CHAPTER II: POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES

THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT

1. EXECUTIVE BRANCH
2. JUDICIAL BRANCH
3. LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS
The doctrine prohibits the delegation of legislative power, the vesting of
judicial officers with non-judicial functions, as well as the investing of nonjudicial officers with judicial powers.
Application of the doctrine became relaxed allowing the delegation of greater
powers by the legislature and vesting larger amount of discretion in
administrative and executive agencies and officials. Reasons:
a. Growing complexity of modern life
b. Multiplication of the subjects of governmental regulations
c. Increased difficulty of administering the laws
d. Rigidity of the theory of separation of governmental powers
e. To promote public interest
CHECK AND BALANCE
Any of the three branches of the government cannot invade the domain of
another. However, no one branch of government can act without any
participation or check from the other branches, which the Constitution
recognizes and permits.
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES have powers or functions which are
administrative and sometimes ministerial in character as well as quasijudicial and quasi-legislative power as may be conferred by the Constitution
or by law.
- May only use powers which are expressly granted unto them by law
and those which are necessarily implied in the exercise thereof.
QUASI-LEGISLATIVE POWER enables them to promulgate implementing
rules and regulations
QUASI-JUDICIAL POWER enables them to interpret and apply such
regulations.

IN DETERMINING WHETHER AN ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY

HAS CERTAIN POWERS, THE INQUIRY SHOULD BE FROM THE
LAW ITSELF AND THE AUTHORITY GIVEN SHOULD BE
LIBERALLY CONSTRUED IN THE LIGHT OF THE PURPOSES
FOR WHICH IT WAS CREATED, AND THAT WHICH IS
NECESSARY TO A FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE

LEGISLATIVE INTENT SHOULD BE UPHELD AS BEING

GERMANE TO THE LAW.
LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION IS ADOPTED TO ENABLE
ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENCIES
TO
DISCHARGE
THEIR
ASSIGNED DUTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LEGISLATIVE
INTENT OR PURPOSE.

POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES

AS TO GRANT:
1. EXPRESS there is a law which grants the administrative agency
the power to act
2. IMPLIED administrative agencies may also exercise powers which
are necessarily implied from the wordings of the law
o Keyword: NECESSARY and INCIDENTAL to ensure that
the purpose for which it was created is achieve.

The grant of adjudicatory powers to administrative agencies should

also include the grant of authority to enforce or execute judgment as
it would be inutile if a decision was rendered and yet it cannot be
enforced.

AS TO
1. DISCRETIONARY the law imposes a duty upon the public officer
and gives him the right to decide how or when the duty shall be
performed. Requires exercise of judgment.
A discretion entrusted to a public officer may not as a rule be
delegated. The presumption is that he was chosen because
he was deemed fit and competent to exercise that judgment
and discretion and unless the power to substitute another in
his place has been given to him, he cannot delegate his
duties to another.
Discretion means sound discretion exercised not arbitrarily
or willfully, but with regard to what is right and equitable
under the circumstances and the law and directed by
officers reason and conscience to just result.
In the absence of arbitrariness or grave abuse of discretion,
the officer conferred with discretion to decide a question may
decide the question either way and still be right and his
decision is not subject to the contrary judgment or control of
others.
2. MINISTERIAL one which is clear and specific as it leaves no room
for the exercise of discretion in its performance.

The fact that the duties of an official are ministerial does not
necessarily follow that he may not, in the administration of his office,
determine questions of law. This determination of what the law is
involves the exercise of judgment.
It is important to determine whether such agency is exercising
ministerial or discretionary powers or duties as it would
determine what kind of remedy should be availed of by an
aggrieved party in case of non-performance of duty by the
public officer. If the duty is ministerial, MANDAMUS may lie to
compel performance; if the duty is discretionary, a petition for
certiorari may lie where there is grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack of jurisdiction on the part of the official or
administrative agency.

AS TO HOW STATUTE IS CLASSIFIED

1. DIRECTORY statute is permissive or discretionary in nature and
merely outlines the act to be done in such a way that no injury can
result from ignoring it or that its purpose can be accomplished in a
manner other than that prescribed and substantially the same result
obtained.
2. MANDATORY leaves the person concerned no other choice on the
matter but to obey. Commands either:
a. Positively something be done (Command)
b. Negatively something be not done (Prohibition)
When mandatory or directory no universal rule to determine what type is
adopted. What is important is the legislative intent behind the law.
Consider:
a. Entire law
b. Its object
c. Purpose
d. Legislative history
e. Consequences once interpreted/construed

f.

Interpretation with other related laws/statutes

Language of the statute may be mandatory in form but could be given a

different interpretation depending on the legislative intent/purpose and
how best it could be carried out.
TEST TO DETERMINE THE NATURE OF A STATUTE
- Ascertain the consequences that will follow in case what the statute
requires is not done or what it forbids is performed.
- If no substantial right depend on it and no injury can result from
ignoring it and the purpose of the legislature is achieved other than
that prescribed then the statute will be regarded as discretionary.
- A statute will not be construed as mandatory if it will lead to absurd,
impossible and mischievous consequences.
ERRORS IN THE EXERCISE OF POWERS
GOVERNMENT NOT BOUND BY ERRORS OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
The government can do no wrong. It authorizes only legal acts by its officers.
Unauthorized acts or wrong committed agents and officers are not acts of the
government. They cannot invoke the non-suability of the state as a defense
since they becomes liable in their personal capacity.
Actions against officials is not a suit against the state.
GOVERNMENT IS NOT ESTOPPED BY MISTAKES OF OFFICERS
The government can subsequently correct the mistake or erroneous
application of the law made by its public officer. No vested right is acquired in
such mistake.
PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY
Government officials are presumed to perform their functions with regularity
and strong evidence is necessary to rebut this presumption.
Mistakes committed by public officers are not actionable as long as its acts
are not motivated by malice or gross negligence amounting to bad faith.