Quasi-Corporations

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
Judge M. Capadocia  Public corporations created as agencies of the State
References: for a narrow and limited purpose. (Elliot, Municipal
Local Government Code Annotated by Rufus B. Rodriguez Corporations). Unlike other public corporations, they
Lectures of Judge Capadocia are not possessed of the powers and liabilities of self-
governing corporations. Their power generally relates
to matters of state, as distinguished from municipal
concern.
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Boy Scout of the Philippines v. COA
What is political law? The BSP is a public corporation. Not all corporations,
Political law is that branch of public law which deals with the which are not GOCC, are ipso facto to be considered private
organization and operation of the government organs of the corporations as there exists another distinct class of
state and defines the relations of the state with its inhabitants corporations or chartered institutions which are known as
of the territory. (People v. Perfecto) PUBLIC CORPORATIONS – are treated by law as agencies or
instrumentalities of the government which are not subject to
Subdivisions of Political law the tests or ownership or control and economic viability.
1. Constitutional Law The BSP, as presently constituted under RA 7278 is a
2. Administrative Law nd
public corporation and falls under the 2 classification of Art.
3. Law on Public Officers 44, Civil Code:
4. Law on Public Corporations
 3 Types of juridical persons:
What is a Corporation? 1. The State and its political subdivisions
A corporation is an artificial being, created by operation of law, 2. Other corporations, institutions, and entities for public
having the right of succession and the powers, attributes and interest or purpose created by law; their personality begins as
properties expressly authorized by law or incident to its soon as they have been constituted according to law
existence. (Sec. 2, Corporation Code) 3. Corporations, partnerships and associations for
private interest or purpose to which the law grants a juridical
Classes of Corporation personality, separate and distinct from each shareholder,
1. Public corporations partner or member.
2. Private corporations – formed for private purpose, The BSP, which was created by a special law to serve a
benefit, aim or end. public purpose in pursuit of constitutional mandate, comes
What is a public corporation? within the class of PUBLIC CORPORATIONS defined by par. 2,
Art. 44 of the Civil Code and governed by the law which creates
 Created by the State either by general or special act it, pursuant to Art. 45 of the same Code.
for purposes of administration of local government or
rendering services in the public interest. BSP‟s classification under the Administrative Code of 1987 is
 Formed or organized for the government of a portion an attached agency of the DECS. As such, BSP enjoys
of the State, it is created by the state as its own operational autonomy and is not under government control or
agency for the accomplishment of parts of its own “supervision and control” (attached chartered agency) but does
public works. (Elliot, Municipal Corporations) not make it a private corporation.
 Pursuant to this definition, public corporations in the BSP may be regarded as both government controlled
Philippines are the governments of PROVINCES, corporation with an original charter and as an instrumentality
CITIES, MUNICIPALITIES and BARANGAYS. of the government.
 Public corporations are established for purposes
connected with the administration of civil or local What is a Municipal Corporation?
governments. They are created by the State as its own
 It is a body politic and corporate constituted by the
agency or instrumentality to help the state in carrying
incorporation of the inhabitants for purposes of local
out its governmental functions.
government thereof. It is established by law partly as
 They are creations by the State either by general or
an agency of the state to assist in the civil government
special act. Example: BSP (Read: BSP v. COA, GR No.
of the country, but chiefly to regulate and administer
177131, June 7, 2011)
the local or internal affairs of the city, town or district
Classes of Public Corporations which is incorporated. (Dillon, Municipal Corporation;
See Section 15, LGC)
1. Quasi-public corporations
 The term has given way to the more recent term,
2. Municipal corporations
LOCAL GOVERNMENT, which has a substantially
identical definition. Municipal corporations and local
governments are therefore one and the same entity.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 2
What is a Local Government?
A political subdivision of a nation or state which is constituted
by law and has substantial control of local affairs. (UP Law
Center Constitution Revision Project citing Sady, Improvement
of Local Government and Administration for Development
Purpose).
What is a GOCC (Government-owned and controlled
corporation)? [Criteria: Function + Ownership]
 Section 2(13) of E.O. 292, Administrative Code of 1987:
Any agency organized as a stock or non-stock
corporation vested with functions relating to public needs
whether government or proprietary in nature, and owned
by the government directly or indirectly or through its
instrumentalities, either wholly, or where applicable, as in
the case of stock corporations, to the extent of at least
51% of its capital stock; provided, that GOCCs may be
further categorized by the Department of Budget, the CSC
and COA for the purpose of the exercise and discharge of
their respective powers, functions and responsibilities with
respect to such corporations.
 In Leyson v. Ombudsman, 331 SCRA 227 and in a later
case, MIAA v. CA, et al., GR No. 155650, July 20, 2006:
The SC has clarified that any agency organized as a
stock or non-stock corporation vested with functions
related to public needs whether governmental or
proprietary in nature, and owned by the government
directly or through its instrumentalities, either wholly, or
where applicable, as in the case of stock corporations, to
the extent of at least 51% of its capital stock is a GOCC.
What is an Agency?
According to the SC, an agency is broadly defined by statute as
any of the various units of the Government, including a
department, bureau, office, instrumentality, or GOCC, or a local
government or a distinct unit therein. (Sec. 2, Introductory
Provisions, Administrative Code of 1987)
Department vs. Bureau vs. Instrumentality
 A DEPARTMENT refers to an executive department
created by law.
 A BUREAU is understood to refer to any principal
subdivision of any department. An office refers to any
major functional unit of a department or bureau,
including regional offices.
DEPARTMENT
(Example: Department of Justice)
BUREAU
(National Bureau of Investigation)
OFFICE
(Office of the Director, Regional Offices)
 An INSTRUMENTALITY refers to any agency of the
National Government, not integrated within the
department framework, vested with special functions
or jurisdiction by law, endowed with some, if not all,
corporate powers, administering special funds and
enjoying operational autonomy, usually through a
charter. The term includes regulatory agencies,
chartered institutions and GOCCs.
 The definition of INSTRUMENTALITY under the
Administrative Code includes GOCC which means that
a government instrumentality may or may not be a
GOCC.
 The term government “INSTRUMENTALITY” is
BROADER than the term GOCC. The fact that a
government instrumentality may include a GOCC
means that there may be an instrumentality that will
not qualify as a GOCC.
MIAA v. CA, GR No. 155650, July 20, 2006
Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) is not a
GOCC under Section 2 (13) of the Administrative Code because
it is not organized as a stock or non-stock corporation. Neither
is it a GOCC under Section 16, Article XII of the Constitution
because MIAA is not required to meet the test of economic
viability.
MIAA is a government instrumentality vested with
corporate powers to perform efficiently its governmental
functions pursuant to Section 2(10) of the Administrative Code.
As a government instrumentality, MIAA is not subject to any
kind of tax by local governments under Section 133 of the
Local Government Code.
(Read: Lapu-lapu City v. PEZA, GR No. 184203 and 187583,
November 26, 2014)
Nature and Status of Municipal Corporations
 Courts regard a Municipal Corporation as a
subordinate branch of the government of the State
and municipal administration as an instrumentality of
state administration.
 It exercises DELEGATED powers of the government. Its
charter is granted for the better government of
particular area or districts. It is a political subdivision
of the state and variedly described as an arm of the
state, a miniature state, an instrumentality of the state,
a mere creature of the same, an agent of the state,
and the like.
Elements of a Municipal Corporation
1. A legal creation or incorporation
2. A corporate name by which all corporate acts are
done
3. Inhabitants constituting the population who are
invested with the political and corporate powers
which are executed through duly constituted officers
and agents
4. A place or territory within which the local civil
government and corporate functions are exercised.
(See Section 7, Local Government Code)
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 3
Kinds of Municipal Corporations
1. Municipal corporation proper – generally, the term
refers to incorporated LGUs invested with the power
of local legislation
2. Quasi-municipal corporation – another term for quasi-
corporation
Distinction between MCP and QMC
 MCP exists and is governed by its charter; QMC
operates directly as an agency of the State to help in
the administration of public functions.
 When invested with the power of local government,
the municipal corporation as an agency of the state
becomes a municipal corporation proper.
Criterion whether a corporation is MCP or QMC
Several tests to determine whether a corporation is municipal
corporation or quasi-municipal. Among the tests are:
1. The voluntary or involuntary nature of the corporation
2. The existence or non-existence of a charter
3. Whether the purpose of the corporation is solely as a
governmental agency or one for self government.
Purposes of Municipal Corporations (Two-fold purpose)
1. To serve as an agency or instrumentality of the state
in carrying on the functions of government which the
state cannot conveniently exercise, such as the
collection of taxes, assessment of property and
enforcement of police regulations; and
2. To act as an agency of the inhabitants of the
community in the regulation and the operation of
municipal franchises and public utilities, such as
maintenance of water system, ferries, wharves, etc.
Municipal Corporation Distinguished from Public
Corporation
 ALL Municipal Corporations are PUBLIC corporations,
but not all PUBLIC corporations are municipal
corporations.
 The term municipal corporations properly applies to
incorporated provinces, cities, municipalities and
barangays, with power of local administration.
Distinguishing Feature of MCs
The distinctive purpose and the distinguishing feature of a
municipal corporation proper is the power of local government.
Dual Nature or Personality of MCs
Every municipal corporation has a two-fold character – the
governmental and the private.
1. Public or governmental – acts as an agent of the State
for the government of the territory and the
inhabitants within the municipal limits. It exercises by
delegation a part of sovereignty of the State.
Example: Establishment and operation of schools;
adoption of regulations against fire and diseases and
preservation of the public peace.
2. Private aspect – acts in a similar category as a
business corporation, performing functions not strictly
governmental or political. It stands for the
community in the administration of local affairs which
is wholly beyond the sphere of the public purposes
for which its governmental powers are conferred.
Example: Establishment of markets and slaughter
houses; operation of telephone system, and operation
of ferry services.
History of Municipal Corporations
 UNDER SPANISH REGIME
The unit of local administration was known as the PUEBLO
which embraced an area of many miles and contained
numerous barrios and villages. The Spaniards used the title
CABEZA DE BARANGAY. Then the towns were organized with a
native official called the GOBERNADORCILLO, little governor,
with the popular title of CAPITAN as head.
Maura Law - The law constituted a MUNICIPAL COUNCIL of 5,
the captain and 4 lieutenants, which was given charge of the
active work of governing the municipality, such as
administration of public works, etc and the details of taxation.
Positions were honorary. The Governor General and the
provincial governor retained disciplinary jurisdiction over the
council and members.
The organization of Manila and up to the time of the Maura
Law, of the other principal cities, such as Iloilo and Cebu
followed closely that which prevailed in Spanish-American
cities, which in turn was derived from Spain. Founded in 1871
by Legaspi as a Spanish city, Manila was given recognition and
named VERY LOYAL and NOBLE CITY.
The cities created had the usual Spanish officials, including 2
alcaldes (mayor and vice mayor) and regidores (councilors),
became self-perpetuating bodies.
 UNDER THE AMERICAN REGIME
The government of municipalities was first provided for in
General Order 43, S 1899. Superseded by GO 40, S 1900,
promulgated by the Military Governor.
Under the Presidency of McKinley, the Philippine Commission
passed Act No. 82, on January 31, 1901, providing for the
organization and government of municipalities, and Act No. 83
on February 5, 1901 for the organization of provinces until they
were embodied with modifications, in the Administrative Code,
as Chapters 56, 57, 64 and 67.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 4
POWERS OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS
Local Government as an Agency of the State
A municipal corporation or local government is merely an
agency instituted by the State for the purpose of carrying out
in detail the objects of government. It is essentially a revocable
agency. It has no vested powers or franchises. It is subject to
the CONTROL of the legislative.
Sources of Power of LGs
1. The 1987 Constitution, its provisions in local governments
2. The Local Government Code and
3. All existing laws, acts, decrees, executive orders,
proclamations and administrative regulations not inconsistent
with the 1987 Constitution and the LGC
Classification of LG Powers
1. Express powers – those granted in express words by the
special charter or general law under which the corporation is
organized
2. Implied powers – those necessary or fairly implied in or
incident to the powers expressly granted
3. Inherent powers – those necessary and inseparable from
every corporation and which come into existence as a matter of
course as soon as a municipality is created. They are the
common-law powers of a corporation such as:
a. To have perpetual succession
b. To sue and be sued, implead and be impleaded
c. To purchase, hold and sell property real and personal for
the benefit of the municipal corporation
d. To have a common seal
e. To make by-laws and ordinances for the government of
the municipality
Most of the inherent powers are expressly provided for in
the charter as corporate powers.
Legislative and Executive powers
Legislative power is the authority to make laws (ordinances)
Executive power is the authority to enforce the laws or appoint
the agents charged with the duty of such enforcement.
The test to determine what is legislative and what is
administrative is whether the ordinance is one making a new
law, or one executing a law already in existence.
In the determination, it is the substance of the act performed
which controls, regardless of the form of execution. The
legislative powers of municipal corporations are generally
vested in the common council (sanggunian) and the executive
or administrative powers in the mayor/governor and the heads
of the designated departments and other officers created by
law.
Intramural and Extramural Powers
Intramural – those exercised within the corporate limits of
municipal corporations
Extramural – those exercised without, like those given for the
protection of water supply, prevention of nuisance and also for
police forces
Governmental and Municipal Powers
Governmental – those to administer the powers of the state
and promoting the public welfare within it like power of
eminent domain, of taxation, to promote public education, to
maintain a fire department or police force
Municipal – those for the special benefit and advantage of the
urban community like erection of waterworks, gas works,
power electric plants, from which profits may be derived by the
municipality
Mandatory and Discretionary powers
Mandatory – those the exercise of which can be required of
municipal corporations. When the charter specifically
prescribes the manner by which the corporate acts are to be
executed and points out the agency or officers who are to
execute them, no other method of procedure may be used in
the premises.
Discretionary – those which it may perform or not, depending
upon its judgment and discretion. If the law is silent on the
matter of exercise, the corporate authorities are necessarily
clothed with discretion in determining the same. All the
methods of executing such acts, as may be reasonably inferred
are deemed granted, provided that the action taken is neither
arbitrary nor capricious and must be in good faith.
Execution of Municipal powers
When the charter/statute prescribes the manner by which the
certain corporate acts are to be executed and points out the
agency/officers who are to execute them, no other method of
procedure may be used. But if the law is silent on the matter of
exercise, the corporate authorities are necessarily clothed with
discretion in determining the same.
All methods of executing such acts, provided the action taken
is neither arbitrary nor capricious and must be in good faith is
deemed granted. Unless restrained by law, it has the discretion,
to select the means and methods of exercising its powers,
provided that the means thus selected must be reasonable. In
making the selection, the sanggunian may proceed either by
way of ordinance or resolution.
Kinds of Properties of LGUs
1. Property for public use
a. Roads or streets, squares, fountains public waters and
promenades. They are open for use by everybody.
b. Public works for public service paid for by said units
like buildings or water systems. They may not be freely
used by everybody.
2. Patrimonial property
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 5
Other Classification based on Mode of Acquisition
1. those acquired by the LGUs by their own funds in their
proprietary capacity. These may be disposed of by the LGUs as
they please.
2. those acquired by the LGUs in its governmental capacity
such as those acquired by succession or by donation from the
National Government or from funds received from the State.
Cannot be sold and held in trust by the LGU.
Regardless of the source or classification of land in the
possession of an lgu, excepting those acquired with its own
funds in its private or corporate capacity, such property is held
in trust for the State for the benefit of its inhabitants, whether it
be for governmental or proprietary purposes.
 Read: Mun of Legaspi, 26 SCRA 218
Salas vs Jarencio 45 SCRA 743
Alienation of the Properties of LGUs
Properties for public use cannot be alienated as such and may
not be acquired by prescription.
Patrimonial properties may be alienated and acquired by
prescription.
Properties of LGUs , whether real or personal, which are
necessary for public use cannot be attached and sold at
execution sale to satisfy a money judgment against the LGU.
(Mun. Of Makati vs CA 190 SCRA 206).
Properties intended for public Use or Service
SC ruled that under Art. 424 NCC, it does not matter that the
property is not actually devoted for public use or for some
public services. If property has been intended for such
use/service, and the unit has not devoted it to other uses, or
adopted any measure, which amounted to withdrawal thereof
from public use or service, the same remains property for
public use.
Control & Supervision
Drilon vs Lim 236 SCRA 136
One in control lays down the rules in the doing of an act. If
they are not followed, he may, in his discretion order the act
undone or re-done by his subordinate or he may even decide
to do it himself.
Supervision does not cover such authority. He merely sees to
it that the rules are followed, but he himself does not lay down
such rules, nor does he have the discretion to modify or
replace them.
If the rules are not observed, he may order the work done or
re-done but only to conform to the prescribed rules. He may
not prescribe his own manner for doing the act. He has no
judgment on this matter except to see to it that the rules are
followed.
LEGISLATIVE CONTROL OVER LGU s
LGUs are under the CONTROL of the legislature subject only to
such limitations as the constitution may impose. This control
flows from the unlimited and absolute power of the legislature
to create LGUs. The control and supervision may extend to the
governmental functions, public affairs and properties of LGUs;
their charters and forms of government, funds, revenues and
their officers.
Legislative control over municipal corporations may be limited
by the Constitution and by the nature of the rights and powers
exercised by them. In all that relates to public or governmental
power or rights, the corporation is merely the agent of the
state, and subject to its control.
In all that relates to private powers or rights, it acts as agent of
the individuals, and it assumes the character and relations of
private individuals, and is not subject to the absolute control of
the legislature.
Limitations on Legislative Control
Constitutional limitations:
1. Those relating to the protection of private property (Eminent
Domain)
2. Those preventing the impairment of contractual obligations
(Non impairment Clause)
3. Those prescribing a uniformity of law and prohibiting special
or local legislation. (Equal Protection Clause)
Can Congress deprive LGUs of the right of local government?
No. The right of local self governance is recognized in the
Constitution as provided in Sec. 25 of Article 2 of the
Constitution saying: “The State shall ensure the autonomy of
local governments.”
Legislative control over municipal officers
Subject only to the Constitution, the legislature has absolute
discretion in providing for the manner of selection or
appointment of the officers who will administer the public and
governmental affairs of the municipal corporation.
Relate: prohibition on 3 term limit of local elective officials.
Read: Latasa Case
Legislative control over Municipal Property
Legislature has complete control over property which an LGU
has acquired in its public or governmental capacity and which
is devoted to public governmental use. The LGU in dealing with
said property is subject to such restrictions and limitations as
the legislature may impose. The State at its pleasure, may
modify or withdraw from the LGU the power to hold and
manage its public property.
Property acquired in its private/proprietary capacity, is held by
it in the same character as a private individual. The legislature
in dealing with such property, is subject to the constitutional
restrictions concerning property. It cannot control such
property, except thru a valid exercise of police power, or
eminent domain. It cannot transfer property to other agencies.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 6
Control over public streets - ABSOLUTE
Public streets are not the private property of an LGU. It cannot
alienate or use them for other than legitimate purposes. The
legislature possesses an unlimited control and therefore can
divert the use of the same for some other public purposes.
The legislature (thru legislative franchises) can authorize a
railroad company to lay its tracks on the city streets.
Control over public cemeteries, markets - NOT ABSOLUTE
A cemetery is within the class of property which an LGU owns
in its private or proprietary character. Ownership of such class
of property is protected under the Constitution in that it
cannot be taken without the payment of just compensation.
Control over public utilities- NOT ABSOLUTE
The operation of a water, light, gas or other like supply in an
LGU by its inhabitants, involves the exercise of proprietary or
business functions of an LGU. Municipal regulations over the
operation of such utilities prevail as against national or state
regulations. However, the service and rates of the public utility
may be subject to state regulation.
Control over municipal funds and revenues
With the recognition of fiscal autonomy of LGUs, legislature
has no control over the public revenues of an LGU such as
those derived from taxation. LGU is now free to create its own
sources of revenues.
EXECUTIVE SUPERVISION OVER LGUs
The President shall exercise general supervision over LGUs to
ensure that local affairs are administered according to law.
General supervision includes the power to order an
investigation of the conduct of LGU officials whenever
necessary. Such general supervision shall be exercised primarily
thru the Secretary of Interior and Local Government. (Sec 4, Art
X, Constitution)
Control and Supervision
SUPERVISION – overseeing or the power or authority of an
officer to see that his subordinate officers perform their duties,
and to take such action as prescribed by law if they should so
fail to perform those duties.
CONTROL - the power of an officer to alter, modify, nullify or
set aside what a subordinate had done in the performance of
his duties and to substitute the judgment of the former for the
latter.
The President‟s power of general supervision does not
authorize the President to remove or suspend a local official
without any ground or on grounds not authorized by law.
Section 60, LGC. An elective official may be removed
from office on the grounds enumerated above by ORDER
of the PROPER COURT.
Creation/Reorganization of Administrative Regions
The creation and reorganization of administrative regions is a
power traditionally lodged with the President to facilitate the
exercise of the power of general supervision over local
governments. The regions themselves are not territorial and
political divisions like LGUs are mere groupings of contiguous
provinces for administrative purposes.
Power to Merge Administrative Regions
The President may, by administrative determination, merge the
existing regions. The regrouping is done only on paper. It
involves no more than a delineation or redrawing of the lines
separating administrative regions for the purpose of facilitating
the administrative supervision of LGUs by the President and
insuring the efficient delivery of essential services.
The regrouping is analogous to redistricting or to division or
merger of local governments, which all have political
consequences on the right of the people residing in those
political units to vote and be voted for. Administrative regions
are mere groupings of contiguous provinces for administrative
purposes, not for political representations.
 Example: E.O. 429, PROVIDING FOR THE
REORGANIZATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE REGIONS IN
MINDANAO, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES (October 12,
1990)
Change of regional center from Zamboanga City to
Pagadian City
The determination of regional capital has always been an
act of Congress, but as the SC said that administrative
regions are mere groupings for administrative purposes
and not territorial and political subdivisions, there is no
basis for contending that only Congress can change or
determine regional centers.
Reorganization Criteria under EO 429
1. Contiguity and geographical features
2. Transportation and communication facilities
3. Cultural and language groupings
4. Land area and population
5. Existing regional centers adopted by several agencies
6. Socio-economic development programs
7. Number of provinces and cities
ARMM Legislative Powers Limited within Territorial
Jurisdiction
Sema v. COMELEC, GR No. 177597;
Marquez v. COMELEC, GR No. 178728, July 16, 2008
Nothing in Sec. 20, Article X of the Constitution authorizes
autonomous regions, expressly or impliedly, to create or
reapportion legislative districts for Congress. The Regional
Assembly may exercise legislative powers within its territorial
jurisdiction. Creation of Shariff Kabunsuan declared
unconstitutional.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 7
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVI SIONS
ARTICLE II
DECLARATION OF STATE PRINCIPLES AND
POLICIES
SECTION 25. The State shall ensure the autonomy of local
governments.
Lina v. Pano, GR No. 129093, August 30, 2001
The principle of local autonomy simply means
DECENTRALIZATION. It does not make local governments
sovereign within the state or an “imperium in imperio.”
ARTICLE X
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Article X of the Constitution guarantees and promotes the
administrative and fiscal autonomy of the LGUs. The LGC was
enacted for the purpose of strengthening the autonomy of the
LGUs in accordance with the Constitution, implementing the
local autonomy provisions.
It becomes the duty of the Court to declare and pronounce
Section 3(b) of PD 198 as already unconstitutional. (Mayor
Michael Rama et. al. v. Hon. Moises, GR No. 197146,
December 6, 2016)
G EN ER AL P R OVI SI ON S
SECTION 1. The territorial and political subdivisions of the
Republic of the Philippines are the provinces, cities,
municipalities, and barangays. There shall be autonomous
regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras as hereinafter
provided.
 They are collectively known as LGUs and are creations
of the Constitution, not merely of Congress, and
vested with their own powers and functions.
 The Philippines is divided into provinces and cities
(independent and highly urbanized). A province is
subdivided into municipalities and/or component
cities, while independent and HU cities are further
subdivided into barangays. Municipalities and
component cities are also further subdivided into
barangays.
 Otherwise stated, a cluster of barangays compose a
municipality, or city, while a cluster of municipalities
and/or component cities compose a province.
 The province is the intermediate authority unit,
providing supervision to the municipalities and
component cities under it, and performing services for
national government. The basic unit of LG or those
performing services for people who live together in a
community are the cities and municipalities (and
barangays).
 The Philippines is one of the countries with a
submunicipal unit, the barangay, which provides the
opportunity for face-to-face interaction among the
people.
SECTION 2. The territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy
local autonomy.
 LGUs now enjoy the recognition of a greater measure
of self-government compared to the very limited
powers in the past. There is break up of monopoly of
the national government over the affairs of the LGUs.
The provision is not self-executing though, needing
the passage of a local government code.
 In De Leon v. Esguerra, 153 SCRA 603 (1987), the SC
said even barangays are meant to possess genuine
and meaningful local autonomy so that they may
develop fully as “self-reliant communities.”
 The political umbilical cord that attached them to the
central government through a system of patronage
and dependence has been cut, to some extent, so that
they can now more or less chart the course of their
own development. (Aquilino Pimentel)
 League of Provinces v. DENR, DENR Sec. Reyes, GR No.
175368, April 11, 2013
Power of review of DENR over small scale mining
permits issued by LGUs (Governors and Mayors) in
relation to RA 7076 (People‟s Small Scale Mining Law).
Power of supervision by the President over the LGUs.
 LTO v. City of Butuan, GR No. 131512, January 20,
2000
Power of LTO to register motor vehicles like tricycles
as well as issue licenses for driving NOT devolved to
LGUs.
Magtajas v. Pryce Properties Inc., 234 SCRA 253 (1995)
“… While the Constitution now directly confers upon the LGUs
the power to tax, which cannot now be withdrawn by mere
statute, however, the national legislature is still the principal of
the LGUs, which cannot defy its will, or modify or violate it.
Hence, PAGCOR Charter has not been repealed by the LGC.
SECTION 3. The Congress shall enact a local government code
which shall provide for a more responsive and accountable
local government structure instituted through a system of
decentralization with effective mechanisms of recall, initiative,
and referendum, allocate among the different local
government units their powers, responsibilities, and resources,
and provide for the qualifications, election, appointment and
removal, term, salaries, powers and functions and duties of
local officials, and all other matters relating to the organization
and operation of the local units.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 8
SECTION 4. The President of the Philippines shall exercise
general supervision over local governments. Provinces with
respect to component cities and municipalities, and cities and
municipalities with respect to component barangays shall
ensure that the acts of their component units are within the
scope of their prescribed powers and functions.
 The power of general supervision implies the
authority to inquire into facts and conditions in order
to render the power real and effective. Supervision is
not incompatible with discipline. The power to
discipline and to ensure that the laws are fully
executed must be construed to authorize the
President to order an investigation of the act/conduct
of the local officials when public service so requires.
SECTION 5. Each local government unit shall have the power
to create its own sources of revenues and to levy taxes, fees,
and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the
Congress may provide, consistent with the basic policy of local
autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges shall accrue
exclusively to the local governments.
 Direct conferment on LGUs of the power to tax and
cannot now be withdrawn by mere statute. (Sec. 129,
LGC)
SECTION 6. Local government units shall have a just share, as
determined by law, in the national taxes which shall be
automatically released to them.
 LGU share in the national taxes (Internal Revenue
Allotment) – provided in Sec. 289, LGC.
 In addition to having administrative autonomy in the
exercise of their functions, they enjoy fiscal autonomy
as well.
Fiscal Autonomy
 LGUs have the power to create their own sources of
revenue in addition to their just share in the national
taxes released by the national government, as well as
the power to allocate their resources in accordance
with their own priorities. It extends to budget
preparations, and local officials in turn have to work
within the constraints thereof.
 The budget is not formulated at the national level and
imposed on local governments, whether it be relevant
to local needs and resources or not. (See Sections 43
and 289 of LGC)
Pimentel Jr. v. Aguirre, 336 SCRA 221
Requisites before the President may interfere in local fiscal
matters:
1. An unmanaged public sector deficit of the national
government
2. Consultations with the presiding officers of the Senate
and the House of Representatives and the Presidents of various
local leagues
3. Corresponding recommendation of the secretaries of
DF, DILG and DBM.
A basic feature of a local fiscal autonomy is the AUTOMATIC
RELEASE of the shares of LGUs in the national internal revenue
as mandated in the Constitution. The LGC further specifies that
the release shall be made directly to the LGU concerned within
5 days after every quarter of the year and SHALL NOT be
subject to any lien or HOLDBACK that may be imposed by the
national government for whatever purpose.
Unconstitutionality of Sec. 4, AO No. 372
The withholding of 10% of the LGUs IRA pending assessment
and evaluation of the fiscal situation of the country
contravenes the Constitution and the law. Although temporary,
it is equivalent to a HOLDBACK. The temporary nature of the
retention by the national government does not matter. Any
retention is prohibited.
Province of Batangas v. Romulo, GR No. 152774, May 27, 2004
The SC held unconstitutional the provisions in the GAA that set
up the LG Service Equalization Fund as a portion of the IRA to
be released only upon finding of the Oversight Committee on
Devolution that the LGU concerned had complied with the
guidelines issued by said committee.
Alternative Center for Organization Reforms and Development,
Inc. v. Zamora, 459 SCRA 578
The SC declared unconstitutional the proviso in the GAA
classifying separately a portion of IRA for LGUs as
“unprogrammed fund” to be released only when the original
revenue targets submitted by the President to the Congress are
realized.
Alvarez v. Guingona Jr, 252 SCRA 695
Share of the LGU in the IRA is part of Income. Funds generated
from local taxes, IRAs and national wealth utilization proceeds
accrue to the general fund of the local government and are
used to finance its operations subject to specified modes of
spending the same as provided in the LGC and the IRR. Income
means all revenues and receipts collected and received forming
the gross accretions of funds of the LGUs.
Items of Income
For purposes of budget preparation, which budget should
reflect the estimates of the income of the LGU, the IRAs and
the share in the national wealth utilization proceeds are
considered items of income.
Income, as defined in the Code, being ALL REVENUES AND
RECEIPTS collected or received forming the gross accretions of
funds of the LGU.
SECTION 7. Local governments shall be entitled to an
equitable share in the proceeds of the utilization and
development of the national wealth within their respective
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 9
areas, in the manner provided by law, including sharing the
same with the inhabitants by way of direct benefits.
 GOCCs now pay to the LGUs for the use and
development of natural resources.
SECTION 8. The term of office of elective local officials, except
barangay officials, which shall be determined by law, shall be
three years and no such official shall serve for more than three
consecutive terms. Voluntary renunciation of the office for any
length of time shall not be considered as an interruption in the
continuity of his service for the full term for which he was
elected.
Borja v. COMELEC, 295 SCRA 157
When a vice mayor succeeds to the office of the mayor by
operation of law and serves the remainder of the term, is he
considered to have served in that office for the purpose of the
3-term limit?
NO. The term limit for the elective officials must be taken to
refer to the right to be elected as well as the right to serve in
the same elective position. (Elected and served)
Thus, if the official is not serving a term for which he was
elected because he is simply continuing the service of the
official he succeeds, such official cannot considered to have
fully served the term notwithstanding his voluntary
renunciation of office prior to its expiration.
 Read also: Latasa v. COMELEC, GR No. 154829, Dec. 10, 2003
SECTION 9. Legislative bodies of local governments shall have
sectoral representation as may be prescribed by law.
 A manifestation of the principle of local autonomy.
The Constitution mandates a system of governance
where all sectors of the community can participate. s
SECTION 10. No province, city, municipality, or barangay may
be created, divided, merged, abolished, or its boundary
substantially altered, except in accordance with the criteria
established in the Local Government Code and subject to
approval by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite in the
political units directly affected.
 The residents of the areas affected by the creation
should approve the measure in a plebiscite.
 Congress has the power to create or abolish a
province, city, municipality or any other political
subdivision.
 The Sangguniang Panlalawigan or Panglungsod has
the power to create and abolish barangays located
within its territorial jurisdiction.
Creation of LGUs
 LGUs in General – Sections 6, 7 and 8, LGC
 Provinces – Sections 460-461
 Cities – Sections 449-450
 Municipalities – Sections 441-442
 Barangays – Sections 385-386
Navarro v. Ermita, 2010
The central policy consideration in the creation of LGUs are
economic viability, efficient administration and capability to
deliver basic services to their constituents. These
considerations must be given importance as they ensure the
success of local autonomy. The LGUs, more than the National
Government itself, know the needs of their constituents and
cater to such needs based on the particular circumstances of
their localities.
Rama v. Moises, 2016 citing Navarro v. Ermita
Where a particular law or statute affecting the LGUs infringes
on their autonomy, and on their rights and powers to efficiently
and effectively address the needs of their constituents, the
Court should lean in favor of their autonomy, their rights and
their powers. Water and its efficient supply are among the
primary concerns of every LGU. Issues that tend to reduce or
diminish the authority of BOD to manage the WDs are imbued
with public interest.
The conduct of plebiscite is an INDISPENSABLE requirement in
the creation, division, merger, abolition and substantial
boundary alteration of LGUs.
Tan v. COMELEC, 142 SCRA 727
The conduct of plebiscite is an INDISPENSABLE requirement in
the creation, division, merger, abolition and substantial
boundary alteration of LGUs.
The plebiscite must be conducted in ALL the LGUs directly
affected – people living in the area of the proposed new LGU
and those living in the parent LGU.
SECTION 11. The Congress may, by law, create special
metropolitan political subdivisions, subject to a plebiscite as set
forth in Section 10 hereof. The component cities and
municipalities shall retain their basic autonomy and shall be
entitled to their own local executives and legislative assemblies.
The jurisdiction of the metropolitan authority that will hereby
be created shall be limited to basic services requiring
coordination.
MMDA v. Bel-Air Village Association
Special Metro political subdivisions are NOT LGUs.
MMDA created under RA 7924 is an agency that handles the
administration of metro-wide basic services affecting the LGUs
of Metro Manila – 14 cities and 3 municipalities. Metro-wide
services are those which have metro-wide impact and
transcend local political boundaries or entail huge expenditures
such that it would not be viable for said services to be provided
by individual LGUs comprising Metro Manila.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 10
Sec. 3(b), RA 7924 – 7 Metro-wide Basic Services
1. Development planning
2. Transport and traffic management
3. Solid waste disposal and management
4. Flood control and sewerage management
5. Urban renewal, zoning and land use planning and shelter
services
6. Health and sanitation, urban protection and pollution
control
7. Public safety
MMDA has no police power, no legislative power. Unlike LGUs,
RA 7924 does not empower MMDA to enact ordinances,
approve resolutions and appropriate funds for the general
welfare of the inhabitants. MMDA is a “development authority.”
It is an agency created for the purpose of laying down policies
and coordinating with the various agencies for the efficient and
expeditious delivery of basic services.
Social Justice Society et. al. v. Hon. Lito Atienza, GR No. 156052,
February 13, 2008
Authority of the MMDA
RA 7942 does not give the MMDA the authority to review land
use plans and zoning ordinances of cities and municipalities.
This was found only in EO 72 which refers to comprehensive
land use plans (CLUP) only. Ordinance 8027 is a specific
ordinance reclassifying land.
SECTION 12. Cities that are highly urbanized, as determined by
law, and component cities whose charters prohibit their voters
from voting for provincial elective officials, shall be
independent of the province. The voters of component cities
within a province, whose charters contain no such prohibition,
shall not be deprived of their right to vote for elective
provincial officials.
Classification of Cities
1. Highly urbanized – those proclaimed as such by the
President upon compliance with the income and
population requirements (P50M and 250,000 inhabitants).
2. Independent component cities – Those whose charters
prohibit their voters from voting for provincial elective
officials. These cities even as they are component cities are
independent of provinces in which they are located.
3. Component cities – those that allow their voters to
participate in the election of provincial officials, and whose
income or population does not qualify them to be highly
urbanized.
Note: RA 9009 – annual income requirement of cities
(independent and component) is P100M.
 Read:
1. Aurelio Umali v. COMELEC, January 2014 - City of
Cabanatuan case
2. City of Santiago in Isabela (1997)
Rama v. Moises, 2016
In HUCs and ICCs which shall be independent of the province,
all matters relating to its administration, powers and functions
are to be exercised through its local executives led by the City
Mayor, subject to the President‟s retained power of general
supervision over provinces. (Sec. 25, LGC)
Ceniza v. COMELEC
Reason for Classification
Classification on the basis of their regular annual income is
based upon substantial distinction. Revenue of a city would
show its capacity for existence and development as a relatively
independent social, economic and political unit. Also show
whether the city has sufficient economic or industrial activity as
to warrant its independence from the province where it is
geographically situated.
No violation of Equal Protection Clause/Right of Suffrage.
The practice of allowing voters in one component city to vote
for the provincial officials and denying the same privilege to
voters in another component city is a matter of legislative
discretion which does not violate the Constitution nor the
voter‟s right of suffrage.
SECTION 13. Local government units may group themselves,
consolidate or coordinate their efforts, services, and resources
for purposes commonly beneficial to them in accordance with
law.
 Manifestation of Local Autonomy – Central Panay
Economic Union where 5 towns band together to
attract development in the area to combat poverty
crisis and insurgency problem in their localities.
SECTION 14. The President shall provide for regional
development councils or other similar bodies composed of
local government officials, regional heads of departments and
other government offices, and representatives from non-
governmental organizations within the regions for purposes of
administrative decentralization to strengthen the autonomy of
the units therein and to accelerate the economic and social
growth and development of the units in the region.
AU TON OM OU S R EGI ON
SECTION 15. There shall be created autonomous regions in
Muslim Mindanao and in the Cordilleras consisting of
provinces, cities, municipalities, and geographical areas sharing
common and distinctive historical and cultural heritage,
economic and social structures, and other relevant
characteristics within the framework of this Constitution and
the national sovereignty as well as territorial integrity of the
Republic of the Philippines.
Relevant Provisions of LGC
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 11
 Sec. 34 – Relations with Pos and NGOs
 Sec. 35 – Linkage with Pos and NGOs
 Sec. 36 – Assistance to Pos and NGOs
 Sec. 106 – Local Development Councils
 Sec. 114 – Relation of LDCs to the Sanggunian and the
Regional Development Councils
SECTION 16. The President shall exercise general supervision
over autonomous regions to ensure that the laws are faithfully
executed.
Special laws govern the two autonomous regions:
 RA 6734, August 1, 1989 – Muslim Mindanao
 RA 6766, January 30, 1990 – Cordilleras
Requirement of Plebiscite
 Creation of the autonomous region shall take effect
only when approved by a majority of the votes cast by
the constituent units in a plebiscite. Only those
provinces and cities where a majority vote in favor of
the act shall be included in the region. As it is now,
ARMM is comprised of the provinces of Basilan, Lanao
del Sur, Maguindanao, Sulu and Tawi-tawi.
 In the Cordillera Autonomous Region, the plebiscite
showed that the creation was approved by a majority
of the votes in Ifugao Province and overwhelmingly
rejected by votes in the rest of the provinces and the
city. Thus, only one province comprise CAR.
Ordillo v. COMELEC, 192 SCRA 100
The SC said that the sole province of Ifugao cannot validly
constitute the CAR.
The Constitution in Section 15 commands the creation of
autonomous regions consisting of provinces, cities,
municipalities and geographical areas which connote that
REGION is to be made up of more than 1 constituent unit. The
term region, in its ordinary sense, means 2 or more provinces.
Pandi v. CA, 380 SCRA 436
The ARMM Organic Acts (before LGC) are deemed part of the
regional autonomy scheme. While they are classified as
statutes, they are more than ordinary statutes because they
enjoy affirmation through a plebiscite. The provisions thereof
cannot be amended by ordinary statute. The amendatory law
has to be submitted to a plebiscite. LGC enacted in 1991.
SECTION 17. All powers, functions, and responsibilities not
granted by this Constitution or by law to the autonomous
regions shall be vested in the National Government.
SECTION 18. The Congress shall enact an organic act for each
autonomous region with the assistance and participation of the
regional consultative commission composed of representatives
appointed by the President from a list of nominees from
multisectoral bodies. The organic act shall define the basic
structure of government for the region consisting of the
executive department and legislative assembly, both of which
shall be elective and representative of the constituent political
units. The organic acts shall likewise provide for special courts
with personal, family, and property law jurisdiction consistent
with the provisions of this Constitution and national laws.
The creation of the autonomous region shall be effective when
approved by majority of the votes cast by the constituent units
in a plebiscite called for the purpose, provided that only
provinces, cities, and geographic areas voting favorably in such
plebiscite shall be included in the autonomous region.
SECTION 19. The first Congress elected under this Constitution
shall, within eighteen months from the time of organization of
both Houses, pass the organic acts for the autonomous regions
in Muslim Mindanao and the Cordilleras.
SECTION 20. Within its territorial jurisdiction and subject to
the provisions of this Constitution and national laws, the
organic act of autonomous regions shall provide for legislative
powers over:
(1) Administrative organization;
(2) Creation of sources of revenues;
(3) Ancestral domain and natural resources;
(4) Personal, family, and property relations;
(5) Regional urban and rural planning development;
(6) Economic, social, and tourism development;
(7) Educational policies;
(8) Preservation and development of the cultural heritage; and
(9) Such other matters as may be authorized by law for the
promotion of the general welfare of the people of the region.
SECTION 21. The preservation of peace and order within the
regions shall be the responsibility of the local police agencies
which shall be organized, maintained, supervised, and utilized
in accordance with applicable laws. The defense and security of
the regions shall be the responsibility of the National
Government.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 12
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
Republic Act No. 7160, effective January 1, 1992
BOOK I GENERAL PROVISIONS
TITLE I BASIC PRINCIPLES
CH APT E R I TH E C OD E: P OLI CY AND APP L IC ATI ON
SECTION 1. TITLE.
This Act shall be known and cited as the "Local Government
Code of 1991".
What is a Local Government?
 Local government is a political subdivision of a nation
or state which is constituted by law and has
substantial control over local affairs. (MMDA v. Bel-Air)
What is a Local Government Unit (LGU)?
 Local Government Unit as defined in Section 15 of RA
7160 is a body politic and corporate endowed with
powers as a political subdivision of the National
Government and a corporate entity representing the
inhabitants.
 LGUs are composed of the PROVINCES, CITIES,
MUNICIPALITIES and BARANGAYS.
 They are also known as municipal corporations.
 As provided in the Constitution, Article X, Section 1,
LGUs are also territorial and political subdivisions of
the state, in addition to the two autonomous regions.
Powers of the LGUs
LGUs may exercise four general kinds of powers, namely:
a) Those that are EXPRESSLY GRANTED to them
b) Those that are IMPLIED from those that are granted
c) Those that are NECESSARY, APPROPRIATE or
INCIDENTAL for their efficient and effective
governance
d) Those that are essential to the promotion of GENERAL
WELFARE of their inhabitants.
SECTION 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY.
(a) It is hereby declared the policy of the State that the
territorial and political subdivisions of the State shall enjoy
genuine and meaningful local autonomy to enable them to
attain their fullest development as self-reliant communities and
make them more effective partners in the attainment of
national goals. Toward this end, the State shall provide for a
more responsive and accountable local government structure
instituted through a system of decentralization whereby local
government units shall be given more powers, authority,
responsibilities, and resources. The process of decentralization
shall proceed from the national government to the local
government units.
(b) It is also the policy of the State to ensure the accountability
of local government units through the institution of effective
mechanisms of recall, initiative and referendum.
(c) It is likewise the policy of the State to require all national
agencies and offices to conduct periodic consultations with
appropriate local government units, nongovernmental and
people's organizations, and other concerned sectors of the
community before any project or program is implemented in
their respective jurisdictions.
State Policy on Local Autonomy [Section 2(a), LGC]
The principle of local autonomy essentially means
DECENTRALIZATION. Before the Code, the SC explained the
meaning of decentralization in Limbona v. Mangedin, 170
SCRA 786 (1989) as either:
1. Decentralization of administration or
2. Decentralization of Power
Autonomy = Decentralization
Municipal governments are only agents of the national
government. Local councils exercise only delegated legislative
powers conferred on them by the Congress as the national
lawmaking body. The delegate cannot be superior to the
principal or exercise powers higher than the latter.
Congress retains control of the LGUs although in
significantly reduced degree. The power of Congress to create
includes the power to destroy. The power to grant includes the
power to recall or withhold.
Congress is still the principal of LGUs, which cannot defy
its will or modify or violate it.
Terms relating to local autonomy
Autonomy is of Greek origin, meaning TO LIVE UNDER
ONE‟S OWN LAWS – hence, self-government. Applied in the
context of Philippine situation, it means the power of LGUs to
enjoy limited self-government as defined by law.
The principle of local autonomy does not make local
governments sovereign within the state, it simply means
DECENTRALIZATION. (Basco, et. al. v. PAGCOR, 197 SCRA 52)
In decentralization of administration, the national
government does not lose supervision and control over their
regional/local field offices. In decentralization of power, the
local government enjoys limited autonomy from the national
government. Thus, to a certain degree, the LGU is ultimately
“free to chart its own destiny and shape its future with
minimum intervention from central authorities. The
autonomous government becomes accountable not to the
central authorities but to its constituency.
 LTO v. City of Butuan, GR No. 131512, Jan. 20, 2000 –
power of LTO to register motor vehicles (tricycles) as
well as to issue licenses for driving not devolved to
the LGUs.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 13
Decentralization
Decentralization gives the LGUs more powers, authority,
responsibilities and resources by the national government. In
this sense, it is substantially similar to “devolution.” In the
Declaration of Policy, decentralization is recognized as the
means used by the State to provide genuine and meaningful
local autonomy to the LGUs.
In essence, decentralization means devolution of national
administration – but not power – to the local levels. (Ganzon v.
CA, 200 SCRA 71)
Devolution
As defined in the Code, devolution is the act by which the
National Government confers power and authority upon the
various LGUs to perform specific functions and responsibilities.
(Section 17(e), par. 2)
The process of decentralization shall proceed from the
National Government to the LGUs. This means that insofar as
the devolution of central government powers and funds are
concerned, they are transferred directly to the LGUs without
any intermediary.
 League of Provinces v. DENR, GR No. 175368, April 11,
2013 – Power of review of DENR over permits issued
by LGUs specifically small scale mining permits
pursuant to RA 7076. Power of supervision of the
President over the LGUs.
 Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Bataan v. Enrique Garcia,
GR No. 174964, October 5, 2016
Patrimonial properties of LGU which cannot be taken
without due process of law and without just
compensation.
Property registered in the name of the municipal
corporation but without proof that it was acquired
with its corporate funds is deemed held in trust for
the State.
Effect of Devolution
The Code provides “There shall be an effective allocation
among the different LGUs of their respective powers, functions,
responsibilities and resources.” These provisions guarantee that
the devolution of powers does not stop at the level of any one
LGU but will actually seep down to all levels of LGUs.
A barangay can exercise its power without any permission
from the municipality or city of which it is part. Also, the funds
allocated to it go directly to the barangay, not through the
mayor or treasurer.
Province of Batangas v. Romulo, GR No. 152774, May 27, 2004
Autonomy is either decentralization of administration or
decentralization of power.
There is decentralization of administration when the central
government delegates administrative powers to political
subdivisions in order to broaden the base of government
power and in the process to make the local governments more
responsive and accountable and ensure their fullest
development as self-reliant communities and make them more
effective partners in the pursuit of national development and
social progress. It relieves the central government of the
burden of managing local affairs and enables it to concentrate
on national concerns.
Decentralization of power
Involves an abdication of political power in favor of LGUs
declared to be autonomous. The autonomous government is
free to chart its own destiny and shape its own future with
minimum intervention from the central government.
Decentralization of power accordingly amounts to “self-
immolation”, since the autonomous government becomes
accountable not to the central authorities but to its
constituency.
Local Autonomy
Includes both administrative and fiscal autonomy. LGUs in
addition to have administrative autonomy in the exercise of
their functions, enjoy fiscal autonomy as well.
Fiscal autonomy means that local governments have the
power to create their own sources of revenue in addition to
their equitable share in the national taxes released by the
national government, as well as the power to allocate their
resources in accordance with their own priorities. It extends to
the preparation of their budgets and local officials in turn have
to work within the constraints thereof. They are not formulated
at the national level and imposed on local governments,
whether they are relevant to local needs and resources or not.
Policy to Ensure Accountability [Section 2(b), LGC]
These are new powers available to the people and may be
exercised by the registered voters residing within a territory of
LGUs under the circumstances mentioned in the various
sections of the Code.
 Read: Alroben Goh v. Lucilo Bayron, GR No. 212584,
November 25, 2015 – Puerto princesa recall elections, issue on
expenses on election.
This policy also emphasizes that local government officials
must be accountable for their actuations. If they are abusive,
they can be recalled even in the midst of their terms. (Art. X,
Sec. 3, Constitution; Chapter 5, LGC)
Recall
Recall is a mode of removal of a public officer by the
people before the end of his term of office. The people‟s
prerogative to remove a public officer is an incident of their
sovereign power and in the absence of constitutional restraint,
the power is implied in all governmental operations. Such
power has been held to be indispensable for the proper
administration of public affairs.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 14

INITIATIVE
An electoral process whereby
designated percentages of
the electorate may initiate
legislative or constitutional
changes through the filing of
formal petitions to be acted
on the legislature or the total
electorate.
As defined in the LGC,
initiative is the legal process
whereby registered voters of
LGU may directly propose,
enact, or amend any
ordinance.
Policy of Consultation [Section 2(c)]
REFERENDUM
The process of referring to the
electorate for approval a
proposed new state
constitution or amendment of
a law passed by the
legislature.
As defined in the Code
referendum is the legal
process whereby the
registered voters of the LGUs
may approve, amend or reject
any ordinance enacted by the
sanggunian. (Section 126)
component units are within the scope of their prescribed
powers and functions; [Note: supervisory power of the province]
(f) Local government units may group themselves, consolidate
or coordinate their efforts, services, and resources commonly
beneficial to them;
(g) The capabilities of local government units, especially the
municipalities and barangays, shall be enhanced by providing
them with opportunities to participate actively in the
implementation of national programs and projects;
(h) There shall be a continuing mechanism to enhance local
autonomy not only by legislative enabling acts but also by
administrative and organizational reforms;
(i) Local government units shall share with the national
government the responsibility in the management and
maintenance of ecological balance within their territorial
jurisdiction, subject to the provisions of this Code and national
policies;

This establishes the PRIOR CONSULTATION RULE,
requiring mandatory consultations not only within the LGUs,
but also NGOs, and POs before any project/program is
implemented. It also requires not only the central government
agencies but even GOCCs.
(Relate with Sections 26 and 27)
SECTION 3. OPERATIVE PRINCIPLES OF
DECENTRALIZATION.
The formulation and implementation of policies and measures
on local autonomy shall be guided by the following operative
principles:
(a) There shall be an effective allocation among the different
local government units of their respective powers, functions,
responsibilities, and resources;
(b) There shall be established in every local government unit an
accountable, efficient, and dynamic organizational structure
and operating mechanism that will meet the priority needs and
service requirements of its communities;
(c) Subject to civil service law, rules and regulations, local
officials and employees paid wholly or mainly from local funds
shall be appointed or removed, according to merit and fitness,
by the appropriate appointing authority;
(d) The vesting of duty, responsibility, and accountability in
local government units shall be accompanied with provision for
reasonably adequate resources to discharge their powers and
effectively carry out their functions: hence, they shall have the
power to create and broaden their own sources of revenue and
the right to a just share in national taxes and an equitable
share in the proceeds of the utilization and development of the
national wealth within their respective areas;
(e) Provinces with respect to component cities and
municipalities, and cities and municipalities with respect to
component barangays, shall ensure that the acts of their
(j) Effective mechanisms for ensuring the accountability of local
government units to their respective constituents shall be
strengthened in order to upgrade continually the quality of
local leadership;
(k) The realization of local autonomy shall be facilitated
through improved coordination of national government
policies and programs an extension of adequate technical and
material assistance to less developed and deserving local
government units;
(l) The participation of the private sector in local governance,
particularly in the delivery of basic services, shall be
encouraged to ensure the viability of local autonomy as an
alternative strategy for sustainable development; and
(m) The national government shall ensure that decentralization
contributes to the continuing improvement of the performance
of local government units and the quality of community life.
This section lays down in detail and specific terms the operative
principles to effect decentralization and local autonomy.
Power to Appoint [Section 3(c)]
The local chief executive has the POWER to APPOINT all
officials and employees of the LGU:
1. Whose salaries and wages are wholly or mainly paid out of
the funds of his LGU and are not otherwise provided for in
this Code; and
2. Those he may be authorized by law to appoint.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. The power to appoint municipal, city and provincial
treasurers. These officers are appointed by the Secretary of
Finance from a list of at least three ranking and eligible
recommendees of the governor or mayor as the case may
be.
2. In the case of barangays, it is a two-step process. The
punong barangay must secure the approval of a majority
of all the members of the sangguniang barangay PRIOR to
appointing or replacing the barangay treasurer, the
barangay secretary and other appointive barangay officials.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 15
Appointment of LGU officials
This appointment is subject to civil service law, rules and
regulations. As a general rule, the appointments shall only be
made according to merit and fitness to be determined as far as
practicable by competitive examination.
EXCEPTIONS: Policy-determining, primarily confidential, and
highly technical positions
1. Policy-determining position – where the public officer is
vested with the power of formulating policies for the
government or any of its agencies, subdivisions or
instrumentalities.
2. Primarily confidential – where its occupant enjoys more
than the ordinary confidence in his aptitude of the
appointing power but bears primarily such close intimacy
which insures freedom of intercourse without
embarrassment or freedom from misgivings of betrayal of
personal trust on confidential matters of the State.
3. Highly technical – where its occupant is required to
possess skills or training in the supreme or superior
degree.
Extent of Power of CSC as to Appointments
The power is limited to approving or disapproving
appointment. (Authentication)
It does not have the authority to direct that an
appointment of a specific individual be made. Once the CSC
attests to the eligibility of the person chosen to fill a vacant
position, its role in the appointment process necessarily ends.
It is not empowered to determine or change the kind or
nature of the appointment, for it is a discretionary power which
must be performed by the officer on whom it is vested
according to his best judgment, the only condition being that
the appointee should possess the minimum qualifications
required by law.
Power to Maintain and Protect the Ecology [Section 3(i)]
This is a SHARED RESPONSIBILITY of the national
government and the LGU subject to the provisions of the Code
and national policies.
Example: Clean Air Act – LGU shall SHARE in the
responsibility of maintaining the air quality in their area – by
implementing the emission standards set by the DENR.
Several sections of the Code mandate the cities, provinces and
municipalities to preserve and protect the environment:
Section 447, a, 1, vi – Power of Sangguniang Bayan to
enact ordinances protecting the environment.
Section 455, 3, vii – Power of City Mayor to adopt measure
to safeguard and conserve land.
Participation of the Private Sector [Section 3(l)]
Example: Solid Waste Management Act – Contract with
private in the collection of solid waste, recycling, reuse, etc.
Effect of Decentralization [Section 3(m)]
 Read: Alvarez v. Guingona, 252 SCRA 695
An LGU now has the power to create its own sources of
revenue; to be allocated a just share in the national taxes (in
the form of IRA); to be given its equitable share in the proceeds
of the utilization and development in the national wealth, if
any, within its territorial boundaries.
SECTION 4. SCOPE OF APPLICATION.
This Code shall apply to all provinces, cities, municipalities,
barangays, and other political subdivisions as may be created
by law, and, to the extent herein provided, to officials, offices,
or agencies of the national government.
The Code also contains provisions which apply to national
officials, like the PRESIDENT as provided for in Section 25
(National Supervision over LGUs) and the PNP under Section 28
(Powers of Local Chief Executives over the Units of the PNP) in
their inter-governmental relations with the LGUs.
SECTION 5. RULES OF INTERPRETATION.
This section provides that ANY DOUBT or QUESTION on a
power of a local government shall be resolved in favor of
DEVOLUTION of powers and in favor of the LOWER LOCAL
GOVERNMENT UNIT.
For tax measures enacted by LGs, any doubt shall be
construed strictly against the Local Government and liberally in
favor of the taxpayer.
This section also strengthens the power of LGs to enact
ORDINANCES under the GENERAL WELFARE provisions for
liberal interpretation of LGs.
CH APT E R II G EN ER AL P OWER S AN D A TTR I BU TES OF
L OC AL G OVER NM EN T U NI TS
SECTION 6. AUTHORITY TO CREATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT
UNITS.
A local government unit may be created, divided, merged,
abolished, or its boundaries substantially altered either by law
enacted by Congress in the case of a province, city,
municipality, or any other political subdivision, or by ordinance
passed by the sangguniang panlalawigan or sangguniang
panlungsod concerned in the case of a barangay located within
its territorial jurisdiction, subject to such limitations and
requirements prescribed in this Code.
The power to create LGUs is legislative. The President has no
power to create LGUs. The validity of incorporation and
corporate existence of MC can only be attacked by the State in
a direct proceeding.
Power to CREATE, DIVIDE, MERGE, ABOLISH OR
SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER BOUNDARIES –
 Congress by LAW – Provinces, cities, municipalities, or
any political subdivision
 Sangguniang Panlalawigan or Sangguniang
Panglungsod by ORDINANCE – Barangays located
within its territorial jurisdiction.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 16
SECTION 7. CREATION AND CONVERSION.
As a general rule, the creation of a local government unit or its
conversion from one level to another level shall be based on
verifiable indicators of viability and projected capacity to
provide services, to wit:
(a) Income. - It must be sufficient, based on acceptable
standards, to provide for all essential government facilities and
services and special functions commensurate with the size of
its population, as expected of the local government unit
concerned;
(b) Population. - It shall be determined as the total number of
inhabitants within the territorial jurisdiction of the local
government unit concerned; and
(c) Land Area. - It must be contiguous, unless it comprises two
or more islands or is separated by a local government unit
independent of the others; properly identified by metes and
bounds with technical descriptions; and sufficient to provide
for such basic services and facilities to meet the requirements
of its populace.
Compliance with the foregoing indicators shall be attested to
by the Department of Finance (DOF), the National Statistics
Office (NSO), and the Lands Management Bureau (LMB) of the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
Requisites of VERIFIABLE INDICATORS of VIABILITY and
PROJECTED CAPACITY to provide services:
1. INCOME – attested by the DOF on financial viability
Province P20M
City P100M
Municipality P2.5M
There is no specific income requirement for barangay.
The financial viability of the created barangay becomes the
obligation of the LGU creating it.
Average annual income includes any income accruing
to the general fund but is exclusive of special funds,
special accounts transfers and non-recurring income.
2. POPULATION – attested by the PSA
Province 250,000
City 150,000
Municipality 25,000
Barangay (rural) 2,000
Barangay (urban) 5,000
3. LAND AREA – attested by the LMB, DENR; must be
spelled out in METES and BOUNDS, with technical
descriptions; does not include the sea. It must be
CONTIGUOUS and sufficient to provide basic services
and facilities.
The contiguity requirement is not applied when the
LGU created
a) Comprises 2 or more islands, or
b) Is separated by a chartered city/ies which do not
contribute to the income of the province.
EXAMPLE: Misamis Oriental
Province 2,000 sq. km.
City 100 sq. km.
Municipality 50 sq. km.
Barangay No land area requirement
Sections 7, 8 and 9 of the LGC fixed the said criteria and
they involve requirements on income, population and land area.
These requirements however, are imposed to help assure the
economic viability of the LGU concerned. They are designed to
achieve an economic purpose. They were not imposed to
determine the necessity for a plebiscite of the people.
The Code does not state that there will be no more
plebiscite after its requirement on income, population and land
area have been satisfied.
Section 10 of the Code requiring the conduct of plebiscite
has a different purpose – political purpose.
Navarro v. Ermita, GR No. 180050, May 12, 2010
RA 9355 creating the province of Dinagat Island was declared
unconstitutional for failure to comply with either the
population or land area requirement.
Section 461 does not state or may it be implied, that when a
province is composed of 2 or more islands, or when the
territory of a province is separated by a chartered city, such
province need not comply with the land area requirement of at
least 2,000 sq. km. The fact that a plebiscite has been held and
a new province proclaimed and its officials appointed, does not
make the creation legal.
Navarro v. Ermita, GR No. 180050, April 12, 2011
A year later the SC reconsidered and declared the creation of
the province of Dinagat Islands CONSTITUTIONAL. The SC said
there appears neither rhyme nor reason why the exemption of
contiguity of land area should apply to cities and
municipalities, but not provinces. Considering the configuration
of the archipelago, there is a greater likelihood that islands or
group of islands would form part of the land area of a newly
created province than in most cities or municipalities. Since the
exemption was expressly provided in the ensuring IRR, the
inclusion was intended to correct the congressional oversight
in Sec. 461 of the Code – and to reflect the TRUE LEGISLATIVE
INTENT.
The only requirement that relate to land area insofar as the
creation of barangay is concerned are:
a) As much as possible, the land must be contiguous;
b) It shall be properly identified by metes and bounds.
 In Mariano v. COMELEC, 242 SCRA 211, the SC has
refrained from using the metes and bounds description of
land area of other LGUs with unsettled boundary disputes.
The case refers to the conversion of the municipality of
Makati to City of Makati. The land area used is the present
territory of the municipality.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 17
Necessity of Fixing Corporate Limits
A municipal corporation cannot without legal
authorization, exercise its powers beyond its own corporate
limits. It is necessary that it must have its boundaries fixed,
definite and certain, in order that they may be identified and
that all may know the exact scope or section of territory or
geographical division embraced within the corporate limits and
over which the local corporation has jurisdiction.
Under the Code, a description of the boundaries in METES
and BOUNDS is said to be an essential part of its charter and
necessary to corporate existence. An incorporation is void
where the boundaries are not described with certainty.
Procedure for Creation of LGUs
 Read Articles 9, 11, 13 and 14 of the IRR of the Code
and take note of the requisites relating to the
verifiable indicators for the creation of a particular
LGU.
Congress may create provinces, cities or municipalities
without petition from anyone. Except where barangays are
sought to be created by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan,
petition and resolutions are not required by the Code.
Barangay units may be merged or consolidated by an
ordinance passed by the appropriate sanggunian based on a
merger or consolidation plan prepared by the governor or
mayor as the case may be.
SECTION 8. DIVISION AND MERGER.
Division and merger of existing local government units shall
comply with the same requirements herein prescribed for their
creation: Provided, however, That such division shall not reduce
the income, population, or land area of the local government
unit or units concerned to less than the minimum requirements
prescribed in this Code: Provided, further, That the income
classification of the original local government unit or units shall
not fall below its current classification prior to such division.
The income classification of local government units shall be
updated within six (6) months from the effectivity of this Code
to reflect the changes in their financial position resulting from
the increased revenues as provided herein.
SAME requisites for creation/conversion apply to
division/merger. What is needed is that the LGU created,
divided, or merged must be able to deliver services to its
constituents.
Effect of Division of Municipal Corporation
Division is effected by:
a) Fixing, altering, or changing the boundaries of MCs
for the purpose of enlarging or decreasing its
territory; or
b) Dividing MC into 2 or more separate municipalities.
The division of a municipal corporation extinguishes the
corporate existence of the original municipality. Unless the law
provides otherwise, when a municipal corporation is divided
into 2 or more municipalities, each municipality acquires title to
all the property, powers, rights and obligations falling within its
territorial limits.
Effect of Merger or Consolidation
Merger is effected by:
a) Consolidating 2 or more separate MCs into one; or
b) Annexing one municipality to another.
The annexation of one municipality to another will dissolve
the annexed (merged) municipality. It shall become part of the
merged corporation and will fall under the jurisdiction of the
latter. The merged corporation shall become subject to all the
laws and ordinances by which the merged corporation is
governed. The officers and employees of the merged territory
shall terminate their official relation with their offices. The
debts and obligations of MC contracted before its
merger/consolidation shall be assumed by the merged territory.
SECTION 9. ABOLITION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS.
Abolition may be done through an act of Congress in the
case of province, city, municipality or any other political
subdivision. In the case of a barangay, it may be done by the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan or Panglungsod concerned. Since
Congress has retained its power to create barangays in Metro
Manila and in cultural communities, it has the power to abolish
the same.
Limitations on the Power to Dissolve MCs
Upon certification from the national agencies concerned
that the standards prescribed for creation have been
irreversibly reduced to less than the minimum.
May the courts order dissolution of MCs?
 The courts have NO power to dissolve MCs, but the
court can declare the act of the legislature creating
the MC unconstitutional or illegal.
Whenever an LGU is abolished, it is a requirement that the
province, city, municipality or barangay with which it will be
incorporated or merged shall be specified in the measure
directing such abolition.
A municipal corporation is not dissolved by the mere
failure to elect its officers to conduct its government. Its
continuance as a legal entity does not depend on the existence
of its officers. The officers do not constitute a corporation. The
inhabitants of the designated locality are the incorporators.
 Change of sovereignty does not necessarily dissolve
MC. (Vilas v. City of Manila, 42 Phil 953)
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 18
SECTION 10. PLEBISCITE REQUIREMENT.
When a law/ordinance is passed creating an LGU, the LGU
is NOT AUTOMATICALLY created. A plebiscite is required to be
conducted. This is a mandatory requirement NOT ONLY of the
Code but of the Constitution.
Is assent of the inhabitants necessary to the incorporation
of an LGU?
 Yes, the plebiscite enables the registered voters of a
locality affected by the creation, division, merger,
abolition or alteration of the boundaries of an LGU to
check the power of Congress or LGU concerned to
carry out such action.
Abbas v. COMELEC, 179 SCRA 287 - Plebiscite is not
required in the merger of administrative regions. The
requirement of plebiscite in the merger of LGUs applies only to
provinces, cities, municipalities or barangays, not to
administrative regions.
The plebiscite requirement is MANDATORY. The rules
cover all CONVERSIONS, whether upward or downward in
character, so long as they result in a material change in the
LGU directly affected, especially a change in the political and
economic rights of the people.
The people‟s plebiscite is required to achieve a political
purpose – to use the people‟s voice as a check against the
pernicious political practice of gerrymandering. There is no
better check against the excess committed by the political
representatives of the people themselves than the exercise of
direct people power.
It is also imperative that the acts of Congress be also
approved by the inhabitants of the locality concerned.
City of Pasig v. COMELEC, 314 SCRA 179
A case involving a boundary dispute between LGUs presents a
prejudicial question which must first be decided before
plebiscites for creation of proposed barangays may be held.
When territorial jurisdiction is an issue raised, until and unless
such issue is resolved with finality, to define the territorial
jurisdiction of the proposed barangay would be an exercise of
futility. A requisite for the creation of a barangay, is for its
territorial jurisdiction to be properly identified by metes and
bounds or more or less permanent natural boundaries.
SECTION 11. SELECTION AND TRANSFER OF LOCAL
GOVERNMENT SITE, OFFICES AND FACILITIES.
This section deals with the physical location or situs of the
seats or the capitals of LGUs.
Is there a requirement as to where the seat of the
government shall be located?
 The location shall be determined by the law creating
or merging LGs guided by the considerations
enumerated in the section.
Article 7 of the IRR states that the seat of a provincial
government shall be located in the capital town or city,
anywhere within at its discretion.
The section also allows changes and/or transfer of location
when changes in the circumstances surrounding the choice
happen. The transfer may be effected by the Sanggunian of the
LGU by a vote of 2/3 of ALL its members after public hearings
are conducted.
Transfer of some offices and facilities, not the entire seat
Local government offices and facilities shall not be
transferred, relocated or converted to other uses unless public
hearings are first conducted for the purpose AND the
concurrence of the majority of the Sanggunian concerned is
obtained.
This section allows the transfer of some LG offices/facilities,
not the entire seat of the government. The vote required is a
simple majority of all the members, unlike a transfer relating to
the seat of the government where the required vote of 2/3 of
all the members is required.
SECTION 12. GOVERNMENT CENTERS.
Legislature Control over the Establishment of Government
Centers
The section encourages the construction of government
centers by the LGUs where national agencies, LGUs, GOCCs
may be located. In designating the center, the LGU shall take
into account the existing national and local agencies. The
expense for erecting the offices shall be borne by the said
government entity and the buildings or facilities must conform
with the overall physical and architectural plans and motifs of
the government center as approved by the sanggunian as
provided in Article 8 of the IRR.
SECTION 13. NAMING OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS
AND PUBLIC PLACES, STREETS AND STRUCTURES.
The power to change the name of certain LGUs, public places,
streets and other structures is now DELEGATED by Congress to
5 classes of sanggunian:
1. Sangguniang Panlalawigan of provinces
2. Sangguniang Panlungsod of HU cities
3. Sangguniang Panlungsod of ICCs
4. Sangguniang Panglungsod of Component Cities and
5. Sangguniang Bayan of the Municipalities
Requirement of Consultation before Change of Name
Consultation with the Philippine Historical Commission is a
requirement as well as the recommendation of the Sanggunian
concerned whenever the name of any component
city/municipality/barangay is changed.
 If the change of name involves hospitals, health
centers and the like, the Local Health Board has to be
consulted.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 19
 If the change of name involves a school, the Local
School Board has to be consulted.
In ALL instances of change of name, consultation with the
Historical Commission is required.
Power to Change by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan
Sangguniang Panlalawigan may in consultation with the
Philippine Historical Commission change the name of:
1. Component cities & municipalities, with
recommendation of sanggunian concerned
2. Provincial roads, avenues, boulevards, thoroughfares
and bridges
3. Public vocational or technical schools and other post
secondary and tertiary schools
4. Provincial hospitals, health centers and other health
facilities and
5. Any other public place or building owned by the
provincial government.
Can LGUs, public places, buildings be named after a living
person?
 The use of the names of living persons IS NOT
ALLOWED, unless for a JUSTIFIABLE reason. Art. 23,
par. 7 of the IRR is an exception. The name of a
FAMILY in a particular community whose members
have significantly contributed to the welfare of the
Filipino people may be used even if some members
may still be alive. The change should not be oftener
than once every 10 years.
 The name of LGU or public place, street or structure
with HISTORICAL, CULTURAL or ETHNIC
SIGNIFICANCE cannot be changed unless by a
UNANIMOUS vote of the sanggunian concerned.
Requirement of Plebiscite
Whenever the name of an LGU is changed, a plebiscite is
required to be conducted in the units directly affected. The
plebiscite is required ONLY if the name being changed is that
of the LGU.
In ANY change of name, the Office of the President, the
representative of the legislative concerned, and the Bureau of
Posts shall be notified.
SECTION 14. BEGINNING OF CORPORATE EXISTENCE.
The legal existence of a municipal corporation is to be
determined by the law creating it. Usually, the law fixes the
beginning of the corporate existence of a municipal
corporation from the effectivity of the law creating it or upon
the organization of its government or upon the qualification of
its officers. When the law is silent as to the beginning of
corporate existence, it shall commence upon the election and
qualification of its chief executive and a majority of the
members of its Sanggunian.
Meaning of Election and Qualification
Election of the chief executive and majority of the
members of the sanggunian means not only receiving the
highest number of votes among the political contenders for
their offices in the last preceding elections AND their
proclamation. Their qualification as such local officials means
their having assumed office.
A distinction should be made however as to the creation
of a corporation and the organization of its government.
Creation should precede the organization. The organization of
the government presupposes necessarily the previous
existence of said corporation at the time its government is
organized. (Mejia v. Balolong, 81 Phil 486)
Proof of Existence of Municipal Corporation
The existence of a municipal corporation may be proved
by its record of incorporation or the CHARTER. In the absence
of a charter, its incorporation may be shown by parol evidence,
at least to prove a de facto existence. Its existence may also be
shown by reputation, or by long us of its corporate powers, or
by legislative grants necessarily implying a town incorporation.
SECTION 15. POLITICAL AND CORPORATE NATURE OF
LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS.
In its private character it acts as instrumentality of the
people to handle properties held in a private capacity. When
engaged in corporate activities, they are on the same plane as
any private corporation.
If the property is taken by the national government and
the same is held by the municipal corporation in its private
capacity, then just compensation should be paid.
Also, when a province transfers title over real property to
another, certain formalities have to be followed. The Deed of
Transfer shall be executed by the governor upon resolution by
the Board AND with the approval of the President. (City of
Naga v. CA, 172 SCRA 13)
Aguada v. City of Manila, 9 Phil 513
The issue is whether or not the present City of Manila is liable
under the contracts for the obligation created therein by the
Ayuntamiento as its successor, and if it is, whether the plaintiff
is entitled to a writ of execution against any of the property of
the present city for the purpose of satisfying the liability.
The present City of Manila is not liable under the contract
entered into by its predecessor, the Old Ayuntamiento because
it is not its successor and such obligations are not incurred by
the present city.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 20
Vilas v. City of Manila, 42 Phil 935
Vilas was a creditor of the City of Manila. When the City was
incorporated, he brought an action against the City to recover
the sum due to him.
The new City of Manila is liable to its creditors for obligations
incurred by the old City of Manila. For the mere change of
sovereign authority does not necessarily dissolve the municipal
corporation under the former sovereign. Only such
governmental functions as are incompatible with the present
sovereignty may be considered suspended. The juristic identity
of the corporation is not affected by the change of sovereignty.
SECTION 16. GENERAL WELFARE.
The powers of an LGU are not absolute. They are subject
to limitations laid down by the Constitution and the laws such
as the Civil Code. The exercise of such powers should be
subservient to the paramount considerations of health and well
being of the members of the community. Every LGU has the
sworn obligation to enact measures that will enhance public
health, safety and convenience, maintain peace and order and
promote the general prosperity of the inhabitants of the LGU. It
should refrain from acting towards that which might prejudice
or adversely affect the general welfare.
General Welfare Clause
This clause empowers LGUs to enact and implement
measures for the general well-being of their inhabitants. Its
basis is the police power of the State as DELEGATED to already
covered by general law as long as the ordinance is not
repugnant to nor in conflict with the law.
LGUs can exercise power that are:
1. Expressly granted
2. Necessarily implied from the power that is expressly
granted
3. Necessary, appropriate or incidental for its efficient
and effective governance; and
4. Essential to the promotion of the general welfare of
the inhabitants.
2 Branches of General Welfare Clause
1. General Legislative Power – authorizes the
Sanggunian to enact ordinances and make
regulations not repugnant to law, as may be necessary
to carry into effect and discharge the powers and
duties conferred upon the Council by law.
2. Police power proper – authorizes the Sanggunian to
enact ordinances as may be necessary and proper for
the preservation and enrichment of culture, health
and safety, enhance the right of the people to a
balanced ecology, development of scientific and
technological capabilities, enhance economic
prosperity and social justice, improve morals, maintain
peace and order, promote full employment among
residents, preserve the comfort and convenience of
their inhabitants.
Requisites for the Exercise of Police Power
1. That the interest of the public generally as
distinguished from those of a particular class require
such interference and
2. That the means is reasonably necessary for the
accomplishment of the purpose and not unduly
oppressive upon individuals.
The policy of Congress as stated in Section 5(c) provides:
The general welfare provisions shall be liberally interpreted
to give more powers to LGUs in accelerating Development and
upgrading the quality of life for the people in the community.
What is police power?
Police power has not received a full and complete
definition. It is elastic and must be responsive to various social
conditions. It is not confined within the narrow circumscription
of precedents resting on past conditions. It must follow the
legal progress of a democratic way of life. Such that which may
at one another time, by reason of changed conditions, be
recognized as a legitimate exercise of power. Also, that which
may be regarded as within the power may not be so regarded
as to another. (PLDT v. City of Davao, 1965)
Sanctions within the Police Power
 Tano v. Socrates, 278 SCRA 154 – “Preferential right” of
subsistence or marginal fishermen to the use of marine
resources involving the enforcement of fishery laws in
municipal waters including the conservation of mangroves.
Enactment of ordinances banning the shipment of all live fish
and lobster and prohibiting the catching, buying and selling of
live coral dwelling aquatic resources.
 Prohibition of establishment of poultry business
within 500m radius from the poblacion is a valid exercise of
police power. Reason: Security of the general health of the
community, environmental reason (breathe clean air),
suppression of animal disease.
 Very recently there is a plan NOT to allow structures
within 30m from the coastline in Leyte. – For environmental
reasons; for the protection of life and property from loss and
destruction.
In such activities…
 Abatement of public nuisance – pursuant to the Civil
Code justified under the general welfare clause;
 Abatement of nuisance without judicial proceedings is
possible only if it is a nuisance per se. Example: A gas
station is not a nuisance per se or one affecting the
immediate safety of persons and property, hence it
cannot be closed down/transferred summarily to
another location.
 Conduct of raid and closure of business
establishments in the exercise of police power.
 Regulation of cockpits, fixing the distance of cockpits
and cabarets within the municipality.
 Anti-noise ordinance held valid.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 21
Exercise of Police Power by LGU
Local Government Units such as provinces, cities,
municipalities and barangays exercise police power through
their respective legislative bodies.
The General Welfare Clause provides for the exercise of
police power for the attainment or maintenance of the general
welfare of the community. The power, however, is exercised by
the government through its legislative branch by the
enactment of laws regulating those and other constitutional
and civil rights.
Police power is primarily vested with the national
legislature which may delegate the same to LGUs through the
enactment of ORDINANCES through the sanggunian.
 Read: Davao case on ordinance prohibiting aerial spray of
banana plantations.
Nuisance
Any act, omission, establishment, business, condition of
property or anything else which:
1. Injures or endangers the health or safety of others
2. Annoys or offends the senses
3. Shocks, defies or disregards decency or morality
4. Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any
public highways or street or any body of water
5. Hinders or impairs the use of property. (Art. 695, NCC)
Abatement of nuisance is justified under the GENERAL
WELFARE CLAUSE.
 Read:
1. Perez v. Spouses Madrona, GR No. 184478, March 21, 2012
2. Natividad Cruz v. Pandancan Hikers Club Inc., GR No.
188213, January 11, 2016 – nuisance per se
3. Aquino v. Municipality of Malay, GR No. 211256,
September 29, 2014
Kinds of Nuisance – Four General Classes
1. Nuisance per se – nuisances unquestionably and under all
circumstances
2. Nuisance per accidens – nuisances only by reason of their
surrounding circumstances
3. Public nuisance – one that affects a community or
neighborhood or any considerable number of persons,
although the extent of annoyance, danger or damage
upon individuals may be unequal.
4. Private nuisance – one that is not included in the definition
of a public nuisance.
How is Abatement effected?
Nuisance relating to ENVIRONMENT – Except if it constitutes a
pollution case, abatement of nuisance is with the local
government.
 Public nuisance – LGU
 Private nuisance – Courts pursuant to the Rule of
Procedure for environmental cases
 Pollution – Pollution Adjudication Board
Remedies against Public Nuisance
1. Prosecution under RPC or Local Ordinance
2. Civil action
3. Abatement without judicial proceedings
Remedies against Private Nuisance
1. Civil action
2. Abatement without judicial proceedings
There is a need for judicial intervention when the nuisance
is not a nuisance per se. The LGU cannot seek cover under the
general welfare clause authorizing the abatement of nuisances
without judicial proceedings. That tenet applies to a nuisance
per se, or one which affects the immediate safety of persons
and property and may be summarily abated under the
undefined law of necessity. (Lucena Grand Central Terminal Inc.
v. JAC Liner Inc., GR No. 148339, February 23, 2005)
In the abatement of nuisance the provisions of the Civil
Code (Art. 694-707) must be observed and followed.
(Pampanga Bus Co. v. Municipality of Tarlac, 3 SCRA 816)
SECTION 17. BASIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES.
LGUs shall endeavor to be self reliant and continue exercising
the powers and discharging the duties and functions vested
upon them. They shall also discharge the functions and
responsibilities of national agencies and offices devolved to
them pursuant to the Code.
Each lgu is tasked to provide specific basic services and
facilities:
 Barangay – agricultural support services, health and
social services, barangay roads and bridges, water
supply systems, sports center, plaza, reading center,
public market, maintenance of katarungang
pambarangay.
Powers Devolved
Certain powers that used to be exercised by the national
government
1) public works
2) health
3) agriculture
4) social welfare
5) certain tourism functions and
6) construction of school buildings and facilities are now
devolved to LGUs.
Purely barangay roads will be the responsibility of the barangay,
municipal roads that of the municipality and provincial roads,
of the province.
In solid waste management, collection at source is the
responsibility of the barangay, while segregation is that of the
municipality.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 22
Health services
Barangays are now mandated to establish and maintain
barangay health and day care centers; municipalities have
power over the delivery of primary health care, maternal and
child care, communicable and non-communicable diseases
control services. Provinces may establish and run hospitals and
other tertiary health services. Cities may exercise the powers
vested in municipalities and provinces on the matter of health
services. The purchase of medicines, medical equipment and
supplies is also lodged with LGUs.
Agriculture
Agricultural support services such as distribution of planting
materials and operation of collecting and buying stations for
farm produce will now be placed under the authority of
barangays. Municipalities will take charge of agriculture
extension and research services and delivery of services and
facilities related to fisheries and agriculture and the
enforcement of fishery laws and DENR laws relative to forestry
conservation projects. Provinces will do agricultural extension
and on-site research and on-site facilities as well as the
organization of dairy farms, livestock markets and farmers and
fishermen cooperatives. The cities will exercise the powers
over agriculture and fishing that provinces and municipalities
have.
Social welfare
Municipalities will now have powers over the welfare of
children and youth, family and community, women, elderly and
disabled persons, vagrants, beggars, street children scavengers,
juvenile delinquents, victims of drug abuse, nutrition and family
planning services and other pro-poor services. Provinces will
handle rebel returness and evacuees programs, relief
operations and population development services. Cities will
exercise the powers of the provinces and the municipalities
over the social welfare.
The power to build schools is now lodged with LGUs.
SECTION 18. POWER TO GENERATE AND APPLY
RESOURCES.
Having fiscal autonomy, lgus can create their own sources of
revenue and free to charter their own destiny. This autonomy
includes:
 Levy taxes and charges which shall accrue exclusively for
their use and disposition and which shall be retained by
them;
 Have a just share in national taxes which shall be
automatically and directly released to them without
need of any further action;
 Have an equitable share in the proceeds from the
utilization and development of the national wealth and
resources within their respective territorial jurisdiction
including sharing the same with the inhabitants by way
of direct benefits
 Acquire, develop, lease, encumber or otherwise dispose
of real or personal property held by them in their
proprietary capacity and to apply their resources and
assets for welfare purposes.
Tax share
The tax share of LGUs is now 40% of the national taxes;
apportioned as follows: 23% provinces; 23% cities; 34%
municipalities and 20% barangays.
Aside from this share, LGUs are invested with powers to tax,
empowering them with a wider capacity to raise their own
revenues within their territory.
LGUs are entitled to definite shares in 1) proceeds from
development and utilization of mines, forests, and marine
resources up to 40% of the gross collection therefrom by the
national government 2) proceeds of GOCC engaged in the
utilization and development of the national wealth up to 1% of
the gross sales or 40% of the gross collections made by the
national government therefrom, whichever is higher.
The distribution of shares of the LGUs derived from the
development and use of natural resources located in a
province are:
1) 20% to the province;
2) 45% to the component city/municipality where located;
and 3) 35% to the barangay where located.
If the natural resources is located in a highly urbanized city, the
distribution of shares are:
1) 65% to the city and
2) 35% to the barangay.
Idle lands in provinces, cities or municipalities in MM may be
additionally taxed at not exceeding 5% of their assessed value.
Levy
A real estate levy may be imposed by the province or city:
province – not exceeding 1% of the assessed value of the
property and city – not exceeding 2%
A special education fund may also be assessed in provinces,
cities or MM municipalities up to a max of 1% of the assessed
value of the real property.
Lands benefited by public works projects or improvements in
provinces, cities and municipalities may be levied a special tax
of not exceeding 60% of the actual cost of the project.
LGU taxes
Provinces may impose tax on
1) Transfers of real property
2) Businesses of printing and publication (not on
newspapers)
3) Franchises
4) Sand & gravel
5) Professions
6) Amusement enterprises
7) Delivery vans of all kinds of products
Municipalities on
1) manufacturers, processors, brewers, distillers, rectifiers
and compounders of liquors & distilled spirits
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 23
2) wholesalers, distributors or dealers of any article of
commerce
3) exporters, manufacturers, millers, producers, wholesalers,
distributors, dealers or retailers of essential commodities;
4) retailers
5) banks & other financial institutions and
6) peddlers of merchandise.
May also levy fees for sealing and licensing weights &
measures and impose fishery fees and for use of MUNICIPAL
WATERS.
Cities may levy taxes, fees and charges which provinces and
municipalities may impose. Like municipalities, they may also
impose a community tax.
City barangays may tax stores and retails whose gross sales do
not exceed P50,000/yr. Municipal barangays whose sales do
not exceed P30,000/yr.
Barangays:
1) services rendered
2) barangay clearances
3) commercial breeding of fighting cocks
4) cockfights
5) cockpits
6) billboards
7) neon signs
8) places of recreation which charge admission fees
LGUs have common revenue powers. They may impose fees for
services rendered by them and toll fees.
SECTION 19. EMINENT DOMAIN.
The power of eminent domain is one of the fundamental
powers of the State. This section is an express grant
(delegation) of the power to local governments. The power
may now be exercised by the LGU without need of approval by
the national government. The exercise of the power though is
not absolute.
Neither the LGC nor the CARP law requires a LGU to secure
approval of the DAR as a condition precedent to institute the
necessary expropriation proceedings. (Province of CamSur v CA
222 SCRA 173)
The rules on conversion of agricultural lands as provided in Sec
65 of the CARP law as implemented by EO 129-A, Series of
1987 cannot be the source of authority of the DAR to
determine the suitability of a parcel of agri land for the
purpose to which it would be devoted by the expropriating
authority. While these rules vest in the DAR the exclusive
authority to approve or disapprove conversions of agri lands
for residential, commercial or industrial uses, such authority is
limited to the applications for reclassification submitted by the
land owners or tenant beneficiaries.
 Read: RA 1899 (Reclamation of Foreshore lands) and
RA 2348 (Reconveyance of lands donated to the
National Government)
Requisites of Eminent Domain
1. An ordinance is enacted by the Sanggunian authorizing the
local chief executive, on behalf of the LGU to exercise the
power or pursue expropriation proceedings over a particular
private property
2. The power is exercised for public use, purpose or welfare, or
for the benefit of the poor and the landless
3. There is payment of just compensation and
4. A valid and definite offer has been previously made to the
owner of the property but said offer was not accepted.
When can the LGU immediately take possession of the
property?
 Read: City of Iloilo v Legaspi Nov 2004
The power may be effected only by ORDINANCE not by a mere
Resolution (is merely a declaration of the sentiment or opinion
of the lawmaking body on a specific matter.) Mun of
Paranaque v VM Realty 292 SCRA 678
The assessed value of a property cannot be made the sole
basis of just compensation since it constitutes only a
percentage of its current fair market value (Mun of Daet vCA 93
SCRA 503)
Section 19 expressly provides that just compensation shall be
determined as of the time of ACTUAL taking and not as of the
date of the filing of the complaint (City of Cebu v Dedamo
142971 May 7, 2002 ).
 Read also: Beluso v Mun of Panay 153974 Aug 7, 2006 and
Jesus is Lord Christian v Mun of Pasig 466 SCRA 235
The burden is on the LGU to prove its compliance with the
mandatory requirement of a valid and definite offer to the
owner of the property before its filing of its complaint for
expropriation. Failure to prove compliance with the mandatory
requirement will result in the dismissal of the complaint.
Proper party to appeal the dismissal is the LGU which filed the
case.
The rules for determining just compensation are those laid
down in the Rules of Court, Rule 67 which allow the owners to
submit evidence on what they consider shall be the just
compensation for their property (Mun of Talisay v Ramirez 183
SCRA 528)
Power of eminent domain as exercised by LGU strictly
construed
The power, being in derogation of property rights, is justified
only by a clear public necessity of an urgentn public policy.
The power must be strictly construed against the LGU. The
purpose and the procedure prescribed for it s exercise must be
strictly followed in all substantial matters. This rule of strict
construction is mandatory and should within reasonable limits,
be inflexibly adhered to and applied.
Ex. Authority to appropriate private property for streets, lanes,
alleys, public plazas or parks cannot include by implication the
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 24
authority to take private property for the construction thereon
of a jail.
Eminent Domain by GOCCs
Governed by RA 8974 - An Act to Facilitate the Acquisition of
right of way. Site or location for National Government
Infrastructure projects. Includes those projects covered by the
Build Operate and Transfer Law (RA 7718).
Upon filing of the expropriation complaint, the plaintiff has the
right to take or enter into possession ( entitled to a writ of
possession) of the real property involved if he deposits with
the authorized government depositary an amount equivalent
to 100% of the zonal value of the property to be expropriated.
SECTION 20. RECLASSIFICATION OF LANDS.
1. Land has ceased to be economically feasible & sound for
agri purposes as determined by Dept of Agriculture
2. Land has substantially greater economic value for residential,
commercial or industrial purposes as determined by the
sanggunian
3. The ff percentages of agri land area at the time of the
passage of the reclassification ordinance are not exceeded:
HUC – 15%
CC/1-3rd class Municipality – 10%
4th-6th class Municipality – 5%
4. Land already distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries
pursuant to CARP law shall not be reclassified
5. Conversion of such land into other purposes shall be done
pursuant to sec 65 of the CARP law
The percentage limitation may be expanded by the President
when public interest so requires upon recommendation of the
NEDA.
LGUs are mandated to prepare their comprehensive land use
plans which thru zoning ordinances shall be the primary and
dominant bases for the future use of land resources.
LGUs need not obtain the approval of the DAR to convert or
reclassify lands from agri to non-agri use. (Fortich v Corona 298
SCRA 678) Relate: DAR v Sarangani Agri Co. Inc. GR 165547
Jan 24, 2007 saying:
The conversion of agri lands into non-agri uses shall be strictly
regulated and may be allowed only when the conditions
prescribed under RA 6657 are present.
Pursuant to RA 6657 and EO 127-A, actions on applications for
land use conversions on individual landholdings shall remain as
the responsibility of the DAR, which shall utilize as its primary
reference documents the comprehensive land use plans and
accompanying ordinance passed upon and approved by the
LGUs concerned, together with the National Land Use Policy.
Thus: Argi lands that have been reclassified for non agri uses
by the LGU, the DAR should refer to the comprehensive land
use plans and the ordinances of the Sanggunian in assessing
land use conversion applications. DAR‟s SCOPE OF AUTHORITY
IN ASSESSING LAND USE CONVERSION APPLICATIONS IS
LIMITED TO EXAMINING WHETHER THE REQUIREMENTS
PRESCRIBED BY LAW AND EXISTING RULES AND
REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH.
Requirements of Sec 20
1. Requests for reclassification have to be acted upon by the
proper central government agency and its failure to act upon a
proper and complete application within three (3) months from
receipt of the application results in the approval thereof;
2. That nothing in the section repeals, amends or modifies in
any manner the provisions of the CARP law
Distinction:
 CONVERSION - by DAR of agricultural lands to non
agricultural to conform to actual land use upon
compliance with the conditions prescribed by RA 6657.
Applications are filed by individual landowners
 RECLASSIFICATION - by LGUs to non-agri uses as when
land is no longer economically feasible for agri purposes.
Reclassification is pursuant to an ordinance by the
Sanggunian.
Newsounds Broadcasting Network Inc v Cesar Dy et al.
April 2, 2009, GR 170270 and 179411
Conversion of property on which radio stations were built from
agricultural to commercial in relation to authority of LGUs to
enact ordinances authorizing the issuance of permits.
Since nothing in the Ordinance requires an applicant for a
mayor‟s permit to submit either an “approved land conversion
papers from the DAR showing that its property was converted
from agri to commercial land, or an approved resolution from
the Sbayan authorizing reclassification of the property from
agri to commercial, failure to submit same is not a ground to
deny mayor‟s permit much less close the establishment.
Laynesa vs Uy 149553, 2008
Issue is whether the reclassification of a lot by a municipal
ordinance, without the DAR‟s approval, suffices to oust the
jurisdiction of the DARAB over a petition for legal redemption
filed by the tenants. – The SC ruled that despite the
reclassification of an agricultural land to non-agri land by the
LGU, the DARAB still retains jurisdiction over a complaint filed
by a tenant of the land in question for threatened ejectment
and redemption. Nothing in sec 20(e) shall be construed as
repealing, amending or modifying in any manner the
provisions of RA 6657.
Validity of Reclassification
Nicolas and Santos Laynesa v Paquito and Pacita Uy, GR
149553, Feb 28, 2008
The Local Government Code, being a later law, which grants
local government units to reclassify land, the Code shall
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 25
govern in case of conflict between it and RA 6657, as to the
issue of reclassification.
Certification from the Municipal Agricultural Office that the
land is not prime agricultural property and certification from
the Municipal Agrarian Reform Office that the land was not
covered by the Operation Land Transfer is not sufficient
compliance with the conditions and requirements for
reclassification.
SECTION 21. CLOSURE AND OPENING OF ROADS.
The power can only be exercised thru an ORDINANCE. The
closure of city streets is within the power of the city council
while the closure of provincial roads is within the powers of the
provincial board.
The Sanggunian has the power to adopt zoning and
subdivision ordinances or regulations subject to the provisions
of existing laws, and to provide for the construction,
improvement, repair and maintenance of streets, alleys, bridges
and other public places, regulate the use thereof and prohibit
the construction or placing of obstacles or encroachments on
them. A municipality has the authority to 1)prepare and
adopt a land use map 2) promulgate a zoning ordinace which
may consider among others the municipal roads to be
constructed and 3) close any municipal road. (Pilapil v CA 216
SCRA 33)
Kind/Class of property of LGU significant
Art 424, Civil Code lays down the principle that properties of
public dominion devoted to public use and made available to
the public in general are outside the commerce of man and
cannot be disposed of or leased by the LGU to private persons.
Aside from the requirement of due process which should be
complied with before closing a road, street or park, the closure
should be for the sole purpose of withdrawing the road or
other public property from public use when circumstances
show that such property is no longer intended or necessary for
public use or public service. (Makasiano vs Diokno 211 SCRA
464).
When the property is already withdrawn from public use, the
property then becomes patrimonial property of the LGU (Art
422, Civil Code). It is only then that the LGU can use or convey
them for any purpose for which other real property belonging
to the LGU might be lawfully used or conveyed (Pilapil v CA
216 S )
Roads and streets which are available to the public in general
and ordinary used for vehicular traffic are still considered
public property devoted to public use. In such case, the LGU
has no power to use it for another purpose or to dispose of or
lease it to private persons. The general public has a legal right
to demand the demolition of illegal stalls in public roads and
streets and the officials of the LGU have the corresponding
duty arising from public office to clear the city streets and
restore them to their specific public purpose (Dacanay v Mayor
Assistio May 1992)
Freedom Parks
Designation of freedom parks in compliance with Sec 15 of BP
880. No freedom park shall however, be closed permanently
without provision for its transfer or relocation to a new site.
In Bayan v Ermita, 169838, April 25, 2006, the SC said to deny
the permit to assemble because there is no public park or plaza
designated in compliance with BP 880, is in effect denying the
right to peacefully assemble.
This section allowing closing and opening of roads by LGUs
provides an alternative for the LGU to raise revenues. Ex.
Basis of establishment of NIGHT CAFÉ
SECTION 22. CORPORATE POWERS.
LGUs have dual functions – governmental and proprietary. This
section enumerates the powers that local governments possess
as corporate entities. This section also provides the consent of
the State allowing LGUs to sue and be sued.
The distinction of powers becomes important for purposes of
determining the liability of the LGU for the acts of its agents
which result in an injury to 3rd persons. If the injury is caused in
the performance of a governmental function/duty, no recovery
as a rule, can be had from the LGU unless there is an existing
statute on the matter, nor from its officers, so long as they
performed their duties honestly and in good faith or they did
not act wantonly or maliciously. If function is proprietary, it
can be held liable to 3rd persons EX CONTRACTU or EX
DELICTO (Torio vs Fontanilla 1978).
The SC said there is no hard and fast rule for purposes of
determining the true nature of an undertaking or function of a
municipality (LGU); the surrounding circumstances of a
particular case are to be considered and will be decisive. The
basic element, however beneficial to the public the undertaking
may be, is that it is governmental in essence. Otherwise, the
function becomes private or proprietary in character.
A municipal corporation may sue and be sued and contract
and be contracted with. It can be held liable to 3rd persons ex
contractu (City of Manila v IAC 179 SCRA 428).
SECTION 23. AUTHORITY TO NEGOTIATE AND SECURE
GRANTS.
LGUs are now authorized to negotiate and secure financial
grants or donations in kind from local and foreign assistance
agencies to get the basic services and facilities required of
them. They can do this even without any clearance or approval
from the national government or from any of its agencies or
offices except when the grant or assistance has national
security implications. Neither is the clearance or approval of a
higher level LGU needed when the financial grant or donation
in kind is secured by a lower agency category.
When central government approval necessary
When the grant or assistance has NATIONAL SECURITY
IMPLICATIONS. Ex. If the financial grant or donation in kind
involves weapons or needs the supervision of foreign agents
for implementation purposes, the approval of the central
government must be obtained. The approval is deemed
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 26

granted if the national government agency concerned fails to CH APT E R III I N TER G OVER NM EN TAL RE L ATI ON S
act upon the request within 30 days from its receipt of the
application for approval.
ARTICLE I
Once the grant agreement or deed of donation is signed, the
local chief executive has to report the terms and conditions National Government and Local Government Units
thereof to both houses of Congress and to the President thru
the DILG (Art 52, IRR). The NEDA and DILG are required to
SECTION 25. NATIONAL SUPERVISION OVER LOCAL
assist the LGUs and the granting institutions or donors in the
GOVERNMENT UNITS.
execution and implementation of the agreements.
President‟s power of supervision done
1) DIRECTLY over provinces, HUC & ICC or
SECTION 24. LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES.
2) INDIRECTLY over ComCities, Mun & Barangays
LGUs and their officials are liable for damages for the malicious
Par c says - The Pres MAY upon request of the LGU . . If there is
or negligent conduct of the officials. They can be sued for
no request from the LGU, can the Pres withhold assistance, ex
damages for death or injury to persons or damage to property.
during a calamity?
They do not enjoy immunity from suits and their liability does
not preclude the criminal liability of the officials concerned. Par b says – National Agencies SHALL coordinate with the LGU
in the discharge of these functions. Does the Sec DILG or DND
Read Art 34 and 2189 of the Civil Code on some liabilities of
in case of calamity have to refer to the President before
LGUs. The test of liability is where the LGU is performing
rendering assistance?
governmental functions as an agency of the state, it shares the
states‟s exemption from tort liability; where it is attending to Relevance of doctrine of qualified agency to the power of
what are primarily local matters, it is liable. Supervision
It is said that liability for defects in streets is an exception to The President has control of all executive departments and the
the rule of immunity in case of governmental functions, if it be acts of the Secretaries, performed and promulgated in the
shown that the municipality had notice of the defects of the regular course of business are, unless disapproved or
streets. It is not necessary for liability to attach to the City of reprobated by the Chief Executive presumptively the acts of the
Manila that the defective road/ street belong to it. It is President. (Carpio v ES 206 SCRA 290). The rule does not
sufficient that it has either control or supervision over the apply to LG officials. The President can only interfere in the
street/road (City of Mnla v Teotico 22 SCRA 267). affairs and activities of a LGU if he finds that the latter has
acted contrary to law. The Pres or his alter egos cannot
Province of Pangasinan is liable for constructing a pumping
interfere in local affairs as long as the LGU acts within the
plant in such close proximity to plaintiff‟s residence practically
parameters of the law and the Constitution. Any directive by
rendering the same uninhabitable. The maintenance of the
the Pres or his alter egos seeking to alter wisdom of a law
nuisance is tantamount to an expropriation (Bengzon v
conforming judgment on local affairs of a LGU is a patent
Province 62 Phil 816).
nullity because it violates the principle of local autonomy and
The province is not liable for the acts of its driver in the separation of powers in governing LGUs.
construction of roads which is a governmental activity (Palafox
Although heads of local governments may be under the
v Prov Ilocos Norte 102 Phil 1186).
supervision of the Secretary of Local governments, local
Since the holding of a town fiesta is an exercise of a proprietary governments are not attached to the DILG. LGUs have their
function, the Municipality is liable for any injury sustained on own legislative and executive powers under the LG Code (Radia
the occasion thereof (Torio v Fontanilla 85 SCRA 599). v Review Committee under EO 17, 157 SCRA 749).
Breach of a contractual obligation between the City of Mnla Finance Secretary has no power to review LGU Tax Ordinances.
and plaintiff, involving property which is patrimonial in (explained in Estanislao v Costales 196 SCRA 853)
character entitles the latter to damages (City of Mnla v IAC 179
The power of the DOJ Secretary to review tax ordinances under
SCRA 428).
Sec 187 of the LGC authorizes the Secretary to declare the
Properties not subject to Levy and Execution passage of the ordinance illegal for failure to follow the
prescribed procedure for the enactment of tax ordinances. It is
Properties of an LGU, whether real or personal, which are
not an act of control but of mere supervision (Drilon v Lim 235
necessary for public use cannot be attached and sold at
SCRA 135)
execution sale to satisfy a money judgment against the LGU.
Revenues derived from taxes, licenses and market fees and
which are intended primarily and exclusively for the purpose of
financing the government activities and functions of the LGU,
are exempt from execution. Public funds are not subject to levy
and execution (Mun of Makati v CA 190 SCRA 206).
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 27
SECTION 26. DUTY OF NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES IN THE MAINTENANCE OF ECOLOGICAL
BALANCE.
Section 26 has to be read in conjunction with Section 27, the so
called Prior Consultation Rule where the National Agencies on
environmental concerns are mandated to CONSULT and get
the PRIOR APPROVAL (Consent) of the LGU before any project
is implemented. The section requires mandatory consultation.
Read: Province of Rizal v ES, 477 SCRA 436
Absent either of these two mandatory requirements of
CONSULTATION or PRIOR APPROVAL by the appropriate
Sanggunian, a national project‟s implementation is illegal.
Lina v Pano, GR No. 129093, Aug 30, 2001
The projects and programs mentioned in Sec 27 should be
interpreted to mean projects and programs whose effects are
among those enumerated in Sec 26. The introduction of lotto
in the province of Laguna is not covered by the sections. Lotto
is neither a program nor a project of the national government
but of a charitable institution, the PCSO.
SECTION 27. PRIOR CONSULTATIONS REQUIRED.
No project or program shall be implemented by government
authorities unless the consultations mentioned in Sections 2 (c)
and 26 hereof are complied with, and prior approval of the
sanggunian concerned is obtained: Provided, That occupants in
areas where such projects are to be implemented shall not be
evicted unless appropriate relocation sites have been provided,
in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
ARTICLE II
Relations with the Philippine National Police
SECTION 28. POWERS OF LOCAL CHIEF EXECUTIVES OVER
THE UNITS OF THE PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE.
LGU powers over the police, fire protection unit and jails are
defined in RA 6975 (DILG and Local Government Act of 1990).
The choice as to who becomes the Police Director is lodged
with the governor or mayor. The Police Chief is chosen by the
governor or mayor from a list of 3 qualified nominees
submitted by the NAPOLCOM. The governor or mayor has no
power of appointment, and has only limited power of selecting
one from among the list of five eligibles to be named chief of
police. The mayor cannot require the Regional Director to
include the name of any officer, no matter how qualified in the
list. The purpose is to enhance police professionalism and to
isolate the police service from political domination (Andaya v
RTC 319 SCRA Dec 3,1999).
ARTICLE III
Inter-Local Government Relations
SECTION 29. PROVINCIAL RELATIONS WITH COMPONENT
CITIES AND MUNICIPALITIES.
This section provides for the Governor‟s supervisory powers
over the component cities and municipalities within its
territorial jurisdiction. The provincial sanggunian also has the
power to REVIEW
1) Component city or municipal ordinances and even
resolutions approving the development plans and public
investment programs formulated by the city or municipal
development councils and
2) Component city or municipality annual or supplemental
appropriations.
Governor’s Coordinative powers
With the component cities and municipalities with the province
and with national agencies. Such activities may cover:
1) Law and order plans of the province with PNP and
NAPOLCOM
2) Measures to safeguard and conserve land, mineral, forest
and other natural resources of the province which may be
coordinated with the mayors concerned
3) Efforts of city/municipalities to host sports contests (national
or regional palaro) or promote sports development activities
4) Convening of meetings or calling of conventions of elective
and appointive officials of the province and its cities/mun and
5) The review pursuant to Sec 30 of the Executive Orders of
the mayor.
SECTION 30. REVIEW OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS.
The Governor has the power of review over Mayor‟s Executive
Orders and the Mayor has the power of review over the
Executive Orders of the Punong Barangay in his jurisdiction.
The purpose of review is to ensure that such EOs are within the
powers granted by law and in conformity with provincial, city
or municipal ordinances. Review is a reconsideration or
reexamination for purposes of correction.
If the governor or mayor fails to act on the said EO within 30
days after their submission, the orders are considered valid.
SECTION 31. SUBMISSION OF MUNICIPAL QUESTIONS TO
THE PROVINCIAL LEGAL OFFICER OR PROSECUTOR.
The Provincial Legal Officer or in the absence of one, the
Provincial Prosecutor is the legal adviser of the municipality.
These officers cannot refuse a request from the LGUs of an
opinion on the matter.
Legal Officer as provided in Sec 481 is now mandatory for
provinces and cities, optional for municipalities depending on
the availability of funds.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 28
This section does not cover the situation wherein the LGU is a
party litigant. The authority of LGU to employ a private lawyer
is expressly limited only to situations where the provincial pros
is disqualified to represent it. (Prov of Cebu v CA 147 SCRA
447)
SECTION 32. CITY AND MUNICIPAL SUPERVISION OVER
THEIR RESPECTIVE BARANGAYS.
The general supervision exercised by the Mayor over the acts
of his barangays is an extension of the supervisory power of
the President over local governments.
SECTION 33. COOPERATIVE UNDERTAKINGS AMONG
LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS.
This section expressly grants to LGUs the power to cooperate
with one another, consolidate their efforts and coordinate their
activities for any legal purpose that is beneficial to them. The
LGUs may therefore contribute funds, equipment, or property
and assign personnel pursuant to an agreement they may enter
into among themselves.
C H AP TER I V R EL ATI ON S WI TH P EOPL E'S AND N ON -
G OVERN M EN TAL OR G AN I Z ATI ON S
SECTION 34. ROLE OF PEOPLE'S AND NON-
GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS.
This provision recognizes the POs and NGOs as active partners
in the pursuit of local autonomy.
POs are groups of people outside of government, who are
organized for the attainment of some legitimate aspirations.
They may also be profit oriented.
NGOs are groups of people who are involved in a more or less
systematic pursuit of some particularized sectoral activity.
SECTION 35. LINKAGES WITH PEOPLE'S AND NON-
GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS.
This is a new provision recognizing Pos and NGOs as effective
partners of the LGUs for local development. It allows LGUs to
establish joint ventures and cooperative arrangements in the
areas of 1) delivery of basic services 2) capability-building and
livelihood projects and 3) development of local enterprises to
improve productivity and income; diversify agriculture, spur
rural industrialization, promote ecological balance and enhance
the economic and social well-being of the people.
Ex. Solid Waste Mgmt Law allows LGUs to enter in contracts
for the collection of solid waste, for establishment of recycling
and reuse facilities.
The provision is so encompassing to include any activity that
promotes the development of a locality.
SECTION 36. ASSISTANCE TO PEOPLE'S AND NON-
GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS.
This is also a new provision allowing LGUs to provide financial
or other assistance to NGOs for economic, socially oriented,
environmental or cultural projects located within its territorial
jurisdiction.
Ex. Reforestation projects and the rehabilitation of fish
habitats.
Tuna industry, local drama and choir groups, development
of springs, lakes or rivers as tourist spots.
C H AP TER V L OC AL PR EQ U ALI FIC ATI ON , B ID S AN D
AWAR D S C OMM I TTEE
SECTION 37. LOCAL PREQUALIFICATION, BIDS AND
AWARDS COMMITTEE (LOCAL PBAC).
SECTION 38. LOCAL TECHNICAL COMMITTEE.
Relate with the Electronic Bids and Awards Law (RA ).
TITLE II ELECTIVE OFFICIALS
CH APT E R I Q U ALI FIC ATI ON S AND EL ECTI ON
SECTION 39. QUALIFICATIONS.
(a) An elective local official must be a citizen of the Philippines;
a registered voter in the barangay, municipality, city, or
province or, in the case of a member of the sangguniang
panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, or sangguniang
bayan, the district where he intends to be elected; a resident
therein for at least one (1) year immediately preceding the day
of the election; and able to read and write Filipino or any other
local language or dialect.
(b) Candidates for the position of governor, vice-governor, or
member of the sangguniang panlalawigan, or mayor, vice-
mayor or member of the sangguniang panlungsod of highly
urbanized cities must be at least twenty-one (21) years of age
on election day.
(c) Candidates for the position of mayor or vice-mayor of
independent component cities, component cities, or
municipalities must be at least twenty-one (21) years of age on
election day.
(d) Candidates for the position of member of the sangguniang
panlungsod or sangguniang bayan must be at least eighteen
(18) years of age on election day.
(e) Candidates for the position of punong barangay or member
of the sangguniang barangay must be at least eighteen (18)
years of age on election day.
(f) Candidates for the sangguniang kabataan must be at least
fifteen (15) years of age but not more than twenty-one (21)
years of age on election day.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 29
With variations on age and residence requirements, all
candidates for elective local offices must be FILIPINO citizens,
registered as voters of the place where they are standing as
candidates and able to read and write.
Age requirement:
 At least 23 yrs for governor, vice governor or member of
the SPanglalawigan or mayor, vice mayor or member of
SPanglungsod of a HUC
 21 yrs for a mayor, vice mayor of an ICC
 18 yrs for member of Spanglungsod of component city
or municipal council or punong barangay or member of
Sbarangay
 15 yrs but nor more than 21 yrs for SK
There is a LITERACY requirement of local elective official; such
that he must be able to read and write.
There is NO PROPERTY qualification. It is not required that a
person should have a house in order to establish his residence
and domicile. It is enough that he sould live in the municipality
or in a rented house or in that of a friend or relative. Nowhere
it is required by the Constitution that the candidate should also
own property in order to be qualified to run. On the other
hand, mere ownership of a house and lot is not equivalent to
residence for purposes of election.
The LGC requires an elective official to be a registered voter. It
does not require him to vote actually. The requirement is to
ensure that the prospective official is actually registered in the
area he seeks to govern and not anywhere else.
Residence Requirement
Must be resident of the province, city, municipality or barangay
where he is seeking election, for at least 1 yr immediately
preceding the election. Candidates for the various sanggunian
districts except the barangay have to be residents of the
districts where they are seeking election.
The term residence is synonymous with DOMICILE, which
imports not only intention to reside in a fixed place but also
personal presence in that place, coupled with conduct
indicative of such intention. In order to acquire a domicile by
choice, there must concur
1) residence or bodily presence in the new locality
2) intention to remain, there and
3) an intention to abandon the old domicile. The purpose
to remain in or at the domicile of choice must be for an
indefinite period of time.
Domicile of origin is not easily lost. Without clear and positive
proof of concurrence of the 3 requirements, the domicile of
origin continues. (Dumpit-Michelena v Boado 475 S 290)
Residence means actual and physical presence – while
discharging the duties as governor of Misamis Oriental, he
owned a house in the city and resided there together with his
family. (Torayno v Comelec 337 S 574)
The mere absence from one‟s residence or origin, domicile – to
pursue studies, engage in business or practice his vocation is
not sufficient to constitute abandonment or loss of such
residence. (Abella v Comelec 201 S 253; Faypon v Quirino 98
Phil 294)
 Read: Coquilla v Comelec 151914 July 31, 2002
Citizenship requirement
The citizenship requirement is to be possessed by an elective
official at the latest as of the time he is proclaimed and at the
start of the term of office to which he has been elected.
Registration for naturalization under PD 725 is valid and
effective and retroacts to the date of the application. (Fivaldo v
Comelec 257 SCRA 727)
The citizenship requirement need not be by birth. Naturalized
Filipinos may qualify for local elective positions.
Dual Citizen may qualify as candidate for local elective
office
Dual citizenship arise when, as a result of the concurrent
application of the different laws of two or more states, a person
is simultaneously considered a national by the said states. Ex.
When a person whose parents are citizens of a state which
adheres to the principle of jus sanguinis (by blood) is born in a
state which follows the doctrine of jus soli. Such a person, ipso
facto and without any voluntary act on his part, is concurrently
considered a citizen of both states.
With the passage of RA 9225, natural born citizens who have
lost their Phil citizenship by reason of their naturalization as
citizens of a foreign country may re-acquire Phil citizenship
upon taking the oath provided for in the Act.
Classes of Dual Citizens
1. Those born of Filipino fathers and/or mothers in foreign
countries which follow the principle of jus soli;
2. Those born in the Philippine of Filipino mothers and alien
fathers if by the laws of their father‟s country such children are
citizens of that country;
3. Those who marry aliens if by the laws of the latter‟s country
the former are considered citizens, unless by their act or
omission they are deemed to have renounced Philippine
citizenship.
Qualification of Candidate Dual Citizen
Lopez vs COMELEC GR 182701, July 23, 2008
Lopez was born a Filipino but he deliberately sought
American citizenship and renounced his Filipino citizenship. He
later on became a dual citizen by re-acquiring Filipino
citizenship. COMELEC disqualified him when it found that he
was not able to regain his Filipino citizenship in the manner
provided by law. He failed to make a personal and sworn
renunciation of any and all foreign citizenship. Lopez argued
that his filing of a certificate of candidacy for barangay
chairman operated as an effective renunciation of foreign
citizenship as held in Valles vs COMELEC 337 SCRA 543.
Dual Citizen – Requirements before one may run for a
public office
The ruling in Valles has been superseded by the enactment of
RA 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re-Acquisition Act of
2003). The law expressly provides for the conditions before
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 30
those who re-acquired Filipino citizenship may run for a public
office in the Philippines.
Section 5. Civil and Political Rights and Liabilities. Those
who retain or re-acquire Philippine citizenship under this Act
shall enjoy full civil and political rights and be subject to all
attendant liabilities and responsibilities under existing laws and
the ff conditions:
Those seeking elective public office in the Philippines
shall meet the qualification for holding such public office as
required by the Constitution and existing laws and at the same
time of the filing of the certificate of candidacy, MAKE A
PERSONAL AND SWORN RENUNCIATION OF ANY AND ALL
FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP BEFORE ANY PUBLIC OFFICER
AUTHORIZED TO ADMINISTER AN OATH.
Ruling
While Lopez was able to regain Filipino Citizenship by virtue of
the Dual Citizenship Law when he took his oath of allegiance
before the Vice Consul of the Philippine Consulate General‟s
Office in LA, California, the same is not enough to allow him to
run for a public office. There is no evidence presented that will
show that Lopez complied with the provision of RA 9225.
Absent such proof, Lopez cannot run for barangay chairman.
Distinguished from Valles case
Rosalind Lopez was a dual citizen by accident of birth on
foreign soil, being born of Filipino parents in Australia, a
country which follows the principle of jus soli. As a result, she
acquired Australian citizenship by operation of Australian law,
but she was also considered a Filipino citizen under Philippine.
She did not perform any act to swear allegiance to a country
other than the Philippines.
SECTION 40. DISQUALIFICATIONS.
The following persons are disqualified from running for any
elective local position:
(a) Those sentenced by final judgment for an offense
involving moral turpitude or for an offense punishable by
one (1) year or more of imprisonment, within two (2) years
after serving sentence;
(b) Those removed from office as a result of an
administrative case;
(c) Those convicted by final judgment for violating the oath
of allegiance to the Republic;
(d) Those with dual citizenship;
(e) Fugitives from justice in criminal or non-political cases
here or abroad;
(f) Permanent residents in a foreign country or those who
have acquired the right to reside abroad and continue to
avail of the same right after the effectivity of this Code; and
(g) The insane or feeble-minded.
Sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving moral
turpitude (everything done contrary to justice,m honesty,
modesty or good morals). It covers any act of baseness,
vileness or depravity in the private and social duties which a
man owes his fellow men, to society in general, contrary to the
accepted and customary rule of the right and duty between
man and woman or conduct contrary to justice, honesty or
good morals. It implies something immoral in itself, regardless
of the fact that it is punishable by law or not. The act itself and
its prohibition by statute fixes the moral turpitude (Court Adm
v san Andres 197 SCRA 704). Ex. Vio of BP 22, estafa
Within 2 yrs after serving sentence
Service of sentence applies only to a convict who has been
confined in a penal facility for some time, and does not apply
to a probationer, whose principal and accessory penalties were
suspended upon the grant of probation. Period of probation
cannot be equated with service of sentence because the grant
of probation suspends the execution of the sentence. Thus, one
who is serving probation should not be disqualified from
running for local elective office because the 2 yr period of
ineligibility under the LGC does not even begin to run (Moreno
v Comelec 168550 Aug 10, 2006)
Removal as disqualification
The PENALTY of REMOVAL from local elective office bars the
official concerned from qualifying as a candidate. Sec 66
reiterates the disqualification.
“The penalty of removal from office as a result of an
administrative investigation shall be considered a bar to the
candidacy of the respondent for any elective position.”
Dual Citizenship
Must be distinguished from dual ALLEGIANCE which refers to a
situation in which a person simultaneously owes, by some
positive act, loyalty to two or more states. While dual
citizenship is involuntary, dual allegiance is the result of an
individual‟s volition. The Constitution in Art 4, Sec 5 provides
“Dual allegiance of citizens is inimical to the national interest
and shall be dealt with by law.” Hence, the disqualification
must be understood as referring to dual allegiance. Persons
with mere dual citizenship do not fall under this disqualification.
(Mercado v Manzano 2006).
Fugitives from justice in criminal or non-political cases here
or abroad
Fugitive from justice includes not only those who flee after
conviction to avoid punishment but likewise who after being
charged flee to avoid prosecution. (Rodriguez v Comelec 259 S
296 and Marquez Jr v Comelec 243 S 538). Intent to evade
on the part of a candidate must therefore be established by
proof that there has already been a conviction or at least, a
charge has already been filed, at the time of flight.
The SC in the Marquez case held that Art 73 of the IRR which
limited the term „fugitive from justice” to refer only to a person
„who has been convicted by final judgment,” as an inordinate
and undue circumscription of the law.
Permanent Residents – Green Card Holders
Refer to so called green card holders, Filipino citizens who have
acquired permanent residency status in the US or elsewhere
and have continued to use it even after Jan 1, 1992. To be
qualified to run for elective office, the law requires that the
candidate who is a green card holder must have waived his
status as a permanent resident or immigrant of a foreign
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 31
country. The waiver of the green card should be manifested by
some act/s independent of and done prior to the filing of the
candidacy. Without such prior waiver, the candidate is
disqualified to run for elective office. (Caasi v CA 191 S 229).
Reason – Congress has laid down a clear policy of
excluding from the right to hold elective public office those
Philippine citizens who possess dual loyalties and allegiance.
SECTION 41. MANNER OF ELECTION. (Amended by RA
8553)
a. Governor & Vice Governor – at large in the entire Province;
Mayor & Vice Mayor – by the entire city/municipality; Punong
Barangay – by the entire barangay
b. By district for the regular members of the various
sanggunians whether provincial, city or municipality
c. By barangay for members of the Sang Barangay
d. By league for presidents of 1) the league of sang of CC &
Mun 2) the Sang ng mga Barangay and 3) the Pederasyon ng
mga S Kabataan
e. By sector for rep of 1) women 2) workers 3) one or the other
of the ff sectors – urban poor, ind cultural comm, disabled
persons, any other sector as determined by the Sang within 90
days prior to the holding of the next local elections.
RA 7166
Provided for election of Sangguniang Members by District not
at large. The purposes of districting or apportionment of the
sangguniang seats is to reduce the number of positions to be
voted for in the May 11, 1992 synchronized elections and
ensure the efficiency of the electoral processes.
The presidents of the Leagues of sang members of CC and
Mun are ex officio members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan .
The presidents of the Liga ng mga Barangay and the
Pederasyon ng mga Sang Kabataan shall be ex officio members
of the Sang Panlalawigan, Panglungsod and Bayan as the case
may be.
SECTION 42. DATE OF ELECTION.
Unless otherwise provided by law, the elections for local
officials shall be held every three (3) years on the second
Monday of May.
SECTION 43. TERM OF OFFICE.
(a) The term of office of all local elective officials elected after
the effectivity of this Code shall be three (3) years, starting from
noon of June 30, 1992 or such date as may be provided for by
law, except that of elective barangay officials: Provided, That all
local officials first elected during the local elections
immediately following the ratification of the 1987 Constitution
shall serve until noon of June 30, 1992.
(b) No local elective official shall serve for more than three (3)
consecutive terms in the same position. Voluntary renunciation
of the office for any length of time shall not be considered as
an interruption in the continuity of service for the full term for
which the elective official concerned was elected.
(c) The term of office of barangay officials and members of the
sangguniang kabataan shall be for three (3) years, which shall
begin after the regular election of barangay officials on the
second Monday of May 1994.
The term of local elective officials is 3 years. Their eligibility for
reelection purposes is limited to 3 consecutive terms. Their
voluntary renunciation of office is not considered as an
interruption in the continuity of service for the full term for
which they have been elected. The term limit must be taken to
refer to the right to be elected as well as the right to serve in
the same elective position. For the 3 term limit to apply, the ff
requisites/conditions must concur: 1) the official concerned has
been elected for 3 consecutive terms to the same local
government post and 2) that he has fully served 3 consecutive
terms (Ong v Alegre 479 S 473). It is not enough that an
individual has served 3 consecutive terms in an elective local
office, he must also have been elected to the same position for
the same number of times before the disqualification can apply.
The term of office starts from noon of June 30 or such date as
may be provided by law. The term is not extendible, such that
they shall hold over until their successors are elected and
qualified. The Constitution has clearly fixed the day on which
the official term shall begin, there is no legislative authority to
continue beyond that period, even though the successors fail
to qualify within the time (Osmena v Comelec 199 S 750).
 Read: Dizon vs Comelec & Morales 182099, Jan 30, 2009
C H AP TER I I VAC AN CI ES AN D SUC C ES SI ON
SECTION 44. PERMANENT VACANCIES IN THE OFFICES OF
THE GOVERNOR, VICE-GOVERNOR, MAYOR, AND VICE-
MAYOR.
Permanent vacancy arises when an elective local official fills a
higher vacant office, refuses to assume office, fails to qualify,
dies, is removed from office, voluntarily resigns, or is
otherwise permanently incapacitated to discharge the
functions of his office. Included in the phrase “voluntary
resigns” is the act of local officials who file certificates of
candidacies for offices other than the ones they are occupying
or for the vice presidency or the presidency.
There is no vacancy whenever the office is occupied by a legally
qualified incumbent; thus, there is a vacancy when there is no
person lawfully authorized to assume and exercise at present
the duties of the office (Menzon v Petilla 197n SCRA 257).
Permanent vacancy in the office of vice governor/mayor
The Sanggunian member who received the highest ranking on
the basis of the proportion of votes obtained by each winning
candidate to the total number of registered voters in each
district should assume the office of the vice governor (Victoria
v Comelec 229 S 169).
 Actually voted x votes obtained/Registered voters = %
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 32

For purposes of the right of succession, ranking in the
sanggunian shall be determined on the basis of the proportion
of votes in each district in the immediately preceding local
election.
The vacancy in the position of vice-mayor due to the
ineligibility of the winning candidate should be filled up in
accordance with Section 44 of the Code. The disqualification
or non-qualification of the winner in a vice-mayoralty race does
not justify the proclamation of the defeated candidate who
obtained the second highest number of votes. (Recabo v
Comelec 308 SCRA 793).
In case of temporary vacancy in the same office, the mode of
succession provided for permanent vacancies may likewise be
observed. (Unda v Comelec 190 S 827).
Where there is permanent vacancy in the office of the Punong
Barangay, the second highest ranking Sangguniang Barangay
member or in case of his permanent disability, the second
highest ranking sanggunian and so on down the line shall
become the Punong Barangay.
2) when the vacancy occurs in the SBarangay;
3) when the vacancy refers to the position of youth
representatives; or
4) when the vacancy concerns the position of barangay
representatives in the sanggunian of a municipality, city or
province.
Is appointing authority limited to those recommended to
him?
When vacancy is caused by a Sanggunian Bayan member not
belonging to a political party, the Governor, upon
recommendation by the Sanggunian Bayan, appoints the
replacement (Farinas v Barba, 256 SCRA 396). The power of
appointment is a discretionary power, however, neither is the
appointing power vested with so large a discretion that he can
disregard the recommendation of the Sanggunian concerned.
Since the recommendation takes the place of nomination by
political party, the recommendation must likewise be
considered a condition precedent for the validity of the
appointment.

SECTION 45. PERMANENT VACANCIES IN THE Who is the appointing authority?

SANGGUNIAN.
Sec 45 is a recognition of the policy to vest in the President, the
The section deals with permanent vacancies in the sanggunians governor, and the mayor in descending order the executive
where Sec 44 does not apply. The vacancy will be filled up by power to appoint in order to fill vacancies in local councils or to
appointment which power is lodged with the President, suspend local officials (as provided in Sec. 63).
governor or mayor. The appointment can be extended by the
The President is not the local chief executive referred to in par
1) President thru the Executive Secretary where the
c but refers to the governor or the mayor with respect to the
vacancy exists in the SPanlalawigan and Panglungsod of
vacancies in the Sanggunian concerned which should be
HUC and ICC.
understood as referring to the sanggunian in which the
2) The Governor where the vacancy exists in the
vacancy is created.
Spanglunsod of CC and the Sbayan; and
3) The City or Municipal Mayor where the vacancy exists
in the Sbarangay, upon recommendation of the Sbarangay SECTION 46. TEMPORARY VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF
concerned. THE LOCAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE.

Party Nomination When there is temporary vacancy in the office of the governor,
mayor or punong barangay, the vice governor, vice mayor or
To maintain the party representation in the sanggunian as
the highest ranking Sbarangay member shall automatically
willed by the people in the election, it is required that ONLY
exercise the powers and duties of the temporarily absent or
the nominee of the political party under which the sanggunian
incapacitated local chief executive. The automatic exercise of
member concerned had been elected and whose elevation to
the powers does not need an appointment, however, the
the position next higher in rank created the last vacancy in the
temporary occupant of the office cannot exercise the powers of
sanggunian shall be appointed. The appointee shall come
APPOINTMENT, SUSPENSION or DISMISSAL of employees
from the same political party as that of the sanggunian
unless the period of temporary incapacity exceeds 30
member who caused the vacancy and shall serve the unexpired
WORKING days.
term of the vacant office.
Reason for the Temporary Vacancy
Two Certificates Required
If the temporary vacancy is caused by physical reasons, the
The section also requires that the party to which the nominee
local chief exe must submit a written declaration to the
and the person being replaced belong shall issue 2 certificates:
sanggunian upon his return to terminate the temporary
a certificate of nomination to the nominee and a certificate of
incapacity. If it is caused by legal reasons such as suspension
membership of the nominee duly signed by the highest official
or arrest, the local chief exe has to submit documents to show
of the political party concerned. Without those certificates, the
that the legal causes no longer subsist.
appointment is void ab initio and the person issuing the
appointment may be charged administratively. When the LCEx travels outside of the territorial jurisdiction but
within the country for 3 days or less, - not considered
The certificates are NOT required when:
physically absent. There is no temporary vacancy and the LCE
1) the person who caused the vacancy does not belong to
may therefore designate OIC of the office. If he fails to
any political party;
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 33
designate, the failure authorizes the vice governor/mayor or
the highest ranking sanggunian member to assume the office
on the 4th day of absence of the LCE concerned.
When the travel exceeds 3 days, the vice governor/mayor or
highest ranking sanggunian member assumes the office.
Designation of OICs
The designation by the LCExe of officials OTHER than their
respective vice governor/mayor or the highest ranking
sanggunian member as OIC is PROHIBITED. The only
EXCEPTION is when the LCE is traveling for 3days or less
outside the jurisdiction but within the country.
Subordinate local executives like mayors of component cities
and municipalities need permission (travel authority) from their
respective governors and the punong barangays from their
mayors to travel outside their jurisdictions.
SECTION 47. APPROVAL OF LEAVES OF ABSENCE.
The leaves of absence have to be acted upon by the officials
mentioned WITHIN 5 WORKING DAYS from the date of receipt
of the application for leave. If the application is not acted upon
as specified, the leave is considered APPROVED.
The provision is intended to prevent harassment of political
enemies thru inaction or other methods by those who have the
power to allow leaves of absence of local elective officials.
C H AP TER I II L OC AL L EG I SL ATI ON
SECTION 48. LOCAL LEGISLATIVE POWER.
Local legislative power shall be exercised by the sangguniang
panlalawigan for the province; the sangguniang panlungsod
for the city; the sangguniang bayan for the municipality; and
the sangguniang barangay for the barangay.
LGUs as agents of the State have the power of subordinate
legislation – able to legislate by virtue of a valid delegation of
legislative power from the national legislature EXCEPT the
power to create their own sources of revenue and to levy taxes
is conferred by the Constitution itself.
The four local legislative bodies
1) Sangguniang Panlalawigan as set out in Sec 468
2) Sangguniang Panlungsod in Sec 458
3) Sangguniang Bayan in Sec 447 and
4) Sangguniang Barangay in Sec 391.
LGUs do not have CONTEMPT powers.
Municipal Ordinances and Resolutions
Are the legislative acts passed by the Sanggunian in the
exercise of its law-making authority. They are of general and
permanent character as distinguished from resolutions which
refer to acts which are temporary in nature or relating to
proprietary functions and private concerns or which involve
ministerial duties. An ordinance is a law but a resolution is
merely a declaration of the sentiment or opinion of a
lawmaking body on a specific matter. As to enactment, a 3rd
reading is necessary for an ordinance, but not for a resolution,
unless decided otherwise by a majority of all the Sanggunian
members.
The power to enact ordinances carries with it the power to
change or repeal them, provided that vested rights are not
thereby impaired and repeals are valid only when passed in a
certain manner which should be definite and should relate
specifically to the ordinance which should be repealed. No
ordinance may be changed by a mere resolution.
Congress has an implied power to repeal any municipal
ordinance either in express terms or necessary implication. If
the subsequent statute is necessarily repugnant to an
ordinance and the intention to repeal is obvious, then the
ordinance is thereby impliedly repealed.
Ex. The SPanlalawigan has the authority to disapprove any
ordinance of a municipality on one ground alone: that the
ordinance is not within the powers granted by the charter. The
Sanggunian exceeds its authority when it disapproves an
ordinance on other grounds, such as reasonableness of the
ordinance or its supposed unconstitutionality or its
inconsistency to public policy.
Validity of Ordinances
Whenever there is a conflict between an ordinance and a
statute, the ordinance must give way (Primicias v Mun of
Urdaneta 93 S 462). A local legislative body intending to
control traffic in public highways is supposed to classify first,
and then mark them with proper signs, all to be approved by
the Land transportation office.
Read: Magtajas v Pryce Properties Corp 234 S 255
Lagcao v Labra 440 S 279
SECTION 49. PRESIDING OFFICER.
The vice governor for the Spanlalawigan; the city vice mayor for
the Spanglungsod and municipal vice mayor for the sessions of
the Sbayan. The presiding officer votes only in case of a tie.
Whenever the regular presiding officer fails to preside at the
sanggunian session, the members present, there being a
quorum, shall elect from among themselves a temporary
presiding officer. There is NO AUTOMATIC succession to the
position of presiding officer in the event that the regular
presiding officer is temporarily unable to preside at a session of
the sanggunian.
SECTION 50. INTERNAL RULES OF PROCEDURE.
The section deals with procedural matters on the organization
and conduct of the sessions of the various sanggunian. The
Code does not require the completion of the updating or
adoption of the internal rules of procedure before the
sanggunian could act on any matter like the enactment of an
ordinance (Malonzo v Zamora 323 S 875). It simply requires
that the matter of adopting or updating the internal rules of
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 34
procedure be taken up during the first day of session. There is
also nothing in the law which prohibits that the 3 readings of a
proposed ordinance be held in just one day.
Mandatory Committees
While allowed to create committees, the Code makes the ff 5
comms mandatory:
1) appropriations
2) women and family
3) youth and sports development
4) environmental protection, and
5) cooperatives
The section also recognizes 2 general causes a member of a
sanggunian may be subjected to disciplinary action by the
sanggunian concerned:
1) disorderly behavior and
2) four consecutive absences without justifiable cause.
Sanctions may be censure, reprimand, exclusion from the
session, suspension for not more than 60 days and expulsion
for either or both of the causes cited. A vote of at least 2/3 of
ALL the members of the sanggunian is needed to suspend or
expel. The conviction by final judgment of a member for any
crime involving moral turpitude with a sentence of more than 1
year shall cause his automatic expulsion from the sanggunian.
SECTION 51. FULL DISCLOSURE OF FINANCIAL AND
BUSINESS INTERESTS OF SANGGUNIAN MEMBERS.
SMembers are OBLIGED to make full disclosures of
1) Own interests in business or financial matters, and
2) Their relationships business-wise financially,
professionally, or by blood or affinity within the 4th civil
degree with any person, firm, entity, where such
relationship may result in a conflict of interest between
their performance of duty and their preference for
professional or family ties or their own business or
financial interests.
4th civil degree by consaguinity/affinity extends to
1) great, great grandparents
2) great great grandchildren
3) first cousins; and
4) great grand uncles and aunts.
Time of disclosure – Upon assumption of office. It is an
absolute requirement demanded of the members by virtue of
their membership in the body, whether or not the member
does anything at all during his entire term. A member is also
required to make a disclosure of the interests of his 4th degree
relatives in business, finance or in the profession before he
discharges his duties in the sanggunian as when he
1) participates in the discussion of an ordinance or
resolution that may affect the business interest, financial
connection or professional relationship mentioned or
2) votes on 2nd or 3rd reading of the said ordinance; or
3) delivers a privilege speech; or
4) takes a position thereon.
SECTION 52. SESSIONS.
The day, time and place of the regular sessions of the
sanggunian are fixed by the members on the 1st session day
after their election.
The sanggunians of the province, city and mun will have at
least ONE REGULAR session a week; the barangay at least TWO
regular sessions a week. Aside from meeting in regular session,
the sanggunian may meet in special session upon CALL 1) of
the LCEx or 2) of a majority of the members. Special sessions
are called for reasons of public interest.
Written notices containing the matters to be considered must
be sent to the members and served personally at their usual
place of residence at least 24 hrs before the special session is
held. The law specifies that the notice be served at the
member‟s residence; if it is in fact served at their offices or
elsewhere and received by them, the law is deemed sufficiently
complied with.
In special sessions, only the agenda specified in the notice will
be considered, unless at least 2/3 of the members present,
there being a QUORUM should vote in favor of considering
other items.
Sessions are open to the public, except if a majority of those
present, there being a quorum, shall vote in favor of a closed
session, which is justified for reasons of public interest, security,
decency or morality.
Sanggunian journals and records of its proceedings are
required to be kept. These may be published upon resolution
of the sanggunian.
The power of a municipal council must be exercised at a
meeting which is legally called. Action of all the members of
the council separately is not the action of the council, and an
agreement entered into separately by the members of the
council outside a regular meeting is not binding. Members of
a municipal council may pass a resolution or decision thereof
only when duly assembled in session, as such body. Their
individual separate acts, when not gathered in session, held in
accordance with law are not acts of the council and do not
carry the authority thereof. While the mandatory prerequisites
to enactment must be substantially observed, exactness in the
manner may not be required, since noncompliance with merely
formal requirements in the manner of enactment ordinarily is
considered by the courts as no ground for declaring an
ordinance void (Subido v City of Manila 108 Phili 462).
SECTION 53. QUORUM.
It is a majority of ALL the members of the sanggunian who
have been elected and qualified. Without a quorum, there can
be no valid session. Any transaction or business conducted
during a session without a quorum is void ab initio.
The meanng of quorum is best explained in the case of former
cong Manuel “walay kurat” Zamora v Caballero (Jan 2004)
when the former was a member of the Sanggunian
Panlalawigan.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 35
When a session is called on a certain day but there is no
quorum, the presiding officer or the majority of the members
present may adjourn from day to day and compel the
attendance of the absent members by ordering their ARREST
by the police and their presentation at the session. The arrest
is not for the purpose of jailing the absent members but to
compel their attendance at the session.
SECTION 54. APPROVAL OF ORDINANCES.
Requisites for validity:
 Read Magtajas case.
Requisites for validity
1) it must not contravene the Constitution or any statute
2) it must not be unfair or oppressive
3) it must not be partial or discriminatory
4) it must not prohibit but may regulate trade
5) it must be general and consistent with public policy and
6) it must not be unreasonable.
Ordinances enacted by the Spanlalwigan are approved by the
Governor; Ordinances enacted by the Spanglungsod are
approved by the city mayor and those enacted by the SBayan
by the mun mayor; those by the SBarangay by the Punong
Barangay.
The approval covered in this section deals ONLY with approval
of the governor for provincial ordinances or resolutions and
the mayor for city ordinances/resolutions.
Approval not ministerial act
The approval of an ordinance where the LCEx affixes his
signature is not a purely ministerial act. He has veto power. (De
los Reyes v Sandiganbayan 281 S 631).
Approval may be done:
1) the governor‟s or mayor‟s signing all the pages of the
ordinance or
2) the governor‟s inaction on a pr0vincial ordinance within
15 days from the date of its receipt, or mayor‟s inaction on
a city/mun ordinance within 10 days from the date of
receipt. The inaction results in the approval of the
ordinance.
In the case of barangay ordinances, once approved by a
majority of all the members of the Sbarangay, the approval of
the punong barangay is not required to make the ordinances
effective, because the PB is a member of the SBarangay. The
action of the majority of all the members binds the PB who just
have to sign and implement them. He has no veto power.
Judicial Notice of Municipal Ordinances
While courts are required to take judicial notice of the laws
enacted by Congress, the rule with respect to local ordinances
is different. Ordinances are not included in the enumeration of
matters covered by MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE under
Section 1, Rule 129 of the Rules of Court.
Trial Courts should take judicial notice of municipal ordinances
within their respective jurisdiction. The enactment of an
ordinance and its provisions are supposed to be known by the
courts of the area where the municipality concerned may be
located and therefore, need not be proven at proceedings in
such courts (Gallego v Pp 8 S 813).
Social Justice Society v Atienza 156052 Feb 13, 2008
Even where there is a statute that requires a court to take
judicial notice of ordinances, a court is not required to take
judicial notice of ordinances that are not before it and to which
it does not have access. The party asking the court to take
judicial notice is obligated to supply the court with the full text
of the rules the party desires it to have notice of. Counsel
should take the initiative in requesting that a trial court take
judicial notice of an ordinance even where a statute requires
courts to take judicial notice of local ordinances.. . Such a
statute does not direct the court to act on its own in obtaining
evidence for the record and a party must make the ordinance
available to the court for it to take notice.
SECTION 55. VETO POWER OF THE LOCAL CHIEF
EXECUTIVE.
The grant of the veto power confers authority beyond the
simple mechanical act of signing an ordinance or resolution, as
a requisite to its enforceability. Such power accords the LCE
the discretion to sustain a reso or ordinance in the 1st instance
or to veto it and return it with his objections to the Sanggunian,
which may proceed to reconsider the same
The Sanggunian may override the veto by a 2/3 vote of all its
members thereby making the ordinance effective for all intents
and purposes.
This is a case where special quorum is required. The number of
members present at a session to override a veto must be more
than the usual majority.
Grounds for Veto
1) Ordinances or parts thereof are ULTRA VIRES
2) Ordinances or parts thereof are prejudicial to the public
welfare
Ultra vires – ordinance/parts thereof are BEYOND the power
of the sanggunian to enact, as when the ordinance amends
and violates a national law by imposing additional
requirements to those which the national law imposes
(Villacorta v Bernardo 143 S 480).
The veto may apply to
1) entire ordinances or
2) particular items of certain ordinances such as:
a) appropriation ordinances; ordinances adopting local
b) development plans and public investment programs and
c) ordinances directing payment of money or creating a
liability against the province, city or municipality.
Generally, only ordinances are subject to veto. The section
allows the veto of resolutions dealing with local development
plans and public investment programs.(involve investment of
public money).
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 36
If an entire ordinance is vetoed, the ordinance is considered
dead, unenforceable for all intents and purposes. If only
certain items are vetoed as in appropriation ordinances, only
the vetoed items are rendered ineffectual.
The LCE must inform the Sanggunian concerned of the veto
within 15/10 days as the case may be. The override makes the
ordinance effective as if approved and signed. Once
overridden, the veto may not be reimposed on the same
ordinance or subject matter.
SECTION 56. REVIEW OF COMPONENT CITY AND
MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES OR RESOLUTIONS BY THE
SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN.
The Sangguniang Panlalawigan, not the Governor, has the
power of review of component city or municipal ordinances of
all kinds and resolutions dealing with local development plans
and public investment programs formulated by the local
development councils. The ordinances/resolutions have to be
submitted to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan for review within 3
days after their approval.
From submission, the SP has 30 days to determine whether or
not the ordinance/reso is valid. The review may result in either
approval or invalidation. Approval may be:
1) formally, by passing a resolution of approval or
2) informally, by its inaction on the ordinance/reso within
30 days from their submittal for review.
The Spanlalawigan may declare such ordinance/reso invalid or
in whole or in part if they are found to be outside the powers
of the sanggunian of the Component City or Municipality. The
action has to be communicated to the LGU concerned within
30 days from the submission of the ordinances or resolutions.
The SP is without authority to disapprove the municipal
resolution authorizing the mayor to initiate expropriation
proceedings for the municipality which clearly has the power to
exercise the right of eminent domain and its SBayan the
capacity to promulgate said resolution. The SP disapproval of
the resolution is an infirm action which does not render the
said resolution null and void. (Moday v CA 268 S 586). The
Code grants the SP the power to declare a mun reso invalid on
the SOLE GROUND THAT IT IS BEYOND THE POWER of the
Sbayan or the mayor to issue.
SECTION 57. REVIEW OF BARANGAY ORDINANCES BY THE
SANGGUNIANG PANLUNGSOD OR SANGGUNIANG
BAYAN.
Barangay ordinances are subject to review by the
Spanglungsod or Sbayan of the city/municipality to which it
belongs. The sanggunian may approve the ordinances if these
are consistent with law or with city/mun ordinances. Approval
is the same as the SPanlalawigan - by reso of the sanggunian
or inaction.
The sanggunian may disapprove the ordinances on the ground
of inconsistency with law or city/mun ordinances, in which case,
the sanggunian shall return the ordinances with its comments
or recommendations to the barangay of origin for their
adjustment, amendment or modification. Until the revisions
called for are made, the effectivity of the ordinances in
question is suspended.
SECTION 58. ENFORCEMENT OF DISAPPROVED
ORDINANCES OR RESOLUTIONS.
LGU officials or employees who attempt to enforce any
ordinance or resolution that has been disapproved by the
sanggunian concerned are liable for suspension or dismissal,
whether they are elective or appointed officials. This is an
additional ground for disciplinary action against erring LGU
officials or employees.
SECTION 59. EFFECTIVITY OF ORDINANCES OR
RESOLUTIONS.
Requisite of publication (by posting). - The effectivity of an
ordinance or resolution approving the local development plan
and public investment program may be fixed in the ordinance
or resolution itself. If it is not so stated, then it is effective on
the 11th day from the date a copy thereof is posted in a
bulletin board at the entrance of the provincial or city,
municipal or barangay hall as the case may be and in two other
conspicuous places in the local government unit concerned.
Ordinances/resolutions passed by HUC and ICC have to be
published at least once in a local newspaper of general
circulation within the city. If there is no such local newspaper,
then in a newspaper of general circulation. It should be
sufficient compliance with the law if the main features, not
necessarily the entire texts of the ordinance/reso are published
in any newspaper of general circulation.
Publication how done
The ordinance/resolution shall be disseminated and posted in
FILIPINO or ENGLISH AND in the language or dialect
understood by the majority of the people within the territorial
jurisdiction of the province, city , municipality, or barangay
concerned. In addition, the gist of all ordinances which have
PENAL sanctions shall be published in a newspaper of general
circulation within the province where the sanggunian
concerned belongs. If there is no such newspaper in the
province, the ordinance has to be posted in all the
municipalities and cities concerned.
C H AP TER I V D I SC IP L IN ARY ACTI ONS
SECTION 60. GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS.
An elective local official may be disciplined, suspended, or
removed from office on any of the following grounds:
(a) Disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines;
(b) Culpable violation of the Constitution;
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 37
(c) Dishonesty, oppression, misconduct in office, gross
negligence, or dereliction of duty;
(d) Commission of any offense involving moral turpitude or an
offense punishable by at least prision mayor;
(e) Abuse of authority;
(f) Unauthorized absence for fifteen (15) consecutive working
days, except in the case of members of the sangguniang
panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, sangguniang bayan,
and sangguniang barangay;
(g) Application for, or acquisition of, foreign citizenship or
residence or the status of an immigrant of another country; and
(h) Such other grounds as may be provided in this Code and
other laws.
An elective local official may be removed from office on the
grounds enumerated above by order of the proper court.
DISLOYALTY to the Republic
An administrative case based on this ground only requires
substantial evidence. (Aguinaldo v Santos 212 S 768).
A public official cannot be removed for administrative
misconduct committed during a prior term. His reelection
expresses the sovereign will of the electorate to forgive or
condone any act or omission constituting a ground for
administrative discipline which was committed during the
previous term. Sound public policy dictates it. This doctrine of
forgiveness or condonation cannot however, apply to criminal
acts which the reelected official may have committed during
his previous term.
Other Grounds for Disciplinary action
Violation of special laws such as
1) Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
Officials and Employees, RA 6713
2) Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, RA 3019
3) The Administrative Code of 1987
4) Revised Penal Code
5) Clean Water Act
6) Solid Waste Management Act
and all other applicable general and special laws.
Desistance of the complainant does not necessarily prevent the
continuation of the investigation of the cause of the complaint
and even the punishment of the official if warranted by the
circumstances (Cruz v Dalisay 152 S 482).
Power to remove erring official exclusive with the courts
An elective local official may be removed from office on the
grounds enumerated BY ORDER OF THE PROPER COURT.
The penalty of dismissal from service upon an erring elective
local official may be decreed only by a court of law (Pablico v
Sandiganbayan 147870 July 31, 2002). The Office of the
President is without any power to remove elected officials,
since such power is exclusively vested in the proper courts as
expressly provided for in Sec. 60 of the Code. (Salalima v
Guingona 257 S 55).
The law on suspension or removal of elective public officials
must be strictly construed and applied.
SECTION 61. FORM AND FILING OF ADMINISTRATIVE
COMPLAINTS.
A verified complaint against any erring local elective official
shall be prepared as follows:
(a) A complaint against any elective official of a province, a
highly urbanized city, an independent component city or
component city shall be filed before the Office of the President;
(b) A complaint against any elective official of a municipality
shall be filed before the sangguniang panlalawigan whose
decision may be appealed to the Office of the President; and
(c) A complaint against any elective barangay official shall be
filed before the sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang
bayan concerned whose decision shall be final and executory.
SECTION 62. NOTICE OF HEARING.
Reglementary Periods. The section lays down the various
periods which must be complied with in the administrative
investigation to conform with the requirements of due process.
The investigating official or agency is directed to comply with 2
periods:
a) require within 7 days from the filing of the complaint, the
official being investigated to submit his verified answer and
b) commence the investigation within 10 days from receipt of
the VERIFIED answer.
The answer must contain a statement at the end thereof that
the person answering is the very person being investigated and
that the answer was prepared by him or at his instance and
that he has read the answer and the statements made therein
are true of his own knowledge.
The respondent is directed to submit his verified answer within
15 days from receipt of the complaint.
VENUE of investigation . Provincial and HUC officials shall be
investigated at their respective offices. Other local elective
officials shall be investigated at the office of their respective
Sanggunian.
Election BAN on Investigations or Suspensions. Investigations
are not allowed within 90 days immediately prior to any local
election. Neither may preventive suspensions be imposed
during the said period. If a preventive suspension has been
imposed prior to the period mentioned, it shall be lifted
automatically at the start of the 90 days stated.
SECTION 63. PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION.
May be ordered even before the charges are heard and before
he is given an opportunity to prove his innocence, - to prevent
the officer from performing the functions of his office. Power
to suspend may be exercised without notice to person
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 38
suspended. Such temporary suspension without previous
hearing is in accord with the law.
Who can suspend?
1) President over local elective officials of a province, HUC
and ICC.
2) Governor over those of ComC and municipalities
3) Mayor over barangay officials.
The Ombudsman has concurrent jurisdiction to impose
preventive suspension in the conduct of administrative
investigation over elective local officials.
Requisites for preventive suspension under the LGC
1. There is reasonable ground to believe that the respondent
has committed the act/s complained of;
2. The evidence of culpability is strong
3. The gravity of the offense so warrants; or
4. The continuance in office of the respondent could influence
the witnesses or pose a threat to the safety and integrity of the
records and other evidence.
Conditions under the Ombudsman Act for preventive
suspension
1. The evidence of guilt should be strong,
2. The charge against the officer / employee should involve
dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the
performance of duty
3. The charges should warrant removal from the service
4. The respondent‟s continued stay in office would prejudice
the case filed against him
When imposed
May be imposed after the issues are joined – meaning the
complaint has been answered and there are no longer any
substantial preliminary issue that remains to be threshed out.
The period of suspension for one administrative case cannot
exceed 60days; and if there are several administrative cases, the
period cannot exceed 90days within a single year on the same
ground/s existing and known at the time of first suspension.
Interruption of the investigation caused by the person being
investigated or upon his request is not counted in computing
the 60 or 90 day suspension.
Period of Preventive Suspension
The period of suspension under this section does not limit the
period of suspension under the Ombudsman Act. Suspension
ordered by the Ombudsman, whose independence is
guaranteed by the Constitution is governed not by the LGC but
by RA 6770.
Elective officials may also be preventively suspended as a
result of the filing of criminal charges against them pursuant to
Sec 13 of the RA 3019. Preventive suspension is mandatory
(Bunye v Escareal 226 S 332), once the validity of the
information is determined. The period however, may not
exceed 90 days.
Preventive suspension is NOT an INTERRUPTION of term and is
not a reason to avoid the 3-term limitation (Aldovino v
Comelec 184836 Dec 23 2009).
Automatic reinstatement
At the end of the period of preventive suspension, the official is
reinstated to office. The proceedings shall continue and be
terminated within 120 days from the date he received formal
notice of the case against him. Delays attributable to
respondent‟s fault, neglect or request are not counted in
reckoning the 120 days during which the case is to be resolved.
The time during which appeals from rulings of the investigator
of the case are pending are not included in computing the 120
days.
SECTION 64. SALARY OF RESPONDENT PENDING
SUSPENSION.
The respondent official preventively suspended from office
shall receive no salary or compensation during such
suspension; but upon subsequent exoneration and
reinstatement, he shall be paid full salary or compensation
including such emoluments accruing during such suspension.
SECTION 65. RIGHTS OF RESPONDENT.
The respondent shall be accorded full opportunity to appear
and defend himself in person or by counsel, to confront and
cross-examine the witnesses against him, and to require the
attendance of witnesses and the psroduction of documentary
process of subpoena or subpoena duces tecum.
These are the same rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
SECTION 66. FORM AND NOTICE OF DECISION.
The investigation shall be terminated within 90 days from the
start thereof and a decision to be rendered within 30 days
thereafter. The decision shall be in writing stating clearly and
distinctly the facts and reasons for the decision. Copies of the
decision shall immediately be furnished the respondent and all
interested parties.
The Code sets the limits of the PENALTY of SUSPENSION to six
(6) months or the unexpired portion of the term of office of the
respondent for every administrative case.
If there are several administrative offenses, the suspension for
each offense should not exceed six months and the successive
service of the suspension should not exceed the unexpired
portion of the term of office of respondent.
What constitutes a Decision
An administrative offense means every act or conduct or
omission which amounts to, or constitutes, any of the grounds
for disciplinary action as enumerated in Sec 60.
In Malinao v Reyes 255 S 616, the SC said in order to render a
decision in administrative cases, the decision of the
Sanggunian must be in writing stating clearly and distinctly the
facts and reasons for such decision. It is not a Decision if it
lacks the signature of the requisite majority. Like the procedure
in the SC, the voting following the deliberation of the members
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 39
of the Sanggunian did not necessarily constitute their decision
unless this was embodied in an opinion prepared by one of
them and concurred in by the others.
The penalty of suspension nor the sanction of preventive
suspension is NOT a BAR to the candidacy of the official
concerned. The penalty of REMOVAL is a bar to the candidacy
for any elective position.
A reelected local official may not be held administratively
accountable for misconduct committed during his prior term of
office. There is no distinction as to the precise timing or period
when the misconduct was committed, reckoned from the date
of the official‟s reelection, except that it must be prior to said
date (Garcia v Mojica 314 S 207).
SECTION 67. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS.
Appeals for administrative decisions may be made within 30
days from receipt of the decision.
Where to appeal:
1. Sangguniang Panlalawigan – from the decision of the
Spanglungsod of Com Cities and the Sbayan
2. Office of the President – from the decision of the
Spanlalawigan and the Spanglungsod of HUC and ICC
Decisions of the Office of the President shall be final and
executory.
SECTION 68. EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL.
Only applies to administrative decisions rendered by the Office
of the President or the appropriate Sanggunian against
elective local officials and NOT to administrative decisions of
the Ombudsman (Lapid v CA 334 S 741).
Administrative appeals no longer prevent decisions from
being enforced. If an elective official (governor) is penalized
with removal, he may be removed even if he appeals to the
Court (CA) to question the decision. During the pendency of
the appeal, he is considered as having been placed under
preventive suspension. He cannot discharge his duties nor
collect salary or other emoluments attached to his office. Once
he is exonerated, he is entitled to reinstatement and to his
salary and emoluments.
Failure of Party to appear before the Lupon or Pangkat
Spouses Valdez vs Sps Tabisula GR 175510, July 28, 2008
A party is precluded from filing any counterclaim in light of
Art. 199 of Rule XXVI of the Rules and Regulations
Implementing the LGC.
Such refusal or willful failure to appear shall be reflected
in the records of the lupon secretary or in the minutes of the
pangkat secretary and shall BAR the COMPLAINANT who fails
to appear from seeking judicial recourse for the same course of
action, and the RESPONDENT who refuses to appear, from
filing any counterclaim arising out of, or necessarily connected
with the complaint.
Art. 199 IRR – Penalty for refusal or failure of party/witness to
appear
Refusal or willful failure of any party or witness to appear
before the lupon or pangkat in compliance with summons
issued pursuant to this Rule may be punished by the city or
municipal court as for indirect contempt of court upon
application filed therewith by the lupon chairman, the pangkat
chairman, or by any of the contending parties. Such refusal or
failure to appear shall be reflected in the records of the lupon
secretary or in the minutes of the pangkat secretary and shall
bar the complainant from seeking judicial recourse.
C H AP TER V R EC AL L
SECTION 69. BY WHOM EXERCISED.
The power of recall for loss of confidence shall be exercised by
the REGISTERED VOTERS of a LGU to which the local elective
official subject to such recall belongs.
Recall is a mode of removal of a public officer by the people
before the end of his term of office. The people‟s prerogative
to remove a public officer is an incident of their sovereign
power and in the absence of constitutional restraint, the power
is implied in all governmental operations. Such power has
been held to be indispensable for the proper administration of
public affairs. It is frequently described as a fundamental right
of the people in a representative democracy.
Meaning and Nature of Recall
Specifically, recall refers to the power of the electorate
(registered voters) to remove a local elected official for thru the
holding of a special election called „recall election”.
The right to recall is complementary to the right to elect or
appoint. It is included in the right of suffrage. It is based on
the theory that the electorate must maintain a direct and
elastic control over public functionaries. It is also predicated
upon the idea that a public office is „burdened‟ with public
interests and that the representatives of the people holding
public offices are simply agents or servants of the people with
definite powers and specific duties to perform and to follow if
they wish to remain in the respective offices (Evardone v
Comelec).
Loss of confidence - only ground for recall
The ONLY ground to recall a locally elected public official is
LOSS OF CONFIDENCE of the people. There is no need for
them to bring up any charge of abuse or corruption against the
officials who are the subject of any recall petition. (Garcia v
Comelec 227 S 100). Loss of confidence is defined as THE
FORMAL WITHDRAWAL BY AN ELECTORATE OF THEIR TRUST
IN A PERSON‟S ABILITY TO DISCHARGE HIS OFFICE
PREVIOUSLY BESTOWED ON HIM BY THE SAME ELECTORATE.
As a ground for recall it is a political question – whether or not
the electorate of the LGU has lost confidence in the incumbent
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 40
mayor is a political question (Evardone v Comelec 204 S 464). It
belongs to the realm of politics where only the people are the
judge.
The power to remove an official, called in English common law
as the power of „amotion” or the power to amove a corporate
officer from his office, for reasonable and just cause, is one of
the common-law incidents of all corporations. Accdg to John
Forest Dillon, the power to amove, like every other incidental
power, is incident to the corporation at large, and not to any
select body or particular part of it, and unless delegated to a
select body or part, it must be exercised by the whole
corporation and at a corporate assembly regularly and duly
convened. The power to hold such an assembly is, however,
implied in the power of amotion.
The power of recall is a power granted to the people who, in
concert, desire to change their leaders for reasons only they, as
a collective, can justify. Recall must be pursued by the people,
not just by one disgruntled loser in the elections or a small
percentage of disenchanted electors. Otherwise, its purposes
as a direct remedy of the people shall be defeated by the ill
motives of a few among them whose selfish resort to recall
would destabilize the community and seriously disrupt the
running of government. (Angobung v Comelec 126571 March
5, 1997)
SECTION 70. INITIATION OF THE RECALL PROCESS.
Amended by RA 9244, Feb 19,2004 (An Act Eliminating the
preparatory recall assembly as a mode of instituting recall of
elective local government officials)
Shall be commenced by a petition of a registered voter in the
LGU concerned and supported by the registered voters in the
LGU concerned during the election in which the local official
sought to be recalled was elected subject to the ff
PERCENTAGE requirements:
1. at least 25% in LGUs with voting population of not more
than 20,000
2. at least 20% in LGUs with voting population of at least
20,000 but not more than 75,000; in no case shall the required
petitioners be less than 5,000
3. at least 15% in LGUs with voting population of at least
75,000 but not more than 300,000, in no case shall the required
petitioners be less than 15,000
4. at least 10% in LGUs with voting population of over 300,000,
in no case shall the required petitioners be less than 45,000
Procedure of the Process of Recall
1. written petition for recall duly signed by the representatives
of the petitioners before the election registrar or his
representative shall be filed with Comelec thru its office in the
LGU
2. Petition shall contain:
a. Names and addresses of the petitioners written in legible
form and their signatures;
b. The barangay, city or mun, local legislative district and the
province to which the petitioners belong
c. The name of the official sought to be recalled
d. A brief narration of the reasons and justifications therefore.
The Comelec shall within 15days from the filing of the petition,
CERTIFY to the sufficiency of the required number of signatures.
Failure to obtain the required number of signatures
AUTOMATICALLY NULLIFIES the petition.
If petition is found to be sufficient in form, the Comelec or its
duly authorized representative shall within 3 days from the
issuance of the certification, PROVIDE the official sought to be
recalled a copy of the petition, CAUSE its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation and a newspaper of general
circulation in the locality , 1x a week for 3 consecutive weeks at
the expense of the petitioners and at the same time post
copies thereof in public and conspicuous places for a period of
not less than 10days nor more than 20 days, for the purpose
of allowing interested parties to examine and verify the validity
of the petition and the authenticity of the signatures contained
therein.
The Comelec or its duly authorized reps shall upon issuance of
certification, proceed independently with the verification and
authentication of the signatures of the petitioners and
registered voters contained thereiun. Representatives of the
petititioners and the official sought to be recalled shall be duly
NOTIFIED and shall have the right to PARTICIPATE therein as
mere OBSERVERS.
The filing of any CHALLENGE or PROTEST shall be allowed
within the period provided (> 10 < 20 days) and shall be ruled
upon with finality within 15days from the date of filing of such
protest or challenge.
Upon the lapse of the period, the Comelec or its duly
authorized representative shall ANNOUNCE the acceptance of
candidates to the positive and thereafter prepare the list of
candidates which shall include the name of the official sought
to be recalled.
SECTION 71. ELECTION ON RECALL.
Upon the filing of a valid resolution or petition for recall with
the appropriate local office of the COMELEC, the Commission
or its duly authorized representative shall set the date of the
election on recall, which shall not be later than thirty (30) days
after the filing of the resolution or petition for recall in the case
of the barangay, city, or municipal officials. and forty-five (45)
days in the case of provincial officials. The official or officials
sought to be recalled shall automatically be considered as duly
registered candidate or candidates to the pertinent positions
and, like other candidates, shall be entitled to be voted upon.
SECTION 72. EFFECTIVITY OF RECALL.
The recall of an elective local official shall be effective only
upon the election and proclamation of a successor in the
person of the candidate receiving the highest number of votes
cast during the election on recall. Should the official sought to
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 41
be recalled receive the highest number of votes, confidence in
him is thereby affirmed, and he shall continue in office.
SECTION 73. PROHIBITION FROM RESIGNATION.
The elective local official sought to be recalled shall not be
allowed to resign while the recall process is in progress.
SECTION 74. LIMITATIONS ON RECALL.
(a) Any elective local official may be the subject of a recall
election only once during his term of office for loss of
confidence.
(b) No recall shall take place within one (1) year from the date
of the official's assumption to office or one (1) year
immediately preceding a regular local election.
REGULAR LOCAL ELECTION is an election where the office held
by the local elective official sought to be recalled will be
contested and be filled by the electorate - day of the regular
local election and not to the election period. (Paras v
Comelec 264 S 49). The intent of Sec 74 is to subject an
elective local official to recall election ONCE during his term of
office.
The term RECALL in Sec. 74 (b) refers to the recall election
itself and not to the preliminary proceeding to initiate recall
such as the filing of a petition for recall or the gathering of the
signatures of at least 25% of the voters for the petition.
Par (b) construed together with (a) merely designates the
period when such elective local official may be subject of a
recall election, that is, during the second year of his term of
office. As long as the recall election is not held before the
official has completed 1 yr in office, he will not be judged on
his performance prematurely (Claudio v Comelec).
Recall election is potentially disruptive of the normal working
of the LGU necessitating additional expenses, hence the
prohibition against the conduct of recall election one year
immediately preceding the regular local election. The
proscription is due to the proximity of the next regular election
for the office of the local elective official concerned.
SECTION 75. EXPENSES INCIDENT TO RECALL ELECTIONS.
All expenses incident to recall elections shall be borne by the
COMELEC. For this purpose, there shall be included in the
annual General Appropriations Act a contingency fund at the
disposal of the COMELEC for the conduct of recall elections.
TITLE III HUMAN RESOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT
SECTION 76. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND
STAFFING PATTERN.
Every local government unit shall design and implement its
own organizational structure and staffing pattern taking into
consideration its service requirements and financial capability,
subject to the minimum standards and guidelines prescribed
by the Civil Service Commission.
LGUs can now create offices aside from those mentioned in the
Code (elective, appointive- human resources and development,
school and health boards), and provide for their powers and
functions and for the qualifications and emoluments of the
personnel thereof. Environmental laws provide for creation of
some positions in the LGU ex. Clean Air Act, Solid Waste
Management Law create a ENRO in the province, city and
municipality; RA 8550 provided for a local agriculture officer.
Classification of LGU employees
Employees of LGU belong to the CAREER service in
government as defined in the Adm Code of 1987.
a. Open career – positions whose appointments require prior
qualification in appropriate examinations and
b. Closed career – positions which are scientific or highly
technical in nature like faculty and academic staff of state
colleges and universities and scientific and technical positions
in scientific or research institutions which establish and
maintain their own merit systems.
Permanent laborers, whether skilled,semiskilled or unskilled are
included in the career service.
Non career service – officials and employees whose a) entrance
into government service is based on requirements other than
examinations of merit and fitness used in the career service
and b) tenure is limited to a period specified by law or which is
coterminous with that of the appointing authority or subject to
his pleasure, or which is limited to the duration of a particular
project for which purpose the employment was made.
This include a) elective officials and their personnel or
confidential staff, b) contractual personnel or those whose
employment are pursuant to a special contract not to exceed 1
yr, c) emergency and seasonal personnel, and d) casual
employee (not permanent, occasional sporadic).
Career service Appointment Status
a. Permanent – issued to one who has met the requirements of
the position
b. Temporary – issued to one who meets all the requirements
for the position to which he is being appointed except the
appropriate civil service eligibility in the absence of appropriate
eligibles and out of necessity to meet the demands of the
public interest in order to fill a vacancy. Such appointment shall
not exceed 12 months and the appointee may be replaced
sooner if a qualified civil service eligible becomes available.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 42
Civil Service Commission Jurisdiction
CSC as the central personnel agency of government, has
jurisdiction over disputes involving the removal and separation
of ALL employees of government branches, subdivisions,
instrumentalities and agencies, including GOCC with original
charters. -employees belonging to the civil service. This
includes LGU employees.
SECTION 77. RESPONSIBILITY FOR HUMAN RESOURCES
AND DEVELOPMENT.
The chief executive of every local government unit shall be
responsible for human resources and development in his unit
and shall take all personnel actions in accordance with the
Constitutional provisions on civil service, pertinent laws, and
rules and regulations thereon, including such policies,
guidelines and standards as the Civil Service Commission may
establish: Provided, That the local chief executive may employ
emergency or casual employees or laborers paid on a daily
wage or piecework basis and hired through job orders for local
projects authorized by the sanggunian concerned, without
need of approval or attestation by the Civil Service
Commission: Provided, further, That the period of employment
of emergency or casual laborers as provided in this Section
shall not exceed six (6) months.
The Joint Commission on Local Government Personnel
Administration organized pursuant to Presidential Decree
Numbered Eleven Hundred thirty-six (P.D. No. 1136) is hereby
abolished and its personnel, records, equipment and other
assets transferred to the appropriate office in the Civil Service
Commission.
Such power is LIMITED by the Constitution, CSC rules and other
laws.
SECTION 78. CIVIL SERVICE LAW, RULES AND
REGULATIONS, AND OTHER RELATED ISSUANCES.
All matters pertinent to human resources and development in
local government units shall be governed by the civil service
law and such rules and regulations and other issuances
promulgated pursuant thereto, unless otherwise specified in
this Code.
The benefits of the GSIS Early Retirement Law (RA 6683) may
be availed of by LGU employees. The law is applicable to
regular, temporary, casual and emergency employees; hence
including coterminous employees (Chua v CSC 206 S 65).
Reorganization as a valid ground for separation is applicable to
LGUs and employees separated shall be entitled to appropriate
separation benefits (Cabagnot v CSC 223 S 59).
SECTION 79. LIMITATION TO APPOINTMENTS.
No person shall be appointed in the career service of the local
government if he is related within the fourth civil degree of
consanguinity or affinity to the appointing or recommending
authority.
The prohibition (nepotism) extends to:
a. Great, great grandparents
b. Great, great grandchildren
c. First cousins and
d. Great, great uncles and aunts in the collateral line
SECTION 80. PUBLIC NOTICE OF VACANCY; PERSONNEL
SELECTION BOARD.
This section requires that notices of vacancies to be filled in
local government offices be POSTED in at least 3 conspicuous
public places for not less than 15 days.
A personnel selection board to be headed by the LCEx shall be
established in every province, city or municipality to assist the
LCEx in the selection and promotion of personnel. Membership
of the board shall be determined by resolution by the
sanggunian. A representative of the CSC, if any and the
personnel officer of the LGU shall be ex-officio members of the
board.
SECTION 81. COMPENSATION OF LOCAL OFFICIALS AND
EMPLOYEES.
Compensations of local officials, elective and appointive, and
the personnel of the LGUs shall be determined by the
Sanggunian concerned. Increases in their compensation are
also determined by the Sanggunian.
If the increases are for elective officials, these are effective only
after their terms are over. If for appointive officials, these are
made effective as the ordinance provides. The increases
though may not exceed the limitations on budgetary
allocations for personnel services provided in the Code.
Title V Book II: Limit from their total annual income from
regular sources realized in the immediately preceding fiscal
year or supplementary appropriations for personal services:
a. 3rd to 1st class province, city, and mun – not more than 45%
b. 6th to 4th class province, city and mun - not more than 55%
Relate to Section 325.
Barangay elective and appointive officials including the SK
chairman are entitled to compensation, allowances,
emoluments and other privileges.
Leave Privileges
Elective local officials enjoy the same leave privileges as the
appointive local officials. They are authorized to accumulate
the number of days to which they are entitled to go on leave
with pay and to commute such leaves so they will receive larger
amounts upon retirement or when needed.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 43
After 6 months of continuous and satisfactory service, officials
and employees of an LGU shall be entitled to 15days of
vacation leave with full pay for each year of service. Such leave
shall be computed exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and
holidays. Local government personnel shall be encouraged to
take an annual 5day vacation leave (forced leave) if he has at
least a total of 10 days vacation leave credits during the year.
Officials and employees of an LGU shall be entitled to 15days
of SICK leave with full pay for each year of service. Such leave
shall be computed exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and
holidays.
In addition to vacation and sick leave privileges, a married
woman in the service of an LGU shall be entitled to maternity
leave of 60days with pay, subject to the ff provisions:
1) if she has rendered 2 or more years of continuous service
2) be entitled to one-half pay if she has rendered less than 2
years of continuous service.
SECTION 82. RESIGNATION OF ELECTIVE LOCAL OFFICIALS.
Resignations are allowed, however, to be effective these have
to be accepted by:
1) President – in case of governors, vice governors and
mayors and vice mayors of HUC and ICC
2) Governor – in case of municipal mayors and vice mayors,
city mayors and vice mayors of component cities
3) Sanggunian - in case of sanggunian members
4) City/Municsipal Mayor – in the case of barangay officials
Acceptance of resignations is necessary so that public service
will not be impaired unnecessarily, and the official concerned
will not be held criminally liable for abandonment of office or
position under Art 238 of the Revised Penal Code.
Period of Acceptance
The authorities concerned have 15 working days from receipt
thereof to act upon the resignation, otherwise it is deemed
accepted. Irrevocable resignations of sanggunian members are
deemed accepted once they are presented in an open session
of the Sanggunian concerned and are duly entered into its
records.
Copies of resignation letters (which must be in writing) and the
action taken thereon shall be furnished the DILG to enable the
department to update is list of local elective officials.
Local elective officials who are the subject of recall elections
CANNOT resign while the recall proceedings are underway.
RA 9006 (Fair Elections Act) – elective officials continue to hold
office whether they run for the same or different positions,
unlike appointive officials who are considered resigned upon
filing their certificate of candidacy.
SECTION 83. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE.
In every local government unit, the local chief executive shall
establish a procedure to inquire into, act upon, resolve or settle
complaints and grievances presented by local government
employees.
This section is intended to provide a venue where
complaints and grievances (regarding working conditions,
salaries and other aspects of their employment) of LGU
employees may be aired and resolved without necessity of
going to court to seek redress.
Then Administrative Code recognizes the RIGHT of ALL
government employees to form, join or assist employees‟
organizations of their own choosing for the furtherance and
protection of their interests. EXCLUDED from this right are
members of the armed forces, policemen, firemen and jail
guards.
SECTION 84. ADMINISTRATIVE DISCIPLINE.
Investigation and adjudication of administrative complaints
against appointive local officials and employees as well as their
suspension and removal shall be in accordance with the civil
service law and rules and other pertinent laws. The results of
such administrative investigations shall be reported to the Civil
Service Commission.
The GOVERNOR/MAYOR are the persons vested by the Code
with this power.
Transfer of employees from one position to another without
reduction in rank or salary when made in the interest of public
service is not considered disciplinary.
SECTION 85. PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION OF APPOINTIVE
LOCAL OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES.
The Governor/Mayor has the power to impose preventive
suspension against any subordinate official/employee being
investigated administratively whenever the charges involve
dishonesty, oppression, grave misconduct, or neglect of duty
and there is reasonable belief that the respondent may be
guilty of the charges which may warrant his removal from
government service – for a period not exceeding 60days.
Upon termination of the period of preventive suspension, the
respondent is reinstated in office automatically, without need
of further action by the investigating office.
SECTION 86. ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION.
Who conducts? – The LCEx may conduct the investigation
personally or may delegate to another person or to a
committee. If it is delegated, the findings and
recommendations of the investigating person or committee
shall be submitted to the LCEx for action.
If the subject of investigation is an employee of the
Sanggunian, it is the vice governor or vice mayor who has the
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 44

power to investigate personally or to delegate the power of b) purchasing any real estate or other property which has been
investigation to another person or committee and to forfeited in favor of the LGU for unpaid taxes or assessment or
adjudicate or decide the case. any legal reason initiated by the LGU

Period to Decide Administrative Cases
Administrative cases shall be decided within 90 days from the
date the respondent is formally notified of the charges. The
findings and recommendations of the investigating person or
office duly delegated with the power to investigate shall be
made within 15 days from the conclusion of the hearings. The
15day period is included in the 90days during which the
charges are to be decided.
c) possessing or using any public property of the LGU for their
own private purposes, and
d) acting as surety or guarantor for any person doing business
with the LGU for which a surety is required.
The prohibited acts under RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees) also
apply to LGU officials and employees as well as other laws
applicable.

SECTION 87. DISCIPLINARY JURISDICTION.

After a finding of guilt, the Local Chief Executive may impose:
a) removal from government service,
b) demotion in rank
c) suspension for not more than 1 year without pay,
d) fine in an amount not exceeding 6 months salary,
e) reprimand and
f) any other disciplinary act.
A penalty of suspension without pay for not more than 30 days
is final but if more than 30 days, the decision is appealable to
the Civil Service Commission.
SECTION 90. PRACTICE OF PROFESSION.
Governors and Mayors (city /municipality) are PROHIBITED
from practicing their professions or engaging in any
occupation other than the exercise of their functions as local
chief exe.
Unlike governor/mayor, sanggunian members may practice
their professions, engage in any occupation, or teach in schools
except during session hours. Members of the sanggunian,
lawyers or not, may not use any property or personnel of the
government, whether national or local, in any case unless they
are acting on behalf of or defending the interests of the
government.

SECTION 88. EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL.
An appeal shall not prevent the execution of a decision of
removal or suspension of a respondent-appellant. In case the
respondent-appellant is exonerated, he shall be reinstated to
his position with all the rights and privileges appurtenant
thereto from the time he had been deprived thereof.
Same as Sec. 68 which allows execution pending appeal of
decisions against respondent elective local official. Decisions
against appointive local officials can be executed even if appeal
is pending.
SECTION 89. PROHIBITED BUSINESS AND PECUNIARY
INTEREST.
General Prohibition
The section declares unlawful any business transaction
between a LG official, elective or appointive, or an employee
WITH
a) the LGU in which he is an official or employee or
b) any of its authorized boards, officials, agents or attorneys,
The prohibitions are prescribed to avoid conflicts of interest
between the discharge of their public duties and the private
practice of their profession where the law allows it.
Prohibitions for Lawyer and Doctor members of
Sanggunian
LAWYERS who are members of the sanggunian are prohibited
from
a) acting as counsel in any court in a civil case where the LGU
or any office, agency or instrumentality of the government is
the adverse party
b) acting as counsel in any court in any criminal case wherein
an officer or employee of the national or local government is
accused of an offense in relation to his office
c) collecting any fee for acting as counsel in administrative
cases involving the LGU of which he is an official.
DOCTORS are prohibited from practicing their profession
during office hours except during emergencies and provided
they do not collect any payment therefor.

where money is paid or property or any other thing of value is

-END OF MIDTERMS-
to be transferred directly or indirectly out of the resources of
the LGU concerned.

Specific Prohibitions

a) holding an interest in any cockpit or other games licensed by

the LGU to which they belong
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 45
SECTION 91. STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
(SALN).
Officials and employees of LGUs shall file sworn statements of
assets, liabilities and net worth, lists of relatives within the 4th
civil degree of consanguinity or affinity in government service,
financial and business interests, and personnel data sheets as
required by law.
ALL public officers and employees in government whether in
the executive, legislative and judiciary are required to file their
SALN with his oath of office upon assumption of office and
every year thereafter.
SECTION 92. OATH OF OFFICE.
All elective and appointive local officials and employees shall,
upon assumption to office, subscribe to an oath or affirmation
of office in the prescribed form. The oath or affirmation of
office shall be filed with the office of the local chief executive
concerned. A copy of the oath or affirmation of office of all
elective and appointive local officials and employees shall be
preserved in the individual personal records file under the
custody of the personnel office, division, or section of the local
government unit concerned.
SECTION 93. PARTISAN POLITICAL ACTIVITY.
Local officials and employees in the career civil service are
PROHIBITED from engaging directly or indirectly in any
partisan political activity or take part in any election, initiative,
referendum, plebiscite, or recall, EXCEPT to vote. They are also
prohibited to use their official authority or influence to cause
the performance of any political activity by any person or body.
They may express their views on current issues or mention the
names of certain candidates for public office whom they
support.
ELECTIVE local officials may take part in partisan political and
electoral activities and may solicit contributions for political
purposes BUT not from their subordinates.
SECTION 94. APPOINTMENT OF ELECTIVE AND
APPOINTIVE LOCAL OFFICIALS; CANDIDATES WHO LOST
IN ELECTION.
Prohibition against holding another public office or
position
While an official is holding a local government office, he cannot
be appointed or designated in any capacity to any public office
or position EXCEPT: If the holding of another office or
employment in the government or any of its subdivisions,
agencies, or instrumentalities, including GOCC or their
subsidiaries is ALLOWED BY LAW or JUSTIFIED by the primary
functions of the office or position of the local official concerned,
it is legally permissible to hold such other office or
employment. Example: Governor/Mayor may hold the
position of Chairman of a Regional Development Council;
Mayor may represent NAPOLCOM in his city/municipality.
Prohibition against appointment of Losing Candidates
Candidates who lost in any election may not be appointed to
any office in government or any GOCC or in any of their
subsidiaries within ONE year after such election. Losing
barangay candidates are NOT covered by the prohibition.
Sec 15 Art VII of the Constitution which prohibits “midnight
appointments” applies only to presidential appointments (De
Rama v CA 131136 Feb 28, 1991).
There is no law that expressly prohibits local elective officials
from making appointments during the last days of his or her
tenure.
SECTION 95. ADDITIONAL OR DOUBLE COMPENSATION.
Local officials and employees are not authorized to receive
additional, double or indirect compensation unless specifically
authorized by law. Neither can they accept any present,
emolument, office or title of any kind from any foreign
government without the consent of Congress. Pensions and
gratuities shall not be considered as additional, double or
indirect compensation.
Simple presents from visiting dignitaries are traditionally
exempted from this prohibitions.
SECTION 96. PERMISSION TO LEAVE STATION.
This section requires that appointive officials of the province,
city, municipal and barangay shall require and secure written
permission from their respective LCEx before departure.
Should the LCEx concerned fail to act upon such application
within 4 working days from receipt thereof, it shall be deemed
approved. The reasons for travel have to be specified. The LCEx
may grant or withhold permission on the basis of public
interest, financial capability of the LGU concerned, and the
urgency of the travel.
Mayors of component cities and municipalities shall secure
permission of the governor concerned for any travel outside
the province.
Mayors of HUC and governors need not ask permission to
leave their cities and provinces if they are only travelling within
the country. If they are travelling outside the country, they
have to notify their respective sanggunian. Permission must be
secured from the Office of the President under certain
circumstances, for example; when they travel abroad a)
extending to more than 3 months b) travel occurs during
periods of emergency or crisis and c) when the travel involves
the use of public funds.
Officials of national agencies or offices assigned to provinces,
cities and mun shall not leave their stations without prior
written notice to the LCEx stating the duration of travel and the
name of the officer designated by him to act in his absence.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 46
SECTION 97. ANNUAL REPORT.
The Local Chief Executive shall submit an annual report to the
Sanggunian on or before March 31 of each year on the
socioeconomic, political and peace and order conditions and
other matters concerning the LGU, covering the immediately
preceding calendar year. A copy of the report shall be
forwarded to the DILG. Component cities and municipalities
shall likewise provide the Sanggunian Panlalawigan copies of
their respective annual reports.
TITLE IX OTHER PROVISIONS APP LICABLE TO
LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS
C H AP TER I SETTL EMEN T OF B OU N D AR Y D ISP UTES
What is a boundary dispute?
There is a boundary dispute when a portion of the whole of the
territorial area of an LGU is claimed by two or more LGUs.
Boundary dispute may involve a portion or the whole of LGU‟s
territorial area. Nothing in the provision excludes a dispute
over an island. So long as the island is being claimed by
different LGUs, there exists a boundary dispute. (Province of
Antique and Municipality of Caluya v Recto Calabocal, Province
of Mindoro and Municipality of Bulalacao, GR 209146, June 8,
2016).
Barangay Mayamot, Antipolo City v. Sangguniang Panlungsod,
Antipolo City, GR 187349, August 17, 2016
SECTION 118. JURISDICTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR
SETTLEMENT OF BOUNDARY DISPUTE.
Settlement of Boundary Disputes
The Code mandates under Section 118 (Jurisdictional
responsibility for settlement of boundary disputes) that
boundary disputes between and among LGUs shall, as much as
possible, be settled amicably. The ff rules govern the amicable
settlement of boundary disputes:
a) Boundary disputes involving two (2) or more barangays in
the same city or municipality shall be referred for settlement to
the Sanggunian Panlungsod or sanngunian Bayan concerned.
b) Boundary disputes involving two (2) or more municipalities
within the same province shall be referred for settlement to the
Sangguniang Panlalawigan concerned.
c) Boundary disputes involving municipalities or component
cities of different provinces shall be jointly referred for
settlement to the sanggunians of the provinces concerned.
d) Boundary disputes involving a component city or
municipality on the one hand and a HUC on the other, OR
two(2) or more HUCs, shall be jointly referred for settlement to
the respective sangginans of the parties.
In the event the sanggunian fails to effect an amicable
settlement within 60days from the date the dispute was
referred thereto, it shall issue a certification to that effect.
Thereafter, the dispute shall be formally tried by the
sanggunian concerned which shall decide the issue within
60days from the date of the certification referred above.
Within the time and manner prescribed by the Rules of Court,
any party may elevate the decision of the sanggunian
concerned to the proper RTC having jurisdiction over the area
in dispute. The RTC shall decide the appeal within one (1) year
from the filing thereof. Pending final resolution of the disputed
area prior to the dispute shall be maintained and continued for
all legal purposes (Sec 119).
The Sanggunian Panlalawigan has an expanded role in
resolving cases of municipal boundary disputes. Aside from
having the function of bringing the contending parties
together and intervening or assisting in the amicable
settlement of the case, the SPanlalawigan is now specifically
vested with ORIGINAL jurisdiction to actually hear and decide
the dispute in accordance with the procedures laid down in the
law and its IRRs. The trial court now has no power to try, at the
first instance, cases of municipal boundary disputes. Only in
the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction can the proper RTC
decide the case, on appeal, should any party aggrieved by the
decision of the Spanlalawigan elevate the same (Mun of Sta Fe
v Mun of Aritao 140474 Sept 21, 2007).
What is the jurisdiction of the RTC in relation to boundary
disputes under the LGC?
The RTC is without jurisdiction to settle a boundary dispute
involving 2 or more LGUs. If there is a failure of amicable
settlement, the dispute shall be formally tried in the
Sanggunian concerned and shall be decided within 60 days
from the date of the certification referred to. The decision of
the Sanggunian may be appealed to the RTC having
jurisdiction over the area in dispute, within the time and
manner prescribed by the Rules of Court. (Prov of Antique v.
Oriental Mindoro)
C H AP TER I I L OC AL I NI TI ATI VE AND R EFER END U M
SECTION 120. LOCAL INITIATIVE DEFINED.
Local Initiative is the legal process whereby the registered
voters of a LGU may directly propose, enact, or amend any
ordinance.
Justice Isagani Cruz defines initiative as the “power of the
people to propose bills and laws, and to enact or reject them at
the polls independent of the legislative assembly.
The power of local initiative and referendum may be exercised
by ALL registered voters of the provinces, cities, municipalities
and barangays.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 47
SECTION 126. LOCAL REFERENDUM DEFINED.
Local referendum, is the legal process whereby the registered
voters of the LGUs may approve, amend or reject any
ordinance enacted by the Sanggunian.
Justice Cruz defined referendum as the right reserved to the
people to adopt or reject any act or measure which has been
passed by a legislative body and which in most cases would
without action on the part of the electors become a law.
RA 6735 (1989) – An Act providing for a System of initiative
and referendum. This law enacted before the Code includes a
system of initiative on local legislation that would allow
petitions proposing the enactment of a regional, provincial, city,
municipal or barangay law, resolution or ordinance.
The LG Code deals only with the power of initiative on
proposed provincial, city, municipality or barangay ordinances
or resolutions and does not include the regional autonomous
regions because other special laws deal with them.
Indirect initiative as used in RA 6735 recognizes the right of
“any duly accredited peoples‟ organization to file petition for
indirect initiative with the appropriate legislative bodies,
including the local sanggunian. The indirect initiative proposal
shall have precedence over other pending legislative measures
on the proper legislative or sanggunian committee.
The LG Code used local initiative.
Indirect initiative under RA 6735 refers to the process whereby
a proposal to enact, amend or repeal a law or an ordinance is
submitted by a required number of registered voters for the
national legislature or local council to act upon. It is indirect
because the people, the registered voters, want a piece of
legislation or an ordinance or resolution enacted, amended or
repealed but they do not do so directly, they course their
action thru their elected representatives in the national
legislature or in the local councils.
In republic systems, there are 2 kinds of legislative power –
original and derivative. Original legislative power is possessed
by the sovereign people. Derivative is that which has been
delegated by the sovereign people to legislative bodies and is
subordinate to the original power of the people.
The system of initiative and referendum enables the people to
exercise an all important original power to legislate, a
manifestation of adopting at the local level the system of direct
democracy.
Kinds of Initiative
a) Initiative on the Constitution which refers to a petition
proposing amendments to the Constitution
b) Initiative on statutes which refers to a petition proposing to
enact a national legislation; and
c) Initiative on local legislation which refers to a petition
proposing to enact a regional, provincial, city, municipal or
barangay law, resolution or ordinance
Kinds of referendum
a) Referendum on statutes which refers to a petition to
approve or reject an act or law, or part thereof, passed by
Congress; and
b) Referendum on local law which refers to a petition to
approve or reject a law, resolution or ordinance enacted by
regional assemblies and local legislative bodies.
Scope
The Constitution clearly includes not only ordinances but also
resolutions as appropriate subjects of a local initiative. Sec 32
of Art VI provides that “ Congress shall as early as possible,
provide a system of initiative and referendum and the
exceptions therefrom, whereby the people can directly propose
and enact laws or approve, or reject any act or law or part
thereof passed by the Congress or local legislative body. “ An
act includes a resolution.(Garcia v Comelec 237
Section 120 speaks only of ordinance and does not deal with
the subjects or matters that can be taken up in a local initiative.
It is Sec 124 which does. Local Initiative therefore, covers all
kinds of measures provided that these are within the power of
the local Sanggunians to enact, subject to the other requisites.
SECTION 124. LIMITATIONS ON LOCAL INITIATIVES.
a) The power of local initiative shall not be exercised more
than once a year.
b) Initiative shall extend only to subjects or matters which are
within the legal powers of the sanggunian to enact
c) If at any time before the initiative is held, the sanggunian
concerned adopts in toto the proposition presented and the
local chief executive approves the same, the initiative shall be
cancelled. However, those against such action may, if they so
desire, apply for initiative in the manner prescribed.
Procedure
Not less than 1000 registered voters in provinces and cities;
100 in municipalities and 50 in barangays, may file a petition
with the sanggunian concerned proposing the adoption,
enactment, repeal or amendment of an ordinance.
If no favorable action thereon is taken by the Sanggunian
concerned within 30days from its presentation, the proponents
thru their duly authorized and registered reps, may invoke their
power of initiative, giving notice thereof to the Sanggunian
concernd.
The proposition shall be numbered serially starting from
Roman numeral I. The Comelec or its designated
representative shall extend assistance in the formulation of the
proposition.
Two (2) or more propositions may be submitted in an initiative.
Proponents shall have 90 days in case of provinces and cities,
60days in case of municipalities, and 30days in case of
barangays, from notice (to Sanggunian) to collect the required
number of signatures.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 48
The petition shall be signed before the election registrar, or his
designated representatives, in the presence of a representative
of the proponent, and a representative of the Sanggunian
concerned in a public place in the LGU. Stations for collecting
signatures may be established in as many places as may be
warranted.
Two (2) or more propositions may be submitted in an initiative.
Proponents shall have 90 days in case of provinces and cities,
60days in case of municipalities, and 30days in case of
barangays, from notice (to Sanggunian) to collect the required
number of signatures.
The petition shall be signed before the election registrar, or his
designated representatives, in the presence of a representative
of the proponent, and a representative of the Sanggunian
concerned in a public place in the LGU. Stations for collecting
signatures may be established in as many places as may be
warranted.
Initiative is resorted to by the people directly either because
the law-making body fails or refuses to enact the law,
ordinance, resolution or act that they desire or because they
want to amend or modify one already existing. Under sec 13 of
RA 6735, the local legislative body is given the opportunity to
enact the proposal. If it refuses/neglects to do so within
30days from its presentation, the proponents thru their duly
authorized and registered reps may invoke their power of
initiative, giving notice thereof to the local legislative body
concerned. Should the proponents be able to collect the
number of signed conformities with the period granted by said
statute, the Comelec shall then set a date for the initiative (not
referendum) at which the proposition shall be submitted to the
registered voters in the LGU concerned. (Subic Bay Metro
Authority v Comelec Sept 26, 1996)
Effectivity of Local propositions
If the proposition is approved by a majority of the votes cast, it
shall take effect 15days after certification by the Comelec as if
affirmative action thereon had been made by the Sanggunian
and local chief executive concerned. If it fails to obtain said
number of votes, the proposition is considered defeated. ( Sec
123)
Limitations upon Sanggunians
Any proposition or ordinance approved thru the system of
initiative and referendum shall not be repealed, modified or
amended by the Sanggunian concerned with six (6) months in
case of provinces and cities, 45days in case of municipalities
and 30days in case of barangays. The Comelec shall certify
and proclaim the results of the said referendum (Sec 125).
In a local referendum, the law-making body submits to the
registered voters of its territorial jurisdiction, for approval or
rejection, any ordinance or resolution which is duly enacted or
approved by such law-making authority. Said referendum shall
be conducted also under the contrrol. And direction of the
Comelec. (Subic Bay Metro Authority v Comelec).
Distinction between Initiative and Referendum
While initiative is entirely the work of the electorate,
referendum is begun and consented to by the law-making
body.
Initiative is a process of law-making by the people themselves
without the participation and against the wishes of their
elected representatives, while referendum consists merely of
the electorate approving or rejecting what has been drawn up
or enacted by a legislative body.
Hence, the process and the voting in an initiative are
understandably more complex than in a referendum where
expectedly the voters will simply write either “yes or No” in the
ballot (Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority v. Comelec).
LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES OF LGUs
Constitutional Ban of Acquisition of A&D Public lands and
Public Corporation
END-USER GOVERNMENT AGENCY DOCTRINE
A local government unit, being a public corporation is
qualified to hold A&D lands of the public domain. It is not
covered by the constitutional ban on acquisition of A&D lands.
The SC recognized this in the Chavez v PEA, simply Amari case
(133250, Nov 11, 2003), where it said that the Public Estates
Authority was considered not an end-user agency with respect
to the reclaimed lands. PEA is the central implementing agency
tasked to undertake reclamation projects nationwide.
The SC distinguished PEA from Cebu City in the Manuel PONCE
et al. v City of Cebu (21870 2-3-65 and 22669 6-24-66) where
it held that Cebu City is an end-user governmental agency, just
like the BasesCDevA or the DFA.
Thus, Congress may by law transfer public lands to the City of
Cebu to be used for municipal purposes, which may be public
or patrimonial. Lands acquired by the City for a public
purpose may not be sold to private parties. However, lands so
acquired by the City for a patrimonial purpose may be sold to
private parties, including private corporations.
In Philippine Fisheries Dev. Authority (PFDA) v CA (169836,
July 31, 2007), the Iloilo Fishing Port Complex, constructed by
the State for public use and/or public service falls within the
term PORT in Art 420 of the Civil Code, thus it is a property of
public dominion and cannot be subject to execution or
foreclosure sale. Since the IFPC is a national government
instrumentality, the doubt on whether the entire IFPC may be
levied upon to satisfy the tax delinquency was resolved against
the City of Iloilo.
In PFDA v CA (150301, Oct 2, 2007), it was also held that the
Navotas Fishing Port Complex (NFPC) cannot be sold at public
auction in satisfaction of the tax delinquency assessments
made by the Municipality of Navotas on the entire complex.
The land on which the NFPC property sits is a reclaimed land,
which belongs to the State.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 49
It may be recalled that in the Amari case (Nov 2003), the SC
declared that reclaimed lands are lands of the public domain
and cannot, without Congressional fiat, be subject of a sale,
public or private. The submerged lands, being inalienable and
outside of the commerce of man, could not be the subject of
commercial transactions. The SC also reiterated the
requirement of public bidding under Sec 379 of the LGC in any
sale of governmental land.
LGUs power to enter into contracts
LGUs can enter into contracts. These contracts must likewise
be respected by Congress such that obligations arising out of
municipal contracts cannot likewise be impaired by Congress.
Unless otherwise provided in the Code, no contract may be
entered into by the Local Chief Executive on behalf of the Local
government unit without PRIOR AUTHORIZATION by the
Sanggunian concerned. A legible copy of such contract shall
be posted at a conspicuous place in the provincial capitol, or
the city, municipal or barangay hall (Sec 22c).
Requisites of a valid governmental contract
1. the LGU must have the power to enter into a particular
contract
2. Prior authorization by the sanggunian and a copy posted
3. if the contract involves the expenditure of public funds,
there should be an actual appropriation and a certificate of
availability of funds by the treasurer of the LGU (as required by
Sec s 46 and 47, Chapter 8, Subtitle B, Book V of the
Administrative Code of 1987)
4. Contract must conform with the formal requisites of written
contracts prescribed by law;
5. If a province is a party to a contract conveying title to real
property, the contract must be approved by the President (Sec
2068 Rev Adm Code). If a municipality is a party to a contract
conveying real property or any interest in it or creating a lien
upon it, the contract must be approved by the provincial
Governor (Sec 2196 Rev Adm Code).
Statutes requiring public bidding apply to amendments of
any contract already executed in compliance with the law
where such amendments alter the original contract in some
vital and essential particulars (Morse v Boston 148 N.E. 813;
253 Massachusetts 247 cited by Rufus Rodriguez).
City of Quezon v. Lexter, GR No. 141616, March 15, 2001
Meaning of prior authorization
Explained in the landmark case of Hon. Quisumbing v Gov
Gwendolyn Garcia (175527 Dec 8, 2008), one of the questions
resolved was whether or not the appropriation ordinance
referred to in Sec 346 in relation to Sec 306 of the Code is the
same prior authorization required under Sec 22(c) ? Simply put
– Whether or not in the absence of a specific resolution
authorizing the Governor to enter into certain contracts, a
general appropriation ordinance covering the monetary
obligations imposed by the projects involved in the contracts
would suffice.
The Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Cebu failed to enact an
appropriation ordinance for the yr 2004 such that the previous
year‟s budget was automatically reenacted pursuant to law.
Ruling of the SC
Quisumbing v Garcia
The question of whether a sanggunian authorization separate
from the appropriation ordinance is required should be
resolved depending on the particular circumstances of the
case. Resort to the appropriation ordinance is necessary in
order to determine if there is a provision therein which
specifically covers the expense to be incurred or the contract to
be entered into. Should the appropriation ordinance, already
contain in sufficient detail the project and cost of a capital
outlay such that all the LCEx needs to do after undergoing the
requisite public bidding is to execute the contract, no further
authorization is required, the appropriation ordinance already
being sufficient.
On the other hand, should the appropriation ordinance
describe the projects in generic terms such as “infrastructure
projects, inter-municipal waterworks, drainage and sewerage,
flood control, and irrigation system projects, reclamation
projects or roads and bridges”, there is an obvious need for a
covering contract for every specific project that in turn requires
approval of the sangunian. Specific sangunian approval may
also be required for the purchase of goods and services which
are neither specified in the appropriation ordinance nor
encompassed within the regular personal services and
maintenance operating expenses.
Effects of noncompliance of the requisites
When a contract is entered into without compliance with (a)
lgu does not have power and (c) availability of funds, the
contract is ultra vires and is null and void. Such contract
cannot be ratified or validated. Ratification of defective
municipal contracts is possible only when there is
noncompliance with (b) prior authorization and (d) approval of
President or Governor. Ratification may either be express or
implied (Nachura 2006).
The Doctrine of Estoppel will not apply to void contracts as
when the LGU already received benefits because it will only
validate an otherwise void contract. The Doctrine of Implied
Municipal Liability applies to transactions without contracts but
could have been valid had one been entered into, to the extent
of the benefit received.
Liability for Contracts
Doctrine of Implied Municipal liability
A municipality may become obligated upon an implied
contract to pay the reasonable value of the benefits accepted
or appropriated by it as to which it has the general power to
contract. The doctrine has been said to apply to all cases where
money or other property of a party is received under such
circumstances that the general law, independent of express
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 50
contract implies an obligation upon the municipality to do
justice with respect to the same.
This principle of liability rests upon the theory that the
obligation implied by law to pay does not originate in the
unlawful contract, but arises from consideration outside. The
measure of recovery is the benefit received by the municipal
corporation.
The amount of the loan, the value of the property or services,
or the compensation specified in the contract, is not the
measure. If the price named in the invalid contract is shown to
be entirely fair and reasonable not only in view of the labor
done, but also in reference to the benefits conferred, it may be
taken as the true measure of recovery (Argenti v City of San
Francisco, 16 Cal 255).
In Province of Cebu v IAC, 147 SCRA 44, it was said that the
Province cannot set up the plea that the contract it entered
into was ultra vires in order to escape liability as it already
retained benefits thereunder. Having regarded the contract as
valid for purposes of reaping benefits, the Province of Cebu
was considered estopped from questioning its validity for the
purpose of denying answerability.
Doctrine of Estoppel is not applicable to void contracts
The doctrine of implied liability has limitations. Being an
application of the doctrine of estoppel, it cannot be applied
against a muncor in order to validate a contract which the mun
cor has no power to make or which it is authorized only to
make under prescribed limitations or in a prescribed mode or
manner – even if the municipal corporation has accepted
benefits thereunder. To apply the doctrine against a
municipality in such case would be to enable it to do indirectly
what it cannot do directly. Where a contract is violative of
public policy, the municipality executing it cannot be estopped
to assert the invalidity on this ground; nor can it be estopped
to assert the invalidity of a contract which has ceded away,
controlled or embarrassed its legislative or government
powers. (Am Jur p202-204).
In San Diego v Municipality of Naujan (107 Phil 118), the SC
rejected the doctrine of estoppel, because to apply the
principle would enable the municipality to do directly what it
cannot do directly. The case involved an original lease contract
which was awarded to the highest bidder, but the reduction of
the rental and the extension of the term of the lease appear to
have been granted without previous public bidding. The case
cited CALTEX Phil Inc. et al v Delgado Bros, Inc. et al (96 Phil
368) which declared null and void the amendment to an
arrastre contract which was made without previous public
bidding.
Liability for illegal dismissal of employees
An illegally dismissed government employee who is later
ordered reinstated is entitled to backwages and other
monetary benefits from the time of his illegal dismissal up to
his reinstatement. This is only fair and just because an
employee who is reinstated after having been illegally
dismissed is considered as not having left his office and should
be given the corresponding compensation at the time of his
reinstatement. But, who should be held liable for the
backwages and other monetary benefits, the LGU or the officer
who effected the illegal dismissal?
Municipal liability
In Mun of Jasaan v Gentallan, Mayor Salcedo appointed
Gentallan as Local Civil Registrar. The CSC approved her
appointment as permanent. But Asis, a research aide in the
Office of the LCR, filed a protest on the ground that Gentallan
is not a qualified next-in-rank. The CSC later on reviewed
Gentallan‟s qualifications and ruled that she was actually not
qualified. The Mayor who followed Salcedo ordered Gentallan
to vacate the post and directed her to assume her former
position as Asst Registration Officer. Gentallan immediately
filed a case of mandamus & damages which was finally decided
in her favor. As a permanent appointee to the position, the SC
said Gentallan enjoyed security of tenure and entitled to all
benefits, rights and privileges attached to the position.
Who should be held liable for damages, the Municipality or
Gentallan‟s superiors who dismissed her?
Since there was no finding of malice or bad faith which
attended the illegal dismissal and refusal to reinstate Gentallan
by her superior officers, the latter cannot be held personally
accountable for her back salaries. The municipal government
was ordered to disburse funds to answer for Gentallan‟s claims
resulting from dismissal.
Where however, the LGU has approved or permitted the illegal
act of its officials in removing its employees, it may be held
liable jointly and severally with the guilty public official.
In Laganapan v Asedillo, 28353, Sept 30, 1987, after the
summary dismissal of Laganapan by Mayor Asedillo, the
Municipal Council of kalayaan, Laguna, instead of opposing or
protesting the dismissal, abolished the appropriation for the
salary of the Chief of Police. The SC considered this act of the
Council as an approval or confirmation of the act of Mayor in
summarily dismissing the Chief of Police, as to make the said
municipality equally liable as the Mayor for the reinstatement
and for the payment of his back salaries. The SC found no
merit that only the Mayor should be held liable because the
records show that the action was instituted against Mayor
Asedillo, not personally, but in his capacity as Municipal Mayor
and he appeared and defended the action in such capacity.
Enforcement of Monetary Judgment
One of the available remedies of a person who has obtained a
favorable monetary judgment from the court in a case filed
against a LGU is to levy on the patrimonial properties of the
LGU.
In Municipality of Paoay v Manaois (86 Phil 629), the SC ruled
that “property which is patrimonial and which is held by a
municipality in its proprietary capacity as treated by the great
weight of authority as the private asset of the town may be
levied upon and sold under an ordinary execution.
But if the LGU does not have patrimonial properties, the
remedy of the judgment creditor is to file a petition for
mandamus to compel it to appropriate money to satisfy the
judgment.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 51
In Municipality of Makati v CA, 190 S 206, The SC said that
when a municipality fails or refuses without justifiable reason,
to effect payment of a final money judgment rendered against
it, the claimant may avail of the remedy of mandamus in order
to compel enactment and approval of the necessary
appropriation ordinance, and the corresponding disbursement
of municipal funds therefor.
As other option, the judgment creditor can file the money
claim with the COA.
However, the money of LGU in the bank cannot be garnished if
it came from public funds. As held in the case, public funds are
exempted from garnishment.
Personal liability of officials
The general rule is that public officials can he held personally
accountable for acts claimed to have been performed in
connection with official duties where they have acted ultra vires
or where there is a showing of bad faith (Chavez v Sanggunian
91391, Jan 24, 1991).
In Rama v CA (148 S 496), the governor, vice governor,
members of the Sanggunian Panlalawigan, provincial auditor,
treasurer and engineer were ordered to pay, jointly and
severally in their individual and personal capacity, damages to
some 200 employees of the Province of Cebu who were eased
out from their positions simply because of their party
affiliations.
In Correa v CFI of Bulacan, 92 SCRA 312, Correa (Mayor) and
Sarmineto (treasurer) were ordered to personally pay the
salaries which the removed employees failed to receive by
reason of their illegal removal from office until they are actually
reinstated. It was held that in the discharge of governmental
function, “municipal corporations are responsible for the acts
of its officers, except if and when, and only to the extent that,
they have acted by authority of the law, and in conformity with
the requirements thereof.”
A public officer who commits a tort or other wrongful act, done
in excess or beyond the scope of his duty, is not protected by
his office and is personally liable therefore like any private
individual.
The principle of personal liability has been applied to cases
where a public officer removes another officer or discharges an
employee wrongfully, the reported cases saying that by reason
of noncompliance with the requirements of law in respect to
removal from office, the officials were acting outside their
official capacity.
However, legislative officers are not personally liable for the
adoption of ordinances. They are exempt from individual
liability for the passage of any ordinance within their authority,
and their motives in reference thereto will not be inquired into,
nor are they individually liable for the PASSAGE of any
ordinance not authorized by their powers; for such ordinance
is void, and need not be obeyed
Liability for defective public works
Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be liable for damages
for the death of, or injuries suffered by, any person by reason
of the defective condition of roads, streets, bridges, public
buildings and other public works under their control or
supervision. The extent of liability for damages shall be
governed by the provisions of the Civil Code on quasi-delicts.
(Art 2189, New Civil Code) It is not necessary for the liability
therein established to attach that the defective roads or streets
belong to the province, city or municipality from which
responsibility is exacted. What said article requires is that the
lgu has either “CONTROL or SUPERVISION” only for liability to
arise, regardless of OWNERSHIP. The Civil Code, a general law
in application, is specific on “defective conditions of roads, etc.
Jimenez v City of Mnla 150 S 510 – City of Mnla liable because
it continued to retain SUPERVISORY powers over the
management and operation of the public market even if it was
managed by a private corporation.
Guilatco v City of Dagupan 171 S 362 – the City of Dagupan is
liable because the road is under supervision by the City
Engineer. The charter indicated that the city has supervision
and control over the sidewalk where the drainage is located.
Mun of San Juan v CA 121920, Aug 9,2005 – definition of
municipal road. The liability attaches regardless of whether the
drilling or excavation is made on a national or municipal road,
for as long as the same is within its territorial jurisdiction.
Relevant provision of LGC is Sec 149 par 1 (bb).
Liability for torts (Quasi-delicts)
Despite the clear language of Sec 24, it is still unclear whether
liability will attach in case regular employees or officers of LGU
who caused damage to another by negligence when the LGU
concerned is engaged in governmental functions.
In Mun of San Fernando v Firme (195 S 692 1991), the
municipality was not held liable for torts committed by a
regular employee, even if the dump truck used belonged to the
municipality, inasmuch as the employee was discharging
governmental function (public works). It was held that
municipal corporations are generally not liable for torts
committed by them in the discharge of governmental functions
and can only be held answerable only if it can be shown that
they were acting in proprietary capacity.
In Sps Jayme v Apostol 163609 Nov 27,2008 – the SC reiterated
the doctrine laid down in the San Fernando case. The driver
assigned to the Mayor hit a minor, who was then crossing the
national highway, while driving at a very high speed. It was
held, while the Mun of Koronadal may be held liable for the
tortuous act of the driver assigned to the Mayor, being the real
employer of the driver, the municipality may not be sued
because it is an agency of the State engaged in governmental
functions and hence, immune from suit. The decision however,
did not apply Sec 24 as the incident took place on Feb 5, 1989.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 52
The SC must have referred to the liability and not SUABILITY of
LGU as held in the earlier San Fernando case.
As for the liability of the LGU, Article 2180 of the New Civil
Code is explicit that the obligation imposed by Art 2176 is
demandable not only for one‟s own acts or omissions, but also
for those of persons for whom one is responsible. The State is
responsible in like manner when it acts thru a special agent, but
not when the damage has been caused by the official to whom
the task done properly pertains, in which case what is provided
in Art 2176 shall be applicable. The responsibility treated of in
this article shall cease when the persons mentioned prove that
he observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to
prevent damage.
The responsibility of the state is limited to cases wherein it acts
thru a SPECIAL AGENT (one who receives a definite and fixed
order or commission, foreign to the exercise of the duties of his
office if he is a special official) so that in representation of the
state and being bound to act as an agent thereof he executed
the trust confided to him. This concept does not apply to any
executive agent who is an employee of the active
administration and who in his own responsibility performs the
functions which are inherent in and naturally pertain to his
office and which are regulated by law and the regulations.
(Supreme Court of Spain, May 18, 1904, 98 Jur Civ 389).
By consenting to be sued a state simply waives its immunity
from suit. It does not thereby concede its liability to plaintiff,
or create any cause of action in his favor, or extend its liability
to any cause not previously recognized. It merely gives a
remedy to enforce a preexisting liability and submits itself to
the jurisdiction of the court, subject to its right to interpose any
lawful defense (Meritt v Government of PI 34 Phil 311 March 21,
1916).
Officers and agents of municipal corporations charged with the
performance of governmental duties which are in their nature
legislative, judicial or quasi judicial, are not liable for the
consequences of their official act unless it be shown that they
act wilfully an maliciously, with the express purpose of inflicting
injury upon the plaintiff.
Mendoza v de Leon
33 Phil 508 1916
The councilors therein were held personally liable for damages
for their wrongful act of rescinding a valid contract of lease
without lawful and justifiable grounds. Officers of
municipalities charged with the administration of patrimonial
property are liable for mismanagement of its affairs as are
directors or managing officers of private corporations; not for
mere mistakes of judgment, but only when their acts are so far
opposed to the true interests of the municipality as to lead to
the clear inference that no one thus acting could have been
influenced by any honest desire to secure such interests, but
that they must have acted with an intent to subserve some
outside purpose regardless of the consequences to the
municipality and in a manner inconsistent with its interest.
Torio v Fontanilla
85 SRCA 599 1978
The municipal council of Malasiqui ordered the construction of
a wooden stage for a play during a fiesta celebration. The
stage, collapsed causing serious physical injuries to the
participants. The municipality should be held LIABLE for the
incident as the holding of the fiesta was an exercise of a
proprietary function. It was an act for the special benefit of the
community and not for the general welfare of the public
performed in pursuance of the policy of the state. The
councilors were however, absolved from liability because they
were likened to the members of the board of directors
enjoying separate and distinct personality, since the celebration
of the fiesta is not a governmental function. As such, they are
not liable for damages for negligence of the agent and the
employees.
City of Manila v IAC,
179 SCRA 428
In the absence of a special law, the North Cemetery is a
patrimonial property of the City of Mnla created by resolution
of the Municipal Board of Aug 27, 1903. The administration and
government of the cemetery were under the City Health
Officer. The City prescribed the procedure and guidelines for
the use and dispositions of burial lots and plots. With the acts
of dominion, the cemetery was within the class of property
which the city owns in its proprietary or private character. As
the operation of the public cemetery was found to be
proprietary function of the City, the City was undoubtedly liable
for the tortuous acts of its employees, under the principle of
respondeat superior.
Liability for Contracts
With the powers of a municipal corporation, it may acquire
property in its public or governmental capacity, and private or
proprietary capacity. The New Civil Code divides such
properties into property for public use (Art 423) and
patrimonial properties (Art 424); Zamboanga del Norte v City
of Zamboanga 22 SCRA 1334.
In the Torio case, the SC declared that with respect to
proprietary functions, the settled rule is that a municipal
corporation can be held liable to third persons EX CONTRACTU
(Municipality of Moncada v Cajuigan 21 Phil 184 or EX delicto
(Mendoza v de Leon 33 Phil 508).
 Cases to Read
National Liga ng mga Barangay v Isabel Paredes, 131939 Sept
27,2004
Cesar Villanueva v Ople GR 165125 Nov. 18, 2005 (enactment
of budget)
Altres et al v Camilo Empleo 180986 Dec 10, 2008
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 53
LOCAL TAXATION
SECTION 129. POWER TO CREATE SOURCES OF REVENUE.
The Constitution under Sec 5, Art X mandates that each LGU
shall have the power to create its own sources of revenues and
to levy taxes, fees and charges subject to such guidelines and
limitations as the Congress may provide consistent with the
basic policy of local autonomy, and that such taxes, fees and
charges shall accrue exclusively to the local governments.
While the local governments‟ general power to tax is
constitutionally guaranteed, such that no legislative act can
take that power away from them, their SPECIFIC power to tax
still remains a delegated power subject to the guidelines and
limitations as Congress may provide.
Despite the provision on local autonomy and decentralization,
the traditional understanding that local governments do not
have the inherent power to tax EXCEPT to the extent that such
power might be delegated to them either by the basic law or
by statute is still prevailing. Only a general delegation of that
power has been given in favor of LGUs.
When there is neither a grant nor a prohibition by statute, the
tax power must be deemed to exist although Congress may
provide statutory limitations and guidelines. (Meralco v Prov of
Laguna 131359, May 5, 1999)
What is the effect of Sec 5 on the fiscal position of
municipal corporations?
Accdg to Fr. Bernas, - Sec 5 does not change the doctrine that
municipal corporations do not possess inherent powers of
taxation. What it does is to confer municipal corporations a
general power to levy taxes and otherwise create sources of
revenue. They no longer have to wait for a statutory grant of
these powers. The power of the legislative authority relative to
the fiscal powers of local governments has been reduced to the
authority to impose limitations on municipal powers. These
limitations must be “consistent with the basic policy of local
autonomy”.
The important legal effect is thus to REVERSE the principle that
doubts are resolved against municipal corporations. In
interpreting statutory provisions on municipal fiscal powers,
doubts will be resolved in favor of LGUs.
Requisites of the Tax Measure
It is understood however, that taxes imposed by local
governments must be for a public purpose, uniform within a
locality, must not be confiscatory, and must be within the
jurisdiction of the LGU to pass. (Quezon City Govt v Bayan
Telecom 162015, March 5, 2006).
Rationale for the rule is to safeguard the viability and self-
sufficiency of LGUs by directly granting them general and
broad tax powers. The Constitution did not intend the
delegation to be absolute and unconditional; the objective is to
ensure that while LGUs are being strengthened and made more
autonomous, the legislature must still see to it that
a) The taxpayer will not be over-burdened or saddled with
multiple and unreasonable impositions;
b) Each LGU will have its fair share of available resources;
c) The resources of the national government will not be unduly
disturbed; and
d) Local taxation will be fair, uniform and just (Meralco v Prov
of Laguna).
Relationship of Congress and LGU relative to Taxing Power
BASCO v. PAGCOR (197 SCRA 52)
The SC struck down the contention that PD 1869 which
exempts Pagcor, a GOCC from paying any “tax of any kind or
form, income or otherwise, as well as fees, charges or levies of
whatever nature, whether National or Local” constitutes a
waiver of the right of the City of Mnla to impose taxes and
legal fees and that the exemption clause in the law is violative
of the principle of local autonomy.
The power of local government to impose taxes and fees is
always subject to LIMITATIONS which Congress may provide by
law. Since PD 1869 remains an operative law until amended
repealed or revoked, its exemption clause remains as an
exception to the exercise of the power of local governments to
impose taxes and fees.
PD 1869 cannot be violative but rather is consistent with the
principle of local autonomy which means decentralization. It
does not make the local governments sovereign within the
state. As to what powers should be decentralized and what
may be delegated to LGUs remains a matter of policy which
concerns wisdom and therefore a political question. The matter
of regulating, taxing or otherwise dealing with gambling is a
State concern and hence, it is the sole prerogative of the State
to retain it or delegate it to local governments.
Since the power to tax is inherently lodged in Congress, it is
only Congress and not any administrative or executive agency,
can define and limit such power of local governments.
Local government cannot tax an instrumentality of the
National Government
The SC confirmed that a local government does not have the
inherent power to tax such that its power to tax, therefore,
must always yield toa legislative act which is superior having
been passed upon by the state itself which has the inherent
power to tax. If Congress can grant the City of Manila the
power to tax certain matters, it can also provide for exemptions
or even take back the power.
Whether or not a local government can tax an instrumentality
of the National Government like PAGCOR, the SC ruled that it
CANNOT upholding the authority of Congress to provide
guidelines and limitations to the power to tax by local
governments.
In MIAA v. CA (2006), the SC said the MIAA is a government
instrumentality, not subject to any kind of tax by the local
governments. The exception to the exemption in Section 234(a)
does not apply to MIAA because it is not a taxable entity under
the LGC. Such exception applies only if the beneficial use of
real property owned by the Republic is given to a taxable entity.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 54
The airport and lands and buildings of MIAA are properties
devoted to public use and are properties of public dominion –
therefore owned by the State or the Republic.
See also: MIAA v. City of Pasay, GR No. 163072, April 2, 2009.
Same ruling referring to the airport and buildings of MIAA in
Pasay City.
LGU can tax GOCC
In Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority (MCIAA) v
Marcos, Sept 11, 1996, however, the SC took a different path
on the same issue of the power to tax of LGUs by ruling that
the City of Cebu can tax a GOCC created by the National
Government like the MCIAA, which was created by Congress
thru a special law. Upholding local autonomy as the prevailing
framework each time Congress exercises its power to establish
guidelines and limitations to local power to tax , the SC refused
to apply the BASCO doctrine, finding it inapplicable having
been decided before the effectivity of the LGC. The SC found in
the Code a provision that withdrew all existing tax exemptions
enjoyed by all persons, before the effectivity of the Code.
Back to BASCO doctrine
In Manila International Airport Authority (MIAA) v CA, 155650
July 20, 2006, after 10 yrs, the SC on exactly the same factual
and legal issues, reverted to the Basco doctrine ruling that
MIAA is exempt from real property taxation by the local
government because 1) it is not a GOCC but an instrumentality
of the National Government and thus exempt from local
taxation and 2) the real properties of MIAA are owned by the
Republic and thus exempt from real estate tax.
In overturning precedents, the SC said ONLY CHILDREN
SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE THEORY THAT
SOMETHING BAD WILL GO AWAY IF YOU PRETEND HARD
ENOUGH THAT IT DOES NOT EXIST.
Mactan-Cebu IAA v. City of Lapu-Lapu, GR No. 181756, June 15,
2015, the SC said that MCIAA is an INSTRUMENTALITY of the
government; its properties actually, solely and exclusively used
for public purposes, consisting of the airport terminal building,
airfield, runway, taxiway and the lots on which they are situated,
are NOT subject to real property tax and the LGU is not
justified in collecting taxes over the said properties.
The 2006 MIAA case governs which held that airport lands and
buildings are EXEMPT from real property tax imposed by local
governments; that it is not a GOCC but an instrumentality of
the national government.
Republic v. City of Paranaque, GR No. 191109, July 18, 2012
The power to tax cannot be allowed to defeat an
instrumentality or creation of the very entity which has the
inherent power to wield it.
The reclaimed lands are still part of the public domain, owned
by the State and therefore, exempt from payment of real
property taxes. There is no point in national and local
governments taxing each other, unless a sound and compelling
policy requires such transfer of public funds from one
government pocket to another. There is no reason for the LGU
to tax national government instrumentalities for rendering
essential public services to the inhabitants of the LGU.
Construction of Local Taxation
As in national taxation, local tax measures, being in derogation
of property rights must also be construed STRICTLY against the
LGU enacting it and LIBERALLY in favor of the taxpayer in case
of doubt. Since taxation, however, is the lifeblood of the local
government, any tax exemption, incentive or relief granted by
any local government shall be construed STRICTLY against the
person claiming it. Thus the principle that TAXATION is the
RULE and EXEMPTION the EXCEPTION, still applies in local
taxation.
SECTION 130 - FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES IN LOCAL
TAXATION.
a) Taxation shall be uniform in each LGU
b)
b) Taxes, fees and charges and other impositions shall:
1. be equitable and based on as far as practicable on the
taxpayer‟s ability to pay
2. be levied and collected only for public purposes
3. not be unjust, excessive, oppressive, or confiscatory
4. not be contrary to law, public policy, national economic
policy, or in restraint of trade
c) The collection of local taxes, fees, charges and other
impositions shall in no case be let to any private person;
d) The revenue collected pursuant to the provisions of the
Code shall inure solely to the benefit of, and be subject to
disposition by, the LGU levying the tax, fee, charge or other
imposition unless specifically provided in the Code; and
e) Each LGU shall, as far as practicable, evolve a progressive
system of taxation.
General Principles governing Local Taxation
The general principles on taxation also apply to the taxing
power of LGUs. UNIFORMITY in taxation is the principle by
which all taxable articles or kinds of property of the same class
shall be taxed at the same rate. Taxation is said to be
EQUITABLE when its burden falls on those better able to pay. It
is PROGRESSIVE when its rate goes up depending on the
resources of the taxpayer. Local taxes are to be utilized
SOLELY for the benefit of the LGU that levies the said taxes,
charges and fees. The EXCEPTIONS allowed by the Code refer
to the taxes, fees and charges where the central government or
higher level LGUs SHARE in the taxes that are collected by the
lower level LGUs. Ex. ComDev Tax collected by the barangay
where 50% goes to the city/mun, while the rest goes to the
barangay. (Sec 164 c (1)).
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 55
SECTION 131 – DEFINITION OF TERMS
Taxes are pecuniary charges imposed by legislature or other
public authority upon persons or property for public purposes;
a forced contribution of wealth to meet the public needs of
government.
Charges are pecuniary liabilities as rents or fees levied on
persons or property.
Fees are charges fixed by law or ordinance for the regulation or
inspection of a business or an activity located in a province, city
or municipality or barangay.
Taxes may be levied upon any natural person or a juridical
person. The corporations/partnerships do not include
a) general professional partnerships
b) joint ventures or consortiums formed to develop energy
resources like petroleum, coal, geothermal and other power
supplies under service contracts with the government
Taxpayer is any person subject to tax or any person who is
liable to pay tax under the Code or any pertinent legislation.
Direct taxes are those which are payable by the very person
who should be pay them as intended by law. Indirect taxes are
those demanded from one person in the expectation and
intention of the law that he can shift the burden to someone
else.
Vessels, foreign or domestic, using local wharves may be
subjected to wharfage fees. Banks, financial institutions,
insurance companies and contractors of all kinds of services as
general engineering services, dress shops, arrastre operations ,
private security agencies, film owners, lessors and distributors
are now subject to local taxation.
SECTION 132. LOCAL TAXING AUTHORITY.
The power to impose a tax, fee or charge or to generate
revenue shall be exercised by the sanggunian of the LGU thru
an ordinance.
The sanggunian is local taxing authority of LGUs and such
authority is exercised by the passage of an appropriate
ordinance which has to be subjected to public hearings before
it can be validly passed.
SECTION 133. COMMON LIMITATIONS ON THE TAXING
POWER.
The exercise of the taxing powers of provinces, cities,
municipalities and barangays shall not extend to the levy of the
ff: (16)
Sec 193 – Withdrawal of Tax Exemption Privileges. Unless
otherwise provided in this Code, tax exemptions or incentives
granted to or presently enjoyed by all persons, whether natural
or juridical, including GOCC, except local water districts,
cooperatives duly registered under RA 6938, non-stock and
non-profit hospitals and educational institutions, are hereby
withdrawn.
(a) Income tax, except when levied on banks and other financial
institutions;
(b) Documentary stamp tax;
(c) Taxes on estates, inheritance, gifts, legacies and other
acquisitions mortis causa, except as otherwise provided herein;
(d) Customs duties, registration fees of vessel and wharfage on
wharves, tonnage dues, and all other kinds of customs fees,
charges and dues except wharfage on wharves constructed and
maintained by the local government unit concerned;
(e) Taxes, fees and charges and other impositions upon goods
carried into or out of, or passing through, the territorial
jurisdictions of local government units in the guise of charges
for wharfage, tolls for bridges or otherwise, or other taxes, fees
or charges in any form whatsoever upon such goods or
merchandise; (f) Taxes, fees or charges on agricultural and
aquatic products when sold by marginal farmers or fishermen;
(g) Taxes on business enterprises certified to by the Board of
Investments as pioneer or non-pioneer for a period of six (6)
and four (4) years, respectively from the date of registration;
(h) Excise taxes on articles enumerated under the National
Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and taxes, fees or charges
on petroleum products;
(i) Percentage or value-added tax (VAT) on sales, barters or
exchanges or similar transactions on goods or services except
as otherwise provided herein; (j) Taxes on the gross receipts of
transportation contractors and persons engaged in the
transportation of passengers or freight by hire and common
carriers by air, land or water, except as provided in this Code;
(k) Taxes on premiums paid by way of reinsurance or
retrocession;
(l) Taxes, fees or charges for the registration of motor vehicles
and for the issuance of all kinds of licenses or permits for the
driving thereof, except tricycles;
(m) Taxes, fees, or other charges on Philippine products
actually exported, except as otherwise provided herein; (n)
Taxes, fees, or charges, on Countryside and Barangay Business
Enterprises and cooperatives duly registered under R.A. No.
6810 and Republic Act Numbered Sixty-nine hundred thirty-
eight (R.A. No. 6938) otherwise known as the "Cooperatives
Code of the Philippines" respectively; and
(o) Taxes, fees or charges of any kind on the National
Government , its agencies and instrumentalities, and local
government units.
Sec 133 prevails over Sec 193
Sec 133 limits the grant to local governments of the power to
tax, and not merely the exercise of a delegated power to tax.
Sec 133 states that the taxing powers of local governments
“shall not extend to the levy “ of any kind of tax on the
national government, its agencies and instrumentalities.
(Republic v Phil Reclamation Authority 191109 July 18, 2012).
MIAA ruling is reiterated.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 56

Since Section 133 prescribes the “common limitations” on the Setting rate of levy as provided in the Code
taxing powers of local governments, Sec 133 logically prevails
While LGUs do not have the inherent power to tax, the taxing
over Sec 193 which grants local governments such taxing
power is given to them to ensure the autonomy of local
powers. The common limitations on the taxing power prevail
governments subject to the guidelines and limitations as
over the grant or exercise of the taxing power. If sec 193 is to
Congress may provide.
prevail, then it would result to “A GROSS ABSURDITY” (Rep v
PRA ). The limits on additional levy for the special education under
Sec 235 should be read as granting fiscal flexibility to LGUs – as
While Sec 193 had effectively withdrawn all tax exemptions or
the word used in the law is MAY, so that LGUs can levy and
incentives granted to, or enjoyed by all persons, whether
collect an annual tax of 1%.
natural or juridical, including GOCC, Congress may however,
enact a law restoring such exemption or privileges enjoyed by Sec. 235‟ permissive language is unqualified in making 1% as
these persons (Quezon city Govt v BayanTel). the maximum rate. (Lucena Demaala v. COA, GR No. 199752,
February 17, 2015)
Tax exemptions cannot be merely implied but must be
categorically and unmistakably expressed in the law granting Procedural Matters Affecting Tax Ordinances and Measures
the exemption (National Dev Corp v Comm Internal Revenue
PUBLIC HEARINGS – As a mandatory requirement, public
151 S 472).
hearings shall always be conducted for the purpose prior to the
Taxation is the rule and exemption is the exception. Tax enactment of tax ordinances and measures (Sec 187).
exemptions should be granted only by clear and unequivocal
Questions on Constitutionality or Legality of Tax Measures -
provision of law on the basis of language too plain to be
Any question may be raised on appeal within 30 days from the
mistaken (National Power Corp v Prov of Isabela 165827, June
effectivity thereof to the Sec of Justice who shall render a
16,2006).
decision within 60 days from the date of receipt of the appeal.
Exception to the Exemption Such appeal shall not have the effect of suspending the
effectivity of the ordinance and the accrual and payment of the
Local governments have no power to tax the national
tax levied therein, provided that within 30days after receipt of
government, its agencies and instrumentalities, EXCEPT as
the decision or the lapse of the 60day period without the
otherwise provided in the LGC pursuant to the saving clause in
Secretary of Justice acting upon the appeal, the aggrieved
Sec 133 stating “unless otherwise provided in the Code”. This
party may file appropriate proceedings with a court of
EXCEPTION - which is an exception to the exemption of the
competent jurisdiction.
Republic from real estate tax imposed by local governments –
refers to Sec 234 (a) of the Code. The exception to the Publication and Public Dissemination
exemption in Sec 234 (a) subjects real property owned by the
Within 10 days after their approval, certified true copies of all
Republic whether titled in the name of the national
provincial, city and municipal tax ordinances or revenue
government, its agencies or instrumentalities, to real estate tax
measures shall be published in full for three (3) consecutive
if the beneficial use of such property is given to a taxable entity
days in a newspaper of local circulation, provided, however,
(Republic v Phil Reclamation A).
that in provinces, cities and municipalities where there are no
newspapers of local circulation, the same may be posted in at
least two (2) conspicuous and publicly accessible places (Sec
City of Lapu-Lapu v. PEZA 188).
GR No. 184203 & 187583, November 26, 2014
Copies of all provincial, city and municipal and barangay tax
The PEZA assumed the non-profit character, including the tax
ordinances and revenue measures shall be furnished the
exempt status of the PEZA. respective local treasurers for public dissemination (Sec 189).
The PEZA is a government instrumentality.

Real properties under PEZA‟s title are owned by the Republic of

the Philippines and exempt from real property taxes.
LGUs are not deprived of revenues from the operations of
economic zones within their territorial jurisdictions. The
national government ensured that LGUs comprising economic
zones shall retain their basic autonomy and identity.
SECTION 190. ATTEMPT TO ENFORCE VOID OR
SUSPENDED TAX ORDINANCES AND REVENUE MEASURES.
The enforcement of any tax ordinance or revenue measure
after due notice of the disapproval or suspension thereof shall
be sufficient ground for administrative disciplinary action
against the local officials and employees responsible therefor.

Similar to Sec. 57
Film Development Council of Phil v. Colon Heritage Realty Corp.,
GR No. 203754 and 204418, June 16, 2015
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 57
SECTION 191. AUTHORITY OF LGUS TO ADJUST RATES OF
TAX ORDINANCES.
The Code imposes a limitation on local tax rates. While LGUs
shall have the authority to adjust the tax rates prescribed in the
Code, the same must not oftener than once every 5 years and
in no case shall such adjustment exceed 10% of the rates fixed
under the Code.
SECTION 192. AUTHORITY TO GRANT TAX EXEMPTION
PRIVILEGES.
LGUs may thru ordinances, duly approved, grant tax
exemptions, incentives or reliefs under such terms and
conditions as they may deem necessary.
In Sec 133, (Common limitations on Taxing Powers), it may be
recalled that local government cannot impose taxes, fees or
charges of any kind on the National Government, its agencies
and instrumentalities. While Sec 193 had effectively withdrawn
all tax exemptions or incentives granted to, or enjoyed by all
persons, whether natural or juridical, including GOCC, Congress
may however, enact a law restoring such exemption or
privileges enjoyed by these persons (Quezon City Government
v Bayan Telecom).
Requisites before President may Interfere in Local Fiscal
Matters
1. An unmanaged public sector deficit of the national
government
2. Consultations with the presiding officers of the Senate
and the House of Representatives and the presidents
of the various local leagues
3. The corresponding recommendation of the secretaries
of the DOF, DILG and DBM.
Any adjustment in the allotment shall in no case be less than
30% of the collection of the national internal revenue taxes of
rd
the 3 fiscal year preceding the current one.
SECTION 284. ALLOTMENT OF INTERNAL REVENUE TAXES.
40% Share shall be based on the collection of the third fiscal
year preceding the current fiscal year.
In the event that the national government incurs an
unmanageable public sector deficit, the President is authorized
upon the recommendation of the Secretary of DOF, DILG and
DBM and subject to consultation with Congress and the
presidents of the Liga, to make the necessary adjustments in
the internal revenue allotment of LGUs but in no case shall the
allotment be less than 30% of the collection of national internal
revenue taxes of the 3rd fiscal year preceding the current one.
SECTION 285. ALLOCATION TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT
UNITS.
(a) Provinces - Twenty-three percent (23%);
(b) Cities - Twenty-three percent (23%);
(c) Municipalities - Thirty-four percent (34%); and
(d) Barangays - Twenty percent (20%)
Uniform and non-discriminatory criteria as prescribed in the
Code are essential to implement a fair and equitable
distribution of national taxes to all LGUs. If the criteria in
creating LGUs are not uniform and discriminatory, there can be
no fair and just distribution of the national taxes to LGUs (First
League of Cities 2008).
SECTION. 286. AUTOMATIC RELEASE OF SHARES.
Just share in the National Taxes as mandated in Sec 286
Pursuant to the Constitutional mandate that this share in the
national taxes be automatically released to the local
governments, Section 286 specifically mandates that the share
of each LGU shall be released, without need of any further
action, directly to the provincial, city, municipal or barangay
treasurer, on a quarterly basis within 5 days after the end of
each quarter, and which shall not be subject to any lien or
holdback that may be imposed by the national government for
whatever purpose.
The provision is imperative because of the use of the word
“shall” (Pimentel v Aguirre 132988 July 19, 2000).
SECTION 287. LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.
Appropriation and Utilization of Shares by the LGUs
To ensure that these IRAs will benefit the local community, Sec
287 mandates that each LGU shall appropriate in its annual
budget no less than 20% of its annual internal revenue
allotment for development projects. Copies of the
development plans of LGUs shall be furnished the DILG for
monitoring purposes and to ensure that local governments
deliver the basic services to their constituents.
SECTION 292. ALLOCATION OF SHARES
Equitable Share in the Proceeds of Utilization of National
Wealth
Amount of share – LGUs shall in addition to the IRA allotment,
have a share of 40% of the gross collection derived by the
government in the preceding fiscal year from mining taxes,
royalties, forestry and fishery charges, and such other taxes,
fees, or charges including related surcharges, interests or fines,
and from its share in any co-production, joint venture or
production sharing agreement in the utilization and
development of the national wealth within its territorial
jurisdiction.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 58

Share from GOCCs Power to Dispose of Patrimonial Properties for Welfare

purposes
Based on the formula whichever will produce a higher share for
the LGU: LGUs are authorized to acquire, develop, lease, encumber,
alienate or otherwise dispose of real or personal property held
a. 1% of the gross sales or receipts of the preceding
by them in their proprietary capacity and to apply their
calendar year; or
resources and assets for productive, developmental or welfare
b. 40% of the mining taxes, royalties, forestry and fishery
purposes, in the exercise or furtherance of their governmental
charges and such other taxes, fees or charges,
or proprietary powers and functions. All these powers are
including related surcharges, interests or fines the
given to LGUs to ensure their development into self-reliant
GOCC would have paid if they were not otherwise
communities and active participants in the attainment of
exempt.
national goals. (Sec 18)
The share shall be distributed in the following manner:
a. Where the natural resources are located in the
province:

Province 20% BOOK III LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS

City/Municipality 45%
TITLE I THE BARANGAY
Barangay 35%

Provided, that where the natural resources are located in 2 SECTION 388. PERSONS IN AUTHORITY.
or more provinces, or 2 or more cities or municipalities or 2 or
For purposes of the Revised Penal Code, the PB, sangguniang
more barangay, their respective share shall be computed on
barangay members and members of the lupong tagapamayapa
the basis of:
in each barangay shall be deemed as persons in authority in
1. Population – 70% and their jurisdiction, while other barangay officials and members
2. Land Area – 30% who may be designated by law or ordinance and charged with
the maintenance of public order, protection and security of life
b. Where the natural resources are located in a HUC: and property, or the maintenance of a desirable and balanced
environment, and any barangay member who comes to the aid
City 65%
of persons in authority, shall be deemed agents of persons in
Barangay 35%
authority.
Where the natural resources are located in 2 or more cities,
The Punong Barangay as a person in authority may arrest
the allocation of shares shall be based on the formula on
and detain persons within legal limits (Milo v Salanga 152 S
population and land area in par. a of Sec 292.
113).

SECTION 293. REMITTANCE OF THE SHARE OF LOCAL

GOVERNMENT UNITS.
The share of local government units from the utilization and
development of national wealth shall be remitted in
accordance with Section 286 of this Code: Provided, however,
That in the case of any government agency or government-
owned or -controlled corporation engaged in the utilization
and development of the national wealth, such share shall be
directly remitted to the provincial, city, municipal or barangay
treasurer concerned within five (5) days after the end of each
quarter.
SECTION 294. DEVELOPMENT AND LIVELIHOOD PROJECTS.
The proceeds from the share of local government units
pursuant to this chapter shall be appropriated by their
respective sanggunian to finance local development and
livelihood projects: Provided, however, That at least eighty
percent (80%) of the proceeds derived from the development
and utilization of hydrothermal, geothermal, and other sources
of energy shall be applied solely to lower the cost of electricity
in the local government unit where such a source of energy is
located.
Qualifications of local elective officials
Raymundo Bautista v. COMELEC
GR No. 154796-97, October 23, 2003
An elective local official, including a Punong Barangay must not
only be a qualified elector or a qualified voter, he must also be
a REGISTERED VOTER of the barangay where he intends to run
for office.
The electorate cannot amend or waive the qualifications
prescribed by law for elective office. The will of the people as
expressed through the ballot cannot cure the vice of
ineligibility. The fact that the candidate is a non-registered
voter, was elected to the office of the Punong Barangay does
not erase the fact that he lacks one of the qualifications for PB.
Since Bautista failed to qualify for the position of PB, the
highest ranking Sangguniang Barangay member shall become
the PB applying the rule of permanent vacancy in the office of
the PB.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 59
C H AP TER I II TH E PU N ON G B AR AN G AY
SECTION 389. CHIEF EXECUTIVE: POWERS, DUTIES, AND
FUNCTIONS.
(a) The punong barangay, as the chief executive of the
barangay government, shall exercise such powers and perform
such duties and functions, as provided by this Code and other
laws.
(b) For efficient, effective and economical governance, the
purpose of which is the general welfare of the barangay and its
inhabitants pursuant to Section 16 of this Code, the punong
barangay shall:
(1) Enforce all laws and ordinances which are applicable
within the barangay;
xxx
(3) Maintain public order in the barangay and, in
pursuance thereof, assist the city or municipal mayor and the
sanggunian members in the performance of their duties and
functions;
xxx
(14) Promote the general welfare of the barangay; and
(15) Exercise such other powers and perform such other
duties and functions as may be prescribed by law or ordinance.
(c) In the performance of his peace and order functions, the
punong barangay shall be entitled to possess and carry the
necessary firearm within his territorial jurisdiction, subject to
appropriate rules and regulations. (Sec 389)
The LGC specifically gives the punong barangay, by virtue of
the position, the LEGAL authority to carry the necessary firearm
within its TERRITORIAL jurisdiction.
Artillero v. Casimiro, Deputy Ombudsman
GR No. 190569, April 25, 2012
Openly carry a rifle outside his residence within the barangay.
The authority of the PBs to possess the necessary firearm
within their territorial jurisdiction is necessary to enforce their
duty to maintain peace and order within the barangays. Owing
to the similar functions, that is, to keep peace and order, they
are like police officers. PBs have a duty as a peace officer that
must be discharged 24 hours a day. As a peace officer, a PB
may be called by his constituents, at any time, to assist in
maintaining the peace and security of his barangay. As long as
the PB is within his barangay he cannot be separated from his
duty as a PB – to maintain peace and order.
The SC further said: It cannot order the prosecutor to file a case
against the PB since there is no law that penalizes a local chief
executive for imbibing liquor while carrying his firearm. Neither
is there any law that restricts the kind of firearms that punong
barangays may carry in the performance of their peace and
order functions. Unfortunately, it appears that the term “peace
and order function” has not been adequately defined by law or
appropriate regulations.
Natividad Cruz v. Pandacan Hiker’s Club
GR No. 188213, January 11, 2016
Abatement of public nuisance – Unless a nuisance is a nuisance
per se, it may not be summarily abated.
A basketball ring, by itself, poses no immediate harm or danger
to anyone but is merely an object or recreation. Neither is it, by
its nature, injurious to the rights of property, of health, or of
comfort to the community and thus, it may not be abated as a
nuisance without the benefit of judicial hearing. As a nuisance,
a basketball ring poses no urgency that could have prevented
the PB from exercising any form of deliberation circumspection
before acting on the same.
The act of PB who cut and/or sawed the ring in half the
basketball ring, which resulted in the destruction of the said
equipment and rendered it completely unusable is an example.
The PB moved instantaneously and did not deliberate nor
consult with the Sbarangay prior to committing the subject
acts; neither did they involve any police or law enforcement
agent in their actions. They acted while tempers were running
high as they become incensed at the removal of the street bar
and padlock that was earlier used to close access to the ring
and at the inability or refusal of the group to return the said
steel bar and padlock to her as she ordered.
Such destructive act finds no legal sanction. No public official is
above the law.
A nuisance may be classified as to whether it is susceptible of a
legal summary abatement. It may be:
(1) Nuisance per se – when it affects the immediate safety
of persons and property, which may be summarily
abated under the undefined law of necessity; or
(2) Nuisance per accidens – which depends upon certain
conditions and circumstances and its existence being
a question of fact, it cannot be abated without due
hearing thereon in a tribunal authorized to decide
whether such a thing in law constitute a nuisance. It
may only be proven in a hearing conducted for that
purpose and may not be summarily abated without
judicial intervention. (City of Manila v. Laguio, 459 Phil
239; Lucena Grand Central Terminal Inc. v JAC Liner
Inc, 492 Phil 315, 2006)
Examples of nuisance per se
a) A mad dog on the loose which may be killed on sight
because of the immediate danger it poses to the
safety and lives of the people.
b) Pornographic materials
c) Contaminated meat and narcotic drugs which are
inherently pernicious and which may be summarily
destroyed
d) Filthy restaurant which may be summarily padlocked
in the interest of public heatlh
A nuisance per se may be abated via an ORDINANCE, without
judicial intervention. (Lucena Grand Terminal)
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 60
There is nuisance when there is any act, omission,
establishment, business, condition of property or anything else
which:
(1) Injures or endangers the health or safety of others;
(2) Annoys or offends the senses;
(3) Shocks, defies or disregards decency or morality;
(4) Obstructs or interferes with the free passage of any
public highway or street or any body of water; or
(5) Hinders or impairs the use of property.
[IASOH – I Am So Over Him]
Nuisance is so comprehensive that it has been applied to
almost all ways which have interfered with the rights of the
citizens, either in person, property or enjoyment of his property,
or his comfort. A nuisance may also be classified according to
the object/s that it affects:
(1) Public nuisance – which affects a community or
neighborhood or any considerable number of persons
although the extent of annoyance, danger or damage
upon the individuals may be unequal; or
(2) Private nuisance – one that is not included in the
foregoing definition which, in jurisprudence, is one
which violates only private rights and produces
damages to one or few persons.
Procedure for Summary Abatement
Under Art 700 of the Civil Code, the abatement including one
without judicial proceedings, of a public nuisance is the
responsibility of the district health officer. Under Art 702 of the
Civil Code, the district health officer is also the official who shall
determine whether or not abatement, without judicial
proceeding, is the best remedy against a public nuisance. The
two articles do not mention that the Chief Executive of the
local government, like the Punong Barangay, is authorized as
the official who can determine the propriety of summary
abatement. (Cruz v. Pandacan Hiker‟s Club).
Abatement of Public Nuisance by Private Individuals
Art 704 of the Civil Code provides: Any private person may
abate a public nuisance which is specially injurious to him by
removing, or if necessary, destroying the thing which
constitutes the same, without committing a breach of the
peace, or doing unnecessary injury. But it is necessary:
(1) That demand be first made upon the owner or the
possessor of the property to abate the nuisance;
(2) That such demand be rejected;
(3) That the abatement be approved by the district health
officer and executed with the assistance of the local
police; and
(4) That the value of the destruction does not exceed
P3,000.
Public officials who abate a nuisance in their private capacities
may be administratively liable if the requisites above are not
complied with.
Administrative offense of conduct prejudicial to the interest of
service is committed when the questioned conduct tarnished
the image and integrity of the officer‟s public office; the
conduct need not be related or connected to the public
officer‟s official functions for the said officer to be meted the
corresponding penalty.
The basis for such liability is RA 6713 (Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees)
particularly Section 4(c) thereof, which ordains that public
officials and employees shall at all times respect the right of
others, and shall refrain from doing acts contrary to public
safety and public interest.
The Machiavellian principle that “the end justifies the means”
has no place in government service, which thrives on the rule
of law, consistency and stability. (National Power Corporation v.
Olandesca, 633 Phil 278, 2010)
The actions of PB in the Cruz case, though well-intentioned,
were improper and done in excess of what was required by the
situation and fell short of the standards of behavior of public
officials. The complete destruction of the basketball ring is
justified neither by law or ordinance nor even by equity or
necessity, which makes the act illegal. Even as an action to
maintain public order, it was done excessively and was
unjustified.
Such an act went beyond what the law required, and, in being
so, it tarnished the image and integrity of the offices held by
the public officials and diminished the public‟s confidence in
the legal system. As public officials they should not have been
too earnest at what they believed was an act of restoring peace
and order in the community if in the process they would end
up disturbing it themselves. They cannot break the law that
they were duty-bound to enforce. Their good intentions do not
justify the destruction of a private property without a warrant,
because the promotion of the general welfare is not
antithetical to the preservation of the rule of law.
C H AP TER I V TH E SANGG U NI ANG B AR A N G AY
SECTION 391. POWERS, DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS
Police Power of the Barangay
The General Welfare Clause provided in Section 16 of the Code
provides for delegation of police power. Following from this
delegated police power of local governments, a Barangay
exercises police power through its legislative body, the
Sangguniang Barangay as provided in Section 391.
The Sangguniang Barangay as the legislative body of the
barangay shall enact ordinances as may be necessary to
discharge the responsibilities conferred upon it by law or
ordinance and to promote the general welfare of the
inhabitants therewith.
The powers granted to the Punong Barangay consist mainly of
executing only those laws and ordinances as already enacted
by the legislative bodies, including that of their own
Sangguniang Barangay.
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 61
C H AP TER VI I R EVI SED KATAR U NG ANG P AM B AR AN G AY
The law on the katarungang pambarangay was originally
governed by PD 1508 enacted on June 11, 1978. The LGC,
Book 3 Title 1 Chapter 7 revised the law. As a consequence of
this revision, PD 1508 was expressly repealed pursuant to Sec
534 (b) of the Code.
While PD 1508 has been repealed by RA 7160, the
jurisprudence built thereon remains applicable because its
provisions were substantially reproduced in the Code.
3 NEW SIGNIFICANT FEATURES
Compared to PD 1508 (Katarungang Pambarangay Law), the
Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under the LGC has at
least 3 new significant features:
1. It increased the authority of the lupon in criminal offenses
from those punishable by imprisonment not exceeding 30days
or a fine not exceeding P200 in PD 1508 to those offenses
punishable by imprisonment not exceeding one (1) year or a
fine not exceeding P5000.
It has broadened the jurisdiction of the lupon and if the
mediation and conciliation process at that level would be
effectively pursued, few cases would reach the regular courts,
justice would be achieved at less expense to the litigants,
cordial relationships among protagonists in a small community
would be restored, and peace and order therein enhanced.
2. As to venue, it provides that disputes arising at the
workplace where the contending parties are employed or at
the institution where such parties are enrolled for study, shall
be brought in the barangay where such workplace or
institution is located.
This 2nd feature, covered by par (d), Sec 409, also broadens the
authority of the lupon in the sense that appropriate civil and
criminal cases arising from incidents occurring in workplaces or
institutions of learning shall be brought in the barangay where
such workplace or institution is located, where the barangay
may not be the appropriate venue in either par (a) or (b) of the
said section. The Rule provides convenience to the parties.
3. It provides for the suspension of the prescriptive periods of
offenses during the pendency of the mediation, conciliation, or
arbitration process. This feature is claimed at maximizing the
effectiveness of the mediation, conciliation or arbitration
process. It discourages any intentional delay of the referral to a
date close to the expiration of the prescriptive period and then
invoking the proximity of such expiration as the reason for
immediate recourse to the courts. It also affords the parties
sufficient time to cool off and face each other with less
emotionalism and more objectivity which are essential
ingredients in the resolution of the dispute. The 60day
suspension could spell the difference between peach and a
full-blown, wearisome, and expensive litigation between the
parties.
SECTION 399. LUPONG TAGAPAMAYAPA.
There is created in each barangay a LT, referred to as LUPON
which is composed of the Punong Barangay as chairman and
10 to 20 members. The lupon shall be constituted every 3
years.
Any person ACTUALLY RESIDING or WORKING in the barangay,
not otherwise expressly disqualified by law, and possessing
integrity, impartiality, independence of mind, sense of fairness,
and reputation for probity, may be appointed a member of the
lupon.
Before the lupon can function as such, it must first be
constituted by the PB. A notice to constitute the lupon, which
shall include the names of proposed members who have
expressed their willingness to serve, shall be prepared by the
PB within the first 15days from the start of the term of office.
Such notice shall be posted in 3 conspicuous places in the
barangay continuously for a period of not less than 3 weeks.
Procedure for Creating the Lupon
The PB taking into consideration any opposition to the
proposed appointment or any recommendations for
appointments as may have been made within the period of
posting, shall within 10days thereafter, appoint as members
those whom he determines to be suitable therefor.
Appointments shall be in writing, signed by the PB, and
attested to by the barangay secretary. The list of appointed
members shall be posted in 3 conspicuous places in the
barangay for the entire duration of their term of office. In
barangays where majority of the inhabitants are members o f
indigenous cultural communities, local systems of settling
disputes thru their councils of datus or elders shall be
recognized without prejudice to the applicable provisions of
the Code. (Sec 399)
SECTION 402. FUNCTIONS OF THE LUPON.
The Lupon shall exercise administrative supervision over the
conciliation panels to be created. It shall meet regularly once a
month to provide a forum for exchange of ideas among its
members and the public on matters relevant to the amicable
settlement of disputes, and to enable various conciliation panel
members to share with one another their observations and
experiences in effecting speedy resolution of disputes. It shall
exercise such other powers and perform such other duties and
functions as may be prescribed by law and ordinance (Sec 402).
SECTION 403. SECRETARY OF THE LUPON.
The barangay secretary shall concurrently serve as the secretary
of the lupon. He shall record the results of mediation
proceedings before the Punong Barangay and shall submit a
report thereon to the proper city or municipal courts. He shall
also receive and keep the records of proceedings submitted to
him by the various conciliation panels. (Sec 403)
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 62
SECTION 404. PANGKAT NG TAGAPAGKASUNDO.
For each dispute brought before the lupon, there shall be
constituted a conciliation panel to be known as the P ng T,
refereed to as the “Pangkat” consisting of 3 members who shall
be chosen by the parties to the dispute from the list of
members of the lupon. Should the parties fail to agree on the
pangkat membership, the same shall be determined by lots
drawn by the lupon chairman. The 3 members constituting the
pangkat shall elect from among themselves the chairman and
the secretary. The secretary shall prepare the minutes of the
proceedings and submit a copy duly attested to by the
chairman to the lupon secretary and to the proper
city/municipal court. He shall issue and cause to be served
notices to the parties concerned. The lupon secretary shall
issue certified true copies of any public record in his custody
that is not be law otherwise confidential (Sec 404).
When Referral to Pangkat Not Necessary
Referral to the Pangkat is MANDATORY only to those cases
where both parties have submitted themselves to the lupon.
Where one party fails to appear for no justifiable reason, the
Punong Barangay may issue the certification to file action
(Alinsugay v Cagampang 143 S 146). Convening the Pangkat
as a necessary second step will serve no useful purpose. It will
accomplish nothing in view of a party‟s unwillingness, as
reflected in his unjustified absence to settle the dispute outside
the regular courts. In that case, the only feasible alternative for
the lupon is to issue the certification allowing complainant to
bring the controversy to court.
SECTION 408. SUBJECT MATTER FOR AMICABLE
SETTLEMENT; EXCEPTION THERETO.
The lupon of each barangay shall have authority to bring
together the parties actually residing in the same city or
municipality for amicable settlement of all disputes except:
(a) Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or
instrumentality thereof;
(b) Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the
dispute relates to the performance of his official functions;
(c) Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one (1)
year or a fine exceeding Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00);
(d) Offenses where there is no private offended party;
(e) Where the dispute involves real properties located in
different cities or municipalities unless the parties thereto
agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an
appropriate lupon;
(f) Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays
of different cities or municipalities, except where such barangay
units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to submit
their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate
lupon;
(g) Such other classes of disputes which the President may
determine in the interest of justice or upon the
recommendation of the Secretary of Justice. The court in which
non-criminal cases not falling within the authority of the lupon
under this Code are filed may, at any time before trial, motu
proprio refer the case to the lupon concerned for amicable
settlement. (Sec. 408)
The law, as written, makes no distinction whatsoever, with
respect to the classes of civil disputes that should be
compromised at the barangay level, in contradistinction to the
limitation imposed upon the lupon as regards its authority over
criminal cases.
 Read: Farrales v Camarista 327 S 84, March 2, 2000
The confrontation before the lupon chairman OR the pangkat
is sufficient compliance with the pre-condition for filing the
case in court (Diu v CA 251 S 472).
The conciliation process is compulsory not only for cases falling
under the exclusive competence of the Municipal courts but
also for actions cognizable by the RTCs (Sps Morata v Sps Go
125 S 444).
The conciliation process at the barangay level is not applicable
to labor disputes (Montoya v Escayo 171 S 442).
Matters that Cannot be Compromised
However, the ff matters CANNOT be COMPROMISED under
the Civil Code:
1. Civil status of persons
2. the validity of a marriage or legal separation
3. any ground for legal separation
4. future support
5. the jurisdiction of courts
6. future legitime and
7. criminal liability (Art 2035, 2034, New Civil Code)
Compromise agreements on these matters shall be null and
void. (Art 1409 (1), 2035 as cited in Joseph Emmanuel,
Restatement on the Law on Local Governments 2005, p 401
There is no need to bring the dispute for settlement before the
barangay lupon when the parties are not ACTUAL RESIDENTS
of the same barangay, nor of different barangays within the
same city or municipality, nor of adjoining barangays of
different cities or municipalities (Tavora v Veloso, 117 S 613).
Where the other co-defendants reside in barangays of different
municipalities, cities and provinces, there is NO NEED for
conciliation in the barangay lupon (Candido v Macapagal 221 S
328). Case can be directly filed in court. It would not serve the
purpose of the law in discouraging litigation among members
of the same barangay thru conciliation where the other parties
reside in barangays other than the one where the lupon is
located and where the dispute arose.
SECTION 409. VENUE.
In procedural law, for purposes of venue, RESIDENCE of a
person is his personal, actual or physical habitation or his
actual residence or place of abode, which may not necessarily
be his legal residence of domicile provided he resides therein
with continuity and consistency. Rules on venue:
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 63
(a) Disputes between persons actually residing in the same
barangay shall be brought for amicable settlement before the
lupon of said barangay.
(b) Those involving actual residents of different barangays
within the same city or municipality shall be brought in the
barangay where the respondent or any of the respondents
actually resides, at the election of the complainant.
(c) All disputes involving real property or any interest therein
shall be brought in the barangay where the real property or the
larger portion thereof is situated.
(d) Those arising at the workplace where the contending
parties are employed or at the institution where such parties
are enrolled for study, shall be brought in the barangay where
such workplace or institution is located. Objections to venue
shall be raised in the mediation proceedings before the
punong barangay; otherwise, the same shall be deemed waived.
Any legal question which may confront the punong barangay
in resolving objections to venue herein referred to may be
submitted to the Secretary of Justice, or his duly designated
representative, whose ruling thereon shall be binding.
Meaning of Residence
For the law to apply, the residence of the parties refers not only
to their actual residence in the same city or municipality, but
also MEMBERSHIP in the barangay (Bejer v CA 169 S 566). It
signifies physical presence in a place and actual stay thereat.
No particular length of time of residence is required though,
however, the residence must be more than temporary.
Where from the allegations in the complaint, it is obvious that
the parties do not reside in the same city/municipality, the
dispute is excepted from referal to the lupon (Boleyley v
Villanueva 314 S 364).
Referral to lupon is required only where parties are
INDIVIDUALS (Borromeo v Pogoy 126 S 217 1983; Gegare vs
CA 177 S 471, 1989).
The Katarungang Pambarangay law does not refer to legal
residence or domicile. A party staying in an apartment unit in
Manila five days a week, every week, but goes home to his
house in Cavite during weekends, ACTUALLY RESIDES in Manila
within the meaning of the law. (Garces v CA 162 S 504)
If the other only contending party is the government or its
instrumentality or subdivision, the case falls within the
exception to amicable settlement at the lupon; but when it is
ONLY one of the contending parties, a barangay conciliation
should still be undertaken among the parties (Gegare v CA 177
S 471). Read also: Farrales v Camarista 327 S 84
SECTION 410. PROCEDURE FOR AMICABLE SETTLEMENT.
1. Initiation
Upon payment of the appropriate filing fee, any individual who
has a cause of action against another individual involving any
matter within the authority of the lupon may complain, orally
or in writing, to the lupon chairman (PB) of the barangay (sec
410).
Only individuals shall be parties to these proceedings either
as complainants or respondents. No complaint by or against
corporations, partnerships or other juridical entities shall be
filed, received, or acted upon (Sec 1, Rule VI IRR). Read:
Universal Robina Sugar Milling v Heirs of Angel Teves 389 S
316 2002
2. Mediation by Lupon Chairman
Upon receipt of the complaint, the lupon chairman shall within
the next working day summon the respondent/s , with notice
to the complainant/s for them and their witnesses to apper
before him for a mediation of their conflicting interests. If he
fails in his mediation effort within 15days from the first meeting
of the parties before him, he shall forthwith set a date for the
constitution of the pangkat in accordance with the provisions
of the Code (Sec 410).
Non appearance of notified party at scheduled conciliation
hearing justifies issuance by the PB of a certification for filing
action in court (Empaynado v CA 204 S 870 1991)
Read: Milagros Lumbuan v Alfredo Ronquillo 155713 may 5,
2006; Alingsugay v Cagampang, Jr 143 S 146.
3. Suspension of Prescriptive period of offenses
While the dispute is under mediation, conciliation, or
arbitration, the prescriptive periods for offenses and cause of
action under existing laws shall be interrupted upon filing of
the complaint with the PB. The prescriptive periods shall
resume upon receipt by the complainant of the complaint or
the certificate of repudiation or of the certification to file action
issued by the lupon or pangkat secretary. Such interruption,
however, shall not exceed 60days from the filing of the
complaint with the PB.
4. Issuance of summons; Hearing; Grounds for
disqualification
The pangkat shall convene not later than 3 days from its
constitution, on the day and hour set by the lupon chairman, to
hear both parties and their witnesses, simplify issues, and
explore all possibilities for amicable settlement. For this
purpose, the pangkat may issue summons for the personal
appearance of parties and witnesses before it. In the event that
a party moves to disqualify any member of the pangkat by
reason of relationship, bias, interest, or any other similar
grounds discovered after the constitution of the pangkat, the
matter shall be resolved by the affirmative vote of the majority
of the pangkat whose decision shall be final. Should
disqualification be decided upon, the resulting vacancy shall be
filled as provided in Sec 410.
5. Period to arrive at settlement
The pangkat shall arrive at a settlement or resolution of the
dispute within 15days from the day it convenes. This period
shall, at the discretion of the pangkat, be extendible for
another period which shall not exceed 15days, except in clearly
meritorious cases (Sec 410).
SECTION. 411. FORM OF SETTLEMENT.
All amicable settlements shall be in writing, in a language or
dialect known to the parties, signed by them, and attested to
by the lupon chairman or the pangkat chairman, as the case
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 64
may be. When the parties to the dispute do not use the same
language or dialect, the settlement shall be written in the
language or dialect known to them.
SECTION 412. CONCILIATION.
Conciliation as pre-condition to filing of complaint in court
No complaint, petition, action or proceeding involving any
matter within the authority of the lupon shall be filed or
instituted directly in court or any other government office for
adjudication, unless there has been a confrontation between
the parties before the lupon chairman or pangkat chairman,
and that no conciliation or settlement has been reached as
certified by the lupon secretary or pangkat secretary as
attested to by the lupon or pangkat chairman or unless the
settlement has been repudiated by the parties thereto (Sec
412).
Prior recourse to the conciliation procedure is not
JURISDICTIONAL such that noncompliance would not deprive
a court of its jurisdiction either over the subject matter or over
the person of the defendant.
Non-compliance with the condition precedent could affect the
sufficiency of the plaintiff‟s cause of action and make his
complaint vulnerable to dismissal on the ground of lack of
cause of action or prematurity. The condition is analogous to
exhaustion of administrative remedies, or the lack of earnest
efforts to compromise suits between family members, lacking
which the case can be dismissed (Perigrina v Panis 133 S 72).
Where, however, the fact of non compliance with and non
observance of such procedure has been seasonably raised as
an issue before the court first taking cognizance of the
complaint, dismissal of the action is proper (Felicidad Uy v Hon.
Maximo Contreras 111416 Sept 24, 1983).
When seasonal?
Failure to invoke the conciliation requirement in a motion to
dismiss before arraignment in a criminal case is deemed a
waiver of such requirement (BanaresII v Balising 328 S 36).
A criminal case dismissed without prejudice for failure to
comply with the conciliation requirement may not be revived
by mere Motion after the 15day period to appeal has expired.
Complainants have to refile the cases after securing the
barangay certification (Banaress II).
When parties may go directly to court
1. Where the accused is under detention
2. Where a person has otherwise been deprived of personal
liberty calling for habeas corpus proceedings
3. Where actions are coupled with provisional remedies such as
preliminary injunction, attachment, delivery of personal
property, and support pendente lite; and
When the applications for a writ of preliminary
attachment/injunction are merely pretenses designed to avoid
the conciliation requirements, referral to the lupon is still
required (Peregrina v Panis 133 S 72).
4. Where the action may otherwise be barred by the statute of
limitations.
Failure to object to non-compliance with condition precedent
amounts to waiver where party took part in trial (Gonzales v CA
151 S 289; Sanchez v Tupas 158 S ).
In the Judge Contreras case, the SC said: parties to disputes
cognizable by the lupon should with sincerity, exhaust the
remedies provided by that law, government prosecutors should
exercise due diligence in ascertaining compliance with it, and
trial courts should not hesitate to impose the appropriate
sanctions for non-compliance.
The customs and traditions of indigenous cultural communities
shall be applied in settling disputes between members of the
cultural communities (Sec 412).
SECTION 413. ARBITRATION.
The parties may, at any stage of the proceedings, agree in
writing that they shall abide by the arbitration award of the
lupon chairman or the pangkat. Such agreement to arbitrate
may be repudiated within 5days from the date thereof for the
same grounds and in accordance with the procedure
prescribed. The arbitration award shall be made after the lapse
of the period of repudiation and within 10days thereafter.
The arbitration award shall be in writing in a language or
dialect known to the parties. When the parties to the dispute
do not use the same language or dialect, the award shall be
written in the language or dialect known to them (Sec 413).
SECTION 415. APPEARANCE OF PARTIES IN PERSON.
In all katarungang pambarangay proceedings, the parties must
appear in person without the assistance of counsel or
representative, except for minors and incompetents who may
be assisted by their next-of-kin who are not lawyers.
It clearly requires the personal appearance of the parties in
conciliation proceedings, unassisted by counsel/representative.
The rationale is to enable the lupon to secure first hand and
direct information about the facts and issues, the exception
being in cases where minors or incompetents are parties.
There can be no quibbling that laymen of goodwill can easily
agree to conciliate and settle their disputes between
themselves without what sometimes is the unsettling
assistance of lawyers whose presence could sometimes
obfuscate and confuse issues.
Worse still, the participation of lawyers with their penchant to
use their analytical skills and legal knowledge tend to prolong
instead of expedite settlement of the case (Atty Evelyn Magno
v Atty Olivia Velasco-Jacoba Nov 22, 2005 6296).
Effects of failure to appear - Read: Sps Valdez v Sps Tabisula
175510, July 28, 2008
Effect of refusal or failure to appear of any party/witness
Refusal or failure of any party or witness to appear before the
lupon or pangkat in compliance with a summons issued may
be punished by the city/municipal court as for indirect
contempt of court upon application filed therewith by the
lupon chairman, the pangkat chairman, or by any of the
contending parties. Such refusal or willful failure to appear
shall be reflected in in the records of the lupon secretary or in
 XAVIER UNIVERSITY – COLLEGE OF LAW | MUNICIPAL CORPORATION | CA Notes | 65
the minutes of the pangkat secretary and shall bar the
complainant who fails to appear, from seeking judicial recourse
for the same cause of action, and the respondent who refuses
to appear from filing any counterclaim arising out of, or
necessarily connected with the complaint. A pangkat member
who serves as such shall be entitled to an honorarium, the
amount of which is to be determined by the Sanggunian
concerned (Sec 515).
Extent of the power to appoint of PB
Applying the rule that the power to appoint includes the power
to remove, Sec 389 vests on the PB, upon approval by a
majority of all the members of the sangguniang barangay, the
power to appoint or replace the barangay treasurer, secretary
and other appointive barangay officials. In the case of the
barangay secretary and treasurer, this provision is reinforced by
Sec 394 and 395.
The power of appointment is to be exercised conjointly by the
PB and a majority of all the members of the sangguniang
barangay. Without such conjoint action, neither an
appointment nor a replacement can be effectual (Alquizola Sr.
v Ocol 313 S 273).
SECTION. 416. EFFECT OF AMICABLE SETTLEMENT AND
ARBITRATION AWARD.
The amicable settlement and arbitration award shall have the
FORCE and EFFECT of a FINAL JUDGMENT of a court upon the
expiration of 10days from the date thereof, unless repudiation
of the settlement has been made or a petition to nullify the
award has been filed before the proper city/municipal court.
However, this rule shall not apply to court cases under the last
par of Sec 408 in which case the compromise settlement
agreed upon by the parties before the lupon or pangkat
chairman shall be submitted to the court and upon approval
thereof, have the force and effect of a judgment of said court.
SECTION. 417. EXECUTION.
The amicable settlement which is not repudiated within the
period therefor may be enforced by execution by the lupon
thru the PB within a time line of 6 months, and if the
settlement is not so enforced by the lupon after the lapse of
the said period, it may be enforced only by an action in the
proper city or municipal court (Sec 417).
Where no repudiation was made during the 10day period, the
amicable settlement attains the status of finality and it
becomes the ministerial duty of the court to implement and
enforce it. Such rule however is not inflexible for it admits of
certain exceptions (Santos v Judge Isidro 178 S 645 ; Proceso
Quiros v Marcelo Arjona 158901 Mar 9 2004).
The remedial aspect of the action filed is governed by the
Regular Procedure.
The time line in Sec 417 (6 months and thereafter) should be
construed to mean that if the obligation in the settlement to be
enforced is due and demandable on the date of the settlement,
the 6-month period should be counted from the date of the
settlement; otherwise, if the obligation to be enforced is due
and demandable on a date other than the date of the
settlement, the 6-month period should be counted from the
date the obligation becomes due and demandable (Ma. Teresa
Vidal v Ma Teresa Escueta 156228 Dec 10, 2003).
Sec 417 provides a mechanism for the enforcement of a
settlement of the parties before the lupon. It provides for a
two-tiered mode of enforcement of an amicable settlement
executed by the parties before the lupon, namely:
a) by execution of the PB which is quasi-judicial and summary
in nature on mere motion of the party/parties entitled thereto;
the proceedings herein are covered by the Code; and
b) by an action in regular form, which remedy is judicial; the
proceedings are governed by the Rules of Court, as amended
(Regular Procedure). The cause of action is the amicable
settlement itself, which by operation of law has the force and
effect of a final judgment.
Under the first remedy, the PB is called upon during the
hearing to determine solely the fact of noncompliance of the
terms of the settlement and to give the defaulting party
another chance at voluntarily complying with his obligation
under the settlement in a period of 6 months.
For the specific procedure in the execution of settlement or
award before the lupon, see Secs 3-7, Rule VII IRR.
SECTION 418. REPUDIATION.
Any party to the dispute may, within 10days from the date of
settlement, repudiate the same by filing with the lupon
chairman a statement to that effect sworn to before him, where
the consent is vitiated by fraud, violence or intimidation. Such
repudiation shall be sufficient basis for the issuance of the
certification for filing a complaint ( Sec 418).
An aggrieved party may only resort to court action after he
has repudiated the amicable settlement within 10days from
date of such settlement by filing with the lupon chairman a
statement to that effect ( Galuba v Laureta 157 S 627).
SECTION. 419. TRANSMITTAL OF SETTLEMENT AND
ARBITRATION AWARD TO THE COURT.
The secretary of the lupon shall transmit the settlement or the
arbitration award to the appropriate city or municipal court
within 5days from the date of award or from the lapse of the
10day period repudiating the settlement and shall furnish
copies thereof to each of the parties to the settlement and the
lupon chairman (Sec 419).
C H AP TER VI II SAN G GU NI AN G KAB ATAAN
R.A. 10742 – Sangguniang Kabataan Reform Act of 2015
The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-
building, thus promotes and protects their physical, moral,
spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being, inculcates in them
patriotism, nationalism, and other desirable values, and
encourages their involvement in public and civic affairs.
Towards this end, the State shall establish adequate, effective,
responsive and enable mechanisms and support systems that
will ensure the meaningful participation of the youth in the
local government and nation-building.