12. araneta vs gatmaitan

2
12. SALVADOR A. A RANETA vs HON. MAGNO S. GATMAITAN FACTS: The League of Municipal Mayors of municipalities near the San Miguel Bay, et!een the pro"inces of Camarines Sur an# Camarines $orte, manifeste# in a resolution that they con#emn the operation of tra!ls in the sai# area an# resol"ing to petition the %resi#e nt of the %hilippine s to regulate fishin g in San Miguel Bay. &n another resolution, the same League of Mayors praye# that the %resi#en t an the operation of tra!ls in the San Miguel Bay Area. &n response to the pleas, the %resi#ent issue# '( 22 prohiiting the use of tra!ls in the Sa n Mi gu el Ba y ut th e '( !as amen #e # y '( )) apparent ly in an s! er to a resolution of the %ro"incial Boar# of Camarines Sur recommen#ing the allo!ance of tra!l*fishing #uring the typhoon season only. Suse+uently, '( - !as issue# re"i"ing '( 22. Thereafter, a group of tra!l operators file# a complaint for inunction praying that the Secreta ry of Agriculture an# $atural /esourc es an# 0irector of Fisherie s e enoine# from forcing sai# eecuti"e or#ers an# to #eclare them null an# "oi#. The court hel# that until the tra!ler is outla! e# y legislat i"e enactment, it cannot e anne# from San Miguel Bay y eecuti"e proclamation an# hel# that the sai# '(s as in"ali#. &SS'3S: 4hether or not the '(s 22, )) an# - issue# y the %resi#ent !ere "ali#5 6'L0: 7es. By "irtue of the %resi#ent8s constitutional po!er of control , he can eercise the rule*ma9i ng po!er conf erre# upon his suor #inates in the ee cuti"e #epartment. The  ustifica tion is that !hate" er is enoy e# y them shoul# also e #eeme# "este# in the %resi#ent, !ho can eercise them !ith more authority an# legal force. &f un#er the Fish ery La!, the Secr etary of Agric ulture has aut hority to regul ate or an fishing y tra!l, then the %resi#ent may eercise the same po!er an# authority ecause of the follo!ing: 1. 6e has cont rol of the eecuti" e #ep ar tment s , ureaus or of fices Constitution; 2. '(s ma y e is sue # y the %resi# ent un#er Sec )< of th e /e" is e#  A#minist rati"e Co#e go"ern ing the general performa nce of #uties y pulic employees or #isposing of issues of general concern <. n# er Sec => of the /e"i se# A# minis trat i"e Co# e, all eec uti" e functi ons of the ?o"ernment of the /epulic of the %hilippines shall e #irectly un#er the ' ecu ti" e 0ep art ment, su e ct to the sup er "is ion an# control of the %resi#ent of the %hilippines in matters of ge neral policy

Upload: joan-cruz

Post on 03-Jun-2018

229 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 12. Araneta vs Gatmaitan

 

12. SALVADOR A. ARANETA vs HON. MAGNO S. GATMAITAN

FACTS:

The League of Municipal Mayors of municipalities near the San Miguel Bay, et!eenthe pro"inces of Camarines Sur an# Camarines $orte, manifeste# in a resolution thatthey con#emn the operation of tra!ls in the sai# area an# resol"ing to petition the%resi#ent of the %hilippines to regulate fishing in San Miguel Bay. &n another resolution,the same League of Mayors praye# that the %resi#ent an the operation of tra!ls in theSan Miguel Bay Area.

&n response to the pleas, the %resi#ent issue# '( 22 prohiiting the use of tra!ls in theSan Miguel Bay ut the '( !as amen#e# y '( )) apparently in ans!er to aresolution of the %ro"incial Boar# of Camarines Sur recommen#ing the allo!ance oftra!l*fishing #uring the typhoon season only. Suse+uently, '( - !as issue# re"i"ing'( 22. Thereafter, a group of tra!l operators file# a complaint for inunction praying thatthe Secretary of Agriculture an# $atural /esources an# 0irector of Fisheries eenoine# from forcing sai# eecuti"e or#ers an# to #eclare them null an# "oi#. The courthel# that until the tra!ler is outla!e# y legislati"e enactment, it cannot e anne# fromSan Miguel Bay y eecuti"e proclamation an# hel# that the sai# '(s as in"ali#.

&SS'3S: 4hether or not the '(s 22, )) an# - issue# y the %resi#ent !ere "ali#5

6'L0:

7es. By "irtue of the %resi#ent8s constitutional po!er of control , he can eercise therule*ma9ing po!er conferre# upon his suor#inates in the eecuti"e #epartment. The ustification is that !hate"er is enoye# y them shoul# also e #eeme# "este# in the%resi#ent, !ho can eercise them !ith more authority an# legal force.

&f un#er the Fishery La!, the Secretary of Agriculture has authority to regulate or anfishing y tra!l, then the %resi#ent may eercise the same po!er an# authority ecauseof the follo!ing:

1. 6e has control of the eecuti"e #epartments , ureaus or officesConstitution;

2. '(s may e issue# y the %resi#ent un#er Sec )< of the /e"ise# A#ministrati"e Co#e go"erning the general performance of #uties y pulicemployees or #isposing of issues of general concern

<. n#er Sec => of the /e"ise# A#ministrati"e Co#e, all eecuti"e functions ofthe ?o"ernment of the /epulic of the %hilippines shall e #irectly un#er the'ecuti"e 0epartment, suect to the super"ision an# control of the%resi#ent of the %hilippines in matters of general policy

Page 2: 12. Araneta vs Gatmaitan