LEGAL RESEARCH

There is a hanging question however as to the legal ramification of the

repeal of a repealing law. If A law which repeals a prior law is in itself also
repealed by a subsequent law, what will happen? What will be the effect?
What will happen if a law expressly repeals a prior law? When a law which
impliedly repealed a prior law is itself repealed, what will happen to the prior
law?
In the case of an express repeal, the intent of the legislation is clear. It is
categorical that the prior law is abrogated. The repeal of the prior law is not
conditioned on any situation or in any thing. In case of an implied repeal,
however, the repeal of the prior law is premised upon the finding or upon a
condition of finding of irreconcilable inconsistency between the prior law and
the second law. In the event that the 2nd law is repealed such irreconcilable
inconsistency which is the sole basis for the repeal of the first law no longer
exists. So, as a general rule, when the repeal of the prior law is implied and
the repealing law is later on repealed the prior law is revived unless the 3 rd
law says otherwise. If the prior law is repealed expressly and the repealing
law is in itself repealed by a new law, the prior law is not revived unless the
3rd expressly provides otherwise. You may read the case of JG Summit
Holdings vs CA, GR124293, September 24, 2003. There is a discussion on
the effects of the repeal of the repealing law.
Now, you have your digest of the case assigned to you last time, Garcia vs
Drilon. Essentially, the case resolved the issue on WON RA 9262 is
unconstitutional. In 2004, the Congress promulgated RA 9262 or the AntiViolence against Women and children. It criminalizes the violence against
women and their children committed by men in intimate relationship with the
woman victim and her children.
In this case the wife filed a case against under 9262 against the husband.
The wife filed a case before the Regional Trial Court. So, apparently the
husband obtained adverse decision from the lower court. Hence, this petition
now before the Supreme Court. Before discussing the substantial aspect of
the case, the SC noted a procedural infirmity committed by the husband.
What was that? According to the SC the petitioner merely raised the
argument before the CA. It is a violation of the doctrine that any issue of
unconstitutionality must be raised the soonest possible time, at the earliest
possible time. Hence, the issue should have been raised before the RTC. But
according to the SC, we are the final arbiter of constitutional issues and this
case presents a new issue of quite importance.

In contesting the constitutionality of RA9262, the petitioner raised 2 main

arguments. Among others, 2 arguments, that the law violates the equal
protection clause of the constitution and the law violates the due process
clause of the constitution. According to the petitioner, why did the law violate
the equal protection clause of the constitution? Essentially the husband is
saying that RA 9262 violates the equal protection clause because RA9262
protects merely the welfare of women and their children. According to him,
husbands and men can also be subject to violence by the wives. Why cant
they be included in the subject to be protected by RA9262. According to the
SC, does the equal protection clause of the Constitution prohibit absolutely
any discrimination? According to the SC, what is guaranteed by the equal
protection clause of the Constitution is for people who are similarly situated
to be treated alike. It doesnt mean that there is some kind of discrimination
under that particular law, there will automatically be violation of the equal
protection clause. That is why in the discussion of the SC in the body of the
decision, the SC enumerated the three conditions which according to the
Court, the particular manifestations have been satisfied. That is why they
said, it does not violate the equal protection clause. Admittedly, there is a
classification between man and woman however it is not violative of the
clause because the first condition, such classification was based on
substantial distinctions, the second, such classification was germane to the
object of the law and the classification applies not only to present
circumstances but to future conditions as well. In discussing that the
classification provided in RA9262 based on substantial distinction, what are
the the 3 facts or circumstances considered by the SC? According to the SC,
there is a substantial distinction in the classification between a man and a
woman because first, there is an unequal power relation between men and
women. Second, there are provisional gender biases existing against women
and the 3rd was statistics which say that women are the usual and most likely
victims of violence. It cant be said that men and women, if you consider the
violence committed against them, are situated equally. Historically, power
relations between men and women place women in a disadvantageous
situation. Hence, this legislation reiterate their welfare and protection.
Now, second, he argues that RA9262 violates the due process clause of the
Constitution. What are his arguments that it violates the due process clause?
What are the basis of the husband in arguing that the law violates the due
process clause of the Constitution? So when you file a complaint under 9262,
it is of course premised that the lives and welfare of the mother and her
children is hard by violence. When you file a complaint under 9262, the wife
can apply for a temporary protection order ex parte. When you say ex parte,
the judge need not call a hearing before issuing a protection order and once
a protection order is issued, it is in essence telling the husband that you
cant go near the wife, you could not be allowed to live in the house where
the wife and her children are staying and you cannot contact or get in touch
with them, etc. According to the husband, upon the filing of the complaint of

the wife, unsubstantiated allegation the Court made order that I cannot enter
my house, I cannot see my children, I cannot contact them. Now what is the
ruling of the SC? According to the SC, there is no deprivation of your right to
defend yourself because under the law ,5 days from the issuance of the TPO,
you can file a comment or opposition. And it cannot be said that the
allegations of the wife may be unsubstantiated because first the allegations
are made under oath and the wife will be required to attach to her complaint,
affidavits of witnesses. It is not unsubstantiated at all. You can oppose the
extension. In fact, in this case, the petitioner filed an opposition and filed a
modification of the TPO, was given 5 days to show cause why the TPO should
not be released. He was given opportunity to answer allegation.
Now, we are through discussing case law as promulgated by the judiciary as
well as the statutory law as enacted by the legislative of the government.
Now let us discuss the issuances under the Executive.
Because the province of the Executive branch is to enforce the law enacted
the legislature it would necessarily follow that the issuances under the
Executive must be made pursuant to the enacted legislation. It must be
made within the bounds and the standards set forth in the law. Under the
Executive branch, there would be two general kinds of issuance. Those
issuances made by the President himself in his capacity as the head of the
Executive department and the issuances made by the head of the different
executive/administrative offices and division.
Rules and regulations issued by the administrative officer under the
Executive branch in accordance with or as authorized by law still have the
force and effect of law and partakes the nature of a statute Although it is
based on an enactment made by the legislature. There are 3 requisites in
order for such rule or regulation issued by the executive or administrative
officer to be valid. The first, that the rule should be germane to the objects
and purpose of the law. That the regulations be not in contradiction with but
the form of the statute or to the standards of the statute that the law
prescribes. And third, that these rules and regulations must be for the sole
purpose of carrying into the effct the general provisions of the law. So in
essence, the issuance of such rule and regulation, the law itself cannot be
extendedthe law itself cannot be restricted. In order to be valid, such rule
or regulation must only be for the sole pupose of implementing or enforcing
a particular law, the general provisions of a particular law. So again, these
are the 3 requisites, in order for administrative rule or regulation will be
valid. No. 1, the rules should be germane to objects and purpose of the law.
Meaning, it is in connect or aligned to the main object of the law. Second,
that the rule or regulation be not in contradiction with but will conform to the
standards that the law prescribes. Third, the rule or regulation has the sole
purpose of carrying into effect the general provisions of the law.

Now, what happens if there is a conflict between the rule and the regulation
and the organic law sought to be enforced by such rule and regulation?
Ofcourse, the organic law will prevail. The rule or regulation cannot be
deemed to amend, repeal, to restrict, to extend the application of a
particular law. The reason for that is that the main power to enact or legislate
law is within the province of the legislature. In the issuance of these
administrative rules and regulations, what is given to these heads of
administrative or executive offices is merely a delegated legislative power
which is ofcourse inferior to the plenary legislative power granted by the
Constitution to the legislative branch. So, as a rule, if there exist a conflict,
the organic law will prevail and such rule and regulation in contradiction to
the very essence of the law will be rendered invalid.
Other than the issuances made by the head of the executive offices or
division/department of the executive branch, the President himself is
empowered or has the authority to issue orders, proclamations, circulars.
This power to issue order, proclamations, circulars, regulations is pursuant to
the ordinance power of the President. The ordinance power is the authority
given to the Presiden to make issuances to enforce a particular law and aid
the other members of the executive branch to properly enforce these law
and perform their functions more effectively and efficiently. Meaning, the
issuances of the President must also be within the bounds of the law enacted
by the legislature.
In the case of David vs Arroyo, GR No. 171396, May 3, 2006. All these
Presidential issuances were defined. You read the full text. The first, the
Executive Orders are the acts of the President providing for rules of a
general or permanent character in the implementation or execution of
constitutional or statutory powers. In the case of Presiddent Duterte, his
Executive Order No. 1 was the reorganization of the Office of the President,
the re-engineering of the Office of the President. Adminitrative order,
these are the acts of the President to particular aspects of governmental
operation in pursuance of his duties as administrative head. The important
AO issued by Pres. Duterte was the AO mandating all members of the
executive to fully disclose their SALN, the FOI. SO, it regulates merely the
conduct of the offices under the Office of the President as well as the officers
therein. Proclamations, Presidential Proclamationsthese are the acts
of the Presidnet fixing a date or declaring a status or condition of public
interest upon the existence of which the operation of a specific law or
regulation is made to depend. The recent Presidential Proclamation made by
Duterte was the one declaring the state of national emergency and as we all
know, upon its declaration, it would empower specific branches or offices of
the government to exercise specific powers as laid down by the constitution.
Memorandum Order or Circulars, these are the acts of the President on
matters of administrative detail or of subordinate or temporary interest
which only concern a particular officer or office of the Government.
Memorandum orders and circulars usually would impose internal rules which

will govern the alterations within the specific offices under the Office of the
President. And lastly, General or Specific Order, these are the acts and
commands of the President in his capacity as Commander in Chief of the AFP.
This would concern members of the AFP.