Rodriguez v. Gella Digest

Rodriguez v Gella

G.R. No. L-6266 February 2, 1953

Paras, C.J.:

Facts:

1.   Petitioners sought to invalidate Executive Orders (EO) 545 and 546 issued on November 10, 1952. EO 545 appropriated the sum of P37,850,500 for urgent and essential public works, while EO 546 set aside the sum of P11,367,600 for relief in the provinces and cities visited by typhoons, floods, droughts, earthquakes, volcanic action and other calamities.

2.     Section 26 of Article VI of the Constitution provides that "in times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may by law authorize the President, for a limited period and subject to such restrictions as it may prescribe, to promulgate rules and regulations to carry out a declared national policy." Accordingly the National Assembly passed Commonwealth Act No. 671, declaring (in section 1) the national policy that "the existence of war between the United States and other countries of Europe and Asia, which involves the Philippines makes it necessary to invest the President with extraordinary powers in order to meet the resulting emergency," and (in section 2) authorizing the President, "during the existence of the emergency, to promulgate such rules and regulations as he may deem necessary to carry out the national policy declared in section 1."

3.   House Bill No. 727 sought to repeal all Emergency Powers Acts but was vetoed by the President. HB 727 may at least be considered as a concurrent resolution of the Congress to formally declare the termination of the emergency powers. 

ISSUE: Whether or not the Executive Orders are still operative

NO.

1.   EOs 545 and 546 must be declared as having no legal anchorage. The Congress has since liberation repeatedly been approving acts appropriating funds for the operation of the Government, public works, and many others purposes, with the result that as to such legislative task the Congress must be deemed to have long decided to assume the corresponding power itself and to withdraw the same from the President.

2.     CA 671 was in pursuance of the constitutional provision, it has to be assumed that the National Assembly intended it to be only for a limited period. If it be contended that the Act has not yet been duly repealed, and such step is necessary to a cessation of the emergency powers delegated to the President, the result would be obvious unconstitutionality, since it may never be repealed by the Congress, or if the latter ever attempts to do so, the President may wield his veto.

3.    If the President had ceased to have powers with regards to general appropriations, none can remain in respect of special appropriations; otherwise he may accomplish indirectly what he cannot do directly. Besides, it is significant that Act No. 671 expressly limited the power of the President to that continuing "in force" appropriations which would lapse or otherwise become inoperative, so that, even assuming that the Act is still effective, it is doubtful whether the President can by executive orders make new appropriations.

4.     The specific power "to continue in force laws and appropriations which would lapse or otherwise become inoperative" is a limitation on the general power "to exercise such other powers as he may deem necessary to enable the Government to fulfil its responsibilities and to maintain and enforce its authority." Indeed, to hold that although the Congress has, for about seven years since liberation, been normally functioning and legislating on every conceivable field, the President still has any residuary powers under the Act, would necessarily lead to confusion and overlapping, if not conflict.

5.   The framers of the Constitution, however, had the vision of and were careful in allowing delegation of legislative powers to the President for a limited period "in times of war or other national emergency." They had thus entrusted to the good judgment of the Congress the duty of coping with any national emergency by a more efficient procedure; but it alone must decide because emergency in itself cannot and should not create power. In our democracy the hope and survival of the nation lie in the wisdom and unselfish patriotism of all officials and in their faithful adherence to the Constitution.