Chapter Ten: Amendment, Revision, Codification, and Repeal
1. What is the legislature's authority to amend laws, and what are the limitations of this power?
The legislature possesses the inherent power to amend, alter, or repeal laws as part of its constitutional
authority to enact legislation. This power, however, is bounded by the Constitution and must adhere to
procedural requirements. The judiciary, specifically the Supreme Court, is precluded from amending
laws, as this function lies exclusively within the legislature's domain. In Quimpo v. Mendoza, the Court
clarified that legislative intent governs amendments, and any modification must align with constitutional
mandates. For instance, while the legislature may enact amendatory statutes, the judiciary's role is
limited to interpreting such statutes within the framework of the law.
2. How is an amendment effected, and what distinguishes express amendment from implied
amendment?
An amendment is a modification of an existing statute, achieved through an amendatory act.
• Express Amendment: This occurs when the amendatory act explicitly states which sections or
provisions of a law are to be altered, often indicated by the phrase "to read as follows."
• Implied Amendment: This arises when a later statute is inconsistent with a prior one, rendering
the conflicting provisions of the earlier law unenforceable. The legislative intent to amend is
inferred from the inconsistency between the statutes.
In Quimpo v. Mendoza, the penalty provision of an earlier tax law was modified by implication when a
subsequent law allowed for installment payments, illustrating the principle that implied amendments
reconcile inconsistencies.
3. What is the significance of the ruling in People v. Macatanda regarding implied amendments?
In People v. Macatanda, the Supreme Court held that when a statute prescribing penalties aligns with
the Revised Penal Code, it constitutes an implied amendment rather than a special law. This ruling
underscores that legislative intent is central to determining whether a subsequent law modifies an
earlier one implicitly.
4. When does an amendment take effect, and what are the publication requirements?
An amendment generally takes effect 15 days following its publication in the Official Gazette or a
newspaper of general circulation, unless a specific date is provided in the amendatory act. Compliance
with publication requirements is essential to ensure that the law becomes effective and enforceable.
5. How are amendments construed, and what is the significance of unchanged portions in a statute?
Amendments must be read in conjunction with the original statute and related provisions, treating the
amended act as if it were originally enacted in its altered form. Portions of the law that remain
unchanged retain their original meaning and effect. In Estrada v. Caseda, the Court ruled that the four-
year validity period of a statute is counted from the approval date of the original act, not the
amendatory statute, illustrating the continuity of unchanged provisions.
6. What is the effect of an amendment on the meaning of a law?
An amendment presumes a legislative intent to change the law's meaning, especially when the language
of the amendatory act materially differs from the original statute. For example, in Victorias Milling Co. v.
SSS, the elimination of an exception in a statutory definition expanded the scope of the general rule,
reflecting the legislature's intent to include the previously exempted category.
7. What principles govern the prospective operation of amendments?
Amendments are presumed to operate prospectively unless a contrary legislative intent is explicitly
stated or necessarily implied. Retroactive application is limited to cases where no vested rights are
impaired. In Imperial v. Collector of Internal Revenue, the Court ruled that a tax law amendment did not
apply retroactively to past transactions unless the statute explicitly provided otherwise.
8. How do amendments affect vested rights?
An amendment does not retroactively impair vested rights or obligations that arose under the original
statute. Such rights continue to be governed by the law as it existed prior to the amendment. This
principle safeguards stability and fairness in legal relationships.
9. What is the effect of an amendment on jurisdiction, and how is this principle applied?
Jurisdiction is determined by the law in force at the time the action is instituted. Once jurisdiction
attaches, it remains with the court until the case is resolved, unless explicitly divested by subsequent
legislation. In Erectors, Inc. v. NLRC, the Court upheld the jurisdiction of the labor arbiter over a case filed
before the effectivity of an amendatory law, affirming the principle that laws affecting jurisdiction
generally operate prospectively.
10. What happens when the amendatory act is declared invalid?
If an amendatory act is declared unconstitutional, the original statute remains unaffected and continues
to be in force. In Government v. Agoncillo, the Court held that the invalidity of the amendment rendered
the original law operative as if the amendment never existed.
REVISION AND CODIFICATION
Question 1: What is the purpose of revising and codifying laws?
The purpose of revising and codifying laws is to consolidate and restate existing laws into a single,
comprehensive statute. This simplifies complicated provisions, makes the laws on a subject more
accessible, and ensures uniformity in interpretation. Codification aims to harmonize different provisions,
assuming that the legislature intended a consistent philosophy or approach across the entire statute.
Question 2: How should the different provisions of a revised statute or code be construed?
The provisions of a revised statute or code should be read and interpreted together as a cohesive whole.
A code enacted as a single, comprehensive statute is not to be viewed as a series of disconnected articles
or provisions. For example, in Lichauco & Co. v. Apostol, the Supreme Court emphasized that when an
irreconcilable conflict arises between parts of a revised statute, the provision most consistent with the
general plan or, in the absence of such guidance, the one later in physical position prevails, as it
represents the latest legislative intent.
Question 3: What happens to provisions omitted in a revised statute or code?
Provisions of the old law omitted in a revised statute or code are deemed repealed unless explicitly
stated otherwise. This reflects the legislature’s intent for the revision or codification to constitute a
complete and exhaustive enactment on the subject matter. In Mecano v. Commission on Audit, however,
the Supreme Court ruled that omission alone does not indicate an intent to repeal unless it is evident
that the revised law covers the entire subject comprehensively.
Question 4: Can changes in phraseology affect the interpretation of a revised statute or code?
Changes in phraseology, such as the addition or omission of words, do not necessarily alter the
construction of a statute. Courts consider the overall legislative intent, and minor alterations are not
held to change the meaning of the law unless they clearly demonstrate an intent to depart from the
former construction.
Question 5: How is codification treated concerning existing laws?
Codification is generally construed as a continuation of existing laws rather than an alteration unless
changes manifest a clear legislative intent to deviate. Rearranging sections or altering their phrasing does
not inherently change their effect unless the modifications are significant and unmistakably intentional.
REPEAL
Question 6: What is the legislature's power to repeal laws?
The power to repeal laws is as complete as the power to enact them. The legislature cannot create
irrepealable laws or limit its ability to enact future legislation that supersedes existing laws.
Question 7: What are the types of repeal, and how are they classified?
Repeals can be total or partial and may be express or implied.
• Total Repeal: Revokes an entire statute.
• Partial Repeal: Leaves unaffected portions of the statute in force.
• Express Repeal: Explicitly identifies the repealed law.
• Implied Repeal: Occurs when the provisions of a new statute conflict irreconcilably with an
existing one or when the new law comprehensively covers the same subject.
Question 8: What are the rules governing repeal by implication?
Repeals by implication occur only when legislative intent to abrogate a prior law is clear and manifest.
Two scenarios can lead to implied repeal:
1. Irreconcilable Conflict: When provisions in the two laws are inconsistent and cannot coexist.
2. Comprehensive Coverage: When the later law covers the entire subject matter of the earlier law,
serving as its substitute.
For instance, in Agujetas v. Court of Appeals, the Court ruled that Section 28 of R.A. 7166, which was
silent on certain details about canvassing provided by Section 231 of the Omnibus Election Code, did not
impliedly repeal the latter. Both laws were reconciled to coexist without nullifying each other.
Question 9: How does irreconcilable inconsistency between statutes affect their enforcement?
Irreconcilable inconsistency leads to implied repeal when the statutes:
• Address the same subject matter.
• Are so incompatible that enforcing one nullifies the other.
In Smith, Bell & Co. v. Estate of Maronilla, the Court held that a prior law is impliedly repealed if the
rationale for its enactment is entirely removed by a later law. However, implied repeals are disfavored,
and courts presume consistency unless a clear and manifest conflict exists.
Question 10: How did the Court interpret implied repeal in Mecano v. Commission on Audit?
The issue in Mecano was whether Section 699 of the Revised Administrative Code of 1917, which
allowed reimbursement for medical expenses of government officials, was repealed by the
Administrative Code of 1987. The Supreme Court ruled that there was no implied repeal because:
• The 1987 Code did not comprehensively cover the subject matter of the 1917 Code.
• Several provisions from the old Code were not addressed in the new one.
• Implied repeal requires clear and irreconcilable conflict, which was absent.
This decision underscores that legislative intent must clearly indicate an implied repeal, and omissions
alone are insufficient evidence of such intent.
Repeal by Reenactment
1. What is the concept of repeal by reenactment?
Repeal by reenactment occurs when a statute reenacts the whole subject matter of a previous law,
effectively substituting the new law for the old one. When certain provisions of the original law are
omitted in the reenactment, those omissions are deemed repealed. The doctrine ensures legislative
clarity and coherence in statutory interpretation, avoiding contradictions between old and new laws.
Key Case: Parras v. Land Registration Commission
This case illustrates that when a law amends a specific section of a prior act by stating that it is amended
"so as to read as follows," any provisions omitted in the reenactment are considered repealed. The new
statute serves as a substitute for the original section, rendering all omitted matters repealed.
2. How does implied repeal manifest, and what are its forms?
Implied repeal arises when a newer statute conflicts with an older one to such an extent that both laws
cannot coexist. This repeal does not require express words but is inferred from the inconsistency or
incompatibility between the two laws.
Forms of Implied Repeal:
1. Universal Negative Statutes:
When the newer law is phrased in a universal negative form, it repeals conflicting provisions of
the earlier law unless the legislature explicitly states otherwise.
2. Affirmative Statutes:
An affirmative statute does not repeal an earlier law unless the legislative intent to repeal is
manifest.
3. Subsequent Special Conditions or Restrictions:
A newer statute introducing special terms on the same subject matter as an earlier general
statute implies repeal of the conflicting provisions in the prior law.
Case Reference: US v. Palacio
This case highlights the principle that repeals by implication are not favored unless there is a manifest
and irreconcilable conflict between the two laws. Courts strive to harmonize statutes wherever possible.
3. What is the significance of a repealing clause in a statute?
A repealing clause, often found in statutes, serves to nullify conflicting provisions of earlier laws.
However, it is not always an express repeal since it may not identify specific laws to be repealed.
Case: Valdez v. Tuason
The Court clarified that a general repealing clause does not inherently repeal any provision not already in
conflict with the new law. The critical inquiry remains whether the new law is fundamentally inconsistent
with the earlier statute.
4. How does a general law interact with a special law in cases of repeal?
Under the principle of generalia specialibus non derogant (general laws do not derogate from special
laws), a general law does not repeal a special law unless explicitly stated. Special laws are treated as
exceptions to general statutes.
Key Cases:
• Sto. Domingo v. De los Angeles:
The Court ruled that the special law remained valid as an exception to the general law since no
explicit intent to repeal it was indicated.
• NAPOCOR v. Arca:
The specific provisions of Commonwealth Act 120, granting NAPOCOR autonomy in rate fixing,
were not repealed by the broader terms of Republic Act 2677. The Court emphasized the
absence of legislative intent to repeal the special law.
5. What is the presumption against implied repeal?
The presumption against implied repeal is a judicial doctrine that prioritizes the coexistence of statutes.
Courts assume that legislatures enact laws with full knowledge of existing ones and do not intend to
create conflicts unless clearly indicated.
Principles:
• Courts aim to harmonize conflicting statutes.
• A construction that avoids repeal is favored, particularly when reconciling general and special
laws.
Case: NAPOCOR v. Angas
The issue revolved around whether Central Bank Circular 416 repealed Article 2209 of the Civil Code. The
Court held that no repeal occurred since the statutes addressed different subjects and could coexist.
6. What is the role of legislative intent in determining repeal by reenactment or implication?
Legislative intent is paramount in identifying whether a repeal is express, implied, or by reenactment.
Courts examine the context, language, and purpose of the statutes to ascertain whether repeal was
intended.
Key Case: David v. COMELEC
The Court resolved a conflict between Republic Acts 6679 and 7160 concerning the term of barangay
officials. The latter law, being more recent, prevailed as it demonstrated the legislature's intent to modify
the prior enactment.
7. How does the principle of "leges posteriors priores contrarias abrogant" apply in cases of conflicting
laws?
This principle asserts that a later statute repeals an earlier one if they are inconsistent. It reflects the
presumption that the later law represents the most current expression of legislative will.
Case: Manila Trading & Supply Co. v. Philippine Labor Union
The Court favored a law enacted later in the same year, even though its effective date preceded that of
the earlier statute, emphasizing the legislative intent underlying the timeline.
8. What happens when a general law contains a repealing clause that impacts a special law?
When a general law explicitly includes a repealing clause, it may repeal a special law if the legislature
clearly intends to bring about that result. However, in the absence of such intent, the special law remains
operative.
Case Reference: Philippine Railway Co. v. Collector of Internal Revenue
The Court ruled that the franchise granted to PRC was not repealed by subsequent general laws on
taxation, as there was no explicit legislative intent to abrogate the earlier special provision.
9. Why are courts hesitant to decree repeal by implication?
Courts are cautious in declaring implied repeals due to the potential for legislative oversight. They
require clear and convincing evidence of legislative intent and avoid interpretations that disrupt
statutory harmony.
Principles:
• Repeals must be manifest and necessary.
• The legislature is presumed deliberate in its enactments.
Case: Philippine National Bank v. Cruz
In reconciling Articles 2241–2245 of the Civil Code with Article 110 of the Labor Code, the latter was
deemed to prevail as the newer and more specific provision reflecting legislative intent.
Repeal and Jurisdiction in Philippine Law: Covering All Cases and Subtopics
1. What was the central issue in Philippine International Trading Corp. v. Commission on Audit, and
how did the Supreme Court resolve it?
The issue in Philippine International Trading Corp. v. COA was whether the PITC Charter had been
impliedly repealed by Section 16 of Republic Act No. 6758, particularly regarding its compensation and
position classification system.
The Supreme Court held that there was indeed an implied repeal of the PITC Charter's exemption from
the government compensation system. The Court underscored that the legislative intent to repeal was
manifest in the enactment of RA 6758, which sought to establish a uniform compensation system across
all government agencies. Consequently, PITC became subject to laws prescribing a government
compensation and position classification system, thus aligning its employees' salaries with government
standards.
2. What are the general effects of the repeal of a statute, as highlighted in Philippine jurisprudence?
The repeal of a statute renders it inoperative from the date the repealing act takes effect. However,
several nuances exist:
• Not Retroactive: Repeal does not invalidate the repealed law from its inception; instead, it stops
its operation from the repeal's effective date.
• Vested Rights: Rights that accrued and vested under the repealed statute remain protected and
enforceable, as emphasized in Buyco v. PNB. For instance, backpay certificate holders who had
vested rights under a statute could continue using them despite its repeal.
• Pending Actions: Repeal does not necessarily nullify proceedings already commenced under the
repealed law unless explicitly provided. For instance, in Un Pak Leung v. Nigorra, the right to
appeal, once perfected, was unaffected by subsequent repeal.
• Illegal Transactions: The expiration or repeal of a law does not render previously illegal
transactions legal or alter ongoing cases related to such transactions unless explicitly stated.
3. How does the repeal of a statute affect jurisdiction, especially concerning pending cases?
Repeal of a statute does not automatically divest courts or administrative bodies of jurisdiction over
cases filed under the old law. The general principles include:
• Jurisdiction Continuity: Jurisdiction, once vested, is generally retained until the case's resolution.
For instance, in cases of illegal importation prosecuted under a repealed law, jurisdiction
persists, as seen in customs forfeiture cases.
• Criminal Cases: In criminal matters, as stated in Republic v. Migrino, jurisdiction persists despite
the repeal of the statute under which prosecution was initiated. However, this rule is subject to
exceptions, such as when the repeal is absolute and renders the act no longer a crime.
• Simultaneous Reenactment: In People v. Almuete, the Court explained that simultaneous repeal
and reenactment preserve continuity. However, a gap between repeal and reenactment can
nullify jurisdiction over cases based on the repealed statute.
4. What are the distinctions between the repeal and expiration of laws in terms of their effects on
criminal liability?
The effects of repeal and expiration differ significantly:
• Absolute Repeal: A total repeal extinguishes the crime, making prosecution under the repealed
law impossible. For example, if a penal law is entirely repealed without reenactment, as noted in
general principles, the crime is obliterated, and the stigma of conviction is erased.
• Expiration: Expired laws do not retroactively negate the illegality of acts committed during their
validity unless explicitly stated. Courts retain jurisdiction over such cases.
• Saving Clauses: Exceptions exist when the repealing law includes provisions preserving pending
actions, ensuring continuity of prosecution despite repeal.
5. How does the repeal of a statute affect contracts, particularly those involving government units?
Contracts entered into under a repealed law are generally unaffected by the repeal:
• Preservation of Terms: As held in Ramos v. Municipality of Daet, the repeal of Batas Pambansa
337 by RA 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991) did not alter existing rights and obligations.
Section 5(d) of RA 7160 explicitly preserved the terms of contracts made under the previous law.
• Impairment Prohibited: Repeal cannot impair vested rights or obligations arising from contracts,
as this would violate constitutional protections against impairing the obligation of contracts,
except in cases of legitimate police power.
6. What is the effect of the simultaneous repeal and reenactment of a law?
Simultaneous repeal and reenactment effectively neutralize the repeal, ensuring the law's uninterrupted
application:
• Continuity: As clarified in People v. Almuete, simultaneous reenactment ensures that obligations
and sanctions under the old law persist. However, a gap between repeal and reenactment
disrupts this continuity, potentially nullifying pending prosecutions.
• Penal Laws: If a penal law is reenacted simultaneously, pending cases under the repealed law
remain unaffected, and the accused can still be prosecuted.
7. What exceptions exist to the general rule that repeal destroys criminal liability under a repealed
law?
While absolute repeal eliminates criminal liability, exceptions include:
• Saving Clauses: When a repealing law includes a clause preserving pending prosecutions, cases
under the repealed statute can continue.
• Reenactment: If the repealing act simultaneously reenacts the penal provision, acts committed
under the repealed law remain crimes.
8. What principles govern the repeal of municipal charters, and how does it affect local governance?
Repeal of a municipal charter has significant consequences:
• Abolition of Offices: Repeal destroys offices under the charter, as seen in legislative actions
converting municipalities to cities. This also terminates incumbents' functions unless the new
charter provides exceptions.
• Example: The conversion of a municipality into a city results in the abolition of pre-existing
offices unless preserved by the new charter.
9. What happens if a repealing law is declared unconstitutional?
If a repealing statute is declared unconstitutional, it does not affect the validity of the original law:
• Revival of the Old Law: The original law remains in force, as the unconstitutional repealing law
has no legal effect.
• Example: This principle ensures legal continuity and avoids gaps in governance or jurisprudence.
10. How does the repeal of tax laws impact assessed liabilities?
The repeal of tax laws is generally prospective, meaning liabilities assessed before the repeal remain
collectible. Courts apply the law in force at the time of assessment.