@@8).
1.7 /esignations !- sangguniang anlala3igan mem!ers must su!mit their letters
of resignation to the .resident or to hisLher alter ego, the #ecretar- of the
7,18
5nterior and Local Government. 'he letter must !e su!mitted, received and
acted uon !- the suervising oIcials, other3ise, there 3as no valid and
comlete resignation (#angguniang Fa-an of #an $ndres vs. Court of $eals,
G./. 6o. 11888+, Aanuar- 1?, 1998).
1.8 Dhen the Jice:Governor e2ercises the o3ers and duties of the <Ice of the
Governor, heLshe does not assume the latter oIce. MeLshe onl- acts as the
Governor !ut does not W!ecomeR the Governor. MisLher assumtion of the
o3ers of the rovincial Chief B2ecutive does not create a ermanent vacuum
or vacanc- in hisLher osition as the Jice:Governor. Fut heLshe does
temoraril- relin9uish the o3ers of the Jice:Governor, including the o3er to
reside over the sessions of the sangguniang anlala3igan (Gam!oa vs.
$guirre, et. al., G./. 6o. 1+,*1+, Aul- *@, 1999).
1.9 $!sence should !e reasona!l- construed to mean WeHectiveR a!sence, i.e., one
that renders the oIcer concerned o3erless, for the time !eing, to discharge
the o3ers and rerogatives of hisLher oIce. 'here is no vacanc- 3henever
the oIce is occuied !- a legall- 9uali&ed incum!ent. $ sensu contrario,
there is a vacanc- 3hen there is no erson la3full- authori=ed to assume and
e2ercise at resent the duties of the oIce (Gam!oa vs. $guirre, et. al., G./.
6o. 1+,*1+, Aul- *@, 1999).
Part 2. ACCO,NTABILIT1 O3 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ,NIT" AN5 O33ICIAL"
Sua-ility and Lia-ility
1. LGUs have the o3er to sue and !e sued (#ection ** 7a87*8, 1991 LGC). Fecause of the
statutor- 3aiver, LGUs are not immune from suit.
*. LGUs and their oIcials are not e2emt from lia!ilit- for death or in4ur- to ersons or
damage to roert- (#ection *,, 1991 LGC).
+. 'he test of lia!ilit- of the municialit- deends on 3hether or not the driver, acting on
!ehalf of the municialit-, is erforming governmental or rorietar- functions. 'he
distinction of o3ers !ecomes imortant for uroses of determining the lia!ilit- of the
municialit- for the acts of its agents 3hich result in an in4ur- to third ersons. Under the
198+ Local Government Code, LGUs are e2emt from lia!ilit- 3hile in the erformance of
their oIcial functions. Eeliver- of sand and gravel for the construction of a municial
!ridge is in the e2ercise of the governmental caacit- of LGUs (0unicialit- of #an
Cernando, La Union vs. Cirme, G./. 6o. L:1*179, $ril 8, 1991). Under the 1991 LGC, the
distinction !et3een governmental and rorietar- o3ers has !een removed.
Lia-ility of Local Government Units
1. Dhen there is no malice or !ad faith that attended the illegal dismissal and refusal to
reinstate on the art of the municial oIcials, the- cannot !e held ersonall-
accounta!le for the !ac> salaries. 'he municial government should dis!urse funds to
7,*8
ans3er for the claims resulting from the dismissal (Civil #ervice Commission vs.
Gentallan, G./. 6o. 11*8++ 0a- @9, *@@1).
*. 'he LGU is lia!le for the illegal dismissal of an aointive emlo-ee and the aointment
in hisLher stead of another, a non:civil service eligi!le, 3hose salaries it thereafter aid.
'he dismissal !- the ma-or 3as con&rmed and rati&ed 3hen the cit- did not oose the
dismissal and the aointment (/egis, Ar. vs. <smeXa, Ar., G./. 6o. *?781, 0a- *+, 1991).
+. $n LGU is lia!le for in4uries sustained due to defective roads and manholes. Cor lia!ilit-
to arise under $rticle *189 of the Civil Code, o3nershi of the roads, streets, !ridges,
u!lic !uildings and other u!lic 3or>s is not a controlling factor, it !eing suIcient that
a rovince, cit- or municialit- has control or suervision thereof (0unicialit- of #an
Auan vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 1*19*@, $ugust 9, *@@1) Guilatco vs. Eaguan, G./.
6o. ?111?, 0arch *1, 1989).
,. 5nasmuch as the license for the esta!lishment of a coc>it is a mere rivilege 3hich can
!e susended at an- time !- cometent authorit-, the &2ing in a municial ordinance of
a distance of not less than t3o >ilometers !et3een one coc>it and another, is not
suIcient to 3arrant the annulment of such ordinance on the ground that it is artial,
even though it is re4udicial to an alread- esta!lished coc>it ($!ad vs. Bvangelista, G./.
6o. +888,, #etem!er *?, 19++).
Lia-ility of Local &)cials
1. 'he o3er of suervision is comati!le 3ith the o3er to disciline. 'he o3er to
disciline does not amount to e2ecutive control 3hich is roscri!ed under #ection, ,,
$rticle % of the 1987 Constitution.
1.1 'he .residentRs o3er of general suervision means no more than the o3er
of ensuring that la3s are faithfull- e2ecuted, or that su!ordinate oIcers act
3ithin the la3. #uervision is not incomati!le 3ith disciline. 'he o3er to
disciline and ensure that the la3s !e faithfull- e2ecuted must !e construed
to authori=e the .resident to order an investigation of the act or conduct of
local oIcials 3hen in hisLher oinion the good of the u!lic service so re9uires
(Aoson vs. 'orres, G./. 6o. 1+1*11, 0a- *@, 1998).
1.* Aurisdiction over administrative discilinar- actions against elective local
oIcials is lodged in t3o authorities( the Eiscilining $uthorit- and the
5nvestigating $uthorit-. 'he Eiscilinar- $uthorit- ma- constitute a #ecial
5nvestigating Committee in lieu of the #ecretar- of the 5nterior and Local
Government. Dith resect to a rovincial governor, the discilining $uthorit-
is the .resident of the .hiliines, 3hether acting !- himselfLherself or
through the B2ecutive #ecretar- (Aoson vs. 'orres, G./. 6o. 1+1*11, 0a- *@,
1998).
1.+ 'he #ecretar- of the 5nterior and Local Government is the 5nvestigating
$uthorit-, 3ho ma- act himselfL herself or constitute and 5nvestigating
Committee. 'he #ecretar- of the Eeartment, ho3ever, is not the e2clusive
5nvestigating $uthorit-. 5n lieu of the Eeartment #ecretar-, the Eiscilining
7,+8
$uthorit- ma- designate a #ecial 5nvestigating Committee (Aoson vs. 'orres,
G./. 6o. 1+1*11, 0a- *@, 1998).
*. 'he grounds for discilinar- action against local elective oIcials are( (1) Eislo-alt- to the
/eu!lic of the .hiliines) (*) Cula!le violation of the Constitution) (+) Eishonest-,
oression, misconduct in oIce, gross negligence, or dereliction of dut-) (,) Commission
of an- oHense involving moral turitude or an oHense unisha!le !- at least rision
ma-or) (1) $!use of authorit-) (?) Unauthori=ed a!sence for &fteen (11) consecutive
3or>ing da-s, e2cet in the case of mem!ers of the sangguniang anlala3igan,
sangguniang anlungsod, sangguniang !a-an, and sangguniang !aranga-) (7)
$lication for, or ac9uisition of, foreign citi=enshi or residence or the status of an
immigrant of another countr-) and (8) #uch other grounds as ma- !e rovided in 1991
LGC and other la3s (#ection ?@, 1991 LGC).
+. 'he !asis of administrative lia!ilit- diHers from criminal lia!ilit-. 'he urose of
administrative roceedings is mainl- to rotect the u!lic service, !ased on the time:
honored rincile that a u!lic oIce is a u!lic trust. <n the other hand, the urose of
the criminal rosecution is the unishment of crime. Mo3ever, the re:election of a u!lic
oIcial e2tinguishes onl- the administrative, !ut not the criminal, lia!ilit- incurred !-
himLher during hisLher revious term of oIce (Jalencia vs. #andigan!a-an, G./. 6o.
1,1++?, Aune *9, *@@,).
,. $n administrative oHense" means ever- act or conduct or omission 3hich amounts to,
or constitutes, an- of the grounds for discilinar- action (#alalima vs. Guingona, G./. 6o.
117189:9*, 0a- **, 199?).
,.1 $ municial ma-or, vice:ma-or and treasurer 3ere guilt- of t3o (*) counts of
violation of the $nti:Graft and Corrut .ractices $ct 3here the- >no3ingl-
simulated a !iddingLcanvassing in favor of the ma-orRs son (Ee Aesus, #r. vs.
#andigan!a-an, G./. 6os. 18*1+9:,@, Ce!ruar- *+, *@11).
,.* 'here are t3o modes !- 3hich a u!lic oIcer 3ho has a direct or indirect
&nancial or ecuniar- interest in an- !usiness, contract, or transaction ma-
violate #ection +(h) of the $nti:Graft and Corrut .ractices $ct. 'he &rst mode
is if in connection 3ith hisLher ecuniar- interest in an- !usiness, contract or
transaction, the u!lic oIcer intervenes or ta>es art in hisLher oIcial
caacit-. 'he second mode is 3hen heLshe is rohi!ited from having such
interest !- the Constitution or an- la3. $ ma-or relative to the issuance of a
license to oerate a coc>it 3hich heLshe o3ns cannot !e held lia!le under
the &rst mode since heLshe could not have intervened or ta>en art in hisLher
oIcial caacit- in the issuance of a coc>it license !ecause heLshe 3as not a
mem!er of the sangguniang !a-an. Under the 1991 LGC, the grant of a
license is a legislative act of the sanggunian. Mo3ever, the ma-or could !e
lia!le under the second mode. (Eomingo vs. #andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 1,9171
<cto!er *1, *@@1) 'eves vs. #andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 11,18*, Eecem!er 17,
*@@,).
,.+ Dhen the validit- of su!se9uent aointments to the osition of $ssistant Cit-
$ssessor has not !een challenged, the cit- ma-or 3ho aointed a erson to
serve in said osition had ever- right to assume in good faith that the one
3ho held the osition rior to the aointments no longer held the same.
'hus, the cit- ma-or is not lia!le for violation of #ections +(a) and +(e) of the
7,,8
$nti:Graft and Corrut .ractices $ct (/e-es vs. $tien=a, G./. 6o. 11**,+
#etem!er *+, *@@1).
,., 'o !e criminall- lia!le for violation of #ection +(e) of /.$. +@19, the in4ur-
sustained must have !een caused !- ositive or assive acts of manifest
artialit-, evident !ad faith, or gross ine2cusa!le negligence. #ince the #tate
$uditors even recommended that municial oIcials should not a- the claims
due to irregularities in the transactions and the atent nullit- of the same, it
cannot !e said that the in4ur- claimed to have !een sustained !- 3as caused
!- an- of oIcialsR overt acts (Cuentes vs. #andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 1?,??,,
Aul- *@, *@@?).
,.1 'he issuance of a certi&cation as to availa!ilit- of funds for the a-ment of the
3ages and salaries of local oIcials a3aiting aointment !- the Civil #ervice
Commission (C#C) is not a ministerial function of the cit- treasurer. #ince the
C#C has not -et aroved the aointment, there 3ere -et no services
erformed to sea> of, and there 3as -et no due and demanda!le o!ligation
($ltres vs. Bmleo, G./. 6o. 18@98?, Eecem!er 1@, *@@8).
,.? $ municial ma-or is mandated to a!ide !- the 1991 LGC 3hich directs that
e2ecutive oIcials and emlo-ees of the municialit- faithfull- discharge their
duties and functions as rovided !- la3. #uch dut- includes enforcing
decisions or &nal resolutions, orders or rulings of the Civil #ervice Commission
(C#C). (Jelasco vs. #andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 1?@991, Ce!ruar- *8, *@@1).
,.7 $ municial ma-or is not guilt- of violating #ection +(e) of the $nti:Graft and Corrut
.ractices $ct in issuing a 0emorandum reventing vendors 3ith 9uestiona!le lease
contracts from occu-ing mar>et stalls 3here the said 0emorandum alies
e9uita!l- to all a3ardees of lease contracts, and did not give an- un3arranted
!ene&t, advantage, or reference to an- articular rivate art- (.eole vs.
#andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 11+91*:71, $ugust *+, *@1@).
,.8 $ll heads of oIces have to rel- to a reasona!le e2tent on their su!ordinates
and on the good faith of those 3ho reare !ids, urchase sulies, or enter
into negotiations. $ u!lic oIcer cannot !e e2ected to ro!e records,
insect documents, and 9uestion ersons !efore heLshe signs vouchers
resented for hisLher signature unless there is some added reason 3h- heLshe
should e2amine each voucher in such detail. Dhen an e2cetional
circumstance e2ist 3hich should have rodded the oIcer, and if heLshe 3ere
out to rotect the interest of the municialit- heLshe s3ore to serve, heLshe is
e2ected go !e-ond 3hat hisLher su!ordinates reared or recommended
(Le-cano vs. Commission on $udit, G./. 6o. 11,??1, Ce!ruar- 1@, *@@?).
,.9 0unicial emlo-ees 3ere guilt- of falsi&cation of u!lic documents 3here
the- failed to disclose in their #tatements of $ssets and Lia!ilities (#$L6) their
relationshi 3ithin the fourth civil degree of consanguinit- and aInit- to the
municial ma-or 3ho aointed them to their ositions (Galeos vs. .eole,
G./. 6os. 17,7+@:+7 L 17,8,1:1*, Ce!ruar- 9, *@11).
,.1@ Dhen a comlaint merel- alleges that the dis!ursement for &nancial
assistance 3as neither authori=ed !- la3 nor 4usti&ed as a la3ful e2ense and
no la3 or ordinance 3as cited that rovided for an original aroriation of
7,18
the amount used for the &nancial assistance and that it 3as diverted from the
aroriation it 3as intended for, the comlaint is defective as it does not
rove technical malversation ('etangco vs. <m!udsman, G./. 6o. 11?,*7,
Aanuar- *@, *@@?).
,.11 $ candidateVs conviction !- &nal 4udgment of the crime of fencing is a crime
involving moral turitude 3hich dis9uali&es such a erson from elective u!lic
oIce under #ection ,@(a) of the 1991 LGC (Eela 'orre vs. Comelec, G./. 6o.
1*119*, Aul- 1, 199?).
,.1* $ u!lic oIcial, more eseciall- an elected one, should not !e onion s>inned.
#trict ersonal disciline is e2ected of an occuant of a u!lic oIce !ecause
a u!lic oIcial is a roert- of the u!lic (Na!ut vs. <m!udsman, G./. 6o.
111+@,, Aune 17, 199,).
,.1+ $ ma-or 3ho continues to erform the functions of the oIce desite the fact
that heLshe is under reventive susension usurs the authorit- of the <Ice
of the 0a-or and is lia!le for violation of #ection 1+ of the $nti:Graft and
Corrut .ractices $ct (0iranda vs. #andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 11,@98, Aul- *7,
*@@1).
Administrative "roceedins
1. $ veri&ed comlaint against an- erring local elective oIcial shall !e reared as follo3s(
(1) $ comlaint against an- elective oIcial of a rovince, a highl- ur!ani=ed cit-, an
indeendent comonent cit- or comonent cit- shall !e &led !efore the <Ice of the
.resident) (*) $ comlaint against an- elective oIcial of a municialit- shall !e &led
!efore the sangguniang anlala3igan 3hose decision ma- !e aealed to the <Ice of
the .resident) and (+) $ comlaint against an- elective !aranga- oIcial shall !e &led
!efore the sangguniang anlungsod or sangguniang !a-an concerned 3hose decision
shall !e &nal and e2ecutor (#ection ?1, 1991 LGC).
*. 5n administrative roceedings, rocedural due rocess siml- means the oortunit- to
e2lain oneRs side or the oortunit- to see> a reconsideration of the action or ruling
comlained of. .rocedural due rocess has !een recogni=ed to include the follo3ing( (1)
the right to actual or constructive notice of the institution of roceedings 3hich ma-
aHect a resondentRs legal rights) (*) a real oortunit- to !e heard ersonall- or 3ith
the assistance of counsel, to resent 3itnesses and evidence in oneRs favor, and to
defend oneRs rights) (+) a tri!unal vested 3ith cometent 4urisdiction and so constituted
as to aHord a erson charged administrativel- a reasona!le guarantee of honest- as 3ell
as imartialit-) and (,) a &nding !- said tri!unal 3hich is suorted !- su!stantial
evidence su!mitted for consideration during the hearing or contained in the records or
made >no3n to the arties aHected (Casimiro vs. 'andog, G./. 6o. 1,?1+7, Aune 8,
*@@1).
*.1 Under the 1991 LGC, an elective local oIcial must !e a citi=en of the
.hiliines. <ne 3ho claims that a local oIcial is not has the !urden of
roving hisLher claim. 5n administrative cases and etitions for dis9uali&cation,
the 9uantum of roof re9uired is su!stantial evidence (0atugas vs. Comelec,
G./. 6o. 1119,,, Aanuar- *@, *@@,).
7,?8
*.* 'he lac> of veri&cation in a letter:comlaint ma- !e 3aived, the defect not
!eing fatal. Jeri&cation is a formal, not 4urisdictional re9uisite (Aoson vs. 'orres,
G./. 6o. 1+1*11, 0a- *@, 1998).
*.+ Under #ection ?1 of the 1991 LGC, a comlaint against an- elective oIcial of
a municialit- shall !e &led !efore the sangguniang anlala3igan 3hose
decision ma- !e aealed to the <Ice of the .resident (Falindong vs.
Eacalos, G./. 6o. 11887,, 6ovem!er 1@, *@@,).
*., 'he voting follo3ing the deli!eration of the mem!ers of the sanggunian in
administrative cases does not constitute the decision unless this 3as
em!odied in an oinion reared !- one of them and concurred in !- the
ma4orit-. Until the- have signed the oinion and the decision is romulgated,
the councilors are free to change their votes. 6o notice of the session 3here a
decision of the sanggunian is to !e romulgated on the administrative case is
re9uired to !e given to the an-merson. 'he deli!eration of the sanggunian is
an internal matter (0alinao vs. /e-es, G./. 6o. 117?18, 0arch *9, 199?).
"enalties
1. <nl- the courts can remove a local elective oIcial.
1.1 'he /ules and /egulations 5mlementing the 1991 LGC, insofar as it vests
o3er on the discilining authorit-" to remove from oIce erring elective
local oIcials, is void. Local legislative !odies andLor the <Ice of the .resident
on aeal cannot validl- imose the enalt- of dismissal from service on
erring elective local oIcials. 5t is !e-ond cavil that the o3er to remove
erring elective local oIcials from service is lodged e2clusivel- 3ith the courts
(.a!lico vs. Jillaando, G./. 6o. 1,787@, Aul- +1, *@@*).
1.* 'he sangguniang !a-an is not emo3ered to remove an elective local oIcial
from oIce. #ection ?@ of the 1991 LGC conferred e2clusivel- on the courts
such o3er. 'hus, if the acts allegedl- committed !- a !aranga- oIcial are of
a grave nature and, if found guilt-, 3ould merit the enalt- of removal from
oIce, the case should !e &led 3ith the regional trial court (#angguniang
Faranga- of Eon 0ariano 0arcos, Fa-om!ong vs. .unong Faranga- 0artine=,
G./. 6o. 17@?*?, 0arch +, *@@8).
1.+ $ sangguniang anlala3igan ma- cause the removal of a municial ma-or
3ho did not aeal to the <Ice of the .resident 3ithin the reglementar-
eriod the decision removing himLher from oIce (/e-es vs. Comelec, G./. 6o.
1*@9@1, 0arch 7, 199?).
1., 'he .resident ma- susend an erring rovincial elected oIcial 3ho
committed several administrative oHenses for an aggregate eriod e2ceeding
si2 months rovided that each administrative oHense, the eriod of
susension does not e2ceed the ?:month limit (#alalima vs. Guingona, G./.
6o. 117189:9*, 0a- **, 199?).
7,78
"reventive Suspension
1. .reventive susension is merel- a reventive measure, a reliminar- ste in an
administrative investigation. 'his is not a enalt-.
*. 'he urose of the susension order is to revent the accused from using hisLher
osition and the o3ers and rerogatives of hisLher oIce to inQuence otential
3itnesses or tamer 3ith records 3hich ma- !e vital in the rosecution of the case
against himLher.

5f after such investigation, the charge is esta!lished and the erson
investigated is found guilt- of acts 3arranting hisLher susension or removal, then
heLshe is susended, removed or dismissed. 'his is the enalt-. 6ot !eing a enalt-, the
eriod 3ithin 3hich one is under reventive susension is not considered art of the
actual enalt- of susension. 'hus, service of the reventive susension cannot !e
credited as service of enalt- (;uim!o vs. Gervacio, G./. 6o. 111?*@, $ugust @9, *@@1).
+. $ reventive susension ma- !e imosed !- the discilinar- authorit- at an- time( (1)
after the issues are 4oined, i.e., resondent has &led an ans3er) (*) 3hen the evidence of
guilt is strong) and (+) given the gravit- of the oHenses, there is great ro!a!ilit- that
the resondent, 3ho continues to hold oIce, could inQuence the 3itnesses or ose a
threat to the safet- and integrit- of the records and other evidence. 'hese are the re:
re9uisites. Mo3ever, the failure of resondent to &le hisLher ans3er desite several
oortunities given himLher is construed as a 3aiver of hisLher right to resent evidence
in hisLher !ehalf. 5n this situation, a reventive susension ma- !e imosed even if an
ans3er has not !een &led (Aoson vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 1?@?1*, Ce!ruar- 1+,
*@@?).
+.1 'he rule under the <m!udsman $ct of 1989 is diHerent. <m!udsman $ct of
1989 does not re9uire that notice and hearing recede the reventive
susension of an erring oIcial. <nl- t3o re9uisites must concur to render the
reventive susension order valid. Cirst, there must a rior determination !-
the <m!udsman that the evidence of resondentRs guilt is strong. #econd, (1)
the oHense charged must involve dishonest-, oression, grave misconduct or
neglect in the erformance of dut-) (*) the charges 3ould 3arrant removal
from the service) or (+) the resondentRs continued sta- in the oIce ma-
re4udice the case &led against him (Cara!eo vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6os.
178@@@L 178@@+, Eecem!er ,, *@@9).
+.* #ection ?+ of the 1991 LGC 3hich rovides for a ?@:da- ma2imum eriod for
reventive susension for a single oHense does not govern reventive
susensions imosed !- the <m!udsman. Under the <m!udsman $ct, the
reventive susension shall continue until the case is terminated !- the <Ice
of the <m!udsman !ut not more than si2 months (0iranda vs.
#andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 11,@98, Aul- *7, *@@1).
+.+ Under the 1991 LGC, a single reventive susension of local elective oIcials
should not go !e-ond ?@ da-s. 'hus, the #andigan!a-an cannot reventivel-
susend a ma-or for 9@ da-s (/ios vs. #andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 1*991+
#etem!er *?, 1997).
,. Eirect recourse to the courts 3ithout e2hausting administrative remedies is not
ermitted. 'hus, a ma-or 3ho claims that the imosition of reventive susension !- the
governor 3as un4usti&ed and oliticall- motivated, should see> relief &rst from the
7,88
#ecretar- of the 5nterior and Local Government, not from the courts (Bsiritu vs. 0elgar,
G./. 6o. 1@@87,, Ce!ruar- 1+, 199*).
,.1 $ municial oIcial laced under reventive susension !- a sangguniang
anlala3igan must &le a motion for reconsideration !efore the said
sanggunian !efore &ling a etition for certiorari 3ith the Court of $eals
(Clores vs. #angguniang .anlala3igan of .amanga, G./. 6o. 119@**,
Ce!ruar- *+, *@@1).
,.* $ municial ma-or ma- &le !efore the Court of $eals a etition for
certiorari, instead of a etition for revie3 assailing the decision of the <Ice of
the .resident 3hich reinstates the reventive susension order issued !- the
rovincial governor. 'he secial civil action of certiorari is roer to correct
errors of 4urisdiction including the commission of grave a!use of discretion
amounting to lac> or e2cess of 4urisdiction. B2haustion of administrative
remedies ma- !e disensed 3ith 3hen ure 9uestions of la3 are involved
(Aoson vs. Court of $eals, G./. 6o. 1?@?1*, Ce!ruar- 1+, *@@?).
E.ect of $e/Election
1. $n administrative case has !ecome moot and academic as a result of the e2iration of
term of oIce of an elective local oIcial during 3hich the act comlained of 3as
allegedl- committed. .roceedings against resondent are therefor !arred !- hisLher re:
election (0alinao vs. /e-es, G./. 6o. 117?18, 0arch *9, 199?).
1.1 $ reelected local oIcial ma- not !e held administrativel- accounta!le for
misconduct committed during hisLher rior term of oIce. 'he rationale for this
holding is that 3hen the electorate ut himLher !ac> into oIce, it is resumed
that it did so 3ith full >no3ledge of hisLher life and character, including hisLher
ast misconduct. 5f, armed 3ith such >no3ledge, it still reelects himLher, then
such reelection is considered a condonation of hisLher ast misdeeds (Jalencia
vs. #andigan!a-an, G./. 6o. 1,1++?, Aune *9, *@@,).
1.* $ u!lic oIcial cannot !e removed for administrative misconduct committed
during a rior term since hisLher re:election to oIce oerates as a
condonation. 'o do other3ise 3ould !e to derive the eole of their right to
elect their oIcers. Dhen the eole have elected a erson to oIce, it must
!e assumed that the- did this 3ith >no3ledge of hisLher life and character
that the- disregarded or forgave hisLher fault, if heLshe had !een guilt- of an-
(#alalima vs. Guingona, G./. 6o. 117189:9*, 0a- **, 199?).
1.+ 'he electorateRs condonation of the revious administrative infractions of
reelected oIcials cannot !e e2tended to that of reaointed coterminous
emlo-ees. 5n the latterRs case, there is neither su!version of the sovereign
3ill nor disenfranchisement of the electorate to sea> of. 5t is the oulaceRs
3ill, not the 3him of the aointing authorit-, that could e2tinguish an
administrative lia!ilit- (#alum!ides vs. <Ice of the <m!udsman, G./.
6o.18@917, $ril *+, *@1@).
7,98
Part 4. PEOPLE>" PARTICIPATION
,enues for "opular "articipation
1. 'here are seven venues !- 3hich ordinar- citi=ens, non:governmental and eoleRs
organi=ations can articiate in local governance. 'hese are( (1) local secial !odies) (*)
rior mandator- consultation) (+) recall) (,) discilinar- action) (1) initiative and
referendum) (?) sectoral reresentation) and (7) artnershi and assistance.
"rior 0andatory Consultation
1. .rior to the imlementation of national ro4ects, the rior aroval !- the LGU and rior
consultation 3ith aHected sectors are re9uired (#ections and *7, 1991 LGC).
1.1 'he grant of an Bnvironmental Clearance Certi&cate !- the Eeartment of
Bnvironment and 6atural /esources in favor of 6ational .o3er Cororation of
the construction of a mooring facilit- does not violate #ections *? and *7 of
the 1991 LGC. 'he mooring facilit- itself is not environmentall- critical and
hence does not !elong to an- of the si2 t-es of ro4ects mentioned in the
la3. 'he ro4ects and rograms mentioned in #ection *7 should !e interreted
to mean ro4ects and rograms 3hose eHects are among those enumerated in
#ections *? and *7, to 3it, those that( (1) ma- cause ollution) (*) ma- !ring
a!out climatic change) (+) ma- cause the deletion of non:rene3a!le
resources) (,) ma- result in loss of cro land, rangeland, or forest cover) (1)
ma- eradicate certain animal or lant secies) and (?) other ro4ects or
rograms that ma- call for the eviction of a articular grou of eole residing
in the localit- 3here these 3ill !e imlemented. 5t is another matter if the
oeration of the o3er !arge is at issue (Fangus Cr- Cisherfol> Ei3ata
0ag!uhos vs. Lan=anas, G./. 6o. 1+1,,*, Aul- 1@, *@@+).
1.* 'he 1991 LGC re9uires conference 3ith the aHected communities of a
government ro4ect. 'hus, !efore the 6ational .o3er Cororation energi=es
and transmits high voltage electric current through its ca!les in connection
3ith .o3er 'ransmission .ro4ect 3hich could cause illnesses, the re9uirements
set forth in #ection *7 of the 1991 LGC must !e follo3ed (Mernande= vs.
6ational .o3er Cororation, G./. 6o. 1,1+*8, 0arch *+, *@@?).
1.+ Under the 1991 LGC, t3o re9uisites must !e met !efore a national ro4ect that
aHects the environmental and ecological !alance of local communities can !e
imlemented( rior consultation 3ith the aHected local communities, and rior
aroval of the ro4ect !- the aroriate sanggunian. $!sent either of these
mandator- re9uirements, the ro4ectRs imlementation is illegal. 'he
esta!lishment of a dumsiteLland&ll !- the national government and the
0etroolitan 0anila Eeveloment $uthorit- re9uires comliance 3ith these
re9uirements (.rovince of /i=al vs. B2ecutive #ecretar-, G./. 6o. 1*91,?,
Eecem!er 1+, *@@1).
1., 'he re9uirement of rior consultation and aroval under #ections *(c) and *7
of the 1991 LGC alies onl- to national rograms andLor ro4ects 3hich are
to !e imlemented in a articular local communit-. Lotto is neither a rogram
71@8
nor a ro4ect of the national government, !ut of a charita!le institution, the
.hiliine Charit- #3eesta>es <Ice. 'hough sanctioned !- the national
government, it is far:fetched to sa- that lotto falls 3ithin the contemlation of
the la3 (Lina, Ar. vs. .aGo, G./. 6o. 1*9@9+, $ugust +@, *@@1).
!nitiative and $eferendum
1. 'he voters have the o3er of initiative and referendum.
1.1 Local initiative is the legal rocess 3here!- the registered voters of an LGU
ma- directl- roose, enact, or amend an- ordinance (#ection 1*@, 1991
LGC).
1.* Local referendum is the legal rocess 3here!- the registered voters of the
LGUs ma- arove, amend or re4ect an- ordinance enacted !- the sanggunian
(#ection 1*?, 1991 LGC).
1.+ 5nitiative is resorted to or initiated !- the eole directl- either !ecause the
la3:ma>ing !od- fails or refuses to enact the la3, ordinance, resolution or act
that the- desire or !ecause the- 3ant to amend or modif- one alread-
e2isting. <n the other hand, in a local referendum, the la3:ma>ing !od-
su!mits to the registered voters of its territorial 4urisdiction, for aroval or
re4ection, an- ordinance or resolution 3hich is dul- enacted or aroved !-
such la3:ma>ing authorit- (#u!ic Fa- 0etroolitan $uthorit- vs. Comelec,
G./. 6o. 1*1,1?, #etem!er *?, 199?).
1., 'he alication of local initiatives e2tends to all su!4ects or matters 3hich are
3ithin the legal o3ers of the sanggunians to enact, 3hich undou!tedl-
includes ordinances and resolutions (Garcia vs. Comelec, G./. 6o. 111*+@,
#etem!er +@, 199,).
Local Special *odies
1. 'he local secial !odies are the develoment councils (#ection 1@?, 1991 LGC), school
!oards (#ection 98, 1991 LGC), health !oards (#ection 1@*, 1991 LGC), eace and order
councils (#ection 11?, 1991 LGC), and eoleRs la3 enforcement !oards (/.$. 6o. ?971).
.eoleRs and non:governmental organi=ations are reresented in these !odies.
"artners'ips and Assistance
1. Local governments shall romote the esta!lishment and oeration of eoleVs and non:
governmental organi=ations to !ecome active artners in the ursuit of local autonom-.
Local governments ma- rovide assistance to, &nancial or other3ise, and ma- enter into
artnershi and cooerative arrangements 3ith civil societ- grous, non:governmental
and eoleRs organi=ations (#ections +, :+?, 1991 LGC).
7118
$ecall
1. 'he o3er of recall or the o3er to remove a local elective oIcial for loss of con&dence
shall !e e2ercised !- the registered voters of an LGU to 3hich the local elective oIcial
su!4ect to such recall !elongs (#ection ?9, 1991 LGC).
1.1 /ecall is a mode of removal of u!lic oIcer !- the eole !efore the end of
hisLher term of oIce. 'he eoleRs rerogative to remove a u!lic oIcer is an
incident of their sovereign o3er and in the a!sence of an- Constitutional
restraint, the o3er is imlied in all governmental oerations. Loss of
con&dence as a ground for recall is a olitical 9uestion (Garcia vs. Comelec,
G./. 6o. 111111, <cto!er 1, 199+).
1.* 'he 1:-ear !an refers to election 3here the oIce held !- the local oIcial
sought to !e recalled shall !e contested. 'he scheduled !aranga- election on
0a- 1997 is not the regular election contemlated for uroses of comuting
the 1:-ear rohi!ition for recall of municial elective oIcials (Aariol vs.
Comelec, G./. 6o. 1*7,1?, 0arch *@, 1997).
1.+ 'he 1:-ear !an cannot !e deemed to al- to the entire recall roceedings.
'he limitations al- onl- to the e2ercise of the o3er of recall 3hich is
vested in the registered voters. #o, as long as the election is held outside the
one:-ear eriod, from assumtion to oIce the local oIcial sought to !e
recalled, the reliminar- roceedings to initiate a recall can !e held even
!efore the end of the &rst -ear in oIce of said local oIcial (Claudio vs.
Comelec, G./. 6o. 1,@1?@, 0a- ,, *@@@).
1., $ art- aggrieved !- the issuance of a Commission on Blection resolution
roviding for the schedule of activities for the recall of elective oIcials should
have &led, 3hen heLshe had suIcient time, a motion for reconsideration 3ith
the Commission ursuant to the rule on e2haustion of administrative remedies
(Aariol vs. Comelec, G./. 6o. 1*7,1?, 0arch *@, 1997).
*. Under the 1991 LGC, there are t3o modes of initiating recall( (1) oular etition !- the
voters) (*) resolution !- the .rearator- /ecall $ssem!l- comosed of elective oIcials
of the suervised:lo3er LGU. Under /.$. 6o. 9*,,, the second mode 3as reealed.
Sectoral $epresentatives
1. 'here shall !e three sectoral reresentatives in the rovincial, cit- and municial
legislative councils. 5n addition to the regular mem!ers, there shall !e one (1) sectoral
reresentative from the 3omen, one (1) from the 3or>ers, and one (1) from an- of the
follo3ing sectors( the ur!an oor, indigenous cultural communities, disa!led ersons, or
an- other sector as ma- !e determined !- the sanggunian concerned 3ithin ninet- (9@)
da-s rior to the holding of the ne2t local elections as ma- !e rovided for !- la3
(#ection ,1, 1991 LGC).
1.1 #ection 9 of the 1987 .hiliine Constitution rovides that legislative !odies
of local government shall have sectoral reresentation as ma- !e rescri!ed
!- la3". 'he hrase as ma- !e rescri!ed !- la3" does not and cannot, !-
its ver- 3ording, restrict itself to the uncertaint- of future legislation. #uch
71*8
interretation 3ould defeat the ver- urose of immediatel- including
sectoral reresentatives in the local la3:ma>ing !odies. <ther3ise, in the
interregnum, from the rati&cation of the Constitution until the assage of the
aroriate statute, the sectors 3ould have no voice in the formulation of
legislation that 3ould directl- aHect their individual mem!ers (#uangan vs.
#antos, G./. 6o. 8,??+, $ugust *,, 199@).
71+8