Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 954 views

    1 Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro (39 Phil. 660)

    Uploaded by

    A M I R A
    This case involves a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917, which authorizes provincial governors, with approval of the provincial board and Department Head, to direct non-Christian inhabitants to relocate to designated sites for reasons of law and order. The petitioners argue this constitutes an unlawful delegation of legislative power. The Court held that the legislature has merely conferred authority on the provincial government to execute the law, not make the law, which does not violate the non-delegation doctrine. As local authorities are better positioned to determine suitable living sites, this delegation was necessary and did not deprive liberties without due process. Therefore, Section 2145 does not constitute an unlawful delegation of power and is constitutional.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    1 Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro (39 Phil. 660)

    Uploaded by

    A M I R A
    954 views3 pages
    This case involves a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917, which authorizes provincial governors, with approval of the provincial board and Department Head, to direct non-Christian inhabitants to relocate to designated sites for reasons of law and order. The petitioners argue this constitutes an unlawful delegation of legislative power. The Court held that the legislature has merely conferred authority on the provincial government to execute the law, not make the law, which does not violate the non-delegation doctrine. As local authorities are better positioned to determine suitable living sites, this delegation was necessary and did not deprive liberties without due process. Therefore, Section 2145 does not constitute an unlawful delegation of power and is constitutional.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917, which authorizes provincial governors, with approval of the provincial board and Department Head, to direct non-Christian inhabitants to relocate to designated sites for reasons of law and order. The petitioners argue this constitutes an unlawful delegation of legislative power. The Court held that the legislature has merely conferred authority on the provincial government to execute the law, not make the law, which does not violate the non-delegation doctrine. As local authorities are better positioned to determine suitable living sites, this delegation was necessary and did not deprive liberties without due process. Therefore, Section 2145 does not constitute an unlawful delegation of power and is constitutional.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    954 views3 pages

    1 Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro (39 Phil. 660)

    Uploaded by

    A M I R A
    This case involves a challenge to the constitutionality of Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917, which authorizes provincial governors, with approval of the provincial board and Department Head, to direct non-Christian inhabitants to relocate to designated sites for reasons of law and order. The petitioners argue this constitutes an unlawful delegation of legislative power. The Court held that the legislature has merely conferred authority on the provincial government to execute the law, not make the law, which does not violate the non-delegation doctrine. As local authorities are better positioned to determine suitable living sites, this delegation was necessary and did not deprive liberties without due process. Therefore, Section 2145 does not constitute an unlawful delegation of power and is constitutional.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    No.

    EN BANC
    G.R. No. L-14078; March 7, 1919; 39 Phil 660

    RUBI, ET AL. (manguianes), plaintiffs, 


    vs.
    THE PROVINCIAL BOARD OF MINDORO, defendant.

    D. R. Williams & Filemon Sotto for plaintiff.


    Office of the Solicitor-General Paredes for defendant.

    Constitutional Law: Article VI, Sec. 1(Legislative Power; Non-Delegation)

    Malcom J.;

    FACTS:
    The case is an application for habeas corpus in favor of Rubi and other
    Manguianes of the Province of Mindoro. It is alleged that the Maguianes are being
    illegally deprived of their liberty by the provincial officials of that province. Rubi and his
    companions are said to be held on the reservation established at Tigbao, Mindoro,
    against their will, and one Dabalos is said to be held under the custody of the provincial
    sheriff in the prison at Calapan for having run away from the reservation.
      The provincial governor of Mindoro and the provincial board thereof directed the
    Manguianes in question to take up their habitation in Tigbao, a site on the shore of Lake
    Naujan, selected by the provincial governor and approved by the provincial board. The
    action was taken in accordance with section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917,
    and was duly approved by the Secretary of the Interior as required by said action.

    Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917 reads as follows:

    SEC. 2145. Establishment of non-Christian upon sites selected by provincial governor.


    — With the prior approval of the Department Head, the provincial governor of any
    province in which non-Christian inhabitants are found is authorized, when such a course
    is deemed necessary in the interest of law and order, to direct such inhabitants to take
    up their habitation on sites on unoccupied public lands to be selected by him an
    approved by the provincial board.

    Petitioners, however, challenge the validity of this section of the Administrative Code.
    This, therefore, becomes the paramount question which the court is called upon to
    decide.

    ISSUE:
    Does section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917 constitute an unlawful delegation
    of legislative power by the Philippine Legislature to a provincial official and a department
    head, therefore making it unconstitutional?
    No. 1

    HELD:
      No. The Philippine Legislature has here conferred authority upon the Province of
    Mindoro, to be exercised by the provincial governor and the provincial board. In
    determining whether the delegation of legislative power is valid or not, the distinction is
    between the delegation of power to make the law, which necessarily involves a
    discretion as to what it shall be, and conferring an authority or discretion as to its
    execution, to be exercised under and in pursuance of the law. The first cannot be done;
    to the later no valid objection can be made. Discretion may be committed by the
    Legislature to an executive department or official. The Legislature may make decisions
    of executive departments of subordinate official thereof, to whom it has committed the
    execution of certain acts, final on questions of fact. The growing tendency in the
    decision is to give prominence to the "necessity" of the case.
    In enacting the said provision of the Administrative Code, the Legislature merely
    conferred upon the provincial governor, with the approval of the provincial board and the
    Department Head, discretionary authority as to the execution of the law. This is
    necessary since the provincial governor and the provincial board, as the official
    representatives of the province, are better qualified to judge “when such as course is
    deemed necessary in the interest of law and order”. As officials charged with the
    administration of the province and the protection of its inhabitants, they are better fitted
    to select sites which have the conditions most favorable for improving the people who
    have the misfortune of being in a backward state.

    WHEREFORE, the action pursuant to section 2145 of the Administrative Code does not
    deprive a person of his liberty without due process of law and does not deny to him the
    equal protection of the laws, and that confinement in reservations in accordance with
    said section does not constitute slavery and involuntary servitude. The Court further of
    the opinion that section 2145 of the Administrative Code is a legitimate exertion of the
    police power, somewhat analogous to the Indian policy of the United States. Section
    2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917 is constitutional. Hence, Section 2145 of the
    Administrative Code of 1917 is not an unlawful delegation of legislative power by the
    Philippine Legislature to provincial official and a department head.

    Petitioners are not unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of their liberty. Habeas corpus
    can, therefore, not issue. This is the true ruling of the court. Costs shall be taxes against
    petitioners. So ordered.

    RATIO: Delegation of Legislative Powers to Local Governments. An exception to the


    general rule against the delegation of legislative power sanctioned by immemorial
    practice permits the central legislative body to make such delegation to local authorities.

    "Necessary in the interest of law and order" is a standard held sufficient.


    No. 1

    You might also like