Demand-Letter Rjbs Enterprises
Demand-Letter Rjbs Enterprises
Demand-Letter Rjbs Enterprises
This has reference to your letter which we received on 20 December 2022, re-
questing the Department’s legal opinion concerning the proposed ordinance of the
Municipality of Aliaga, Nueva Ecija, entitled “AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING
THE WINNING ARGUMENT DEBATE-JUNIOR AND SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
EDITION, AUTHORIZING THE MUNICIPAL VICE MAYOR AND PRESIDING
OFFICER TO GRANT REWARDS AND PRIZES SUBJECT TO ACCOUNTING AND
AUDITING RULES AND PROCEDURES, APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND PRO-
VIVDING THE GUDIELINES THEREOF”.
Existing areas or portions which has a lope gradient greater than 15% should
not be recultivated 5 years after the effectivity of this ordinance
2. Section 11. Ban on Aerial Spraying- a ban on aerial spraying as an agricul-
tural practice in all agricultural entities shall be strictly enforced in the ter-
ritorial jurisdiction of Malaybalay City immediately after the effectivity of
this Ordinance;
3. Section 12. Non-Conversion of Irrigated and Irrigable Areas- To ensure
rice sufficiency, conversion of irrigated and irrigable area to Large Scale
Agri-Industrial Plantations is prohibited.
Upon the foregoing premises, the Filipino Banana Growers and Exporters Associa-
tion, Inc. (PGBEA) manifested its opposition thereto in its letter addressed to the
concerned Sanguniang Panlunsod on the grounds, inter alia, that the subject pro-
posed slope limitation are not grounded on actual farm practices; that the ban on
aerial spraying is unconstitutional; that the closure of agricultural plantations on ir-
rigated/irrigable farm lands is tantamount to unlawful taking; and that the Corpo-
rate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities must not be made mandatory;
In essence, is it this Department’s understanding that ultimately, herein issue
hinges on the validity and legality of the propsed ordinance.
Foremost, Local Government Units (LGU’s) like the Sanguniang Panlunsod of
… are vested by the Local Government Code of the power to legislate for the general
welfare of their constituents. Section 458 (a) of the Code provides, viz;
The Sanguniang panlunsod, as the legislative body of the city shall enact ordi-
nances, approve resolutions and appropriate funds for the general welfare of the city
and its inhabitants pursuant to section 16 of this Code and in the proper exercise of
the corporate powers of the city as provided for under Section 22 of this Code
Section 16 of the Code provides that:
“Every local government unit shall exercise the power expressly granted, those nec-
essarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental
for its efficient and effective governance, and those which are essential to the promo-
tion of general welfare. Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local govern-
ment units shall ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and en-
richment of culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right of the people to a
balanced ecology, encourgage and support the development of appropriate and self-
reliant scientific and technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance eco-
nomic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among their residents,
maintain peace and order, and presereve the comfort and convenience of their in-
habitants.”
To address the issue on the legality and validity of herein subject proposed
Ordinance, please be apprised that the Supreme Court (SC) had established a test in
determining the validity and constitutionality of a local ordiance. In the case of City
of Manila vs. Laguio, Jr. (GR No. 118127) the Sc had eludidated the same, thusly:
“xxx for an ordinance to be valid, it must not only be within the corporate
powers of the local government unit to enact and must be passed according to the
procedure prescribed by law, it must also conform to the following substantive re-
quirements: (1) must not contravene the Consitution or any Statute; (2) must not b
unfair or oppressive; (3) must not be partial or discriminatory’ (4) must not prohibit
but may regulate trade; (5) must be general and consistent with public policy; and
(6) must not be unreasonable.
Anent the first criterion, ordinances shall only be valid when they are not contrary to
the Consitution and to the Laws. The Ordinance must satisfy two requirements: it
must pass muster under the test of constitutionality and the test of consistency with
the prevailing laws. That ordinances shold be consitituional uphld the principle of
the Supremacy of the Constitution. The requirement that the enactment must no vio
Sincerely,