Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

DENR Administrative Order

No. 97-32
October 10, 1997

Grounds:

DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS - In administrative


proceedings conducted pursuant hereto, the following shall be
considered presumptions of fact and/or law and taken as part of the
evidence unless specifically controverted and successfully
overcome by a preponderance of evidence.

(a) All those apprehended on-site for direct or indirect


participation in the commission of the offense(s) cited had
full knowledge of and willingly participated therein;

(b) The registered owner and/or operator/driver of a


conveyance used in the commission of the offense had full
knowledge and willingly participated therein by providing
the conveyance for the illegal purpose to which said
conveyance was applied. In case the registered owner of the
conveyance is a partnership or corporation, the partners
and/or officers thereof had full knowledge of and granted
authorization or issued instructions for the use or
application of the conveyance in the commission of the
offense.

-------- Section 2. Grounds of and period for filing motion for reconsideration. Within the period
for taking an appeal, the aggrieved party may move for reconsideration upon the grounds
that the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order, or that the decision or
final order is contrary to law.

Section 3. Contents of motion for reconsideration and notice thereof. The motion shall be
made in writing stating the ground or grounds therefor, a written notice of which shall be
served by the movant on the adverse party.

A motion for reconsideration shall point out specifically the findings or conclusions of the
judgment or final order which are not supported by the evidence or which are contrary to
law, making express reference to the testimonial or documentary evidence or to provisions
of law alleged to be contrary to such findings or conclusions.

A pro forma motion for reconsideration shall not toll the reglementary period of appeal.
Section 14. No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly
and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based.

It must be stated that Section 14, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution need not apply to
decisions rendered in administrative proceedings, as in the case a[t] bar. Said section
applies only to decisions rendered in judicial proceedings. In fact, Article VIII is titled
“Judiciary,” and all of its provisions have particular concern only with respect to the
judicial branch of government. Certainly, it would be error to hold or even imply that
decisions of executive departments or administrative agencies are oblige[d] to meet the
requirements under Section 14, Article VIII.
The rights of parties in administrative proceedings are not violated as
long as the constitutional requirement of due process has been satisfied. In
the landmark case of Ang Tibay v. CIR, we laid down the cardinal rights of
parties in administrative proceedings, as follows:
1) The right to a hearing, which includes the right to present
one’s case and submit evidence in support thereof.
2) The tribunal must consider the evidence presented.
3) The decision must have something to support itself.
4) The evidence must be substantial.
5) The decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at
the hearing, or at least contained in the record and disclosed
to the parties affected.
6) The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its or his
own independent consideration of the law and facts of the
controversy and not simply accept the views of a
subordinate in arriving at a decision.
7) The board or body should, in all controversial question,
render its decision in such a manner that the parties to the
proceeding can know the various issues involved, and the
reason for the decision rendered.

As can be seen above, among these rights are “the decision must be
rendered on the evidence presented at the hearing, or at least contained in
the record and disclosed to the parties affected;” and that the decision be
rendered “in such a manner that the parties to the proceedings can know the
various issues involved, and the reasons for the decisions rendered.” Note
that there is no requirement in Ang Tibay that the decision must express
clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based. For as long as
the administrative decision is grounded on evidence, and expressed in a
manner that sufficiently informs the parties of the factual and legal bases of
the decision, the due process requirement is satisfied.

-------- Section 2. Grounds of and period for filing motion for reconsideration. Within the period
for taking an appeal, the aggrieved party may move for reconsideration upon the grounds
that the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order, or that the decision or
final order is contrary to law.

Section 3. Contents of motion for reconsideration and notice thereof. The motion shall be
made in writing stating the ground or grounds therefor, a written notice of which shall be
served by the movant on the adverse party.

A motion for reconsideration shall point out specifically the findings or conclusions of the
judgment or final order which are not supported by the evidence or which are contrary to
law, making express reference to the testimonial or documentary evidence or to provisions
of law alleged to be contrary to such findings or conclusions.

A pro forma motion for reconsideration shall not toll the reglementary period of appeal.
DENR Administrative Order
No. 97-32
October 10, 1997

DECISION — The Decision shall be rendered by the RED upon


recommendation of Hearing Officer. Substantial evidence shall
suffice to sustain an administrative Decision adverse to interested
Party(ies), failing which, a ruling shall be issued dismissing the
case, and the controversy deemed closed and ordering that the
seized item(s) be returned forthwith. When the evidence so warrants, a
ruling shall be issued declaring the seized items to be confiscated in
favor of the Government, together with
recommendations for further prosecution, if any.
In the absence of
compelling reasons, which shall in all cases be stated on the
record, confiscation proceedings shall be terminated within fifteen
(15) regular business days from commencement thereof. A
transcript of stenographic notes or minutes taken at these
proceedings shall form part of the permanent records of the case
together with the Decision issued thereon citing the evidence
adduced and reasons supporting the ruling. The Decision shall
become final and executory upon the lapse of fifteen (15) regular
business days unless a Motion for Reconsideration is filed as

provided below.