LOCAL GOVERNMENT

LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 3. Owned by the government directly or through its

instrumentalities either wholly, or, where
applicable as in the case of stock corporations, to
Local Government
the extent of at least fifty-one (51) of its capital
A political subdivision of a nation or state, which is
stock. (Leyson, Jr. v. Office of the Ombudsman,
constituted by law and has substantial control of local
G.R. No. 134990, April 27, 2000)
affairs.
Public corporation vs. GOCC
PUBLIC CORPORATIONS PUBLIC CORPORATION GOCC
Purpose
Public corporation Administration of local Performance of functions
It is one created by the State either by general or government relating to public needs
special act for purposes of administration of local whether Governmental or
government or rendering service in the public Proprietary in nature
interest. Who creates
By the state either by By Congress or by
Criterion to determine whether a corporation is a general act or special act incorporators
public corporation How created
It is the relationship of the corporation to the state. If it By legislation (1) Original charters or
was created by the State as its own agency to help it in special laws or
carrying out its governmental functions, it is public. (2) general corporation law
Otherwise, it is private. as a stock or non-stock

Dual characteristic of public corporation CLASSIFICATIONS

1. Public or governmental - It acts as an agent of
the State for the government of the territory and Kinds of corporations
its inhabitants within the municipal limits. The 1. Quasi-public corporations - Private corporations
municipal corporation exercises by delegation a that render public service, supply public wants, or
part of the sovereignty of the state. pursue other eleemosynary objectives. While
2. Private or proprietary - It acts as an agent of the purposely organized for the gain or benefit of its
community in the administration of local affairs members, they are required by law to discharge
which is wholly beyond the sphere of public functions for the public benefit. It must be
purposes for which its governmental powers are stressed that a quasi-public corporation is a
conferred. It acts as separate entity for its own species of private corporations, but the
purposes, and not a subdivision of the State. qualifying factor is the type of service the former
renders to the public: if it performs a public
DISTINGUISHED FROM GOCC service, then it becomes a quasi-public
corporation. (Philippine Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals vs. Commission on
Government owned and controlled corporations Audit, G.R.169752, September 25, 2007)
(GOCC)
2. Municipal corporations - Body politic and
Any agency organized as a stock or non-stock corporate constituted by the incorporation of
corporation vested with functions relating to public inhabitants for purposes of local government. It is
needs whether governmental or proprietary in established by law partly as an agency of the
nature, and owned by the government directly or State to assist in the civil government of the
indirectly through its instrumentalities either wholly, or country, but chiefly to regulate and administer
where applicable as in the case of stock the local or internal affairs of the city, town or
corporations to the extent of at least 51% of its district which is incorporated.
capital stock. (Sec. 2 (13) of EO No. 292 Administrative
Code of 1987)
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS
Elements of a GOCC
1. Any agency organized as a stock or non-stock Essential elements of a municipal corporation
corporation 1. Legal creation or incorporation;
2. Corporate name;
2. Vested with functions relating to public needs
whether governmental or proprietary in nature

1
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
NOTE: The sangguniang panlalawigan may, in Creation of municipalities by the president
consultation with the Philippine Historical Institute, The SC declared as unconstitutional Sec. 68 of the
change the name of component cities and municipalities, Revised Administrative Code which authorized the
upon the recommendation of the sanggunian concerned; President to create municipalities through Executive
provided that the same shall be conducted for the Order (Pelaez vs. Auditor General, 15 SCRA 569). With
purpose in the political unit directly affected. (Sec. 13, this declaration, municipalities created by EO could
LGC)
not claim to be de facto
municipal corporations, because there was no valid
3. Inhabitants; and
law authorizing incorporation.
4. Territory

Nature of a municipal corporation REQUISITES FOR CREATION, CONVERSION,

Every LGU created or organized under the LGC is a body DIVISION, MERGER, AND DISSOLUTION
politic and corporate endowed with powers to
be exercised by it in conformity with law. As such, it Territorial and political subdivisions
shall exercise powers as a political subdivision of the 1. Barangays
National Government and as a corporate entity 2. Municipalities
representing the inhabitants of its territory. (Sec. 15, 3. Cities
LGC) 4. Provinces (Sec.1, Art.X, 1987 Constitution)

Dual function of Municipal Corporation Authority to create municipal corporations

1. Public or governmental - It acts as an agent of the A LGU may be created, divided, merged, abolished or its
State or the government of the territory and the boundaries substantially altered either:
inhabitants. 1. By law enacted by Congress in case of province,
2. Private or proprietary - It acts as an agent of the city, municipality or any other political
community in the administration of local affairs. As subdivision;
such, it acts as a separate entity, for its own 2. By an ordinance passed by the Sangguniang
purposes, and not as a subdivision of the State. Panlalawigan or Sangguniang Panlungsod
(Bara Lidasan v. Comelec, 21 SCRA 496) concerned in the case of a barangay located within
its territorial jurisdiction, subject to such
Types of municipal corporations limitations and requirements prescribed in the
1. De jure municipal corporations - Created or LGC. (Sec. 6, LGC)
recognized by operation of law.
2. Municipal corporations by prescription -Exercised Requisites or limitations imposed on the creation or
their powers from time immemorial with a charter, conversion of municipal corporations
which is presumed to have been lost or destroyed. 1. Plebiscite requirement - Must be approved by
3. De facto municipal corporations - Where the majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite called for
people have organized themselves, under color such purpose in the political unit or units directly
of law, into ordinary municipal bodies, and have
affected.
gone on, year after year, raising taxes, making
improvements, and exercising their usual
NOTE: The residents of the mother province must
franchises, with their rights dependent quite as participate in the plebiscite to conform to the
much on acquiescence as on the regularity of constitutional requirement.
their origin.
2. Income requirement - Must be sufficient and based
NOTE: An inquiry into the legal existence of a de
on acceptable standards to provide for all essential
facto corporation is reserved to the State in a proceeding government facilities and services and special
for quo warranto or other direct proceeding. (Mun. of functions commensurate with the size of its
Malabang, Lanao del Sur v. Benito, G.R. No. L-28113, population as expected of the LGU
March 28, 1969) concerned.

Essential requisites of de facto corporation Average annual income for the last consecutive year
1. Valid law authorizing incorporation should be at least:
2. Attempt in good faith to organize under it a. Province - P 20M
3. Colorable compliance with law b. Highly Urbanized City - P 50M
4. Assumption of corporate powers c. City - P 100M RA 9009 amending Sec. 450 of
LGC

2
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
d. Municipality - P 2.5M NOTE: When a municipal district of other territorial divisions
is converted or fused into a municipality all property rights
NOTE: The income requirement for the conversion of vested in original territorial organization shall become
municipality to a component city only includes locally vested in the government of the municipality. (Sec. 1 (4), RA
generated average annual income. (RA 9009 amending 688)
Sec. 450 of LGC)
Q: At the end of the 11th Congress’ existence, several
3. Population requirement - To be determined as the bills aiming to convert certain municipalities
total number of inhabitants within the into cities were pending. The same were not, however,
territorial jurisdiction of the LGU concerned. passed into law. During the 12th Congress, RA 9009
The required minimum population shall be: was enacted, amending the LGC by increasing the
income requirement for conversion of municipalities
a. Barangay - 2K
into cities from P20M to P100M. Congress
But 5K in:
deliberated on exempting the municipalities
i. Metro Manila mentioned earlier from the new income
ii. Highly urbanized cities requirement yet, no concrete action came out of such
b. Municipality - 25K deliberations.
c. City - 150K
d. Highly Urbanized Cities - 200K Through their respective sponsors, the
e. Province - 250K municipalities filed individual cityhood bills
containing a common proviso exempting them
4. Land requirement - Must be contiguous, unless it from the new income requirement. The Congress
comprises two or more islands or is separated by a LGU approved the same. Concerned parties protested
independent of the others; properly identified by such laws allowing a “wholesale conversion” of
metes and bounds with technical descriptions; and municipalities as being unconstitutional.
sufficient to provide for such basic services and facilities.
Area requirements are:
1. Are the cityhood laws valid?
a. Barangay - 2 or more contiguous
territory (Sec. 386, LGC) 2. The challenged “cities” claim that it was the intent
b. Municipality - 50 sq. km (Sec. 442, LGC) of the Congress to grant them exemption from the
c. City - 100 sq. km (Sec.450, LGC) income requirement, per the deliberations of the 11th
d. Province - 2,000 sq.km (Sec. 461, LGC) Congress. What will become of the cityhood bills
and their deliberations that were pending at the
NOTE: Compliance with the foregoing indicators shall
be attested to by the Department of Finance, NSO and
adjournment of the 11th Congress?
the Lands Management Bureau of DENR. (Sec.7, par. c.,
LGC) A:

Corporate existence 1. Yes, they are valid. The 16 cities covered by the
Cityhood Laws not only had conversion bills
Corporate existence of LGUs begins upon the election
pending during the 11th Congress, but have also
and qualification of its chief executive and a
complied with the requirements of the LGC
majority of the members of its sanggunian, unless
prescribed prior to its amendment by RA 9009.
some other time is fixed therefor by law or ordinance Congress undeniably gave these cities all the
creating it. (Sec. 14, LGC) considerations that justice and fair play
demanded. Hence, this Court should do no less by
Rules on merger and division of LGUs stamping its imprimatur to the clear and
1. It should not reduce the income, population or unmistakable legislative intent and by duly
land area of the LGC concerned to less than the recognizing the certain collective wisdom of
minimum requirement Congress. Congress, who holds the power of the
2. The income classification of the original LGU/s purse, only sought the well-being of respondent
shall not fall below its current income municipalities in enacting the Cityhood Laws having
classification prior to the division seen their respective capacities to become
3. A plebiscite must be held in LGU/s affected component cities of their provinces, which was
Assets and liabilities of creation shall be temporarily stunted by the enactment of RA 9009.
equitably distributed between the LGUs affected By allowing respondent municipalities to convert
and new LGU into component cities, Congress desired only to
uphold the very purpose of the LGC, i.e., to make
the LGUs “enjoy genuine and meaningful local

3
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
autonomy to enable them to attain their fullest the law valid?
development as self-reliant communities and make
them more effective partners in the attainment of A: No. Congress cannot establish a new legislative
national goals,” which is the very mandate of district based on a projected population of the
the Constitution. (League of Cities of the National Statistics Office (NSO) to meet the
Philippines. (LCP) v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176951, population requirement of the Constitution in the
April 12, 2011) reapportionment of legislative districts.
2. Notwithstanding that both the 11th and 12 th
A city that has attained a population of 250,000 is
Congress failed to act upon the pending cityhood
entitled to a legislative district only in the
bills, both the letter and intent of Sec. 450 of the
“immediately following election.” In short, a city must
LGC, as amended by RA 9009, were carried on
first attain the 250,000 population, and thereafter, in the
until the 13th Congress, when the Cityhood
immediately following election, such city shall have a
Laws were enacted. The exemption clauses found
district representative. There is no showing in the
in the individual Cityhood Laws are the express
present case that the City of Malolos has attained or will
articulation of the intent to exempt respondent
attain a population of 250,000, whether actual or
municipalities from the coverage of RA 9009.
projected, before May 10, 2010 elections. Thus, the
(League of Cities of the Philippines. (LCP) v.
City of Malolos is not qualified to have a legislative
COMELEC, G.R. No. 176951, February 15, 2011)
district of its own under Sec. 5(3), Art. VI of the 1987
NOTE: On November 18, 2008, the SC ruled the
Constitution and Sec 3 of the Ordinance appended to
cityhood laws unconstitutional. On December 21, 2009, the 1987 Constitution. (Aladaba v. Comelec, G.R. No.
it reversed the ruling. Then again, on August 24, 2010, 188078, January 25, 2010)
it decided to uphold the original ruling. And finally, last
April 12, 2011 it upheld the constitutionality of the Q: Congress enacted a law reapportioning the
creation of the 16 new cities. composition of the Province of Camarines Sur and
created legislative districts thereon. Frankie
Q: May Congress validly delegate to the ARMM challenged the law because it runs afoul to the
Regional Assembly the power to create provinces, constitutional requirement that there must be at
cities, and municipalities within the ARMM pursuant to least a population of 250,000 to create a legislative
Congress’s plenary legislative powers? district. Comelec argued that the mentioned
requirement does not apply to provinces. Is the
A: No. There is no provision in the Constitution that 250,000 population standard an indispensable
conflicts with the delegation to regional legislative requirement for the creation of a legislative district
bodies of the power to create municipalities and in provinces?
barangays. However, the creation of provinces and
cities is another matter. Only Congress can create A: No. Sec. 5(3), Art. VI of the 1987 Constitution
provinces and cities because the creation of the same which requires 250,000 minimum population
necessarily includes the creation of legislative requirement apply only for a city to be entitled to a
districts, a power only Congress can exercise under representative but not for a province.
Sec. 5 Art. VI of the Constitution and Sec. 3 of the
Ordinance appended to it. The provision draws a plain and clear distinction
between the entitlement of a city to a district on one
The ARMM Regional Assembly cannot enact a law hand, and the entitlement of a province to a district
creating a national office like the office of a district on the other. For while a province is entitled to at
representative of Congress because the legislative least a representative, with nothing mentioned about
powers of the ARMM Regional Assembly operate only population, a city must first meet a population
within its territorial jurisdiction as provided in Sec. 20 minimum of 250,000 in order to be similarly entitled.
Art. X of the Constitution. (Sema v. COMELEC, G.R. No. (Aquino and Robredo v. Comelec, G.R. No. 189793,
178628, July 16, 2008) April 7, 2010)

Q: Congress enacted a law creating the legislative Q: Sec. 461 of the LGC provides that before a province
district of Malolos based on a certification of the could be created, it must comply with the 2000-km
demographic projection from NSO stating that by land area requirement. Art. 9(2) of the LGC-IRR,
2010, Malolos is expected to reach the population of however, exempts the creation of provinces with more
250,000, hence entitling it to one legislative district. Is than one island from the said land area requirement.

4
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Thus, Dinagat Province – consisting of more than one component city into an HUC is a substantial alteration of
island, with a total land area of 802.12 sq. km, and has boundaries.
an average annual income of P 82 M as certified by the
Bureau of Local Government Finance– was created “Substantial alteration of boundaries” involves and
through a law pursuant to the exception expressly necessarily entails a change in the geographical
provided in the said LGC-IRR provision. Is the creation configuration of LGU or units. However, the phrase
of Dinagat Province valid? “boundaries” should not be limited to the mere physical
one, referring to the metes and bounds of the LGU, but
A: Yes. When the exemption was expressly provided in also to its political boundaries. It also connotes a
Art. 9(2) of the LGC-IRR, the inclusion was intended to modification of the demarcation lines between political
correct the congressional oversight in Sec. 461 of the subdivisions, where the LGU’s exercise of corporate
LGC and to reflect the true legislative intent which is to power ends and that of the other begins. And as a
allow an exception to the land area requirement in qualifier, the alteration must be “substantial” for it to be
cases of non-contiguity also as regards to provinces within the ambit of the constitutional provision. (Umali
especially considering the physical configuration of the vs. COMELEC, GR No. 203974, April 22, 2014)
Philippine archipelago. The land area requirement
should be read together with the territorial contiguity NOTE: It is the duty of the President to declare a city as highly
whereas the land area, while considered as an indicator urbanized after it shall have met the minimum requirements,
of viability of LGU, is not conclusive in showing that upon proper application and ratification in a plebiscite by
Dinagat Province cannot become a province taking into qualified voters therein (Sec. 453, LGC). The provision makes it
account its average annual income. Hence, the basic ministerial for the President, upon proper application, to
declare a component city as highly urbanized once the
services to its constituents has been proven possible
minimum requirements, which are based on certifiable and
and sustainable making Dinagat Province ready and
measurable indices under Sec. 452 of LGC are satisfied. The
capable of becoming a province. (Navarro vs. Executive mandatory language “shall” used in the provision leaves the
Secretary, G.R. No. 180050; April 12, 2011) President with no room for discretion. (Ibid.)

Q: Congress passed a law providing for the Requirements for division and merger of LGUs
apportionment of a new legislative district in CDO
1. It shall not reduce the income, population or land
City. The COMELEC subsequently issued a resolution
area of the LGU/s concerned to less than minimum
implementing said law. Zander now assails the requirements prescribed;
resolution, contending that rules for the conduct of 2. Income classification of the original LGU/s shall not
a plebiscite must first be laid down, as part of the fall below its current income classification prior to
requirements under the Constitution. According to division; (Sec.8, LGC)
Zander, the apportionment is a conversion and 3. Plebiscite be held in LGUs affected; (Sec.10, LGC)
division of CDO City, falling under Sec. 10 Art. X of 4. Assets and liabilities of creation shall be
the Constitution, which provides for the rule on equitably distributed between the LGUs
creation, division, merger, and abolition of LGUs. affected and new LGU; (RA 688)
Decide.
Abolition of LGU
A: There is no need for a plebiscite. CDO City LGUs may be abolished by:
politically remains a single unit and its administration is 1. Congress - In case of provinces, city,
not divided along territorial lines. Its territory remains municipality, or any other political subdivision.
whole and intact. Thus, Sec. 10, Art. X of the 2. Sangguniang Panlalawigan or Sangguniang
Constitution does not come into play. (Bagabuyo v. Panglungsod - In case of a barangay, except in
COMELEC, G.R. No. 176970, December 8, 2008) Metropolitan Manila area and in cultural
communities.
Q: Is the conversion of a component city to a highly LGU may be abolished when its income, population or
urbanized city considered within the ambit of land area has been irreversibly reduced to less than
“creation, division, merger, abolition or substantial the minimum standards prescribed for its creation, as
alteration of boundaries” under Sec. 10, Art. X of certified by the national agencies mentioned. The
the Constitution? law or ordinance abolishing LGU shall specify the
province; city, municipality or barangay with which
A: Yes. While conversion to an HUC is not explicitly the LGU sought to be abolished will be incorporated
provided in Sec. 10, Art. X of the Constitution, the Court or merged. (Sec. 9, LGC)
nevertheless observes that the conversion of a
No creation, division, merger, abolition, or substantial

5
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
alteration of boundaries of LGUs shall take effect material change in the LGU directly affected. (Miranda
unless approved by a majority of the votes cast in a v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 133064, September 16, 1999)
plebiscite called for the purpose in the political unit or
units directly affected. Said plebiscite shall be PRINCIPLES OF LOCAL AUTONOMY
conducted by the COMELEC within one hundred twenty
(120) days from the date of effectivity of the law or Principle of Local Autonomy
ordinance effecting such action, unless said law or Under the 1987 Constitution, it simply means
ordinance fixes another date. (Sec. 10, LGC) decentralization; it does not make the local
governments sovereign within the state or an
NOTE: A barangay may officially exist on record and the fact
“imperium in imperio”. (Basco v. PAGCOR, G.R. 91649,
that nobody resides in the place does not result in its
automatic cessation as a unit of local government. Under
May 14, 1991)
the LGC of 1991, the abolition of
an LGU may be done by Congress in the case of a province, Decentralization
city, municipality, or any other political subdivision. In the System whereby LGUs shall be given more powers,
case of a barangay, except in Metropolitan Manila area and authority, responsibilities and resources to provide a
in cultural communities, it may be done by the more responsive and accountable government
Sangguniang Panlalawigan or Sangguniang Panglungsod structure. (Sec. 2 (a), LGC)
concerned subject to the mandatory requirement of a
plebiscite conducted for the purpose in the political units
Decentralization of Administration vs. Decentralization
affected. (Sarangani vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 135927, June
of Power
26, 2000)
Decentralization of Decentralization of Power
Q: Through a plebiscite, RA 7720 took effect and Administration
converted Municipality XYZ to an independent Consists merely in the Involves abdication by the
component city. RA 8528 was later enacted and delegation of national government of
amended RA 7720 that downgraded from independent administrative powers to political power in favor of
component city to a component city the XYZ without broaden base of LGUs declared to be
the approval of the people of XYZ in a plebiscite. For governmental power autonomous. The
failure to submit the law to a proper plebiscite as autonomous government
provided under Sec. 10, Art. X of the Constitution, is RA becomes accountable not
8528 constitutional considering that it merely to the central authorities
reclassified the XYZ City as it did not involve any but to its constituency
“creation, division, merger, abolition, or substantial (Limbona v. Mangelin,
alteration of boundaries of boundaries of LGUs”? G.R.80391, February 28,
1989)
A. No. Sec. 10, Art. X of the Constitution calls for the
people of the LGU directly affected top vote in a NOTE: Under the Philippine concept of local autonomy, only
plebiscite whenever there is a material change in their administrative powers over local affairs are delegated to
rights and responsibilities. They may call the political subdivisions. In turn, economic, political and social
downgrading of XYZ to a component city as a mere developments at the smaller political units are expected to
transition but they cannot blink away from the fact that propel social and economic growth and development. But to
the transition will radically change its physical and enable the country to develop as a whole, the programs and
political configuration as the rights and responsibilities policies effected locally must be integrated and coordinated
of its people. As such, the city mayor will be placed towards a common national goal. (Pimentel Jr. v. Aguirre, G.R.
under the administrative supervision of the provincial 132988, July 19, 2000)
governor; the resolutions and ordinances of the city
council will have to be reviewed by the Provincial
Board; taxes collected by the city will have to be shared Devolution
with the province; and there would be a reduction in The act by which the national government confers
their IRA. Thus, the changes are substantial. When RA power and authority upon the various LGUs to
7720 upgraded the status of XYZ City from a perform specific functions and responsibilities. (Sec.
municipality to an independent component city, it 17(e) LGC)
required the approval of its people through a plebiscite
called for that purpose because the consent of the NOTE: The LGC did not fully devolve the enforcement of the
people serves as a checking mechanism to any exercise small-scale mining law to the provincial government, as its
of legislative power. Hence there is no reason why the enforcement is subject to the supervision, control and review
same should not be done when RA 8528 downgrades of the DENR, which is in charge, subject to law and higher
the status of their city. The rules cover all conversions, authority, of carrying out the State's constitutional mandate
whether upward or downward so long as the result in a

6
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
to control and supervise the exploration, development, 2. The means employed are reasonably necessary for
utilization of the country's natural resource. (League of the attainment of the object sought to be
Provinces of the Philippines vs. DENR, G.R. 175368, April, 11, accomplished and not duly oppressive. (Due process
2013) clause)
3. Exercisable only within the territorial limits of the
POWERS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS LGU, except for protection of water supply (Sec 16,
LGC)
Sources of powers of a municipal corporation 4. Must not be contrary to the Constitution and the
1. Constitution laws.
2. Statutes (e.g. LGC)
3. Charter Ministerial duty of the Chief Executive
4. Doctrine of right to self-government
The LGC imposes upon the city mayor, to “enforce all
laws and ordinances relative to the governance of the
Classifications of municipal powers city.” As the chief executive of the city, he has the duty to
1. Express, implied, inherent enforce an ordinance as long as it has not been repealed
2. Government or public, corporate or private by the Sanggunian or annulled by the courts. He has no
3. Intramural, extramural other choice. It is his ministerial duty to do so. (Social
4. Mandatory, directory; ministerial, discretionary Justice Society vs. Atienza, Jr., G.R. No. 156052, March 7,
2007)
Execution of powers of LGU
1. Where statute prescribes the manner of exercise, Abatement of nuisance without judicial proceeding
procedure must be followed. The abatement of nuisances without judicial
2. Where the law is silent, LGU has the discretion to proceedings applies to nuisance per se or those which
select reasonable means and methods to affect the immediate safety of persons and property and
exercise may be summarily abated under the undefined law
of necessity. (Tayaban v. People, G.R. No. 150194,
Governmental powers of LGU March 6, 2007)
1. Police power
2. Basic services and facilities However, the local sanggunian does not have the power
3. Power to generate and apply resources to find, as a fact, that a particular thing is a nuisance
4. Power of eminent domain per se, a thing which must be determined and
5. Taxing Power resolved in the ordinary courts of law (AC Enterprise,
6. Reclassification of Land Inc. v. Frabelle Properties Corporation,G.R. No. 166744,
7. Local legislative power November 2, 2006)
8. Closure and opening of roads
9. Corporate Powers NOTE: Power to issue licenses and permits include power to
10. Liability of LGUs revoke, withdraw or restrict through the imposition of certain
11. Settlement of Boundary Disputes conditions. However, the conditions must be reasonable and
12. Succession of Local Officials cannot amount to an arbitrary interference with the business.
13. Discipline of Local Officials (Acebedo Optical Company, Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 100152,
14. Authority over police units March 31, 2000)

POLICE POWER License/permit to do business vs. License to engage in

a profession
Nature of the police power of the LGU LICENSE/PERMIT TO DO LICENSE TO ENGAGE IN A
The police power of the LGU is not inherent. LGUs BUSINESS PROFESSION
exercise the police power under the general welfare Granted by the local Board or Commission
clause. (Sec. 16, LGC) authorities tasked to regulate the
particular profession
Requisites/limitations for the proper exercise of the Authorizes the person to Authorizes a natural
police power engage in the business or person to engage in the
1. The interests of the public generally, as some form of commercial practice or exercise of his
distinguished from those of a particular class, activity or her profession
require the interference of the state. (Equal
Protection clause) NOTE: A business permit is issued primarily to regulate the

7
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
conduct of business. It cannot, by the imposition of atmosphere for clandestine entry, presence and exit"
condition, be used to regulate the practice of a profession. and thus become the "ideal haven for prostitutes and
(Acebedo Optical v. CA, G.R. No. 100152, March 31, 2000) thrill-seekers". Precisely it was intended to curb the
opportunity for the immoral or legitimate use to which
Q: The Sangguniang Panglungsod of Marikina City
such premises could be and are being devoted. (Ermita-
enacted an ordinance “Regulating the Construction of
Malate Hotel and Motel Operations Association vs. City
Fences and Walls in the City of Marikina”. The
Mayor of Manila, G.R. No. L24693, July, 31, 1967)
ordinance provided, among others, that fences should
not be more than 1 meter and fences in excess of 1
Q: Mayor Lim signed into law, City Ordinance 7774,
meter shall be 80% see-thru. It further provided that in
which prohibits short time admission in hotels, motels,
no case shall walls and fences be built within the five
lodging houses, pension houses and similar
meter parking area allowance located between the
establishments in the City of Manila. Pursuant to the
front monument line and the building line of
above policy, short-time admission and rate, wash-up
commercial and industrial establishments and
rate or other similarly concocted terms, are hereby
educational and religious institutions. Is the ordinance
prohibited in hotels, motels, inns, lodging houses,
valid?
pension houses and similar establishments in the City
of Manila. Petitioners argued that the Ordinance is
A: No. It has long been settled that the State may not,
unconstitutional and void since it violates the right to
under the guise of police power, permanently divest
privacy and the freedom of movement; it is an invalid
owners of the beneficial use of their property solely to
exercise of police power; and it is an unreasonable and
preserve or enhance the aesthetic appearance of the
oppressive interference in their business. May an LGU
community. Compelling the respondents to construct
regulate the short time periods and wash rates of
their fence in accordance with the assailed ordinance is,
motels to protect public morals?
thus, a clear encroachment on their right to property,
which necessarily includes their right to decide how best
to protect their property. (Fernando vs. St. Scholastica's A: No. Individual rights may be adversely affected
only to the extent that may fairly be required by the
College, G.R. No. 161107, March 13, 2013)
legitimate demands of public interest or public
welfare. However, well-intentioned the Ordinance may
Q: Can the City Mayor of Manila validly take custody be, it is in effect an arbitrary and whimsical intrusion
of several women of ill repute and deport them as into the rights of the establishments as well as their
laborers without knowledge and consent to the said patrons. The Ordinance needlessly restrains the
deportation? operation of the businesses of the petitioners as well
as restricting the rights of their patrons without
A: No. One can search in vain for any law, order, or sufficient justification. The Ordinance rashly equates
regulation, which even hints at the right of the Mayor wash rates and renting out a room more than twice a
of the city of Manila or the chief of police of that city to day with immorality without accommodating
force citizens of the Philippine Islands — and these innocuous intentions. (White Light Corp., v. City of
women despite their being in a sense lepers of society Manila, 576 SCRA 416, 2009)
are nevertheless not chattels but Philippine citizens
protected by the same constitutional guaranties as are EMINENT DOMAIN
other citizens — to change their domicile from Manila
to another locality. (Villavicencio vs. Lukban G.R. No. L- Eminent Domain
14639, March 25, 1919) In general, eminent domain is defined as the power of
the nation or a sovereign state to take, or to
Q: May an LGU require customers to fill out a prescribed
authorize the taking of, private property for a public
form stating personal information such as name,
use without the owner’s consent, conditioned upon
gender, nationality, age, address and occupation before
payment of just compensation. It is acknowledged as
they could be admitted to a motel, hotel, or lodging
an inherent political right, founded on a common
house?
necessity and interest of appropriating the property
of individual members of the community to the great
A: Yes. The Ordinance was enacted precisely to minimize
necessities of the whole community. (Barangay
certain practices hurtful to public morals such as the
Sindalan v. CA, G.R. 150640, March 22,
increase in the rate of prostitution, adultery and
2007)
fornication in Manila traceable in great part to the
existence of motels, which "provide a necessary
Requisites for a valid exercise of power of eminent

8
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
domain condemned, for the public use or purpose
1. An Ordinance is enacted by the local legislative described in the complaint, upon the payment of
council authorizing the local chief executive, in just compensation to be determined as of the
behalf of the LGU, to exercise the power of date of the filing of the complaint. An order of
eminent domain or pursue expropriation dismissal, if this be ordained, would be a final
proceeding over a particular property. one, since it finally disposes of the action and
leaves nothing more to be done by the Court on
NOTE: A resolution will not suffice for LGU the merits. The order of condemnation shall be a
to be able to expropriate private property; a municipal final one, as the Rules expressly state, in the
ordinance is different from a resolution in that an
proceedings before the Trial Court, no objection to
ordinance is a law while a resolution is merely a
the exercise of the right of condemnation (or the
declaration of the sentiment or opinion of a
lawmaking authority on a specific matter.
propriety thereof) shall be filed or heard.
2. The determination by the RTC of the just
2. It must be for Public use, purpose or welfare of compensation for the property sought to be taken.
for the benefit of the poor or landless This is done by the Court with the assistance of
3. There must be payment of just Compensation not more than three (3) commissioners. The
A valid and definite Offer has been previously order fixing the just compensation on the basis
made to the owner of the property sought to be of the evidence before, and findings of, the
expropriated, but said offer was not accepted. commissioners would be final. It would finally
(Municipality of Paranaque vs. V.M. Realty dispose of the second stage of the suit, and leave
Corporation G.R. No. 127820. July 20, 1998) nothing more to be done by the Court regarding
the issue. (Brgy. Son Roque, Talisay, Cebu v. Hrs. of
Due process requirements in eminent domain Francisco Pastor, G.R. No. 138896, June 20, 2000)
Offer must be in writing specifying:
1. Property sought to be acquired NOTE: LGU’s prolonged occupation of private property
2. The reason for the acquisition without the benefit of expropriation proceedings entitles
3. The price offered the landowner to damages. (City of Iloilo vs. Judge Contrera-
Besana, G.R. No. 168967, February. 12, 2010)
NOTE:
1. If owner accepts offer: a contract of sale will be executed. Satisfaction of “public use” requirement
2. If owner accepts but at a higher price: Local chief executive That only a few could actually benefit from the
shall call a conference for the purpose of reaching an expropriation of the property does not diminish its
agreement on the selling price; If agreed, contract of sale public use character. It is simply not possible to
will be drawn. (Art. 35, LGC IRR) provide all at once land and shelter for all who need
them. Corollary to the expanded notion of public use,
Elements for an authorized immediate entry expropriation is not anymore confined to vast tracts of
1. Filling of a complaint for expropriation sufficient in land and landed estates. It is therefore of no moment
form and substance that the land sought to be expropriated in this case is
2. Deposit of the amount equivalent to fifteen less than half a hectare only. Through the years, the
percent (15%) of the fair market value of the public use requirement in eminent domain has evolved
property to be expropriated based on its current into a flexible concept, influenced by changing
tax declaration. conditions. Public use now includes the broader
notion of indirect public benefit or advantage
NOTE: Upon compliance, the issuance of writ of possession
including in particular, urban land reform and housing.
becomes ministerial. (City of Iloilo vs Legaspi, G.R. No.
(Philippine Columbian Association vs. Panis, G.R. L-
154614, November 25, 2004)
106528, December 21, 1993)
Phases of expropriation proceedings
NOTE: The passage of RA 7279, the “Urban Development
1. The determination of the authority of the and Housing Act of 1992” introduced a limitation on the size
plaintiff to exercise the power of eminent of the land sought to be expropriated for socialized housing.
domain and the propriety of its exercise in the The law expressly exempted “small property owners” from
context of the facts involved in the suit. It ends expropriation of their land for urban land reform. (City of
with an order, if not of dismissal of action, of Mandaluyong v. Aguilar, G.R. 137152, January 29, 2001)
condemnation declaring that the plaintiff has a
lawful right to take the property sought to be Satisfaction of “genuine necessity” requirement
The right to take private property for public

9
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
purposes necessarily originates from “the necessity” the Congress may provide” as provided by Sec. 5, Art. X of 1987
and the taking must be limited to such necessity. In Constitution. (City of Iriga vs. Camarines Sur III Electric
City of Manila v. Chinese Community of Manila, we Cooperative, Inc. G.R. No. 192945, September 5, 2012)
held that the very foundation of the right to exercise
eminent domain is a genuine necessity and that Main sources of revenues of LGUs
necessity must be of a public character. Moreover, 1. Taxes, fees, and charges. (Sec. 5, Art. X, 1987
the ascertainment of the necessity must precede or Constitution)
accompany and not follow the taking of the land. In 2. Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) - Just share in the
City of Manila v. Arellano Law College, the necessity national taxes which shall be automatically
within the rule that the particular property to be released to them. (Sec. 6, Art. X, 1987 Constitution)
expropriated must be necessary, does not mean an
NOTE: The current sharing is 40% local and 60% national.
absolute but only a reasonable or practical necessity,
The share cannot be reduced except if there is unmanageable
such as would combine the greatest benefit to the
public sector deficit.
public with the least inconvenience and expense to
the condemning party and the property owner 3. Equitable share in the proceeds of the utilization
consistent with such benefit. (Masikip v. City of Pasig, and development of the national wealth within
G.R. 136349, January. 23, 2006) their areas. (Sec. 7, Art. X, 1987 Constitution)

Q: May LGU expropriate a property to provide a right- Principles governing exercise of taxing and revenue-
of-way to residents of a subdivision? sharing powers of LGUs
1. Taxation shall be uniform in each LGU
A: No. Considering that the residents who need a 2. Taxes, fees, charges and other impositions shall
feeder road are all subdivision lot owners, it is the be equitable and based as far as practicable on
obligation of the subdivision owner to acquire a right- the taxpayer’s ability to pay; it shall be levied and
of-way for them. However, the failure of the collected only for public purpose; it must not be
subdivision owner to provide an access road does not unjust, excessive, oppressive, or confiscatory; it
shift the burden to petitioner. To deprive must not be contrary to law, public policy,
respondents of their property instead of compelling national economic policy, or restraint of trade;
the subdivision owner to comply with his obligation The collection of local taxes, fees, charges and
under the law is an abuse of the power of eminent other impositions shall in no case be let to any
domain and is patently illegal. Worse, the private person.
expropriation will actually benefit the subdivision’s 3. The revenue collected shall inure solely to the
owner who will be able to circumvent his benefit of and be subject to disposition by, the
commitment to provide road access to the local government unit, unless specifically
subdivision in conjunction with his development provided therein.
permit and license to sell from the Housing and Land 4. Each local government, as far as practicable,
Use Regulatory Board, and also be relieved of evolves a progressive system of taxation. (Sec.
spending his own funds for a right-of-way. (Barangay 130, LGC)
Sindalan v. CA G.R. No. 150640, March 22, 2007)
ARMM’s taxing power
TAXING POWER The ARMM has the legislative power to create sources
of revenues within its territorial jurisdiction and subject
Nature of the power of taxation of LGUs to the provisions of the 1987 Constitution and national
A municipal corporation, unlike a sovereign state, is laws. (Sec. 20[b], Art. X)
clothed with no inherent power of taxation. The
charter or statute must plainly show an intent to confer Power to tax by ordinary LGUs vs. Power to tax by
that power or the municipality cannot assume it. And Autonomous Regions
the power when granted is to be construed in LGU’S OUTSIDE LGU’S INSIDE
strictissimi juris. (Medina vs. City of Baguio, G.R. No. L- AUTONOMOUS REGIONS AUTONOMOUS REGIONS
4060, August 29, 1952) (I.E. ARMM)
NOTE: The power of the LGUs to impose and collect taxes is
Basis of Taxing Power
derived from the Constitution itself which grants them “the Sec. 5, Art. X, 1987 Sec. 20(b), Art. X, 1987
power to create its own sources of revenues and to levy taxes, Constitution Constitution
fees and charges subject to such guidelines and limitation as Governing guidelines and limitations

10
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
LGC of 1991 Respective Organic Act expected results;
8. Local budget plans and goals shall, as far as
practicable, be harmonized with national
NOTE: Unlike Sec. 5, Art. X, Sec. 20, Art. X of the 1987 development plans, goals and strategies in order to
Constitution is not self-executing. It merely authorizes
optimize the utilization of resources and to avoid
Congress to pass the Organic Act of the autonomous
regions which shall provide for legislative powers to levy duplication in the use of fiscal and physical resources.
taxes upon their inhabitants. 9. Local budgets shall operationalize approved local
development plans;
Q: The President, through AO 372, orders the 10. LGUs shall ensure that their respective budgets
withholding of 10 percent of the LGUs' IRA "pending incorporate the requirements of their component
the assessment and evaluation by the Development units and provide for equitable allocation of
Budget Coordinating Committee of the emerging resources among these component units;
fiscal situation" in the country. Is the AO valid? 11. National planning shall be based on local
planning to ensure that the needs and
A: No. A basic feature of local fiscal autonomy is the aspirations of the people as articulated by the
automatic release of the shares of LGUs in the LGUs in their respective local development plans
national internal revenue. This is mandated by no are considered in the formulation of budgets of
less than the Constitution. The LGC specifies further national line agencies or offices;
that the release shall be made 12. Fiscal responsibility shall be shared by all those
directly to the LGU concerned within five days exercising authority over the financial affairs,
after every quarter of the year and “shall not be transactions and operations of LGUs; and
subject to any lien or holdback that may be imposed by 13. The LGU shall endeavor to have a balanced budget in
the national government for whatever purpose.” each fiscal year of operation (Sec. 305, LGC)
As a rule, the term "shall" is a word of command that
must be given a compulsory meaning. The provision Procedures LGU must comply with for a revenue
is, therefore, imperative. (Pimentel, Jr. v. Aguirre, G.R. ordinance to be valid
No. 132988, July 19, 2000) 1. A prior public hearing on the measure conducted
according to prescribed rules.
Principles governing financial affairs, transactions 2. Publication of the tax ordinance, within 10 days
and operations of LGUs after their approval, for 3 consecutive days in a
1. Shall be paid out of the local treasury except in newspaper of local circulation provided that in
pursuance of an appropriation ordinance or provinces, cities, and municipalities where there
law; are no newspapers of local circulation, the same
2. Local government funds and monies shall be spent may be posted in at least two (2) conspicuous
solely for public purposes; and publicly accessible places.
3. Local revenue is generated only from sources
expressly authorized by law or ordinance, and NOTE: If the tax ordinance or revenue measure contains
collection thereof shall at all times be penal provisions as authorized in Art. 280 of this Rule, the gist
of such tax ordinance or revenue measure shall be published
acknowledged properly; in a newspaper of general circulation within the province
4. All monies officially received by a local where the sanggunian concerned belongs. (Art. 276, IRR of
government officer in any capacity or on any LGC)
occasion shall be accounted for as local funds,
unless otherwise provided; Effectivity of tax ordinance
5. Trust funds in the local treasury shall not be paid out In case the effectivity of any tax ordinance or
except in the fulfilment of the purpose for which revenue measure falls on any date other than the
the trust was created or the funds received; beginning of the quarter, the same shall be
6. Every officer of the LGU whose duties permit or considered as falling at the beginning of the next
require the possession or custody of local funds ensuing quarter and the taxes, fees, or charges due
shall be properly bonded, and such officer shall shall begin to accrue therefrom. (Art. 276, IRR of LGC)
be accountable and responsible for said
funds and for the safekeeping thereof in Q: The Province of Palawan passes an ordinance
conformity with the provisions of law; requiring all owners/operators of fishing vessels that
7. Local governments shall formulate sound fish in waters surrounding the province to invest ten
financial plans and local budgets shall be based on percent (10%) of their net profits from operations
functions, activities, and projects in terms of therein in any enterprise located in Palawan. NARCO

11
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Fishing Corp., a Filipino corporation with head office in in case of delinquency (Sec. 168, LGC)
Navotas, Metro Manila, challenges the ordinance as 2. Availing local government’s liens (Sec. 173, LGC)
unconstitutional. Decide. 3. Administrative action through distraint of goods,
chattels, and other personal property (Sec.
A: The ordinance is invalid. The ordinance was 174(a), LGC)
apparently enacted pursuant to Art. X, Sec. 7 of the 4. Judicial action (Sec. 174(b), LGC)
Constitution, which entitles local governments to an
equitable share in the proceeds of the utilization and Nature of a community tax
development of the national wealth within their Community tax is a poll or capitation tax which is
respective areas. However, this should be made imposed upon person who resides within a specified
pursuant to law. A law is needed to implement this territory.
provision and a local government cannot constitute
itself unto a law. In the absence of a law, the Exempted from the payment of community tax
ordinance in question is invalid. 1. Diplomatic and consular representatives;
2. Transient visitors when their stay in the
Person authorized to determine the legality or Philippines does not exceed 3 months. (Sec. 159,
propriety of a local tax ordinance or revenue measure LGC)
It is the Secretary of Justice who shall determine
questions on the legality and constitutionality of Real property taxes
ordinances or revenue measures. Such questions These are directly imposed on privilege to use real
shall be raised on appeal within thirty days from property such as land, building, machinery, and other
the effectivity thereof to the Secretary of Justice who improvements, unless specifically exempted.
shall render a decision within sixty days from the
date of receipt of the appeal: Provided, however, Q: Bayantel was granted by Congress after the
that such appeal shall not have the effect of effectivity of LGC, a
suspending the effectivity of the ordinance and the legislative franchise with tax exemption privileges
accrual and payment of the tax, fee, or charge levied which partly reads “the grantee, its successors or
therein: Provided, finally, that within thirty days assigns shall be liable to pay the same taxes on their
after receipt of the decision or the lapse of the sixty- real estate, buildings and personal property,
day period without the Secretary of Justice acting exclusive of this franchise, as other persons or
upon the appeal, the aggrieved party may file corporations are now or hereafter may be required
appropriate proceedings with a court of competent by law to pay.” This provision existed in the
jurisdiction (RTC). (Sec. 187, LGC) company’s franchise prior to the effectivity of the
LGC. Quezon City then enacted an ordinance
Requisites of a valid tax protest in a LGU imposing a real property tax on all real properties
1. Taxpayer first pays the taxes located within the city limits and withdrawing all
2. There shall be annotation on the tax receipts the exemptions previously granted. Among properties
words "paid under protest". covered are those owned by the company. Bayantel
3. The protest in writing must be filed within thirty asserts that its properties are exempt from tax
(30) days from payment of the tax to the provincial, under its franchise. Is Bayantel correct?
city treasurer or municipal treasurer, in the case of
a municipality within Metropolitan Manila Area, A: Yes. The properties are exempt from taxation. The
who shall decide the protest within sixty (60) days grant of taxing powers to local governments under the
from receipt. (Sec. 252, LGC) Constitution and the LGC does not affect the power of
Congress to grant tax exemptions.
NOTE: A claim for tax exemption, whether full or partial, does
not deal with the authority of local assessor to assess real
The term "exclusive of the franchise" is interpreted to
property tax, but merely raises a question of reasonableness of
correctness of such assessment, which requires compliance mean properties actually, directly and exclusively used
with Sec. 252 of the LGC. (Camp John Hay Development in the radio and telecommunications business.
Corporation vs. Central Board of Assessment Appeals, G.R. No. The subsequent piece of legislation which reiterated
169234, October 2, 2013) the phrase “exclusive of this franchise” found in the
previous tax exemption grant to the company is an
Remedies available to the LGUs to enforce the payment express and real intention on the part of the Congress
of taxes to once against remove from the LGC’s delegated
1. Imposing penalties (surcharges and penalty interest) taxing power, all of the company’s properties that are

12
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
actually, directly and exclusively used in the pursuit of transfer or relocation to a new site. (Sec 21(a)
its franchise. (The City Government of Quezon City, et al., (b), LGC)
v. Bayan Telecommunications, Inc., G.R. No. 162015, B. In case of temporary closure:
March 6, 2006) 1. It must be for actual emergency, fiesta
celebration, public rallies, agricultural or
NOTE: An ordinance levying taxes, fees or charges shall not industrial works and highway
be enacted without any prior public hearing conducted for telecommunications and water work
the purpose. (Figuerres v. CA, G.R. No. 119172, March 25, projects
1999) 2. Duration of which shall be specified
3. Except for those activities not officially
sponsored or approved by the LGU
Elements so that the President may interfere in local
concerned (Sec 21(c,) LGC)
fiscal matters
1. An unmanaged public sector deficit of the national NOTE: Any city, municipality or barangay may, by ordinance,
government; temporarily close and regulate the use of a local street,
2. Consultations with the presiding officers of the road, thoroughfare or any other public place where
Senate and the House of Representatives and the shopping malls, Sunday, flea or night markets, or shopping
presidents of the various local leagues; areas may be established and where articles of commerce
may be sold or dispensed with to the general public. (Sec
3. And the corresponding recommendation of the 21(d), LGC)
secretaries of the Department of Finance,
Interior and Local Government, and Budget and
Material factors to consider in closing a street
Management. (Pimentel, Jr. vs. Aguirre, G.R. No.
132988, July 19, 2000) The material factors which a municipality must
consider in deliberating upon the advisability of
closing a street are: "the topography of the property
CLOSING AND OPENING OF ROADS
surrounding the street in the light of ingress and
egress to other streets; the relationship of the street
LGU’s power to open or close a road
in the road system throughout the subdivision; the
LGU may, pursuant to an ordinance, permanently or
problem posed by the 'dead end' of the street; the
temporarily close or open any local road, alley, park, or
width of the street; the cost of rebuilding and
square falling within its jurisdiction: Provided, however,
maintaining the street as contrasted to its ultimate
That in case of permanent closure, such ordinance must
value to all of the property in the vicinity; the
be approved by at least two-thirds (2/3) of all the
inconvenience of those visiting the subdivision; and
members of the sanggunian, and when necessary, an
whether the closing of the street would cut off any
adequate substitute for the public facility that is subject
property owners from access to a street." (Favis v.
to closure is provided. (Sec 21(a) LGC)
City of Baguio, G.R. L-29910, April 25, 1969)
NOTE: No permanent closure of any local road, street, alley,
park, or square shall be effected unless there exists a LEGISLATIVE POWER
compelling reason or sufficient justification therefor such
as, but not limited to, change in land use, establishment of Local legislative bodies and their presiding officers
infrastructure facilities, projects, or such other justifiable Province Sangguniang Vice-governor
reasons as public welfare may require. (Art. 44(a), IRR, RA Panlalawigan
7160)
City Sangguniang City Vice-mayor
Panlungsod
Limitations of permanent and temporary closure
Municipality Sangguniang bayan Municipal
A. In case of permanent closure:
1. It must be approved by atleast 2/3 of all the Vice-mayor
members of the Sanggunian and when Barangay Sangguniang Punong
necessary provide for an adequate barangay Barangay
substitute for the public facility
2. Adequate provision for the public safety NOTE: The presiding officer shall vote only to break a tie. (Sec.
must be made 49(a) LGC)
3. The property may be used or conveyed for
any purpose for which other real property In the absence of the regular presiding officer or his inability
may be lawfully used or conveyed. However, no to preside at the sanggunian session, the members present
freedom park shall be closed and constituting a quorum shall elect from among themselves
a temporary presiding officer. (Gamboa v. Aguirre, G.R. No.
permanently without provision for its

13
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
134213, July 20, 1999) no business shall be transacted (Sec. 53(b)(c), LGC)

Q. May an incumbent Vice-Governor, while Fixing of Sessions

concurrently the acting governor, continue to preside IF REGULAR SESSIONS IF SPECIAL SESSIONS
over the sessions over the sessions of the Sangguniang By resolution on the 1st day When public interest so
Panlalawigan? If not, who may preside in the of the session immediately demands, special session
meantime? following the election of may be called for by the
its members chief executive or by a
A: A Vice-Governor who is concurrently an acting majority vote members of
governor is actually a quasi-governor. For purposes of Sanggunian
exercising his legislative prerogatives and powers, he
is deemed a non-member of the SP for the time
Requirements of a sanggunian session
being. Being the Acting Governor, the Vice-Governor
1. It shall be open to public unless it is a closed-
cannot continue to simultaneously exercise the duties
door session
of the latter office, since the nature of the duties of the
2. No two sessions, regular or special, may be held in
provincial Governor call for a full-time occupant to
a single day
discharge them. Such is not only consistent with but
3. Minutes of the session be recorded and each
also appears to be the clear rationale of the new Code
sanggunian shall keep a journal and record of its
wherein the policy of performing dual functions in both
proceedings which may be published upon
offices has already been abandoned. To repeat, the
resolution of the sanggunian concerned.
creation of a temporary vacancy in the office of the
4. In case of special sessions:
Governor creates a corresponding temporary vacancy in
a. Written notice to the members must be
the office of the Vice-Governor whenever the latter acts served personally at least 24 hours before
as Governor by virtue of such temporary vacancy. This the special session
event constitutes an “inability” on the part of the b. Unless otherwise concurred in by 2/3
regular presiding officer (Vice Governor) to preside votes of the sanggunian members
during the SP sessions, which thus calls for the present, there being no quorum, no
operation of the remedy set in Art. 49(b) of the LGC– other matters may be considered at a
concerning the election of a temporary presiding special session except those stated in the
officer. The continuity of the Acting Governor’s (Vice- notice. (Sec. 52, LGC)
Governor) powers as presiding officer of the SP is
suspended so long as he is in such capacity. Under Sec. Q: On its first regular session, may the sanggunian
49(b), “(i)n the event of the inability of the regular transact business other than the matter of adopting or
presiding officer to preside at the sanggunian session, updating its existing rules or procedure?
the members present and constituting a quorum shall
elect from among themselves a temporary presiding A: Yes. There is nothing in the language of the LGC
officer.” (Gamboa v. Aguirre, G.R. No. 13421 that restricts the matters to be taken up during the
first regular session merely to the adoption or
Quorum in the sanggunian updating of the house rules. (Malonzo v. Zamora, G.R.
A majority of all the members of the sanggunian who No. 137718, July 27, 1999)
have been elected and qualified. (Sec. 53 (a), LGC)
ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTIONS
Procedures to be taken by the presiding officer if
there is a question of quorum and if there is no quorum Ordinance vs. Resolution
Should there be a question of quorum raised during a ORDINANCE RESOLUTION
session, the PO shall immediately proceed to call the roll Law Merely a declaration of
of the members and thereafter announce the results. the sentiment or opinion
(Sec. 53, (a) LGC) of a lawmaking body on a
specific matter
If there is no quorum, the PO may: General and permanent Temporary in nature
1. Declare a recess until such time that quorum is character
constituted Third reading is necessary GR: Third reading is not
2. Compel attendance of the members who are absent for an ordinance necessary in resolution
without justifiable cause
3. Declare the session adjourned for lack of quorum and XPN: Unless decided

14
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
otherwise by a majority of Effect of the enforcement of a disapproved ordinance
all the Sanggunian or resolution
members (Arrastre, Inc. It shall be sufficient ground for the suspension or
Vs. Villaflor, GR. 128509, dismissal of the official or employee. (Sec. 58, LGC)
August 22, 2006)
Effectivity of ordinance or resolution
Elements of a valid ordinance or resolution GR: After 10 days from the date a copy is posted in a
1. Must not Contravene the constitution and any bulletin board and in at least 2 conspicuous spaces.
statute (Sec. 59 (a) LGC)
2. Must not be Unfair or oppressive
3. Must not be Partial or discriminatory XPN: Unless otherwise stated in the
4. Must not Prohibit, but may regulate trade ordinance or resolution. (Sec. 59 (a), LGC)
5. Must not be Unreasonable
6. Must be General in application and Consistent Ordinances requiring publication for its effectivity
with public policy. (Magtajas vs. Pryce Properties 1. Ordinances that carry with them penal sanctions.
Corporation, Inc, G.R. No. 111097, July 20, 1994) (Sec. 59(c) LGC)
2. Ordinances and resolutions passed by highly
Review of ordinances or resolutions urbanized and independent component cities. (Sec.
COMPONENY CITIES AND 59(d), LGC)
MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES BARANGAY ORDINANCES
Approval of ordinances
OR RESOLUTIONS
1. By affixing the signature of the chief executive on
Who reviews
each and every page thereof if he approves the
Sanggunang Panlalawigan Sangguniang Panglungsod same
or Sangguniang Bayan 2. By overriding the veto by 2/3 vote of all
When copies of ordinance or resolutions be forwarded members of the sanggunian if the local chief
Within 3 days after Within 10 days after its executive vetoed the same
approval enactment
Period to examine NOTE: Local Chief Executive may veto the
ordinance only once on the ground that the
Within 30 days after the Within 30 days after the
ordinance is ultra vires and prejudicial to public
receipt; may examine or receipt welfare. The veto must be communicated to the
may transmit to the sanggunian within:
provincial attorney or a. 15 days = province
provincial prosecutor. b. 10 days= city or municipality (Sec. 54, LGC)
If the latter, must submit
his comments or Items that the local chief executive can veto
recommendations within 1. Item/s of an appropriation ordinance.
10 days from receipt of the 2. Ordinance/resolution adopting local development
document plan and public investment program
When declared valid 3. Ordinance directing the payment of money or
If no action has been If no action has been creating liability (Sec.55, LGC)
taken within 30 days after taken within 30 days after NOTE: Ordinances enacted by the sangguniang barangay
submission submission shall, upon approval by a majority of all its members be
signed by the punong barangay. The latter has no veto
When invalid (grounds)
power.
If beyond the power If inconsistent with the law
conferred on the or city or municipal
sangguniang panlungsod ordinance LOCAL INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
or sangguniang Local initiative vs. Referendum
pangbayan Effect: Barangay INITIATIVE REFERENDUM
ordinance is suspended The legal process whereby The legal process whereby
until such time as the the registered voters of the registered voters of
revision called is LGU may directly propose, the LGU may approve,
effected(Sec. 56 and 57, enact or amend any amend or reject any
LGC) ordinance. (Sec. 120 LGC) ordinance enacted by the

15
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
sanggunian. (Sec. 126 RA a. 60 days = provinces
7160) b. 45 days = municipalities; and
c. 30 days = barangays
NOTE: Local initiative includes not only ordinances but also
resolutions as its appropriate subjects. (Garcia v. COMELEC, G.R. The COMELEC shall certify and proclaim the results of
111230, Sept. 30, 1994)
the said referendum.

Limitations on local initiative CORPORATE POWERS

1. It shall not be exercised for more than once a
year.
Corporate powers of LGUs
2. It shall extend only to subjects or matters which are
1. To have Continuous succession in its corporate
within the legal powers of the sanggunian to enact.
name
3. If at any time before the initiative is held, the
2. To Sue and be sued
sanggunian concerned adopts in toto the 3. To have and use a Corporate seal
proposition presented and the local chief executive ;
approves the same, the initiative shall be canceled. NOTE: Any new corporate seal or changes on such
However, those against such action may, if they so shall be registered with the DILG.
desire, apply for initiative in the manner herein
provided. (Sec. 124, LGC) 4. To a Acquire and convey real or personal property
5. To Enter into contracts
NOTE: Any proposition or ordinance approved through an
initiative and referendum shall not be repealed, modified or
NOTE: Unless otherwise provided in this Code, no
amended by the sanggunian within 6 months from the date
contract may be entered into by the local chief
of approval thereof, and may be amended, modified or
executive in behalf of the LGU without prior
repealed within 3 years thereafter by a vote of ¾ of all its authorization by the sanggunian concerned. A
members. In case of barangays, the period shall be 18 legible copy of such contract shall be posted at a
months after the approval thereof. (Sec. 125 LGC) conspicuous place in the provincial capitol or the city,
municipal or barangay hall.
Procedure in conducting local initiative
1. Number of voters who should file petition with
the Sanggunian concerned: 6. To Exercise such other powers as granted to
corporations (Sec. 22, LGC)
a. Province and cities - at least 1000
registered voters
b. Municipality - at least 100 registered TO SUE AND BE SUED
voters
c. Barangay - at least 50 registered voters Proper officer to represent the city in court actions
2. The Sanggunian concerned has 30 days to act on The city legal officer is supposed to represent the city
the petition. If the Sanggunian does not take any in all civil actions and special proceedings
favorable action, the proponents may invoke the wherein the city or any of its officials is a party, but
powers of initiative, giving notice to Sanggunian. where the position is as yet vacant, the City
3. Proponents will have the following number of Prosecutor remains the city’s legal adviser and officer for
days to collect required number of signatures civil cases. (Asean Pacific Planners vs. City of
a. Provinces and cities - 90 days Urdaneta, G.R. No. 162525, September 23, 2008)
b. Municipalities - 60 days
c. Barangay - 30 days
NOTE:
4. Signing of petition
5. Date of initiative set by COMELEC if required a. Only the Provincial Fiscal or the Municipal Attorney can
represent a province or municipality in lawsuits. This is
number of signatures has been obtained.
mandatory. Hence, a private attorney cannot represent a
province of municipality.
Effectivity of proposition b. Suit is commence by the local executive, upon authority of
If the proposition is approved by a majority of the votes the Sanggunian, except when the City Councilors, by
cast, it will take effect 15 days after certification by the themselves and as representatives of or on behalf of the City.
COMELEC. Bring the action to prevent unlawful disbursement of City
funds. (City Council of Cebu vs. Cuizon, 47 SCRA 325)

Control over the local referendum

Q: May LGU funds and properties be seized under
The local referendum shall be held under the control
writs of execution or garnishment to satisfy
and direction of the COMELEC within

16
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
judgments against them? disposed of or leased by the LGU to private persons.
(Macasiano vs. Diokno, G.R. No. 97764, August 10,
A: No. The universal rule that where the State gives 1992)
its consent to be sued by private parties either by
general or special law, it may limit claimants action Rules on LGU’s power to acquire and convey real or
only up to the completion of proceedings anterior to personal property
the stage of execution and that the power of the 1. In the absence of proof that the property was
Courts ends when the judgment is rendered. Since acquired through corporate or private funds, the
government funds and properties may not be seized presumption is that it came from the State upon
under writs of execution or garnishment to satisfy the creation of the municipality and, thus, is
such judgments is based on obvious considerations of governmental or public property. (Salas vs.
public policy. Disbursements of public funds must be Jarencio, G.R. No. L-29788, August 30,
covered by the corresponding appropriations as 1972;Rabuco vs. Villegas, G.R. No. L-24661,
required by law. The functions and public services February 28, 1974)
rendered by the State cannot be allowed to be 2. Town plazas are properties of public dominion;
paralyzed or disrupted by the diversion of public funds they may be occupied temporarily, but only for
from their legitimate and specific objects. (Traders the duration of an emergency. (Espiritu vs.
Royal Bank v. IAC, G.R. No. 68514, December. 17, Municipal Council of Pozorrubio, Pangasinan, G.R.
1990) No. L-11014, January 21, 1958)
3. Public plazas are beyond the commerce of man,
NOTE: The rule on the immunity of public funds from and cannot be the subject of lease or other
seizure or garnishment does not apply where the funds contractual undertaking. And, even assuming the
sought to be levied under execution are already allocated existence of a valid lease of the public plaza or
by law specifically for the satisfaction of the money part thereof, the municipal resolution effectively
judgment against the government. In such a case, the terminated the agreement, for it is settled that
monetary judgment may be legally enforced by judicial
the police power cannot be surrendered or
processes. (City of Caloocan v. Allarde, G.R. No. 107271,
Sept. 10, 2003)
bargained away through the medium of a
contract. (Villanueva vs. Castaneda, G.R. No. L-
61311, September 21, 1987)
TO ACQUIRE AND SELL PROPERTY
4. Public streets or thoroughfares are property for
public use, outside the commerce of man, and
Documents to support the contract of sale entered
may not be the subject of lease or other
into by the LGU
contracts. (Dacanay vs. Asistio, 208 SCRA 404)
1. Resolution of the sanggunian authorizing the local
chief executive to enter into a contract of sale.
TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTS
The resolution shall specify the terms and
conditions to be embodied in the contract.
Ordinance appropriating the amount specified in Elements of a valid municipal contract
the contract. 1. The LGU has the express, implied or inherent
2. Certification of the local treasurer as to power to enter into particular contract
2. The contract is entered into by the proper
availability of funds together with a statement
department board, committee, officer or agent.
that such fund shall not be disbursed or spent for
any purpose other than to pay for the purchase of NOTE: No contract may be entered into by the local
the property involved. (Jesus is Lord Christian chief executive on behalf of the local government
School Foundation, Inc. vs. Mun. of Pasig, G.R. without prior authorization by the sanggunian
No. 152230, August 9, 2005) concerned, unless otherwise provided. (Sec 22(c) LGC).

Properties that can be alienated by LGUs 3. The contract must comply with certain
Only properties owned in its private or proprietary substantive requirements:
capacity. (Province of Zamboanga del Norte v. City of
Zamboanga, G.R. No. L-24440, March 28, 1968) a. Actual appropriation; and
b. certificate of availability of funds
Art. 424 of the Civil Code lays down the basic
principle that properties of public dominion devoted to 4. The contract must comply with the formal
public use and made available to the public in requirements of written contracts. (e.g., Statue of
general are outside the commerce of man and cannot be Frauds)

17
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Halang, and Uno, for a new city hall site and to
NOTE: This includes the power to acquire and convey purchase several lots and to execute, sign and deliver
properties by the LGU through written contracts. the required documents. Mayor Tiama then entered
into MOA, Deed of Sale, Deed of Mortgage, and Deed
Conditions under which a local executive may enter of Assignment.
into a contract in behalf of his government unit
1. The contract must be within the power of the Thereafter, Ong, a member of the City Council,
municipality questioned the lack of ratification by the City Council
2. The contract must be entered into by an of the contracts, among others. Should all the
authorized officer (e.g. mayor with proper documents pertaining to the purchase of the lots bear
resolution by the Sangguniang Bayan, Sec.142 the ratification by the City Council of Calamba?
LGC)
3. There must be appropriation and certificate of A: No. Sec. 22(c), LGC, provides: (c) Unless otherwise
availability of funds provided in this Code, no contract may be entered into
4. The contract must conform with the formal by the local chief executive in behalf of the LGU without
requisites of a written contract as prescribed by prior authorization by the sanggunian concerned.
law; and Clearly, when the local chief executive enters into
5. In some cases the contract must be approved by the contracts, the law speaks of prior authorization or
President and/or provincial governor (Sec. 2068 authority from the Sangguniang Panlungsod and not
and Sec. 2196, Revised Adm. Code) ratification. It cannot be denied that the City Council
issued Res. 280 authorizing Mayor Tiama to purchase
Authority to negotiate and secure grants the subject lots.
The local chief executive may, upon authority of
the sanggunian, negotiate and secure financial grants NOTE: As aptly pointed out by the Ombudsman, ratification by
or donations in kind, in support of the basic services the City Council is not a condition sine qua non for Mayor
and facilities enumerated under Sec. 17, LGC Lajara to enter into contracts. With the resolution issued by
from local and foreign assistance agencies without the Sangguniang Panlungsod, it cannot be said that there was
necessity of securing clearance or approval of any evident bad faith in purchasing the subject lots. The lack of
department, agency, or office of the national ratification alone does not characterize the purchase of the
government or from any higher LGU; Provided that properties as one that gave unwarranted benefits to Pamana
projects financed by such grants or Prudential Bank or one that caused undue injury to
Calamba City. (Vergara vs. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 174567,
or assistance with national security implications shall
be approved by the national agency concerned. March 12, 2009)
(Sec.23, LGC)
Ultra vires contracts
Requirement of public bidding These are contracts entered into without the first and
In the award of government contracts, the law requires third requisites. Such are null and void and cannot
competitive public bidding. It is aimed to protect the be ratified or validated. Ratification of defective
public interest by giving the public the best possible municipal contracts is possible only when there is
advantages thru open competition. It is a mechanism non-compliance with the second and/or fourth
that enables the government agency to avoid or requirements above. Ratification may either be
preclude anomalies in the execution of public expressed or implied.
contracts. (Garcia v. Burgos, G.R. No. 124130, June 29,
1998) NOTE: An act which is outside of the municipality’s jurisdiction
is considered as a void ultra vires act, while an act attended
only by an irregularity but remains within the municipality’s
Failure of bidding power is considered as an ultra vires act subject to ratification
When any of the following occurs: and/or validation. To the former belongs municipal contracts
1. There is only one offeror which (a) are entered into beyond the express, implied or
2. When all the offers are non-complying or inherent powers of the LGU; and (b) do not comply with the
unacceptable. (Bagatsing vs. Committee on substantive requirements of law e.g., when expenditure of
Privatization, G.R. No. 112399, July 14, 1995) public funds is to be made, there must be an actual
appropriation and certificate of availability of funds; while to
the latter belongs those which (a) are entered into by the
Q: The City Council of Calamba issued several
improper department, board, officer of agent; and (b) do not
resolutions authorizing Mayor Tiama to negotiate with
comply with the formal requirements of a written contract
landowners within the vicinity of Barangays Real, e.g., the Statute of Frauds. (Land Bank of the Philippines vs.

18
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Eduardo Cacayuran, G.R. No. 191667, April 17, 2013)
3. Liability for tort
LIABILITY OF LGUs
NOTE: They may be held liable for torts arising from the
Scope of municipal liability performance of their private and proprietary functions
under the principle of respondeat superior. They are
Municipal liabilities arise from various sources in the
also liable for back salaries for employees illegally
conduct of municipal affairs, both governmental and dismissed/separated or for its refusal to reinstate
proprietary. employees.

Rule on the liabilities of LGUs and their officials Doctrine of Implied Municipal Liability
LGUs and their officials are not exempt from A municipality may become obligated upon an implied
liability arising from death or injury to persons or contract to pay the reasonable value of the benefits
damage to property. (Sec. 24, LGC) accepted or appropriated by it as to which it has the
general power to contract. The doctrine of implied
Liabilities of LGUs municipal liability has been said to apply to all cases
1. LGUs shall be liable for damages for the death of, where money or other property of a party is received
or injuries suffered by, any person by reason of under such circumstances that the general law,
the defective condition of roads, streets, bridges, independent of express contract implies an obligation
public buildings, and other public works under upon the municipality to do justice with respect to
their control or supervision. (Art. 2189, NCC) the same. (Province of Cebu v. IAC, G.R. 72841,
January 29, 1987)
NOTE: LGU is liable even if the road does not belong to it
as long as it exercises control or supervision over the said NOTE: Estoppel cannot be applied against a municipal
roads. corporation in order to validate a contract which the
municipal corporation has no power to make or which it is
2. The State is responsible in like manner when it authorized to make only under prescribed conditions,
acts through a special agent; but not when the within prescribed limitations, or in a prescribed mode or
damage has been caused by the official to whom manner, although the corporation has accepted the
the task done properly pertains. In which case, benefits thereof and the other party has fully performed his
Art. 2176 shall be applicable. (Art. 2180 (6), NCC) part of the agreement, or has expended large sums in
3. When a member of a city or municipal police preparation for performance. (Favis vs. Municipality of
force refuses or fails to render aid or protection to Sabangan, G.R. L-26522, February 27, 1969)
any person in case of danger to life or
property, such peace officer shall be primarily If a suit is filed against a local official which could result in
liable for damages and the city or municipality personal liability, the latter may engage the services of
shall be subsidiarily responsible therefor. (Art. 34, private counsel.
NCC)
Tort liability of LGUs
Bases for municipal liabilities 1. LGU-engaged (governmental function) - not
liable
1. Liability arising from violation of law
2. LGU-engaged (proprietary function) - liable
NOTE: Liability arising from violation of law such as
closing municipal streets without indemnifying Q: A collision between a passenger jeepney, sand
persons prejudiced thereby, non-payment of wages to its and gravel truck, and a dump truck driven by
employees due to lack of funds or other causes or its Monte and owned by the Municipality of San
refusal to abide a temporary restraining order may result Fernando occurred which resulted to the death of
in contempt charge and fine.
Jessica, a passenger of the jeepney. The heirs of
Jessica instituted an action for damages against
2. Liability for contracts
the Municipality. Is the municipality liable for the
tort committed by its employee?
NOTE:
a. LGU is liable provided that the contract is intra
vires. If it is ultra vires, they are not liable A: No. The driver of the dump truck was performing
duties or tasks pertaining to his office – he was on his
b. A private individual who deals with a municipal way to get a load of sand and gravel for the repair of
corporation is imputed CONSTRUCTIVE knowledge San Fernando's municipal streets. The municipality
of the extent of the power or authority of the cannot be held liable for the tort committed by its
municipal corporation to enter into contracts.

19
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
regular employee, who was then engaged in the 118(a), LGC)
discharge of governmental functions. The death of the 2. Boundary disputes involving two or more
passenger –– tragic and deplorable though it may be –– municipalities within the same province shall be
imposed on the municipality no duty to pay monetary settled by the sangguniang panlalawigan
compensation. (Municipality of San Fernando vs. Hon. concerned. (Sec. 118(b), LGC)
Firme, G.R. No. L-52179, April 8, 1991) 3. Boundary disputes involving municipalities or
component cities of different provinces shall be
jointly referred for settlement to the
Q: The Municipality of Malasiqui authorized the
sanggunians of the provinces concerned. (Sec.
celebration of town fiesta by way of a resolution and
118(c), LGC)
appropriated an amount for the construction of 2 4. Boundary disputes involving a component city or
stages. One of the members of the group to perform a municipality on the one hand and a highly
play during the fiesta was Fontanilla. Before the urbanized city on the other shall be jointly
dramatic part of the play was reached, the stage referred for settlement to the respective
collapsed and Fontanilla was pinned underneath sanggunians of the parties. (Sec. 118(d), LGC)
resulting to his death. The heirs of Fontanilla filed a 5. Boundary disputes involving two or more highly
complaint against the Municipality. Is the municipality urbanized cities shall be jointly referred for
liable? settlement to the respective sanggunians of the
parties. (Sec. 118(d), LGC)
A: Yes. The town fiesta was an exercise of a private or
proprietary function of the municipality. Holding a fiesta Importance of drawing with precise strokes the
even if the purpose is to commemorate a religious or territorial boundaries of LGUs
historical event of the town is in essence an act for the The boundaries must be clear for they define the
special benefit of the community and not for the limits of the territorial jurisdiction of LGU. It can
general welfare of the public performed in pursuance of legitimately exercise powers of government only within
a policy of the state. No governmental or public policy the limits of its territorial jurisdiction. Beyond these
of the state is involved in the celebration of a town limits, its acts are ultra vires. Needless to state, any
fiesta. (Municipality of Malasiqui vs. Heirs of Fontanilla, uncertainty in the boundaries of LGUs will sow costly
G.R. No. L-29993, October 23, 1978) conflicts in the exercise of governmental powers
which ultimately will prejudice the people’s welfare.
NOTE: There can be no hard and fast rule for purposes of This is the evil sought to be avoided by the LGC in
determining the true nature of an undertaking or function of a requiring that the land area of a LGU must be spelled
municipality; the surrounding circumstances of a particular out in metes and bounds, with technical descriptions.
case are to be considered and will be decisive. The basic (Mariano v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 118577, March 7, 1995)
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. (Ibid.) SUCCESSION OF ELECTIVE OFFICIALS

SETTLEMENT OF BOUNDARY DISPUTES Classes of vacancies in the elective post

PERMANENT VACANCY TEMPORARY VACANCY
Settlement of boundary disputes Arises when an elected Arises when an elected
Boundary disputes between local governments units local official: official is temporarily
should, as much as possible, be settled amicably. 1. Fills a higher vacant incapacitated to perform
After efforts to settle fail, the dispute may be brought office his duties due to legal or
to the appropriate RTC in the said province. Since the 2. Refuses to assume physical reason such as:
LGC is silent as to what body has exclusive jurisdiction office 1. Physical sickness
over the settlement of boundary disputes between a 3. Fails to qualify 2. Leave of absence
municipality and an independent component city of 4. Dies 3. Travel abroad or
the same province, the RTC has general jurisdiction 5. Removed from office 6. 4. Suspension from office
to adjudicate the said controversy. Voluntarily resigns (Sec. 46, LGC)
7. Permanently
Body or bodies vested by law with the authority to incapacitated to
settle boundary disputes discharge the
1. Boundary disputes involving two or more functions of his office (Sec.
barangays in the same city or municipality shall 44, LGC)
be referred for settlement to the sangguniang
panlungsod or sangguniang bayan concerned. (Sec. Filling of vacancy

20
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
1. Automatic succession no means refers to the vacancy in the No.8 position which
2. By appointment (Sec. 45, LGC) occurred with the elevation of 8th placer to the seventh
position in the Sanggunian. Such construction will result in
absurdity. (Navarro v. CA, G.R. No. 141307, March 28, 2001)
Rules of succession in case of permanent vacancies
A. In case of permanent vacancy in: In case of vacancy in the representation of the youth and
1. Office of the Governor: Vice- Governor the barangay in the Sanggunian, it shall be filled
2. Office of the Mayor: Vice-Mayor automatically by the official next in rank of the organization
3. Office of the Vice Governor or Vice-Mayor: concerned.
highest ranking Sanggunian member or in case
of his permanent inability, the second highest Rules on temporary vacancies
ranking Sanggunian member - successor
1. In case of temporary vacancy of the post of the
should have come from the same political
local executive (leave of absence, travel abroad,
party.
suspension): Vice- Governor, Vice Mayor, highest
4. Office of the Punong Barangay: the highest
ranking sangguniang barangay shall automatically
ranking sangguniang barangay member -
exercise the powers and perform the functions
successor may or may not have come from
of the local chief executive concerned.
the same political party.
NOTE:
NOTE: For purposes of succession, ranking
GR: The acting Governor or Mayor cannot exercise
in the Sanggunian shall be determined on the
the power to appoint, suspend or dismiss employees
basis of the proportion of the votes obtained
by each winning candidate to the total number of
registered voters in each district in the immediately XPN: If the period of temporary incapacity
preceding local election. (Sec. 44 (d)(3) LGC) exceeds 30 working days.

The general rule is that the successor (by 2. If travelling within the country, outside his
appointment) should come from the same jurisdiction for a period not exceeding 3 days: he
political party as the sanggunan member whose may designate in writing the officer-in-charge.
position has become vacant. The exception would The OIC cannot exercise the power to appoint,
be in the case of vancancy in the Sangguniang suspend or dismiss employee.
barangay. The reason for the rule is to maintain 3. If without said authorization, the Vice-Governor,
the party representation as willed by the people Vice-Mayor or the highest ranking sangguniang
in the election. barangay member shall assume the powers on
the 4th day of absence. (Sec. 46, LGC)
B. In case automatic succession is not applicable and
there is vacancy in the membership of the Termination of temporary incapacity
sanggunian it shall be filled up by appointment in the 1. If the temporary incapacity was due to (a) Leave of
following manner: absence (b) Travel abroad, and (c) Suspension, it
1. The President through the Executive shall terminate upon submission to the
Secretary shall appoint the political nominee of
appropriate sanggunian of a written declaration by
the local executive for the sangguniang
the local chief executive concerned that he has
panlalawigan and panlungsod of highly
urbanized cities and independent component reported back to office
cities 2. If the temporary incapacity was due to legal
2. The Governor, shall appoint the political reasons, the local chief executive should also
nominees for the sangguniang panlungsod of submit necessary documents showing that the
component cities and the sangguniang legal cause no longer exist. (Sec. 46[b], LGC)
bayan concerned
3. The city or municipal mayor shall appoint the DISCIPLINE OF LOCAL OFFICIALS
recommendee of the sangguniang barangay
concerned. Grounds for disciplinary actions
An elective local official may be disciplined,
NOTE: The “last vacancy” in the Sanggunian refers to that suspended or removed from office on any of the
created by the elevation of the member formerly occupying
following grounds:
the next higher in rank which in turn also had become
vacant by any of the causes already enumerated. The term 1. Disloyalty to the Republic of the Philippines
“last vacancy” is thus used in Sec. 45(b) to differentiate
it from the other vacancy previously created. The term by NOTE: An administrative, not criminal, case for

21
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
disloyalty to the Republic only requires substantial 3. Given the gravity of the offense, there is great
evidence. (Aguinaldo v. Santos, G.R. No. 94115, August probability that the continuance in office of the
21, 1992) respondent could influence the witnesses or pose
a threat to the safety and integrity of the records
2. Culpable violation of the Constitution and other evidence. (Sec. 63[b], LGC)
3. Dishonesty, oppression, misconduct in office, gross
negligence, dereliction of duty Persons who can impose preventive suspension
AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE RESPONDENT LOCAL
NOTE: Acts of lasciviousness cannot be considered SUSPENSION BELONGS OFFICIAL
misconduct in office, and may not be the basis of an TO THE
order of suspension. To constitute a ground for
disciplinary action, the mayor charged with the offense President Elective official of a
must be convicted in the criminal action. province, highly urbanized
or independent
Indeed, there is merit in petitioner's contention that the component city
same ruling applies to acts of lasciviousness which falls
under the same classification as crimes against chastity. Governor Elective official of a
In the instant case, not only is a final judgment lacking, component city or
but the criminal cases filed against the petitioner were municipality
all dismissed by the trial court, for insufficiency of
evidence, on the basis of its findings that the attendant Mayor Elective official of a
circumstances logically point to the existence of consent barangay. (Sec 63[a], LGC)
on the part of the offended parties. (Palma v. Fortich,
G.R. No. L-59679, January 29, 1987) Rules on preventive suspension
1. A single preventive suspension shall not extend
4. Commission of any offense involving moral beyond 60 days.
turpitude or an offense punishable by at least 2. In the event that there are several administrative
prision mayor cases filed, the elective official cannot be
5. Abuse of authority preventively suspended for more than 90 days
6. GR: Unauthorized absence for 15 consecutive within a single year on the same ground or
working days grounds existing and known at the time of his
first suspension. (Sec. 63[b], LGC)
XPNs: In the case of members of the
Sangguniang:
Preventive suspension under RA 6770 vs. Preventive
a. Panlalawigan
b. Panlunsod suspension under RA 7160 (LGC)
c. Bayan PREVENTIVE PREVENTIVE
d. Barangay SUSPENSION UNDER RA SUSPENSION UNDER LGC
7. Application for or acquisition of foreign 6770
citizenship or residence or the status of an Requirements
immigrant of another country; 1. The evidence of guilt 1. There is
8. Such other grounds as may be provided by the is strong; and reasonable ground
Code and other laws. (Sec. 60, LGC) 2. That any of the to believe that the
following respondent has
NOTE: An elective local official may be removed from office on circumstances are committed the act
any of the grounds enumerated above only by an order from present: or acts complained
the proper court. The Office of the President is without any a. The charge of;
power to remove elected officials since such power is against the 2. The evidence of
exclusively vested in the proper courts as expressly provided officer of culpability is strong;
for in the last paragraph of Sec. 60, of LGC. (Salalima v. employee 3. The gravity of the
Guingona, G.R. No. 117589-92, May 22, 1996) should involve offense so warrants
dishonesty, 4. The continuance in
JURISDICTION oppression or office of the
grave respondent could
misconduct or influence the
PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION neglect in the witnesses or pose a
performance of threat to the safety
Preventive suspension should be imposed when: duty; and integrity of the
1. After the issues are joined; b. The charges records and other
2. When the evidence of guilt is strong; should warrant evidence

22
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
removal from done only for cause as provided by law. (Dario v.
office; or Mison, G.R. No. 81954, August 8, 1989)
c. The
respondent’s NOTE: The unjust removal or non-compliance with the
continued stay in prescribed procedure constitutes reversible error and this
office would entitles the officer or employee to reinstatement with back
prejudice the salaries and without loss of seniority rights.
case filed against
him. Q: Does the Sangguniang Panlungsod and
Maximum period Sangguniang Bayan have the power to remove
6 months 60 days elective officials?
(Hagad v.Gozo-Dadole, G.R. No. 108072 December 12,
1995) A: No. The pertinent legal provisions and cases
decided by this Court firmly establish that the
Power of the Ombudsman under RA 6770 to Sanggunaing Bayan is not empowered to do so.
conduct administrative investigation Sec. 60 of the LGC conferred
upon the courts the power to remove elective local
The Ombudsman and the Office of the President officials from office. (The Sangguniang Barangay of
have concurrent jurisdiction to conduct Don Mariano Marcos vs. Martinez, G.R. No. 170626,
administrative investigations over elective officials. March 3, 2008)
(Hagad v. Gozo-Dadole, G.R. No. 108072, December
12, 1995) Resignation of public elective officials
Resignation of elective officials shall be deemed
Signing of preventive suspension order effective only upon acceptance by the following
The Ombudsman, as well as his Deputy, may sign authorities:
an order preventively suspending officials. Also, the 1. The President, in case of Governors, Vice-
length of the period of suspension within the limits Governors, and Mayors and Vice-Mayors of highly
provided by law and the evaluation of the strength of urbanized cities and independent and
the evidence both lie in the discretion of the component cities
Ombudsman. It is immaterial that no evidence has 2. The Governor, in the case of municipal Mayors
been adduced to prove that the official may influence and Vice-Mayors, city Mayors and Vice-Mayors of
possible witnesses or may tamper with the public component cities
records. It is sufficient that there exists such a 3. The Sanggunian concerned, in case of
possibility. (Castillo-Co v. Barbers, G.R. No. 129952 sangguninan members
June 16, 1998) 4. The City or Municipal Mayor, in case of barangay
officials. (Sec. 82, LGC)
Effect of an appeal on the preventive suspension
NOTE: The resignation shall be deemed accepted if not
ordered by the Ombudsman
acted upon by the authority concerned within 15 working
An appeal shall not stop the decision from being days from receipt thereof. Irrevocable resignations by
executory. In case the penalty is suspension or sanggunian members shall be deemed accepted upon
removal and the respondent wins such appeal, he representation before an open session of the sanggunian
shall be considered as having been under preventive concerned and duly entered in its records, except where
suspension and shall be paid the salary and such the sanggunian members are subject to recall elections or
other emoluments that he did not receive by reason to cases where existing laws prescribe the manner of acting
of the suspension or removal. A decision of the Office upon such resignations.
of the Ombudsman in administrative cases shall be
executed as a matter of course. (Office of the ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL
Ombudsman vs. Samaniego, G.R. No. 175573, Oct. 5,
2010) Rules on administrative appeals
Decisions in administrative cases may, within 30 days
REMOVAL from receipt thereof, be appealed to the following:
1. The Sangguniang panlalawigan, in case of
Removal decisions of the sangguniang panlungsod of
Removal imports the forcible separation of the component cities and the sangguniang bayan; and
incumbent before the expiration of his term and can be 2. The Office of the President, in the case of

23
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
decisions of the sangguniang panlalawigan and condonation of the officer’s previous misconduct to
the sangguniang panlungsod of highly urbanized the extent of cutting off the right to remove him
cities and independent component cities. (Sec. therefore, has no application to pending criminal
67, LGC) cases against petitioner for the acts he may have
committed during a failed coup. (Aguinaldo v. Santos,
NOTE: Decisions of the President shall be final and G.R. No. 94115, August 21, 1992)
executory.
Q. Salumbides and Glenda were appointed as
Persons authorized to file administrative complaint Municipal Legal Officer/Administrator and Municipal
1. Any private individual or any government officer or Budget Officer, respectively, of Tagkawayan, Quezon.
employee by filing a verified complaint; To solve the classroom shortage, Mayor Salumbides III
2. Office of the President or any government (the mayor), consulted Salumbides who suggested that
agency duly authorized by law to ensure that the construction of projects be charged to the account
LGUs act within their prescribed powers and of the Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses/
functions. (AO 23, Rule 3 Sec. 1, December 17, 1992) Repair and Maintenance of Facilities (MOOE/RMF) and
implemented “by administration,”.
A verified complaint shall be filed with the
following: Glenda advised Salumbides that there were no more
1. Office of the President - Against elective official of available funds that could be taken from the
provinces, highly urbanized cities, independent MOOE/RMF, but the savings of the municipal
component cities, and component cities. government were adequate to fund the projects.

NOTE: It may be noted that the Constitution places The construction of the projects commenced using the
local governments under the supervision of the
funds allocated for the following year without any
Executive. Likewise, the Constitution allows Congress to
include in the LGC provisions for removal of local approved appropriation and ahead of the public
officials, which suggests that Congress may exercise bidding. Salumbides was of the opinion that the
removal powers. So, the LGC has done and delegated its projects were regular and legal.
exercise to the President. Note also that legally,
supervision is not incompatible with disciplinary Dishonesty, Grave Misconduct, Gross Neglect of Duty,
action. (Ganzon vs. CA, 200 SCRA 271)
Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service,
and violation of the COA Rules and the LGC were
Under AO 23, the President has delegated the power to
charged against the petitioners.
investigate complaints to the Secretary of Interior and
Local Government. This is valid delegation because
what is delegated is only the power to investigate, not By Order, the Ombudsman dropped the mayor and
the power to discipline. Besides the power of the Coleta, both elective officials, the 2004 elections
Secretary of Interior and Local Government is based having mooted the case.
on the “alter-ego” principle. (Joson vs. Torres, 290 SCRA
279)
Petitioners Salumbides and Glenda assert that the
2. Sangguniang Panlalawigan - Elective officials of settled doctrine of condonation to cover coterminous
municipalities; appointive officials who were administratively charged
along with the reelected official/appointing authority
with infractions allegedly committed during their
NOTE: Decision may be appealed to the Office of the
preceding term. That the non-application of the
President.
condonation doctrine to appointive officials violates
the right to equal protection of the law. Is the
3. Sangguniang Panglunsod or Bayan - Elective
contention tenable?
barangay officials. (Sec. 61, LGC)

NOTE: Decision shall be final and executory. A. NO. In the recent case of Quinto v. Commission on
Elections, the Court applied the four-fold test in an
DOCTRINE OF CONDONATION equal protection challenge against the resign-to-run
provision, wherein it discussed the material and
Subsequent re-election as condonation substantive distinctions between elective and
The rule that public official cannot be removed for appointive officials that could well apply to the doctrine
administrative misconduct committed during a prior of condonation.
term, since his re-election to office operates as a

24
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
It is the will of the populace, not the whim of one performance of duty, or if there is reason to believe
person who happens to be the appointing authority, that the respondent is guilty of the charges which
that could extinguish an administrative liability. Since would warrant his removal from the service. (Sec. 85,
petitioners hold appointive positions, they cannot claim LGC)
the mandate of the electorate. The people cannot be
charged with the presumption of full knowledge of the Imposable penalties
life and character of each and every probable appointee Except as otherwise provided by law, the local chief
of the elective official ahead of the latter’s actual executive may impose the penalty of:
reelection. 1. Removal from service
2. Demotion in rank
3. Suspension for not more than one (1) year
Q. Romeo Jalosjos is a member of Congress who is without pay
now confined at the national penitentiary while his 4. Fine in an amount not exceeding six (6) months'
conviction for statutory rape on two counts and acts of salary
lasciviousness on six counts is pending appeal. Jalosjos 5. Reprimand and otherwise discipline subordinate
filed this motion asking that he be allowed to fully officials and employees under his jurisdiction
discharge the duties of a Congressman, including NOTE: If the penalty imposed is suspension without pay for
attendance at legislative sessions and committee not more than thirty (30) days, his decision shall be final. If the
penalty imposed is heavier than suspension of thirty (30)
meetings despite his having been convicted in the first
days, the decision shall be appealable to the Civil Service
instance of a non-bailable offense. Commission, which shall decide the appeal within thirty (30)
days from receipt thereof. (Sec. 87, LGC)
Accused-appellant’s relied on the ruling in Aguinaldo
v. Santos, which states, that – “The Court should never
RECALL
remove a public officer for acts done prior to his
present term of office. To do otherwise would be to
deprive the people of their right to elect their officers. Recall
When a people have elected a man to office, it must It is a mode of removal of a public officer by the
be assumed that they did this with the knowledge of people before the end of his term. The people’s
his life and character, and that they disregarded or prerogative to remove a public officer is an incident of
forgave his fault or misconduct, if he had been guilty their sovereign power, even in the absence of
of any. It is not for the Court, by reason of such fault or constitutional restraint; the power is implied in all
misconduct, to practically overrule the will of the governmental operations. (Garcia v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
people.” Decide 111511, October 5, 1993)

NOTE: All expenses incident to recall elections shall be borne

It can be readily seen in the above-quoted ruling that
by the COMELEC. For this purpose, there shall be included
the Aguinaldo case involves the administrative removal in the annual General Appropriations Act a contingency
of a public officer for acts done prior to his present term fund at the disposal of the COMELEC for the conduct of recall
of office. It does not apply to imprisonment arising from elections. (Sec. 75, LGC)
the enforcement of criminal law. Moreover, in the same
way that preventive suspension is not removal, Ground for recall
confinement pending appeal is not removal. He remains The only ground for recall of local government
a congressman unless expelled by Congress or, officials is loss of confidence. It is not subject to judicial
otherwise, disqualified. inquiry. The Court ruled that ‘loss of confidence’ as
a ground for recall is a political question. (Evardone v.
APPOINTIVE OFFICIALS COMELEC, G.R. No. 94010, December 2, 1991)

Preventive suspension of appointive local officials and Recall initiation

employees A recall may be initiated against any elective
The local chief executives may preventively provincial, city, municipal, or barangay official by a
suspend, for a period not exceeding sixty (60) days, petition of a registered voter in the LGU concerned
any subordinate official or employee under his and supported by the registered voters in the LGU
authority pending investigation if the charge against concerned during the election in which the local
such official or employee involves dishonesty, official sought to be recalled was elected subject to
oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the the following percentage requirements:

25
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
a. At least twenty-five percent (25%) in the
case LGUs with a voting population of not Recall process
more than twenty thousand (20,000); 1. Petition of a registered voter in the LGU
b. At least twenty percent (20%) in the case of concerned, supported by percentage of
LGUs with a voting population of at least registered voters during the election in which the
twenty thousand (20,000) but not more local official sought to be recalled was elected. (%
than seventy-five thousand (75,000):
decreases as population of people in area
Provided, That in no case shall the required
increases. Also, the supporting voters must all sign
petitioners be less than five thousand (5,000);
c. At least fifteen percent (15%) in the case of the petition)
LGUs with a voting population of at least 2. Within 15 days after filing, COMELEC must certify
seventy-five thousand (75,000) but not more the sufficiency of the required number of
than three hundred thousand (300,000): signatures. Failure to obtain required number
Provided, however, That in no case shall the automatically nullifies petition.
required number of petitioners be less than 3. Within 3 days of certification of sufficiency,
fifteen thousand COMELEC provides official with copy of petition
(15,000); and and causes its publication for three weeks (once
d. At least ten percent (10%) in the case of LGUs a week) in a national newspaper and a local
with a voting population of over three newspaper of general circulation. Petition must
hundred thousand (300,000): Provided, also be posted for 10 to 20 days at conspicuous
however, that in no case shall the required places. Protest should be filed at this point and
petitioners be less than forty-five thousand ruled with finality within 15 days after filing.
(45,000). (Sec. 70 of LGC, as amended by RA COMELEC verifies and authenticates the
9244) signature
4. COMELEC announces acceptance of candidates.
NOTE: By virtue of RA 9244, Secs. 70 and 71 of the LGC 5. COMELEC sets election within 30 days upon
were amended, and the Preparatory Recall Assembly has
completion of previous section in
been eliminated as a mode of instituting recall of elective
local government officials. barangay/city/municipality proceedings and 45
days in the case of provincial officials. Officials
All pending petitions for recall initiated through the sought to be recalled are automatic candidates.
Preparatory Recall Assembly shall be considered dismissed (Sec 70, LGC)
upon the effectivity of RA 9244 (Approved February. 19, 2004).
Ban on resignation of elective local official subject of
Limitations on recall
recall
1. Any elective local official may be subject of a
The elective local official sought to be recalled shall not
recall election only once during his term of office for
be allowed to resign while the recall process is in
loss of confidence; and
progress. (Sec. 73, LGC)
2. No recall shall take place within one year from
the date of the official’s assumption to office or Effectivity of recall
one year immediately preceding a regular
Only upon the election and proclamation of a
election. (Sec. 74, LGC)
successor in the person of the candidate receiving the
highest number of votes cast during the election on
NOTE: The one-year time bar will not apply where the local
recall. Should the official sought to be recalled
official sought to be recalled is a Mayor and the
receive the highest number of votes, confidence in
approaching election is a barangay election. (Angobung v.
him is thereby affirmed, and he shall continue in
COMELEC, G.R. No. 126576, March 5, 1997)
office. (Sec. 72, LGC)

Q: Sec. 74 of the LGC provides that “no recall shall Q. Will it be proper for the COMELEC to act on a
take place within one year immediately preceding a petition for recall signed by just one person?
regular local election.” What does the term “regular
local election,” as used in this section, mean?
A: No. A petition for recall signed by just one person is
in violation of the statutory 25% minimum requirement
A: It refers to one where the position of the official
as to the number of signatures supporting any
sought to be recalled is to be actually contested and
petition for recall. (Angobung v. COMELEC, G.R. No.
filled by the electorate. (Paras v. Comelec, G.R. No.
126576, March 5, 1997)
123169, November 4, 1996)

26
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
TERM LIMITS

Term of office of an elected local official

Three (3) years starting from noon of June 30
following the election or such date as may be
provided by law, except that of elective barangay
officials, for maximum of 3 consecutive terms in the
same position. (Sec. 43, LGC)

The term of office of Barangay and Sangguniang

Kabataan elective officials, by virtue of RA 9164, is three
(3) years.

NOTE: The objective of imposing the three-term limit rule was

to “avoid the evil of a single person accumulating excess power
over a particular territorial jurisdiction as a result of a
prolonged stay in the same office”.

For a three term rule to apply the local official must have
fully served the term and been elected through regular
election.

Term limit of Barangay officials

The term of office of barangay officials was fixed at
three years under RA 9164. (19 March 2002)
Further, Sec.43 (b) provides that "no local elective
official shall serve for more than three (3) consecutive
terms in the same position. The Court interpreted this
section referring to all local elective officials without
exclusions or exceptions. (COMELEC v. Cruz, G.R. No.
186616, November 20, 2009)

27