TITLE: ALFREDO TANO, BALDOMERO TANO, DANILO TANO, ROMUALDO TANO||| vs HON. GOV. SALVADOR P.
SOCRATES,
MEMBERS OF SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN OF PALAWAN|||
G.R. No.110249, [], 343 PHIL 670-734 DATE:August 21, 1997
PONENTE: DAVIDE, JR., J : p TOPIC:
FACTS OF THE CASE:Petitioners caption their petition as one for "Certiorari, Injunction With
Preliminary and Mandatory Injunction, with Prayer for Temporary Restraining Order" and pray that
this Court:
(1) declare as unconstitutional:
(a) Ordinance No. 15-92, dated 15 December 1992, of the Sangguniang Panlungsod of
Puerto Princesa;
(b) (b) Office Order No. 23, Series of 1993, dated 22 January 1993, issued by Acting City
Mayor Amado L. Lucero of Puerto Princesa City; and (c) Resolution No. 33, Ordinance No. 2, Series
of 1993, dated 19 February 1993, of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Palawan;
(2) enjoin the enforcement thereof; and
(3) restrain respondents Provincial and City Prosecutors of Palawan and Puerto Princesa City and
Judges of the Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts 1 and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in
Palawan from assuming jurisdiction over and hearing cases concerning the violation of the
Ordinances and of the Office Order. prcd
More appropriately, the petition is, and shall be treated as, a special civil action
for certiorari and prohibition.
Without seeking redress from the concerned local government units, prosecutor's office and courts,
petitioners directly invoked our original jurisdiction by filing this petition on 4 June 1993. In sum,
petitioners contend that:
the Ordinances deprived them of due process of law, their livelihood, and unduly restricted them
from the practice of their trade, in violation of Section 2, Article XII and Sections 2 and 7 of Article XIII
of the 1987 Constitution.
Office Order No. 23 contained no regulation nor condition under which the Mayor's permit
could be granted or denied; in other words, the Mayor had the absolute authority to determine
whether or not to issue the permit.
as Ordinance No. 2 of the Province of Palawan "altogether prohibited the catching, gathering,
possession, buying, selling and shipping of live marine coral dwelling organisms, without any
distinction whether it was caught or gathered through lawful fishing method," the Ordinance took
away the right of petitioners-fishermen to earn their livelihood in lawful ways; and insofar as
petitioners-members of Airline Shippers Association are concerned, they were unduly prevented
from pursuing their vocation and entering "into contracts which are proper, necessary, and essential
to carry out their business endeavors to a successful conclusion."
PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
1
STATEMENT OF ISSUE/S: Whether or not the Ordinances in question are unconstitutional
HOLDING: NO,
In Section 534 (Repealing Clause) of the LGC expressly repeals or amends Section 16 and 29 of P.D.
No. 704 45a insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of the LGC.
Under the general welfare clause of the LGC, local government units have the power, inter alia, to
enact ordinances to enhance the right of the people to a balanced ecology. It likewise specifically
vests municipalities with the power to grant fishery privileges in municipal waters, and impose rentals,
fees or charges therefor; the penalize, by appropriate ordinances, the use of explosives, noxious or
poisonous substances, electricity, muro-ami, and other deleterious methods of fishing; and to
prosecute any violation of the provisions of applicable fishery laws.
It is clear to the Court that both Ordinances have two principal objectives or purposes: (1) to
establish a "closed season" for the species of fish or aquatic animals covered therein for a period
of five years; and (2) to protect the coral in the marine waters of the City of Puerto Princesa and the
Province of Palawan from further destruction due to illegal fishing activities.
The accomplishment of the first objective is well within the devolved power to enforce fishery laws in
municipal waters, such as P.D. No. 1015, which allows the establishment of "closed seasons." The
devolution of such power has been expressly confirmed in the Memorandum of Agreement of 5 April
1994 between the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Interior and Local Government.
The realization of the second objective clearly falls within both the general welfare clause of
the LGC and the express mandate thereunder to cities and provinces to protect the environment and
impose appropriate penalties for acts which endanger the environment.
In closing, we commend the Sangguniang Panlungsod of the City of Puerto Princesa
and Sangguniang Panlalawigan of the Province of Palawan for exercising the requisite political will to
enact urgently needed legislation to protect and enhance the marine environment, thereby sharing in
the herculean task of arresting the tide of ecological destruction.
Notes, if any:
SEC. 16. General Welfare. — Every local government unit shall exercise the powers expressly granted, those necessarily
implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary, appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance, and those which
are essential to the promotion of the general welfare. Within their respective territorial jurisdictions, local government units shall
ensure and support, among other things, the preservation and enrichment of culture, promote health and safety, enhance the right
of the people to a balanced ecology, encourage and support the development of appropriate and self-reliant scientific and
technological capabilities, improve public morals, enhance economic prosperity and social justice, promote full employment among
their residents, maintain peace and order, and preserve the comfort and convenience of their inhabitants. (emphasis supplied).
