Scribd
Upload
39 views2 pages

Local Government Ordinance Validity

Uploaded by

richard28asentista
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
39 views2 pages

Local Government Ordinance Validity

Uploaded by

richard28asentista
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Political Law—Law on Local Government

Makasiano v. Diokno property thus withdrawn from public use may


be used or conveyed for any purpose for which
Facts: The respondent of this case, municipal
other real property belonging to the local unit
of parañaque passed a ordinance authorized for
concerned might be lawfully used or conveyed.
the closure of the road of Paranaque and Metro
(Emphasis ours).
Manila. The ordinance was approved by the
municipal council, authorizing the use of city or Verily, the powers of a local government unit are
municipal road for flea market. not absolute. They are subject to limitations laid
down by the Constitution and the laws such as
The respondent municipality and Palanyag
our Civil Code. Moreover, the exercise of such
(cooperative) entered into an agreement to
powers should be subservient to paramount
operate and maintain the flea market.
considerations of health and well-being of the
The petitioner,Macasiano, wrote a letter to members of the community. Every local
discontinue the flea market. government unit has the sworn obligation to
enact measures that will enhance the public
The respondents filed to the trial court a joint health, safety and convenience, maintain peace
petition for prohibition and mandamus and order, and promote the general prosperity
The trial court uphold the validity of the of the inhabitants of the local units. Based on
ordinance. this objective, the local government should
refrain from acting towards that which might
Issue: whether the ordinance issued by prejudice or adversely affect the general
respondent municipality is valid. welfare.
Properties of the local government which are
devoted to public service are deemed public
and are under the absolute control of Congress US vs. Espiritusanto
(Province of Zamboanga del Norte v. City of
AUTHORITY OF MUNICIPAL COUNCILS TO
Zamboanga, L-24440, March 28, 1968, 22 SCRA
SUPPRESS GAMBLING; "TO PROVIDE AGAINST,"
1334). Hence, local governments have no
INCLUDES POWER TO PROHIBIT. — A municipal
authority whatsoever to control or regulate the
council acts within its power, as conferred by
use of public properties unless specific authority
the organic law, in enacting an ordinance
is vested upon them by Congress. One such
prohibiting the game called jueteng within the
example of this authority given by Congress to
limits of the municipality. The Municipal Code,
the local governments is the power to close
Act No. 82, section 39, authorizing
roads as provided in Section 10, Chapter II of
municipalities to provide against the evils of
the Local Government Code, which states:
gambling, should be understood to include the
Sec. 10. Closure of roads. — A local government power to prohibit games of chance and to make
unit may likewise, through its head acting necessary regulations to exterminate the evils
pursuant to a resolution of its sangguniang arising from the playing of prohibited games.
and in accordance with existing law and the
The defendant of this case appeal the decision
provisions of this Code, close any barangay,
of conviction for charging the defendant with a
municipal, city or provincial road, street, alley,
violation of municipal ordinance enacted by
park or square. No such way or place or any
the municipal council of Malabon.
part of thereof shall be close without
indemnifying any person prejudiced thereby. A
Political Law—Law on Local Government

Hence it is undeniable that the said municipal


council, in passing the said ordinance, did not
Section 19. eminent domain.
exceed its authority and kept strictly within the
powers conferred upon it by its organic law and
the general laws that deal with gambling.

MMDA [Link]

The MMDA has no police power granted by the


Congress.

Section 5 of RA 7924 is understood by the lower


court and by the petitioner to grant MMDA
power to confiscate and suspend or revoke
driver’s licenses without need of any other
legislative enactment, such is an unauthorized
exercise power.

Parayno v. Jovellanos

A gas filling station in Calasiao owned by the


petitioner. Some resident petition to SB of said
municipality for the closure or transfer of the
station to another location. SB recommended
for the closure and transfer of the station.

The Court hold the zoning distinction of the


respondent municipality and invalidly used its
police power in ordering the closure/transfer of
the petitioner’s gas station.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Police power relates to the enforcement of gambling laws by allowing municipalities to create ordinances that prohibit gambling activities that are deemed detrimental to public morals and safety. The authority to enact such laws, as illustrated in the US vs. Espiritusanto case, reflects the municipalities' role in maintaining public order and morals under their granted powers .

Constitutional and legislative constraints shape municipal governance by delineating the scope of authority and power that municipalities can exercise. These constraints ensure that municipal actions are legally grounded, focusing on public interest and welfare, and that they do not infringe on higher national interests as represented in the legislature or Constitution .

The court might emphasize public welfare in interpreting local government powers to ensure that any exercise of authority aligns with the broader societal goals of health, safety, and well-being. By focusing on public welfare, courts can ensure that local governments prioritize community needs over arbitrary policy implementations, as demonstrated in how ordinances are evaluated for validity .

Balancing regulation and individual rights involves ensuring that zoning and public health ordinances do not disproportionately infringe on personal property rights without due legal process. This balance demands that ordinances serve legitimate public needs such as safety and welfare while providing due compensation and notice when personal rights are affected, as seen in the review of municipal powers and court findings like in the Parayno v. Jovellanos case .

The case of US vs. Espiritusanto demonstrates the authority of municipal councils to suppress gambling activities. A municipal council, under its powers conferred by the organic law, enacted an ordinance prohibiting the game of jueteng. This illustrates that the council acted within its power to regulate and prohibit gambling activities as part of its responsibility to protect public morals, health, and safety .

In MMDA v. Garin, the court determined that the MMDA lacked police power because Congress did not grant it such authority. The court highlighted that Section 5 of RA 7924 did not bestow upon MMDA the power to confiscate or suspend driver’s licenses, emphasizing the necessity for a legislative enactment for such powers to be valid .

Legal principles guiding the closure of public properties by local governments include the need for specific authorization from Congress and adherence to provisions that such actions must serve public health, safety, and welfare. These closures must compensate any adversely affected parties, and decisions should be bound by the limitations set in the Constitution and statutory laws like the Local Government Code .

The Makasiano v. Diokno case infers that local government autonomy is limited and subordinated to national legislation. Local governments must act within the scope of authority granted by Congress, particularly when managing public properties like roads. The case underscores the hierarchical relationship where national legislation provides specific authorizations necessary for local actions .

In Parayno v. Jovellanos, the court held that the municipality had invalidly used its police power in ordering the closure or transfer of a gas station. The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to legal standards for zoning distinctions and the proper exercise of police power, considering the imbalance in protecting the property rights of the petitioner against arbitrary municipal action .

Local governments do not have absolute authority to control or regulate the use of public properties, including roads, unless specific authority is granted by Congress. In the case of Makasiano v. Diokno, the validity of an ordinance by the local government for closing roads was challenged, highlighting the requirement for specific authority from Congress. Such powers must also align with paramount considerations of health, safety, and general welfare of the community .

You might also like