imbong vs ochoa

16
7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 1/16 Imbong vs ochoa *SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES:  A. Whether or not (WON) RA 10354/Reproductive Health (RH) La i! uncon!titutional "or violatin# the$ 1. Ri#ht to li"e %. Ri#ht to health 3. &reedo' o" reli#ion and ri#ht to "ree !peech a.) WON the RH La violate! the #uarantee o" reli#iou! "reedo' !ince it 'andate! the tate!pon!ored procure'ent o" contraceptive!* hich contravene the reli#iou! +elie"! o" e.#. the petitioner! +.) WON the RH La violate! the #uarantee o" reli#iou! "reedo' +, co'pellin# 'edical health practitioner!* ho!pital!* and health care provider!* under pain o" penalt,* to re"er patient! to other in!titution! de!pite their con!cientiou! o+-ection! c.) WON the RH La violate! the #uarantee o" reli#iou! "reedo' +, reuirin# ould+e !pou!e!* a! a condition "or the i!!uance o" a 'arria#e licen!e* to attend a !e'inar on parenthoo d* "a'il, plannin#* +rea!t"eedin# and in"ant nutrition 4. Ri#ht to privac, ('arital privac, and autono',) 5. &reedo' o" epre!!ion and acade'ic "reedo' . ue proce!! clau!e 2. ual protection clau!e . rohi+ition a#ain!t involuntar, !ervitude 6. WON the dele#ation o" authorit, to the &ood and ru# Ad'ini!tration (&A) to deter'ine WON a !uppl, or product i! to +e included in the !!ential ru#! Li!t i! valid 7. WON the RH La in"rin#e! upon the poer! devolved to Local 8overn'ent! and the Autono'ou! Re#ion in 9u!li' 9indanao (AR99)

Upload: abethzkyyyy

Post on 10-Jan-2016

223 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

digest

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 1/16

Imbong vs ochoa

*SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES:

 A. Whether or not (WON) RA 10354/Reproductive Health (RH) La i! uncon!titutional "or violatin# the$

1. Ri#ht to li"e

%. Ri#ht to health

3. &reedo' o" reli#ion and ri#ht to "ree !peech

a.) WON the RH La violate! the #uarantee o" reli#iou! "reedo' !ince it 'andate! the tate!pon!ored

procure'ent o" contraceptive!* hich contravene the reli#iou! +elie"! o" e.#. the petitioner!

+.) WON the RH La violate! the #uarantee o" reli#iou! "reedo' +, co'pellin# 'edical health

practitioner!* ho!pital!* and health care provider!* under pain o" penalt,* to re"er patient! to other 

in!titution! de!pite their con!cientiou! o+-ection!

c.) WON the RH La violate! the #uarantee o" reli#iou! "reedo' +, reuirin# ould+e !pou!e!* a! a

condition "or the i!!uance o" a 'arria#e licen!e* to attend a !e'inar on parenthood* "a'il, plannin#*

+rea!t"eedin# and in"ant nutrition

4. Ri#ht to privac, ('arital privac, and autono',)

5. &reedo' o" epre!!ion and acade'ic "reedo'

. ue proce!! clau!e

2. ual protection clau!e

. rohi+ition a#ain!t involuntar, !ervitude

6. WON the dele#ation o" authorit, to the &ood and ru# Ad'ini!tration (&A) to deter'ine WON a

!uppl, or product i! to +e included in the !!ential ru#! Li!t i! valid

7. WON the RH La in"rin#e! upon the poer! devolved to Local 8overn'ent! and the Autono'ou!

Re#ion in 9u!li' 9indanao (AR99)

Page 2: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 2/16

* HELD:

 A.

1. NO.

%. NO.

3.

a.) NO.

+.) :.

c.) NO.

4. :.

5. NO.

. NO.

2. NO.

. NO.

6. NO.

7. NO.

* RATIO:

1.) 9a-orit, o" the 9e'+er! o" the 7ourt +elieve that the ue!tion o" hen li"e +e#in! i! a !cienti"ic and

'edical i!!ue that !hould not +e decided* at thi! !ta#e* ithout proper hearin# and evidence. Hoever*

the, a#reed that individual 9e'+er! could epre!! their on vie! on thi! 'atter.

 Article ;;* ection 1% o" the 7on!titution !tate!$ <=he tate reco#ni>e! the !anctit, o" "a'il, li"e and !hall

protect and !tren#then the "a'il, a! a +a!ic autono'ou! !ocial in!titution. ;t !hall euall, protect the li"e

o" the 'other and the li"e o" the un+orn "ro' conception.?

Page 3: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 3/16

;n it! plain and ordinar, 'eanin# (a canon in !tatutor, con!truction)* the traditional 'eanin# o" 

<conception? accordin# to reputa+le dictionarie! cited +, the ponente i! that li"e +e#in! at "ertili>ation.

9edical !ource! al!o !upport the vie that conception +e#in! at "ertili>ation.

=he "ra'er! o" the 7on!titution al!o intended "or (a) <conception? to re"er to the 'o'ent o" <"ertili>ation?

and (+) the protection o" the un+orn child upon "ertili>ation. ;n addition* the, did not intend to +an all

contraceptive! "or +ein# uncon!titutional@ onl, tho!e that ill or de!tro, the "ertili>ed ovu' ould +e

prohi+ited. 7ontraceptive! that actuall, prevent the union o" the 'ale !per' and "e'ale ovu'* and tho!e

that !i'ilarl, tae action +e"ore "ertili>ation !hould +e dee'ed nona+ortive* and thu! con!titutionall,

per'i!!i+le.

The intent of the fames of the !onstit"tion fo #otecting the $ife of the "nbon chi$% &as to

#event the Legis$at"e fom #assing a meas"e #event abotion' =he 7ourt cannot interpret thi!

otheri!e. The RH La& is in $ine &ith this intent an% act"a$$( #ohibits abotion'  6, u!in# the ord

<or? in de"inin# a+orti"acient (ection 4(a))* the RH La prohi+it! not onl, dru#! or device! that prevent

i'plantation +ut al!o tho!e that induce a+ortion and induce the de!truction o" a "etu! in!ide the 'otherB!

o'+. =he RH La reco#ni>e! that the "ertili>ed ovu' alread, ha! li"e and that the tate ha! a +ounded

dut, to protect it.

Hoever* the author! o" the ;RR #ravel, a+u!ed their o""ice hen the, rede"ined the 'eanin# o" 

a+orti"acient +, u!in# the ter' <pri'aril,?. Reco#ni>in# a! a+orti"acient! onl, tho!e that <pri'aril, induce

a+ortion or the de!truction o" a "etu! in!ide the 'otherB! o'+ or the prevention o" the "ertili>ed ovu' to

reach and +e i'planted in the 'otherB! o'+? (ec. 3.01(a) o" the ;RR) ould pave the a, "or the

approval o" contraceptive! that 'a, har' or de!tro, the li"e o" the un+orn "ro' conception/"ertili>ation.

=hi! violate! ection 1%* Article ;; o" the 7on!titution. &or the !a'e rea!on* the de"inition o" 

contraceptive! under the ;RR (ec 3.01(-))* hich al!o u!e! the ter' <pri'aril,?* 'u!t +e !truc don.

%.) etitioner! clai' that the ri#ht to health i! violated +, the RH La +ecau!e it reuire! the inclu!ion o" 

hor'onal contraceptive!* intrauterine device!* in-ecta+le! and other !a"e* le#al* nona+orti"acient and

e""ective "a'il, plannin# product! and !upplie! in the National ru# &or'ular, and in the re#ular 

purcha!e o" e!!ential 'edicine! and !upplie! o" all national ho!pital! (ection C o" the RH La). =he,cite ri!! o" #ettin# di!ea!e! #ained +, u!in# e.#. oral contraceptive pill!.

o'e petitioner! do not ue!tion contraception and contraceptive! per se. Rather* the, pra, that the

!tatu! uo under RA 42%C and 5C%1 +e 'aintained. =he!e la! prohi+it the !ale and di!tri+ution o" 

contraceptive! ithout the pre!cription o" a dul,licen!ed ph,!ician.

Page 4: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 4/16

=he RH La doe! not intend to do aa, ith RA 42%C (1C). )ith RA +,- in #$ace. the !o"t

be$ieves a%e/"ate safeg"a%s e0ist to ens"e that on$( safe contace#tives ae ma%e avai$ab$e to

the #"b$ic'  ;n "ul"illin# it! 'andate under ec. 10 o" the RH La* the OH 'u!t eep in 'ind the

provi!ion! o" RA 42%C$ the contace#tives it &i$$ #oc"e sha$$ be fom a %"$( $icense% %"g stoe o 

#hamace"tica$ com#an( an% that the act"a$ %istib"tion of these contace#tive %"gs an%

%evices &i$$ be %one fo$$o&ing a #esci#tion of a /"a$ifie% me%ica$ #actitione'

9eanhile* the e/"iement of Section - of the RH La& is to be consi%ee% 1man%ato(2 on$( afte 

these %evices an% mateia$s have been teste%. eva$"ate% an% a##ove% b( the 3DA'  7on#re!!

cannot deter'ine that contraceptive! are <!a"e* le#al* nona+orti"icient and e""ective?.

3.) =he 7ourt cannot deter'ine hether or not the u!e o" contraceptive! or participation in !upport o" 

'odern RH 'ea!ure! (a) i! 'oral "ro' a reli#iou! !tandpoint@ or* (+) ri#ht or ron# accordin# to oneB!

do#'a or +elie". Hoever* the 7ourt ha! the authorit, to deter'ine hether or not the RH La

contravene! the 7on!titutional #uarantee o" reli#iou! "reedo'.

3a.) =he tate 'a, pur!ue it! le#iti'ate !ecular o+-ective! ithout +ein# dictated upon the policie! o" an,

one reli#ion. =o allo reli#iou! !ect! to dictate polic, or re!trict other #roup! ould violate Article ;;;*

ection 5 o" the 7on!titution or the !ta+li!h'ent 7lau!e. =hi! ould cau!e the tate to adhere to a

particular reli#ion* and thu!* e!ta+li!he! a !tate reli#ion. =hu!* the tate can enhance it! population

control pro#ra' throu#h the RH La even i" the pro'otion o" contraceptive u!e i! contrar, to the reli#iou!

+elie"! o" e.#. the petitioner!.

3+.) ection! 2* %3* and %4 o" the RH La o+li#e! a ho!pital or 'edical practitioner to i''ediatel, re"er a

per!on !eein# health care and !ervice! under the la to another acce!!i+le healthcare provider de!pite

their con!cientiou! o+-ection! +a!ed on reli#iou! or ethical +elie"!. =hese #ovisions vio$ate the

e$igio"s be$ief an% conviction of a conscientio"s ob4ecto' The( ae conta( to Section ,-5,6.

Atic$e VI of the !onstit"tion o the 3ee E0ecise !$a"se. &hose basis is the es#ect fo the

invio$abi$it( of the h"man conscience'

=he provi!ion! in the RH La co'pellin# non'aternit, !pecialt, ho!pital! and ho!pital! oned and

operated +, a reli#iou! #roup and health care !ervice provider! to re"er patient! to other provider! and

penali>in# the' i" the, "ail to do !o (ection! 2 and %3(a)(3)) a! ell a! co'pellin# the' to di!!e'inate

in"or'ation and per"or' RH procedure! under pain o" penalt, (ection! %3(a)(1) and (a)(%) in relation to

ection %4) al!o violate (and inhi+it) the "reedo' o" reli#ion. While penaltie! 'a, +e i'po!ed +, la to

en!ure co'pliance to it* a constit"tiona$$(7#otecte% ight m"st #evai$ ove the effective

im#$ementation of the $a&'

Page 5: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 5/16

cludin# pu+lic health o""icer! "ro' +ein# con!cientiou! o+-ector! (under ec. 5.%4 o" the ;RR) al!o

violate! the eual protection clau!e. =here i! no percepti+le di!tinction +eteen pu+lic health o""icer! and

their private counterpart!. ;n addition* the "reedo' to +elieve i! intrin!ic in ever, individual and the

protection o" thi! "reedo' re'ain! even i" he/!he i! e'plo,ed in the #overn'ent.

D!in# the co'pellin# !tate intere!t te!t* there i! no com#e$$ing state inteest to li'it the "ree eerci!e o" 

con!cientiou! o+-ector!. =here i! no imme%iate %ange to the $ife o hea$th o" an individual in the

perceived !cenario o" the a+oveuoted provi!ion!. ;n addition* the li'it! do not pertain to li"ethreatenin#

ca!e!.

=he es#on%ents a$so fai$e% to sho& that these #ovisions ae $east int"sive means  to achieve a

le#iti'ate !tate o+-ective. =he Le#i!lature ha! alread, taen other !ecular !tep! to en!ure that the ri#ht to

health i! protected* !uch a! RA 42%C* RA 35 (=he opulation Act o" the hilippine!) and RA C210

(=he Magna Carta o" Wo'en).

3c.) ection 15 o" the RH La* hich reuire! ould+e !pou!e! to attend a !e'inar on parenthood*

"a'il, plannin#* +rea!t"eedin# and in"ant nutrition a! a condition "or the i!!uance o" a 'arria#e licen!e* i!

a rea!ona+le eerci!e o" police poer +, the #overn'ent. =he la doe! not even 'andate the t,pe o" 

"a'il, plannin# 'ethod! to +e included in the !e'inar. =ho!e ho attend the !e'inar are "ree to accept

or re-ect in"or'ation the, receive and the, retain the "reedo' to decide on 'atter! o" "a'il, li"e ithout

the intervention o" the tate.

4.) ection %3(a)(%)(i) o" the RH La* hich per'it! RH procedure! even ith onl, the con!ent o" the

!pou!e under#oin# the provi!ion (di!re#ardin# !pou!al content)* int"%es into matia$ #ivac( an%

a"tonom( an% goes against the constit"tiona$ safeg"a%s fo the fami$( as the basic socia$

instit"tion' articularl,* ection 3* Article EF o" the 7on!titution 'andate! the tate to de"end$ (a) the

ri#ht o" !pou!e! to "ound a "a'il, in accordance ith their reli#iou! conviction! and the de'and! o" 

re!pon!i+le parenthood and (+) the ri#ht o" "a'ilie! or "a'il, a!!ociation! to participate in the plannin#

and i'ple'entation o" policie! and pro#ra'! that a""ect the'. =he RH La cannot in"rin#e upon thi!

'utual deci!ion'ain#* and endan#er the in!titution! o" 'arria#e and the "a'il,.

=he eclu!ion o" parental con!ent in ca!e! here a 'inor under#oin# a procedure i! alread, a parent or 

ha! had a 'i!carria#e (ection 2 o" the RH La) i! al!o anti"a'il, and violate! Article ;;* ection 1% o" 

the 7on!titution* hich !tate!$ <=he natural and pri'ar, ri#ht and dut, o" parent! in the rearin# o" the

,outh "or civic e""icienc, and the develop'ent o" 'oral character !hall receive the !upport o" the

8overn'ent.? ;n addition* the portion o" ection %3(a)(ii) hich read! <in the ca!e o" 'inor!* the ritten

con!ent o" parent! or le#al #uardian or* in their a+!ence* per!on! eerci!in# parental authorit, or neto"

Page 6: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 6/16

in !hall +e reuired onl, in elective !ur#ical procedure!? i! invalid a! it denie! the ri#ht o" parental

authorit, in ca!e! here hat i! involved i! <non!ur#ical procedure!.?

Hoever* a 'inor 'a, receive in"or'ation (a! oppo!ed to procedure!) a+out "a'il, plannin# !ervice!.

arent! are not deprived o" parental #uidance and control over their 'inor child in thi! !ituation and 'a,

a!!i!t her in decidin# hether to accept or re-ect the in"or'ation received. ;n addition* an eception 'a,

+e 'ade in li"ethreatenin# procedure!.

5.) =he 7ourt declined to rule on the con!titutionalit, o" ection 14 o" the RH La* hich 'andate! the

tate to provide A#eand evelop'entAppropriate Reproductive Health ducation. Althou#h educator!

'i#ht rai!e their o+-ection to their participation in the RH education pro#ra'* the 7ourt re!erve! it!

 -ud#'ent !hould an actual ca!e +e "iled +e"ore it.

 An, attac on it! con!titutionalit, i! pre'ature +ecau!e the epart'ent o" ducation ha! not ,et

"or'ulated a curriculu' on a#eappropriate reproductive health education.

ection 1%* Article ;; o" the 7on!titution place! 'ore i'portance on the role o" parent! in the develop'ent

o" their children ith the u!e o" the ter' <pri'ar,?. =he ri#ht o" parent! in up+rin#in# their ,outh i!

!uperior to that o" the tate.

=he provi!ion! o" ection 14 o" the RH La and corre!pondin# provi!ion! o" the ;RR !upple'ent (rather 

than !upplant) the ri#ht and dutie! o" the parent! in the 'oral develop'ent o" their children.

6, incorporatin# parentteacherco''unit, a!!ociation!* !chool o""icial!* and other intere!t #roup! in

developin# the 'andator, RH pro#ra'* it could ver, ell +e !aid that the pro#ra' ill +e in line ith the

reli#iou! +elie"! o" the petitioner!.

.) The RH La& %oes not vio$ate the %"e #ocess c$a"se of the !onstit"tion as the %efinitions of 

 sevea$ tems as obseve% b( the #etitiones ae not vag"e'

=he de"inition o" <private health care !ervice provider? 'u!t +e !een in relation to ection 4(n) o" the RH

La hich de"ine! a <pu+lic health !ervice provider?. =he <private health care in!titution? cited under 

ection 2 !hould +e !een a! !,non,'ou! to <private health care !ervice provider.

=he ter'! <!ervice? and <'ethod!? are al!o +road enou#h to include providin# o" in"or'ation and

renderin# o" 'edical procedure!. =hu!* ho!pital! operated +, reli#iou! #roup! are ee'pted "ro'

renderin# RH !ervice and 'odern "a'il, plannin# 'ethod! (a! provided "or +, ection 2 o" the RH La)

a! ell a! "ro' #ivin# RH in"or'ation and procedure!.

Page 7: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 7/16

=he RH La al!o de"ine! <incorrect in"or'ation?. D!ed to#ether in relation to ection %3 (a)(1)* the ter'!

<incorrect? and <noin#l,? connote a !en!e o" 'alice and ill 'otive to 'i!lead or 'i!repre!ent the pu+lic

a! to the nature and e""ect o" pro#ra'! and !ervice! on reproductive health.

2.) To #ovi%e that the #oo ae to be given #ioit( in the govenment8s RH #ogam is not a

vio$ation of the e/"a$ #otection c$a"se. ;n "act* it i! pur!uant to ection 11* Article E;;; o" the

7on!titution* hich !tate! that the State sha$$ #ioiti9e the nee%s of the "n%e#ivi$ege%. sic e$%e$(.

%isab$e%. &omen. an% chi$%en an% that it sha$$ en%eavo to #ovi%e me%ica$ cae to #a"#es'

=he RH La doe! not onl, !ee to tar#et the poor to reduce their nu'+er* !ince ection 2 o" the RH La

prioriti>e! poor and 'ar#inali>ed couple! ho are !u""erin# "ro' "ertilit, i!!ue! and de!ire to have

children. ;n addition* the RH La doe! not pre!cri+e the nu'+er o" children a couple 'a, have and doe!

not i'po!e condition! upon couple! ho intend to have children. =he RH La onl, !ee! to provide

priorit, to the poor.

=he eclu!ion o" private educational in!titution! "ro' the 'andator, RH education pro#ra' under ection

14 i! valid. =here i! a need to reco#ni>e the acade'ic "reedo' o" private educational in!titution!

e!peciall, ith re!pect to reli#iou! in!truction and to con!ider their !en!itivit, toard! the teachin# o" 

reproductive health education.

.) =he reuire'ent under ec. 12 o" the RH La "or private and non#overn'ent health care !ervice

provider! to render 4 hour! o" pro bono RH !ervice! %oes not amo"nt to invo$"nta( sevit"%e* "or 

to rea!on!. &ir!t* the practice o" 'edicine i! undenia+l, i'+ued ith pu+lic intere!t that it i! +oth the

poer and a dut, o" the tate to control and re#ulate it in order to protect and pro'ote the pu+lic el"are.

econd* ection 12 onl, encoura#e! private and non#overn'ent RH !ervice provider! to render pro

bono !ervice. 6e!ide! the hilHealth accreditation* no penalt, i! i'po!ed !hould the, do otheri!e.

Hoever* con!cientiou! o+-ector! are ee'pt "ro' ec. 12 a! lon# a! their reli#iou! +elie"! do not allo

the' to render RH !ervice* pro bono or otheri!e (ee art 3+ o" thi! di#e!t.)

6. =he dele#ation +, 7on#re!! to the &A o" the poer to deter'ine hether or not a !uppl, or product i!

to +e included in the !!ential ru#! Li!t i! valid* a! the &A not onl, ha! the poer +ut al!o the

co'petenc, to evaluate* re#i!ter and cover health !ervice! and 'ethod! (under RA 32%0 a! a'ended

+, RA C211 or the &A Act o" %00C).

7. =he RH La doe! not in"rin#e upon the autono', o" local #overn'ent!. ara#raph (c) o" ection 12

provide! a cate#orical eception o" ca!e! involvin# nationall,"unded pro-ect!* "acilitie!* pro#ra'! and

Page 8: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 8/16

!ervice!. Dnle!! a local #overn'ent unit (L8D) i! particularl, de!i#nated a! the i'ple'entin# a#enc,* it

ha! no poer over a pro#ra' "or hich "undin# ha! +een provided +, the national #overn'ent under the

annual #eneral appropriation! act* even i" the pro#ra' involve! the deliver, o" +a!ic !ervice! ithin the

 -uri!diction o" the L8D.

;n addition* L8D! are 'erel, encoura#ed to provide RH !ervice!. rovi!ion o" the!e !ervice! are not

'andator,. =here"ore* the RH La doe! not a'ount to an undue encroach'ent +, the national

#overn'ent upon the autono', en-o,ed +, L8D!.

 Article ;;;* ection! * 10* and 11 o" RA C054 or the Or#anic Act o" the AR99 'erel, delineate! the

poer! that 'a, +e eerci!ed +, the re#ional #overn'ent. =he!e provi!ion! cannot +e !een a! an

a+dication +, the tate o" it! poer to enact le#i!lation that ould +ene"it the #eneral el"are.

!pina v!. Ga'ora* r.* 31 7RA 12(%010)udicial Revie@ Locu! tandi@ Word! and hra!e!@ Le#al !tandin# or locu! !tandi re"er! to the ri#ht o" apart, to co'e to a court o" -u!tice and 'ae !uch a challen#eI'ore particularl,* it re"er! to hi! per!onaland !u+!tantial intere!t in that he ha! !u""ered or ill !u""er direct in-ur, a! a re!ult o" the pa!!a#e o" thatla.I =he lon# !ettled rule i! that he ho challen#e! the validit, o" a la 'u!t have a !tandin# to do !o.Le#al !tandin# or locu! !tandi re"er! to the ri#ht o" a part, to co'e to a court o" -u!tice and 'ae !uch achallen#e. 9ore particularl,* !tandin# re"er! to hi! per!onal and !u+!tantial intere!t in that he ha!!u""ered or ill !u""er direct in-ur, a! a re!ult o" the pa!!a#e o" that la. =o put it another a,* he 'u!t!ho that he ha! +een or i! a+out to +e denied !o'e ri#ht or privile#e to hich he i! la"ull, entitled orthat he i! a+out to +e !u+-ected to !o'e +urden! or penaltie! +, rea!on o" the la he co'plain! o". Here*there i! no clear !hoin# that the i'ple'entation o" the Retail =rade Li+erali>ation Act pre-udice!petitioner! or in"lict! da'a#e! on the'* either a! tapa,er! or a! le#i!lator!. till the 7ourt ill re!olve theue!tion the, rai!e !ince the rule on !tandin# can +e relaed "or nontraditional plainti""! lie ordinar,citi>en!* tapa,er!* and le#i!lator! hen a! in thi! ca!e the pu+lic intere!t !o reuire! or the 'atter i! o"

tran!cendental i'portance* o" overarchin# !i#ni"icance to !ociet,* or o" para'ount pu+lic intere!t.

National cono', and atri'on,@ While ection 1C* Article ;; o" the 1C2 7on!titution reuire! thedevelop'ent o" a !el"reliant and independent national econo', e""ectivel, controlled +, &ilipinoentrepreneur!* it doe! not i'po!e a polic, o" &ilipino 'onopol, o" the econo'ic environ'ent.IA! the7ourt eplained in =aJada v. An#ara* %2% 7RA 1 (1CC2)* the provi!ion! o" Article ;; o" the 1C27on!titution* the declaration! o" principle! and !tate policie!* are not !el"eecutin#. Le#i!lative "ailure topur!ue !uch policie! cannot #ive ri!e to a cau!e o" action in the court!. =he 7ourt "urther eplained in=aJada that Article E;; o" the 1C2 7on!titution la,! don the ideal! o" econo'ic nationali!'$ (1) +,epre!!in# pre"erence in "avor o" uali"ied &ilipino! in the #rant o" ri#ht!* privile#e! and conce!!ion!coverin# the national econo', and patri'on, and in the u!e o" &ilipino la+or* do'e!tic 'aterial! andlocall,produced #ood!@ (%) +, 'andatin# the tate to adopt 'ea!ure! that help 'ae the' co'petitive@and (3) +, reuirin# the tate to develop a !el"reliant and independent national econo', e""ectivel,

controlled +, &ilipino!. ;n other ord!* hile ection 1C* Article ;; o" the 1C2 7on!titutionreuire! thedevelop'ent o" a !el"reliant and independent national econo', e""ectivel, controlled +, &ilipinoentrepreneur!* it doe! not i'po!e a polic, o" &ilipino 'onopol, o" the econo'ic environ'ent. =heo+-ective i! !i'pl, to prohi+it "orei#n poer! or intere!t! "ro' 'aneuverin# our econo'ic policie! anden!ure that &ilipino! are #iven pre"erence in all area! o" develop'ent.

a'e@ While the 7on!titution 'andate! a +ia! in "avor o" &ilipino #ood!* !ervice!* la+or and enterpri!e!*it al!o reco#ni>e! the need "or +u!ine!! echan#e ith the re!t o" the orld on the +a!e! o" eualit, andreciprocit, and li'it! protection o" &ilipino enterpri!e! onl, a#ain!t "orei#n co'petition and trade practice!

Page 9: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 9/16

that are un"air.I;ndeed* the 1C2 7on!titution tae! into account the realitie! o" the out!ide orld a! itreuire! the pur!uit o" a trade polic, that !erve! the #eneral el"are and utili>e! all "or'! andarran#e'ent! o" echan#e on the +a!i! o" eualit, and reciprocit,@ and !pea! o" indu!trie! hich areco'petitive in +oth do'e!tic and "orei#n 'aret! a! ell a! o" the protection o" &ilipino enterpri!e!a#ain!t un"air "orei#n co'petition and trade practice!. =hu!* hile the 7on!titution 'andate! a +ia! in"avor o" &ilipino #ood!* !ervice!* la+or and enterpri!e!* it al!o reco#ni>e! the need "or +u!ine!! echan#eith the re!t o" the orld on the +a!e! o" eualit, and reciprocit, and li'it! protection o" &ilipinoenterpri!e! onl, a#ain!t "orei#n co'petition and trade practice! that are un"air.

a'e@ =rade and ;ndu!tr,@ olice oer@ ection 10* Article E;; o" the 1C2 7on!titution #ive! 7on#re!!the di!cretion to re!erve to &ilipino! certain area! o" inve!t'ent! upon the reco''endation o" theNational cono'ic and evelop'ent Authorit, (NA) and hen the national intere!t reuire!.Iection10* Article E;; o" the 1C2 7on!titution #ive! 7on#re!! the di!cretion to re!erve to &ilipino! certain area!o" inve!t'ent! upon the reco''endation o" the NA and hen the national intere!t reuire!. =hu!*7on#re!! can deter'ine hat polic, to pa!! and hen to pa!! it dependin# on the econo'ic ei#encie!.;t can enact la! alloin# the entr, o" "orei#ner! into certain indu!trie! not re!erved +, the 7on!titution to&ilipino citi>en!. ;n thi! ca!e* 7on#re!! ha! decided to open certain area! o" the retail trade +u!ine!! to"orei#n inve!t'ent! in!tead o" re!ervin# the' eclu!ivel, to &ilipino citi>en!. =he NA ha! not oppo!ed!uch polic,.

a'e@ a'e@ Retail =rade Li+erali>ation Act (R.A. 2%)@ olice oer@ =he control and re#ulation o"trade in the intere!t o" the pu+lic el"are i! o" cour!e an eerci!e o" the police poer o" the tate@ =o theetent that Repu+lic Act (R.A.) No. 2%* the Retail =rade Li+erali>ation Act* le!!en! the re!traint on the"orei#ner!B ri#ht to propert, or to en#a#e in an ordinaril, la"ul +u!ine!!* it cannot +e !aid that the laa'ount! to a denial o" the &ilipino!B ri#ht to propert, and to due proce!! o" la.I=he control andre#ulation o" trade in the intere!t o" the pu+lic el"are i! o" cour!e an eerci!e o" the police poer o" thetate. A per!onB! ri#ht to propert,* hether he i! a &ilipino citi>en or "orei#n national* cannot +e taen"ro' hi' ithout due proce!! o" la. ;n 1C54* 7on#re!! enacted the Retail =rade Nationali>ation Act orR.A. 110 that re!trict! the retail +u!ine!! to &ilipino citi>en!. ;n den,in# the petition a!!ailin# the validit,o" !uch Act "or violation o" the "orei#nerB! ri#ht to !u+!tantive due proce!! o" la* the upre'e 7ourt heldthat the la con!tituted a valid eerci!e o" police poer. =he tate had an intere!t in preventin# alien

control o" the retail trade and R.A. 110 a! rea!ona+l, related to that purpo!e. =hat la i! not ar+itrar,.Here* to the etent that R.A. 2%* the Retail =rade Li+erali>ation Act* le!!en! the re!traint on the"orei#ner!B ri#ht to propert, or to en#a#e in an ordinaril, la"ul +u!ine!!* it cannot +e !aid that the laa'ount! to a denial o" the &ilipino!B ri#ht to propert, and to due proce!! o" la. &ilipino! continue to havethe ri#ht to en#a#e in the ind! o" retail +u!ine!! to hich the la in ue!tion ha! per'itted the entr, o""orei#n inve!tor!.

a'e@ a'e@ olice oer@ ;t i! not ithin the province o" the 7ourt to inuire into the i!do' o"Repu+lic Act (R.A.) No. 2% !ave hen it +latantl, violate! the 7on!titution.I;t i! not ithin the provinceo" the 7ourt to inuire into the i!do' o" R.A. 2% !ave hen it +latantl, violate! the 7on!titution. 6ut a!the 7ourt ha! !aid* there i! no !hoin# that the la ha! contravened an, con!titutional 'andate. =he7ourt i! not convinced that the i'ple'entation o" R.A. 2% ould eventuall, lead to alien control o" the

retail trade +u!ine!!. etitioner! have not 'u!tered an, concrete and !tron# ar#u'ent to !upport it!the!i!. =he la it!el" ha! provided !trict !a"e#uard! on "orei#n participation in that +u!ine!!.

9etropolitan 9anila evelop'ent Authorit, v 7oncerned Re!ident! o" 9anila 6a,8R No. 121C424 ece'+er 1* %00

&A7=$

Page 10: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 10/16

=he co'plaint +, the re!ident! alle#ed that the ater ualit, o" the 9anila 6a, had "allen a,+elo the alloa+le !tandard! !et +, la* !peci"icall, re!idential ecree No. () 115% or the hilippine nviron'ent 7ode and that ALL de"endant! (pu+lic o""icial!) 'u!t +e -ointl, and/or !olidaril,lia+le and collectivel, ordered to clean up 9anila 6a, and to re!tore it! ater ualit, to cla!! 6* ater! "it"or !i''in#* divin#* and other "or'! o" contact recreation.

;D$

(1) WON ection! 12 and %0 o" 115% under the headin#!* Dp#radin# o" Water Kualit, and 7leanup Operation!* envi!a#e a cleanup in #eneral or are the, li'ited onl, to the cleanup o"   !peci"ic pollution incident!@(%) WON petitioner! +e co'pel led +, 'anda'u! to clean up and reha+ilitate the 9anila 6a,.

 AL;7A6L LAW$

115% hilippine nviron'ental 7ode ection 12. Dp#radin# o" Water Kualit,. Where the ualit, o" ater ha! deteriorated t o a de#ree here it ! !tate ill adver!el, a""ect it! +e!t u!a#e* the #overn'ent a#encie! concerned !hall tae !uch 'ea!ure! a! 'a, +e nece!!ar, to up#rade the ualit, o" !uch ater to 'eet the pre!cri+ed ater ualit, !tandard!. ection %0.7leanup Operation!.;t !hall +e the re!pon!i+ilit, o" the polluter to contain * re'ove and clean

up ater pollution incident! at hi! on epen!e. ;n ca!e o" hi! "ailure to do !o* the#overn'ent a#encie! concerned !hall undertae contain'ent* re'oval and cleanup operation! andepen!e! incurred in !aid operation !hall +e char#ed a#ain!t the per!on! and/ or entitie! re!pon!i+le"or !uch pollution.

HL$

(1) ec. 12 doe! not in an, a, !tate that the #overn'ent a#encie! concerned ou#ht to con"ine the'!elve! to the contain'ent* re'oval* and cleanin# operation! hen a !peci"ic pollution incident occur!. On the contrar,* ec. 12 reuire! the' to act even in the a+!ence o" a !peci"ic pollution incident* a! lon# a! ater ualit, <ha! deteriorated to a de#ree here it! !tate ill adver!el, a""ect it! +e!t u!a#e.? ection 12 M %0 are o" #eneral application and are not "or !peci"icpollution incident! onl,. =he "act that the pollution o" the 9anila 6a, i! o" !uch 'a#nitude and !cope

 that it i! ell ni#h i'po!!i+le to dra the line +eteen a !peci"ic and a #eneral pollution incident.

(%) =he 7leanin# or Reha+ilitation o" 9anila 6a, 7an +e 7o'pelled +, 9anda'u!. While thei'ple'entation o" the 99A! 'andated ta!! 'a, entail a deci!ion'ain# proce!!* theen"orce'ent o" the la or the ver, act o" doin# hat the la eact! to +e done i! 'ini!terial in nature and 'a, +e co'pelled +, 'anda'u!. Dnder hat other -udicial di!cipline de!cri+e! a!<continuin# 'anda'u! *? the 7ourt 'a,* under etraordinar, circu'!tance!* i!!ue directive! ith theend in vie o" en!urin# that it! deci!ion ould not +e !et to nau#ht +, ad'ini!trative inaction or indi""erence.

NO=$ =hi! continuin# 'anda'u! i! no lon#er applica+le* !ince thi! i! in!titutionali>ed in the rule! o" procedure "or environ'ental ca!e!.

%0 da,! =e'porar, re!trainin# order

BELGICA VS OCHOA G.R. No. 208566 !o"#t#$a" La% Const#t&t#ona" La% Lo$a" Go'ern(ent

In'a"#) *e"egat#on

Leg#s"at#'e *epart(ent In'a"#) *e"egat#on o+ Leg#s"at#'e !o%er 

Page 11: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 11/16

=hi! ca!e i! con!olidated ith 8.R. No. %04C3 and 8.R. No. %0C%51.

=he !ocalled por +arrel !,!te' ha! +een around in the hilippine! !ince a+out 1C%%. or 6arrel i!

co''onl, non a! the lu'p!u'* di!cretionar, "und! o" the 'e'+er! o" the 7on#re!!. ;t underent

!everal le#al de!i#nation! "ro' <Congress#ona" !or, Barre" ? to the late!t <!r#or#t- *e'e"op(ent 

 Ass#stan$e &n) ? or  ;DA3. =he allocation "or the por +arrel i! inte#rated in the annual Genera"  Appropr#at#ons A$t  (8AA).

ince %011* the allocation o" the A& ha! +een done in the "olloin# 'anner$

a. ;+< mi$$ion$ "or each 'e'+er o" the loer hou!e@ +roen don to 40 'illion "or </ar) proe$ts?

(in"ra!tructure pro-ect! lie road!* +uildin#!* !chool!* etc.)* and 30 'illion "or <so+t proe$ts? (!cholar!hip

#rant!* 'edical a!!i!tance* livelihood pro#ra'!* ;= develop'ent* etc.)@

+. ;,<< mi$$ion$ "or each !enator@ +roen don to 100 'illion "or hard pro-ect!* 100 'illion "or !o"t

pro-ect!@

c. ;,<< mi$$ion$ "or the Ficere!ident@ +roen don to 100 'illion "or hard pro-ect!* 100 'illion "or 

!o"t pro-ect!.

=he A& article! in the 8AA do provide "or ea$ignment of f"n%s here+, certain ca+inet 'e'+er!

'a, reue!t "or the reali#n'ent o" "und! into their depart'ent provided that the reue!t "or reali#n'ent i!

approved or concurred +, the le#i!lator concerned.

!res#)ent#a" !or, Barre" 

=he pre!ident doe! have hi! on !ource o" "und al+eit not included in the 8AA. =he !ocalled pre!idential

por +arrel co'e! "ro' to !ource!$ (a) the 9ala'pa,a &und!* "ro' the 9ala'pa,a 8a! ro-ect thi!

ha! +een around !ince 1C2* and (+) the re!idential ocial &und hich i! derived "ro' the earnin#! o" 

A87OR thi! ha! +een around !ince a+out 1C3.

!or, Barre" S$a( Contro'ers- 

ver !ince* the por +arrel !,!te' ha! +een +e!ie#ed +, alle#ation! o" corruption. ;n ul, %013* !i

hi!tle +loer!* headed +, 6enhur Lu,* epo!ed that "or the la!t decade* the corruption in the por +arrel

!,!te' had +een "acilitated +, anet Li' Napole!. Napole! had +een helpin# la'aer! in "unnelin#

their por +arrel "und! into a+out %0 +o#u! N8OB! (non#overn'ent or#ani>ation!) hich ould 'ae it

appear that #overn'ent "und! are +ein# u!ed in le#it ei!tin# pro-ect! +ut are in "act #oin# to <#ho!t?

pro-ect!. An audit a! then conducted +, the 7o''i!!ion on Audit and the re!ult! thereo" concurred ith

the epo!e! o" Lu, et al.

9otivated +, the "ore#oin#* 8reco 6el#ica and !everal other!* "iled variou! petition! +e"ore the upre'e

7ourt ue!tionin# the con!titutionalit, o" the por +arrel !,!te'.

ISSUES:

;. Whether or not the con#re!!ional por +arrel !,!te' i! con!titutional.

Page 12: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 12/16

;;. Whether or not pre!idential por +arrel !,!te' i! con!titutional.

HELD:

I' No* the con#re!!ional por +arrel !,!te' i! uncon!titutional. ;t i! uncon!titutional +ecau!e it violate! the

"olloin# principle!$

a. Separat#on o+ !o%ers

 A! a rule* the +ud#etin# poer lie! in 7on#re!!. ;t re#ulate! the relea!e o" "und! (poer o" the pur!e).

=he eecutive* on the other hand* i'ple'ent! the la! thi! include! the 8AA to hich the A& i! a

part o". Onl, the eecutive 'a, i'ple'ent the la +ut under the por +arrel !,!te'* hatB! happenin#

a! that* a"ter the 8AA* it!el" a la* a! enacted* the le#i!lator! the'!elve! dictate a! to hich pro-ect!

their A& "und! !hould +e allocated to a clear act o" i'ple'entin# the la the, enacted a violation

o" the principle o" !eparation o" poer!. (Note in the older ca!e o" H;L7ONA v! nriue>* it a! ruled

that por +arrel* then called a! 7& or the 7ountr,ide evelop'ent &und* a! con!titutional in!o"ar a!

the le#i!lator! onl, reco''end here their por +arrel "und! #o).

=hi! i! al!o hi#hli#hted +, the "act that in reali#nin# the A&* the eecutive ill !till have to #et the

concurrence o" the le#i!lator concerned.

b. Non1)e"egab#"#t- o+ Leg#s"at#'e !o%er 

 A! a rule* the 7on!titution ve!t! le#i!lative poer in 7on#re!! alone. (=he 7on!titution doe! #rant the

people le#i!lative poer +ut onl, in!o"ar a! the proce!!e! o" re"erendu' and initiative are concerned).

=hat +ein#* le#i!lative poer cannot +e dele#ated +, 7on#re!! "or it cannot dele#ate "urther that hich

a! dele#ated to it +, the 7on!titution.

ception! to the rule are$

(i) dele#ated le#i!lative poer to local #overn'ent unit! +ut thi! !hall involve purel, local 'atter!@

(ii) authorit, o" the re!ident to* +, la* eerci!e poer! nece!!ar, and proper to carr, out a declared

national polic, in ti'e! o" ar or other national e'er#enc,* or "i ithin !peci"ied li'it!* and !u+-ect to

!uch li'itation! and re!triction! a! 7on#re!! 'a, i'po!e* tari"" rate!* i'port and eport uota!* tonna#e

and har"a#e due!* and other dutie! or i'po!t! ithin the "ra'eor o" the national develop'ent

pro#ra' o" the 8overn'ent.

;n thi! ca!e* the A& article! hich allo the individual le#i!lator to identi", the pro-ect! to hich hi!

A& 'one, !hould #o to i! a violation o" the rule on nondele#a+ilit, o" le#i!lative poer. =he poer toappropriate "und! i! !olel, lod#ed in 7on#re!! (in the to hou!e! co'pri!in# it) collectivel, and not

lod#ed in the individual 'e'+er!. &urther* nohere in the eception! doe! it !tate that the 7on#re!! can

dele#ate the poer to the individual 'e'+er o" 7on#re!!.

$. !r#n$#p"e o+ C/e$,s an) Ba"an$es

Page 13: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 13/16

One "eature in the principle o" chec! and +alance! i! the poer o" the pre!ident to veto ite'! in the 8AA

hich he 'a, dee' to +e inappropriate. 6ut thi! poer i! alread, +ein# under'ined +ecau!e o" the "act

that once the 8AA i! approved* the le#i!lator can no identi", the pro-ect to hich he ill appropriate hi!

A&. Dnder !uch !,!te'* ho can the pre!ident veto the appropriation 'ade +, the le#i!lator i" the

appropriation i! 'ade a"ter the approval o" the 8AA a#ain* <7on#re!! cannot choo!e a 'ode o" 

+ud#etin# hich e""ectivel, render! the con!titutionall,#iven poer o" the re!ident u!ele!!.?

). Lo$a" A&tono(- 

 A! a rule* the local #overn'ent! have the poer to 'ana#e their local a""air!. =hrou#h their Local

evelop'ent 7ouncil! (L7!)* the L8D! can develop their on pro#ra'! and policie! concernin# their 

localitie!. 6ut ith the A&* particularl, on the part o" the 'e'+er! o" the hou!e o" repre!entative!*

hatB! happenin# i! that a con#re!!'an can either +,pa!! or duplicate a pro-ect +, the L7 and later on

clai' it a! hi! on. =hi! i! an in!tance here the national #overn'ent (note* a con#re!!'an i! a national

o""icer) 'eddle! ith the a""air! o" the local #overn'ent and thi! i! contrar, to the tate polic,

e'+odied in the 7on!titution on local autono',. ;tB! #ood i" thatB! all that i! happenin# under the por

+arrel !,!te' +ut or!e* the A& +eco'e! 'ore o" a per!onal "und on the part o" le#i!lator!.

II' :e!* the pre!idential por +arrel i! valid.

=he 'ain i!!ue rai!ed +, 6el#ica et al a#ain!t the pre!idential por +arrel i! that it i! uncon!titutional

+ecau!e it violate! ection %C (1)* Article F; o" the 7on!titution hich provide!$

No (one- s/a"" be pa#) o&t o+ t/e reas&r- e3$ept #n p&rs&an$e o+ an appropriation (a)e b- "a%.

6el#ica et al e'pha!i>ed that the pre!idential por co'e! "ro' the earnin#! o" the 9ala'pa,a and

A87OR and not "ro' an, appropriation "ro' a particular le#i!lation.

=he upre'e 7ourt di!a#ree! a! it ruled that C10* hich created the 9ala'pa,a &und* a! ell a!

1C (a! a'ended +, 1CC3)* hich a'ended A87ORB! charter* provided "or the appropriation* to

it$

(i) C10$ ection thereo" provide! that all "ee!* a'on# other!* collected "ro' certain ener#,related

venture! !hall "or' part o" a !pecial "und (the 9ala'pa,a &und) hich !hall +e u!ed to "urther "inance

ener#, re!ource develop'ent and "or other purpo!e! hich the re!ident 'a, direct@

(ii) 1C* a! a'ended$ ection 1% thereo" provide! that a part o" A87ORB! earnin#! !hall +e

allocated to a 8eneral &und (the re!idential ocial &und) hich !hall +e u!ed in #overn'ent

in"ra!tructure pro-ect!.

=he!e are !u""icient la! hich 'et the reuire'ent o" ection %C* Article F; o" the 7on!titution. =he

appropriation conte'plated therein doe! not have to +e a particular appropriation a! it can +e a #eneral

appropriation a! in the ca!e o" C10 and 1C.

Greco Antonious Beda B. Belgica, et al. Vs. Hon. Executive Secretary Paquito N. Ocoa, !r, et

al."Social !ustice Society #S!S$ President Sa%son S. Alcantara Vs. Hon. &ran'lin (. )rilon, etc., et 

Page 14: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 14/16

al."Pedrito (. Nepo%uceno, etc. Vs. President Benigno Si%eon *. Aquino +++, et al.

*oncurring Opinion *.!. Sereno, !. *arpio, !. -eonen.

*oncurring and )issenting Opinion !. Brion.

.

=he ;!!ue! 6e"ore the 7ourt

6a!ed on the pleadin#!* and a! re"ined durin# the Oral Ar#u'ent!* the

"olloin# are the 'ain i!!ue! "or the 7ourtP! re!olution$

;. rocedural ;!!ue!.

Whether or not (a) the i!!ue! rai!ed in the con!olidated petition! involve an actual and -u!ticia+le

controver!,@ (+) the i!!ue! rai!ed in the con!olidated petition! are 'atter! o" polic, not !u+-ect to -udicial

revie@ (c) petitioner! have le#al !tandin# to !ue@ and (d) the 7ourtP! eci!ion dated Au#u!t 1C* 1CC4 in

8.R. No!. 113105* 113124* 1132* and 113* entitled Qhilippine 7on!titution A!!ociation v.nriue> 114 (hilcon!a) and eci!ion dated April %4* %01% in 8.R. No. 14C2* entitled QLa,er!‖

 A#ain!t 9onopol, and overt, v. ecretar, o" 6ud#et and 9ana#e'ent 115 (LA9) +ar the reliti#ation‖

o" the i!!ue o" con!titutionalit, o" the Qor 6arrel ,!te' under the principle! o" re! -udicata and !tare‖

deci!i!.

;;. u+!tantive ;!!ue! on the <7on#re!!ional or 6arrel.?

Whether or not the %013 A& Article and all other 7on#re!!ional or 6arrel La! !i'ilar thereto are

uncon!titutional con!iderin# that the, violate the principle! o"/con!titutional provi!ion! on (a) !eparation o" 

poer!@ (+) nondele#a+ilit, o" le#i!lative poer@ (c) chec! and +alance!@ (d) accounta+ilit,@ (e) political

d,na!tie!@ and (") local autono',.

;;;. u+!tantive ;!!ue! on the <re!idential or 6arrel.?

Whether or not the phra!e! (a) Qand "or !uch other purpo!e! a! 'a, +e herea"ter directed +, the

re!ident under ection o" C10*11 relatin# to the 9ala'pa,a &und!* and (+) Qto "inance the‖

priorit, in"ra!tructure develop'ent pro-ect! and to "inance the re!toration o" da'a#ed or de!tro,ed

"acilitie! due to cala'itie!* a! 'a, +e directed and authori>ed +, the O""ice o" the re!ident o" the

hilippine! under ection 1% o" 1C* a! a'ended +, 1CC3* relatin# to the re!idential ocial‖

&und* are uncon!titutional in!o"ar a! the, con!titute undue dele#ation! o" le#i!lative poer.

=he!e 'ain i!!ue! !hall +e re!olved in the order that the, have +een

!tated. ;n addition* the 7ourt !hall al!o tacle certain ancillar, i!!ue! a!pro'pted +, the pre!ent ca!e!.

.

WHR&OR* the petition! are AR=L: 8RAN=. ;n vie o" the con!titutional violation! di!cu!!ed in

thi! eci!ion* the 7ourt here+,

declare! a! DN7ON=;=D=;ONAL$

Page 15: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 15/16

(a) the entire %013 A& Article@

(+) all le#al provi!ion! o" pa!t and pre!ent 7on#re!!ional or 6arrel La!* !uch a! the previou! A&

and 7& Article! and the variou! 7on#re!!ional ;n!ertion!* hich authori>e/d le#i!lator! hether

individuall, or collectivel, or#ani>ed into co''ittee! to intervene* a!!u'e or participate in an, o" the

variou! po!tenact'ent !ta#e! o" the +ud#et eecution* !uch a! +ut not li'ited to the area! o" pro-ect

identi"ication* 'odi"ication and revi!ion o" pro-ect identi"ication* "und relea!e and/or "und reali#n'ent*

unrelated to the poer o" con#re!!ional over!i#ht@

(c) all le#al provi!ion! o" pa!t and pre!ent 7on#re!!ional or 6arrel La!* !uch a! the previou! A&

and 7& Article! and the variou! 7on#re!!ional ;n!ertion!* hich con"erred per!onal* lu'p!u'

allocation! to le#i!lator! "ro' hich the, are a+le to "und !peci"ic pro-ect! hich the, the'!elve!

deter'ine@

(d) all in"or'al practice! o" !i'ilar i'port and e""ect* hich the 7ourt !i'ilarl, dee'! to +e act! o" #rave

a+u!e o" di!cretion a'ountin# to lac or ece!! o" -uri!diction@ and

(e) the phra!e! (1) Qand "or !uch other purpo!e! a! 'a, +e herea"ter directed +, the re!ident under‖ection o" re!idential ecree No. C10 and (%) Qto "inance the priorit, in"ra!tructure develop'ent

pro-ect! under ection 1% o" re!idential ecree No. 1C* a! a'ended +, re!idential ecree No. 1CC3*

"or +oth "ailin# the !u""icient !tandard te!t in violation o" the principle o" nondele#a+ilit, o" le#i!lative

poer.

 Accordin#l,* the 7ourtP! te'porar, in-unction dated epte'+er 10* %013 i! here+, declared to +e

R9ANN=. =hu!* the di!+ur!e'ent/relea!e o" the re'ainin# A& "und! allocated "or the ,ear %013*

a! ell a! "or all previou! ,ear!* and the "und! !ourced "ro' (1) the 9ala'pa,a &und! under the phra!e

Qand "or !uch other purpo!e! a! 'a, +e herea"ter directed +, the re!ident pur!uant to ection o"‖

re!idential ecree No. C10* and (%) the re!idential ocial &und under the phra!e Qto "inance the

priorit, in"ra!tructure develop'ent pro-ect! pur!uant to ection 1% o" re!idential ecree No. 1C* a!‖

a'ended +, re!idential ecree No. 1CC3* hich are* at the ti'e thi! eci!ion i! pro'ul#ated* notcovered +, Notice o" 7a!h Allocation! (N7A!) +ut onl, +, pecial Allot'ent Relea!e Order! (ARO!)*

hether o+li#ated or not* are here+, NO;N. =he re'ainin# A& "und! covered +, thi! per'anent

in-unction !hall not +e di!+ur!ed/relea!ed +ut in!tead reverted to the unappropriated !urplu! o" the

#eneral "und* hile the "und! under the 9ala'pa,a &und! and the re!idential ocial &und !hall re'ain

therein to +e utili>ed "or their re!pective !pecial purpo!e! not otheri!e declared a! uncon!titutional.

On the other hand* due to i'proper recour!e and lac o" proper !u+!tantiation* the 7ourt here+, N;

petitioner!P pra,er !eein# that

the ecutive ecretar, and/or the epart'ent o" 6ud#et and 9ana#e'ent +e ordered to provide the

pu+lic and the 7o''i!!ion on Audit co'plete li!t!/!chedule! or detailed report! related to the avail'ent!

and utili>ation o" the "und! !u+-ect o" the!e ca!e!.

etitioner!P acce!! to o""icial docu'ent! alread, availa+le and o" pu+lic record hich are related to the!e

"und! 'u!t* hoever* not +e prohi+ited +ut 'erel, !u+-ected to the cu!todianP! rea!ona+le re#ulation! or

an, valid !tatutor, prohi+ition on the !a'e. =hi! denial i! ithout pre-udice to a proper 'anda'u! ca!e

hich the, or the 7o''i!!ion on Audit 'a, choo!e to pur!ue throu#h a !eparate petition.

=he 7ourt al!o N; petitioner! pra,er to order the inclu!ion o" 

the "und! !u+-ect o" the!e ca!e! in the +ud#etar, deli+eration! o" 7on#re!! a! the !a'e i! a 'atter le"t to

Page 16: Imbong vs Ochoa

7/18/2019 Imbong vs Ochoa

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/imbong-vs-ochoa-5692696361554 16/16

the prero#ative o" the political +ranche! o" 

#overn'ent.

&inall,* the 7ourt here+, ;R7= all pro!ecutorial or#an! o" the

#overn'ent to* ithin the +ound! o" rea!ona+le di!patch* inve!ti#ate and accordin#l, pro!ecute all

#overn'ent o""icial! and/or private individual! "or po!!i+le cri'inal o""en!e! related to the irre#ular*

i'proper and/or unla"ul di!+ur!e'ent/utili>ation o" all "und! under the or 6arrel ,!te'.

=hi! eci!ion i! i''ediatel, eecutor, +ut pro!pective in e""ect.

O ORR.