Local Government Code

of 1991 (RA 7160)

Took effect on January 1, 1992
Publication in MALAYA newspaper completed on
October 18,1991
Definition of local government
● Local government is a political subdivision of a nation
or state which is constituted by law and has substantial
control of local affairs. (MMDA vs. Bel-Air Village Assn
Inc. 328 SCRA 836).

● Local Government Unit as defined in Sec. 15 of RA 7160

is a body politic and corporate endowed with powers as
a political subdivision of the National Government and
as a corporate entity representing the inhabitants of its
territory.
What are the LGUs?
● LGUs are composed of the PROVINCES, CITIES,
MUNICIPALITIES and BARANGAYS.
● They are also known as municipal corporations.

● As provided in the Constitution, Article X, Section 1,

LGUs are also the territorial and political
subdivisions of the state, in addition to two
autonomous regions.
Powers of LGUs
● LGUs may exercise four general kinds of powers,
namely:
● a.) those that are expressly granted to them
● b.) those that are implied from those that are granted
to them
● c.) those that are necessary, appropriate, or incidental
for their efficient and effective governance, and
● d.) those that are essential to the promotion of the
general welfare of their inhabitants.
 State Policy on Local Autonomy
Section 2. Declaration of Policy
● a.) The territorial and political subdivisions of the State
shall enjoy genuine and meaningful LOCAL
AUTONOMY to accelerate their fullest development as
self-reliant communities and make them more effective
partners in the attainment of national goals.
● The principle of local autonomy essentially means
decentralization. Before the Code, the SC explained the
meaning of decentralization in Limbona vs Mangedin
170 SCRA 786 (1989) as either:
● 1,) decentralization of administration or
● 2.) decentralization of power
 Ganzon vs CA 200 SCRA 271

1991
● “As the Constitution declares that local autonomy means a
more responsive and accountable local government
structure instituted thru a system of decentralization, then
Constitution does nothing more than to break up the
monopoly of the national over the affairs of local
governments and to liberate the local governments from the
imperialism of Manila. Autonomy is not meant to end the
relation of partnership and interdependence between the
central administration and LGUs, or otherwise to usher in
federalism. Local governments are subject to regulation,
however, limited, and for no other purpose than precisely,
albeit periodically, to ENHANCE SELF GOVERNMENT.
Terms relating to local autonomy
● Autonomy is of Greek origin, meaning TO LIVE
UNDER ONE’S OWN LAWS – hence self
government. Applied in the context of the Philippine
situation, it means the power of LGUs to enjoy
limited self-government as defined by law.
● The principle of local autonomy does not make local
governments sovereign within the state, it simply
means DECENTRALIZATION. (Basco et al. Vs
Pagcor 197 SCRA 52)
Autonomy = Decentralization
● Municipal governments are only agents of the national
government. Local councils exercise only delegated legislative
powers conferred on them by Congress as the national
lawmaking body. The delegate cannot be superior to the
principal or exercise powers higher than the latter.
● Congress retains control of LGUs although in significantly
reduced degree. The power of Congress to create includes the
power to destroy. The power to grant still includes the power
to recall or withhold.
● Congress is still the principal of LGUs, which cannot defy its
will or modify or violate it.
● In decentralization of administration, the national
government does not lose supervision and control over
their regional/local field offices. In decentralization of
power, the local government enjoys limited autonomy
from the national government. Thus, to a certain
degree, the LGU is ultimately “free to chart its own
destiny and shape its future with minimum intervention
from central authorities. The autonomous government
becomes accountable not to the central authorities but to
its constituency.
Decentralization
● Decentralization gives the LGUs more powers,
authority, responsibilities and resources by the national
government. In this sense, it is substantially similar to
“devolution”. In the Declaration of Policy,
decentralization is recognized as the means used by the
State to provide genuine and meaningful local
autonomy to LGUs.
● In essence, decentralization means devolution of
national administration – but not power - to the local
levels. (Ganzon vs. CA, 200 SCRA 271)
Devolution
● As defined in the Code, devolution is the act by
which the National Government confers power and
authority upon the various LGUs to perform specific
functions and responsibilities. (Sec. 17 (e), 2nd par).
● The process of decentralization shall proceed from
the National Government to the LGUs. This means
that insofar as the devolution of central government
powers and funds are concerned, they are transferred
directly to the LGUs without any intermediary.
Effect of devolution
● The Code provides “ There shall be an effective
allocation among the different LGUs of their respective
powers, functions, responsibilities and resources.” These
provisions guarantee that the devolution of powers does
not stop at the level of any one lgu but will actually seep
down to all levels of LGUs.
● A barangay can exercise its powers without any
permission from the municipality or city of which it is a
part. Also, the funds allocated to it go directly to the
barangay, not thru the mayor or treasurer.
Prov. Of Batangas vs Romulo 152774,
May 27, 2004
● Autonomy is either decentralization of administration or
decentralization of power.
● There is decentralization of administration when the central
government delegates administrative powers to political
subdivisions in order to broaden the base of government
power and in the process to make local governments more
responsive and accountable and ensure their fullest
development as self-reliant communities and make them
more effective partners in the pursuit of national
development and social progress. It relieves the central
government of the burden of managing local affairs and
enables it to concentrate on national concerns.
Decentralization of power
● Involves an abdication of political power in favor of
LGUs declared to be autonomous. The autonomous
government is free to chart its own destiny and shape
its future with minimum intervention from central
authorities.
● Decentralization of power accordingly amounts to
“self-immolation,” since the autonomous government
becomes accountable not to the central authorities but
to its constituency.
Local autonomy
● includes both administrative and fiscal autonomy. LGUs
in addition to having administrative autonomy in the
exercise of their functions, enjoy fiscal autonomy as well.
● Fiscal autonomy means that local governments have the
power to create their own sources of revenue in addition to
their equitable share in the national taxes released by the
national government, as well as the power to allocate their
resources in accordance with their own priorities. It
extends to the preparation of their budgets, and local
officials in turn have to work within the constraints thereof.
They are not formulated at the national level and imposed
on local governments, whether they are relevant to local
needs and resources or not.
Policy to ensure accountability
● b.) It is also the policy of the State to ensure the
accountability of LGUs thru the institution of
effective mechanisms of recall, initiative and
referendum.
● These are new powers available to the people and
may be exercised by the registered voters residing
within a territory of LGUs under the circumstances
mentioned in the various sections of the Code.
Policy of accountability
● This policy also emphasizes that local government
officials must be accountable for their actuations. If
they are abusive, they can be recalled even in the
midst of their terms (Art. X, Sec. 3, Constitution,
Chapter 5 of the Code).
Recall
● Recall is a mode of removal of a ;public officer by the
people before the end of his term of office. The
people’s prerogative to remove a public officer is an
incident of their sovereign power and in the absence
of constitutional restraint, the power is implied in all
governmental operations. Such power has been held
to be indispensable for the proper administration of
public affairs.
Initiative
● An electoral process whereby designated percentages
of the electorate may initiate legislative or
constitutional changes thru the filing of formal
petitions to be acted on by the legislature or the total
electorate.
As defined in the LGC, initiative is the legal process
whereby the registered voters of a LGU may directly
propose, enact or amend any ordinance.
Referendum
● Is the process of referring to the electorate for
approval a proposed new state constitution or
amendment or of a law passed by the legislature.
● As defined in the Code, referendum is the legal
process whereby the registered voters of the LGUs
may approve, amend or reject any ordinance enacted
by the sanggunian. (Section 126).
Policy of Consultation
● c.) It is likewise the policy of the State to require all national
agencies and offices to conduct periodic consultations with
appropriate LGUs, NGOs and POs, and other concerned
sectors of the community before any project or program is
implemented in their respective jurisdictions.
● This establishes the PRIOR CONSULTATION RULE,
requiring mandatory consultations not only with the LGUs,
but also NGOs and POs before any project/program is
implemented. It also requires not only the central
government agencies but even GOCCs.
● Relate with Sec. 26 and 27
Sec. 3 Operative Principles of
Decentralization
● This section lays down in detail and specific terms the
operative principles to effect decentralization and local
autonomy.
a.) There shall be an effective allocation among the
different LGUs of their respective powers, functions,
responsibilities, and resources.
● b.) There shall be established in every LGU an
accountable, efficient, and dynamic organizational
structure and operating mechanism that will meet the
priority needs and service requirements of its
communities;
Operative Principles of
decentralization
● c.) Subject to civil service law, rules and regulations,
local officials and employees paid wholly or mainly
from local funds shall be appointed or removed,
according to merit and fitness, by the appropriate
appointing authority;
● The local chief executive has the power to appoint all
officials and employees of the LGU:
● 1.) whose salaries and wages are wholly or mainly paid
out of the funds of his LGU and are not otherwise
provided for in the Code; and
● 2.) those he may be authorized by law to appoint.
Exceptions
● The power to appoint the municipal, city and provincial
treasurers. These officers are appointed by the Secretary
of Finance from a list of at least three ranking and
eligible recommendees of the governor or mayor as the
case may be.
● In the case of barangays, it is a two-step process. The
punong barangay must secure the approval of a
majority of all the members of the sangguniang
barangay prior to appointing or replacing the barangay
treasurer, the barangay secretary, and other appointive
barangay officials.
Appointment of LGU officials
● These appointment are subject to civil service law,
rules and regulations. As a general rule, the
appointments shall only be made according to merit
and fitness to be determined as far as practicable by
competitive examination.
● EXCEPTIONs: Policy-determining, primarily
confidential and highly technical positions
Policy determining position- where the public officer is vested
with the power of formulating policies for the government or
any its agencies, subdivisions, or instrumentalities

Primarily confidential – where its occupant enjoys more than the

ordinary confidence in his aptitude of the appointing power but
bears primarily such close intimacy which insures freedom of
intercourse without embarrassment or freedom from misgivings
of betrayal of personal trust on confidential matters of State.

Highly technical – where its occupant is required to possess skills

or training in the supreme or superior degree.
Extent of power of CSC as to
appointments
● The power is limited to approving or disapproving an
appointment.
● It does not have the authority to direct that an appointment
of a specific individual be made. Once the CSC attests to
the eligibility of the person chosen to fill a vacant position,
its role in the appointment process necessarily ends.
● It is not empowered to determine or change the kind or
nature of the appointment, for it is a discretionary power
which must be performed by the officer on whom it is
vested according to his best judgment, the only condition
being that the appointee should possess the minimum
qualifications required by law.
Operative Principles
● d.) the vesting of duty, responsibility and accountability
in LGUs shall be accompanied with provision for
reasonably adequate resources to discharge their
powers and effectively carry out their functions; hence,
they shall have the power to create and broaden their
own sources of revenue and the right to a JUST SHARE
in national taxes and an equitable share in the proceeds
of the utilization and development of the national
wealth within their respective areas;
Operative Principles
● e.) Provinces with respect to component cities and
municipalities, and cities and municipalities with
respect to component barangay’s shall ensure that the
acts of their component units are within the scope of
their prescribed powers and functions;
● Supervisory power of the province
● f.) LGUs may group themselves, consolidate or
coordinate their efforts, services, and resources for
purposes commonly beneficial to them;
Operative Principles
● g.) The capabilities of local government units,
especially the municipalities and barangays shall be
enhanced by providing them with the opportunities
to participate actively in the implementation of
national programs and projects;

● h.) There shall be a continuing mechanism to enhance

local autonomy not only by legislative enabling acts
but also be administrative and organizational reforms;
Operative Principles
● i.) LGUs shall share with the National government the
responsibility in the management and maintenance of
ecological balance within their territorial jurisdiction, subject
to the provisions of this Code and national policies;
● The power to maintain and protect the ecology is the
SHARED RESPONSIBILITY of the national government and
the LGU subject to the provisions of the Code and national
policies.
● Ex. Clean Air Act – lgu shall SHARE in the responsibility of
maintaining the air quality in their area – by implementing the
emission standards set by the DENR
● Several sections of the Code mandate the cities, provinces,
and municipalities to preserve and protect the environment.
● Section 447, a, l, vi – power of sanggunian bayan to enact
ordinances protecting the environment
● Section 455, 3, vii – power of city mayor to adopt
measure to safeguard and conserve land

● J. Effective mechanisms for ensuring the accountability of

local government units to their respective constituents shall
be strengthened in order to upgrade continually the quality
of local leadership.
Operative Principles
● k.) The realization of local autonomy shall be facilitated
thru improved coordination of national government
policies and programs and extension of adequate technical
and material assistance to less developed and deserving
LGUs;
● l.) the participation of the private sector in local governance,
particularly in the delivery of basic services, shall be
encouraged to ensure the viability of local autonomy as an
alternative strategy for sustainable development;
● Ex. Solid Waste Mgmt Act - contract with private sector
in collection of solid waste, recycling, reuse etc.
Operative Principles
● m.) The National Government shall ensure that
decentralization contributes to the continuing
improvement of the performance of LGUs and the
quality of community life.
Read: Alvarez vs Guingona 252 SCRA 695
An lgu now has the power to create its own sources
of revenue; to be allocated a just share in national taxes
(in the form of IRA); to be given its equitable share in
the proceeds of the utilization and development of the
national wealth, if any, within its territorial boundaries.
Sec. 4 – Scope of Application
● Provinces, Cities, Municipalities, Barangays and
the 2 Autonomous Regions (ARMM and CAR)
● The Code also contains provisions which apply to
national officials, like the PRESIDENT as provided
for in Section 25 (National Supervision over LGUs)
and the PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE under
Section 28 (Powers of Local Chief Executives over the
Units of the PNP) in their inter-governmental
relations with the LGUs.
Section 5 – Rules of Interpretation
● The section provides that ANY DOUBT or QUESTION
on a power of a local government shall be resolved in
favor of DEVOLUTION of powers and in favor of the
LOWER LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT.
● For tax measures enacted by LGs, any doubt shall be
construed strictly against the LG and liberally in favor of
the taxpayer.
● The section also strengthens the power of LGs to
enact ORDINANCES under the GENERAL WELFARE
provisions for liberal interpretation in favor of LGs.
 Sec. 6 – Authority to create LGUs
● The power to create LGUs is legislative. The President has
no power to create LGUs. The validity of incorporation and
corporate existence of a MC can only be attacked by the
State in a direct proceeding.
● Power to CREATE, DIVIDE, MERGE, ABOLISH or
SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER BOUNDARIES by -
● -Congress by LAW of Provinces, cities,
● municipalities or any political subdivision
● -Sangguniang Panlalawigan or Sangguniang
● Panglungsod by ORDINANCE of Barangays
● located within its territorial jurisdiction.
Sec. 7 – Creation and Conversion
● Requisites of VERIFIABLE INDICATORS of VIABILITY
and PROJECTED CAPACITY to provide services:
● 1. INCOME – attested to by the DOF on financial viability
● Province - 20M
● City - 100M
● Municipality - 2.5M
● There is no specific income requirement for barangay.
The financial viability of the created barangay becomes the
obligation of the LGU creating it.
● Average annual income includes any income accruing to
the general fund but is exclusive of special funds, special
accounts transfers and non-recurring income.
● 2. POPULATION – attested to by the National
● Statistics Office on population
● requirement
● Province - 250,000
● City - 150,000
● Municipality - 25,000
● Barangay - 2,000
● 5,000 (urban areas)
● 3. LAND AREA - attested to by the LMB, DENR ; must be
spelled out in METES and BOUNDS, with technical
descriptions; does not include the sea. It must be
CONTIGUOUS and sufficient to provide basic services and
facilities. The contiguity requirement is not applied when the
LGU created a) comprises 2 or more islands or b) is
separated by a chartered city/ies which do not contribute to
the income of the province.
● Ex. Misamis Oriental
● Province - 2,000 sq km
● City - 100 sq km
● Municipality - 50 sq km
● Barangay - No land area requirement
 Navarro et al. v Ex Sec Ermita

GR 180050, May 12, 2010
● RA 9355 creating the province of Dinagat Island was
declared unconstitutional for failure to comply with
either the population or land area requirement.
● Section 461 does not state or may it be implied, that
when a province is composed of 2 or more islands, or
when the territory of a province is separated by a
chartered city, such province need not comply with the
land area requirement of at least 2000 sq km. The fact
that a plebiscite has been held and a new province
proclaimed and its officials appointed, does not make
the creation legal.
 Navarro v Ermita

GR 180050, April 12, 2011
● A year later the SC reconsidered and declared the creation
of the province of Dinagat Islands CONSTITUTIONAL.
The SC said there appears neither rhyme nor reason why
the exemption of contiguity of land area should apply to
cities and municipalities, but not provinces. Considering
the configuration of the archipelago, there is a greater
likelihood that islands or group of islands would form part
of the land area of a newly created province than in most
cities or municipalities. Since the exemption was expressly
provided in the ensuing IRR, the inclusion was intended to
correct the congressional oversight in Sec 461 of the Code –
and to reflect the TRUE LEGISLATIVE INTENT.
● The only requirement that relate to land area insofar as
the creation of barangay is concerned are: a) as much as
possible the land must be contiguous and b) it shall be
properly identified by metes and bounds.
● In Mariano vs. Comelec 242 SCRA 211, the SC has
refrained from using the metes and bounds description
of land area of other LGUs with unsettled boundary
disputes. The case refers to the conversion of the
municipality of Makati to city of Makati. The land area
used is the present territory of the municipality.
Necessity of Fixing corporate limits
● A municipal corporation cannot without legal
authorization, exercise its powers beyond its own corporate
limits. It is necessary that it must have its boundaries fixed,
definite and certain, in order that they may be identified
and that all may know the exact scope or section of territory
or geographical division embraced within the corporate
limits and over which the local corporation has jurisdiction.
● Under the Code, a description of the boundaries in METES
& BOUNDS is said to be an essential part of its charter and
necessary to corporate existence. An incorporation is void
where the boundaries are not described with certainty.
Procedure for creation of LGUs
● Read Article 9, 11, 13 and 14 of the IRR of the Code and take
note of the requisites relating to the verifiable indicators for
the creation of a particular LGU.
● Congress may create provinces, cities or municipalities
without petition from anyone. Except where barangays are
sought to be created by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan,
petition and resolutions are not required by the Code.
Barangay units may be merged or consolidated by an
ordinance passed by the appropriate sanggunian based on a
merger or consolidation plan prepared by the governor or
mayor as the case may be.
 Sec. 8 – Division and Merger
● Shall comply with the same requirements prescribed for
creation. Provided, such division shall not reduce the
income, population or land area of the LGU/s
concerned to less than the minimum requirements
prescribed in this Code; That the income classification of
the original LGU/s shall not fall below its current
income classification prior to such divisiion.
● SAME requisites for creation/conversion apply to
division/merger. What is needed is that the LGU
created, divided or merged must be able to deliver
services to its constituents.
Effect of division of municipal
corporation
● Division is effected by: a) fixing, altering, or changing
the boundaries of MCs for the purpose of enlarging or
decreasing its territory; or b) dividing a MC into 2 or
more separate municipalities
● The division of a municipal corporation extinguishes the
corporate existence of the original municipality. Unless
the law provides otherwise, when a municipal
corporation is divided into 2 or more municipalities,
each municipality acquires title to all the property,
powers, rights and obligations falling within its
territorial limits.
Effect of Merger or Consolidation
● Merger is effected by a) consolidating 2 or more separate
MCs into 1; or b) annexing 1 municipality to another
● The annexation of 1 municipality to another will dissolve
the annexed (merged) municipality. It shall become part of
the merged corporation and will fall under the jurisdiction
of the latter. The merged corporation shall become subject
to all the laws and ordinances by which the merged
corporation is governed. The officers and employees of the
merged territory shall terminate their official relation with
their offices. The debts and obligations of a MC contracted
before its merger/consolidation shall be assumed by the
merged territory.
 Sec. 9 – Abolition of LGUs
● A LGU may be abolished when its income, population or land
area has been IRREVERSIBLY REDUCED to less than the
minimum standards prescribed for its creation as certified by the
national agencies to Congress or to the sanggunian concerned.
The law or ordinance abolishing a LGU shall specify the province,
city, municipality or barangay with which the LGU sought to be
abolished will be incorporated or merged.
● Abolition may be done thru an act of Congress in the case of
province, city, municipality or any other political subd. In the
case of a barangay, it may be done by the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan or Panglungsod concerned. Since Congress has
retained its power to create barangays in Mmnla and in cultural
communities, it has the power to abolish the same.
Limitations on the power to dissolve
municipal corporation
● Upon Certification from the National agencies
concerned that the standards prescribed for creation
have been irreversibly reduced to less than the
minimum.
● May courts order dissolution of municipal
corporations? The courts have NO power to dissolve
municipal corporations. But the court can declare the
act of the legislature creating a municipal corporation
unconstitutional or illegal.
● Whenever an LGU is abolished, it is a requirement that the
province, city, municipality or barangay with which it will
be incorporated or merged shall be specified in the measure
directing such abolition.
● A municipal corporation is not dissolved by the mere
failure to elect its officers to conduct its government. Its
continuance as a legal entity does not depend on the
existence of its officers. The officers do not constitute a
corporation. The inhabitants of the designated locality are
the incorporators.
● Change of sovereignty does not necessarily dissolve
municipal corporation (Vilas v City of Manila 42 Phil 953)
 Sec. 10 – Plebiscite requirement
● No creation, division, merger or abolition or substantial
alteration of boundaries of LGUs shall take effect unless
approved by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite
called for the purpose in the political unit/s directly
affected. Said plebiscite shall be conducted by the Comelec
within 120 days from the date of effectivity of the law/
ordinance effecting such action, unless said law/ordinance
fixes another date.
● When a law/ordinance is passed creating an LGU, the
LGU is NOT AUTOMATICALLY created. A plebiscite is
required to be conducted. This is a mandatory requirement
NOT ONLY of the Code but of the Constitution.
● Is assent of the inhabitants necessary to the
incorporation of an LGU? Yes, the plebiscite enables the
registered voters of a locality affected by the creation,
division, merger, abolition or alteration of the
boundaries of a LGU to check the power of Congress or
LGU concerned to carry out such action.
● Plebiscite is not required in the merger of administrative
regions. The requirement of plebiscite in the merger of
LGUs applies only to provinces, cities, municipalities or
barangays not to administrative regions (Abbas v
Comelec 179 SCRA 287).
 City of Pasig vs Comelec

314 SCRA 179
● A case involving a boundary discpute between LGUs
presents a prejudicial question which must first be
decided before plebiscites for creation of proposed
barangays may be held.
● When territorial jurisdiction is an issue raised, until
and unless such issue is resolved with finality, to define
the territorial jurisdiction of the proposed barangay
would be an exercise in futility. A requisite for the
creation of a barangay, is for its territorial jurisdiction to
be properly identified by metes and bounds or more or
less permanent natural boundaries.
 Sec. 11. Selection and transfer of
LG sites, offices and facilities
● The law/ordinance creating/merging LGUs shall
specify the seat of government from where
governmental and corporate services shall be delivered.
In selecting said site, factors relating to geographical
centrality, accessibility, availability of transportation
and communication facilities, drainage and sanitation,
development and economic progress and other relevant
considerations shall be taken into account.
● The section deals with the physical location or situs of
the seats or the capitals of LGUs.
Is there a requirement as to where
the seat of govt shall be located?
● The location shall be determined by the law creating or
merging LGs guided by the considerations enumerated in the
section.
● Art 7 of the IRR states that the seat of a provincial
government shall be located in the capital town or city,
anywhere within at its discretion.
● The section also allows changes and/or transfer of location
when changes in the circumstances surrounding the choice
happen. The transfer may be effected by the sanggunian of the
LGU by a vote of 2/3 of ALL its members, and only after
public hearings are conducted.
● When conditions and developments in the LGU
concerned have significantly changed subsequent to the
establishment of the seat of government, its sanggunian
may, after public hearing and by a vote of 2/3 of all its
members, transfer the same to a site better suited to its
needs. Provided, that no such transfer shall be made
outside the territorial boundaries of the LGU concerned.
The old site, together with the improvements thereon,
may be disposed of by sale or lease or converted to such
other use as the sanngunian may deem beneficial to the
LGU concerned and its inhabitants.
Transfer of some offices and
facilities, not the entire seat
● Local government offices and facilities shall not be
transferred, relocated or converted to other uses unless
public hearings are first conducted for the purpose
AND the concurrence of the majority of all the
members of the sanggunian concerned is obtained.
● This section allows the transfer of some LG offices/
facilities, not the entire seat of government. The vote
required is a simple majority of all the members, unlike
a transfer relating to the seat of government where the
required vote of 2/3 of all the members is required.
Sec. 12 – Government Centers
● Provinces, cities and municipalities shall endeavor to
establish a government center where offices, agencies or
branches of the national government, LGUs or GOCCs
may as far as practicable, be located. In designating
such a center, the LGU concerned shall take into account
the existing facilities of national and local agencies
which may serve as the government center . The
national government, LGUs or GOCCs concerned shall
bear the expenses for the construction of its buildings
and facilities in the government center.
 legislature control over the
establishment of govt centers
● The section encourages the construction of government
centers by LGUs where national agencies, LGUs, GOCCs may
be located. In designating the center, the LGU shall take into
account the existing national and local agencies. The expense
for erecting the offices shall be borne by the said government
entity and the buildings or facilities must conform with the
overall physical and architectural plans and motifs of the
government center as approved by the sanggunian as
provided in Art 8 of the IRR.
● Take note however, that NOT ONLY Congress can create
regional center. The President may by Order create regional
center pursuant to the power of supervision over
administrative regions. Ex. EO 429 changing the regional
capital from Zamboanga to Pagadian City.
Sec. 13 – Naming of LGUs, Public
Places, streets and structures
● The power to change the name of certain LGUs, public
places, streets and other structures is now
DELEGATED by Congress to 5 classes of sanggunians:
● 1. Sangguniang Panlalawigan of provinces
● 2. Sangguniang Panlungsod of highly urbanized cities
● 3. Sangguniang Panlungsod of independent
component cities
● 4. Sangguniang Panlungsod of component cities and
● 5. Sangguniang Bayan of the Municipalities
Requirement of Consultation before
change of name
Consultation with the Philippine Historical Commission is
a requirement as well as the recommendation of the
sanggunian concerned wnenever the name of any
component city/municipality/barangay is changed.
If the change of name involves hospitals, health centers
and the like, the Local Health Board has to be consulted.
If the change of name involves a school, the Local School
Board has to be consulted.
In ALL instances of change of name, consultation with the
Historical Commission is required.
 Power to change by 

Sangguniang Panlalawigan
● Sangguniang Panlalawigan may in consultation with
Philippine Historical Comm CHANGE the name of:
● 1. Component cities & municipalities, with
recommendation of sanggunian concerned
● 2. Provincial roads, avenues, boulevards, thoroughfares
and bridges
● 3. public vocational or technical schools and other post
secondary and tertiary schools
● 4. Provincial hospitals, health centers and other health
facilities and
● 5. Any other public place or building owned by the
provincial government
Can LGUs, public places buildings be
named after a living person?
● The use of the names of living persons IS NOT ALLOWED,
unless for a JUSTIFIABLE reason. Art 23, par 7 of the IRR is
an exception. The name of a FAMILY in a particular
community whose members have significantly contributed
to the welfare of the Filipino people may be used even if
some members may still be alive. The change should not be
oftener than once every 10 years.
● The name of a LGU or public place, street or structure with
HISTORICAL, CULTURAL or ETHNIC SIGNIFICANCE
cannot be changed unless by a UNANIMUOUS vote of the
sanggunian concerned.
 Requirement of Plebiscite
● Whenever the name of an LGU is changed, a
plebiscite is required to be conducted in the units/s
directly affected. The plebiscite is required ONLY if
the name being changed is that of a LGU.
● In ANY change of name, the Office of the
President, the representative of the legislative district
concerned, and the Bureau of Posts shall be notified.
Sec. 14 – Beginning of Corporate
Existence
● When a new LGU is created, its corporate existence shall
commence upon the election and qualification of its chief
executive and a majority of the members of its sanggunian,
unless some other time is fixed therefor by the law or
ordinance creating it.
● The legal existence of a municipal corporation is to be
determined by the law creating it. Usually, the law fixes the
beginning of the corporate existence of a municipal
corporation from the effectivity of the law creating it or upon
the organization of its government or upon the qualification of
its officers. When the law is silent as to the beginning of
corporate existence, it shall commence upon the election and
qualification of its chief executive and a majority of the
members of its sanggunian.
 Meaning of 

election and qualification
Election of the chief executive and majority of the members of
the sanggunian means not only receiving the highest
number of votes among the political contenders for their
offices in the last preceding elections AND their
proclamation. Their qualification as such local officials
means their having assumed office.
● A distinction should be made however, as to the creation
of a corporation and the organization of its government.
Creation should precede the organization. The organization
of the government presupposes necessarily the previous
existence of said corporation at the time its government is
organized. (Mejia v Balolong 81 Phil 486).
Proof of existence of municipal
corporation
● The existence of a municipal corporation may be
proved by its record of incorporation or the
CHARTER. In the absence of a charter, its
incorporation may be shown by parol evidence, at
least to prove a de facto existence. Its existence may
also be shown by reputation, or by long use of its
corporate powers, or by legislative grants necessarily
implying a town incorporation.
Sec. 15 – Political and Corporate
Nature of LGUs
● This section defines a local government and embodies
the DUAL personality (public and private) of a local
government as a subdivision or agency of the
government, and as a corporate entity representing the
inhabitants of its territory. Municipal corporations
perform dual functions, governmental and corporate.
● In the exercise of its governmental powers and duties,
they are agencies of the national government
(instrumentality of the State) for the purpose of
delivering services that are supposed to be performed
by the State.
● In its private character it acts as instrumentality of the
people to handle properties held in a private capacity. When
engaged in corporate activities, they are on the same plane
as any private corporation.
● If property is taken by the national government and same is
held by the municipal corporation in its private capacity,
then just compensation should be paid.
● Also, when a province transfers title over real property to
another certain formalities have to be followed. The Deed of
Transfer shall be executed by the governor upon resolution
by the Board AND with the approval of the President (City
of Naga v CA 172 SCRA 13).
 Aguada vs. City of Manila

9 Phil 513
● Then issue is whether or not the present City of Manila
is liable under the contracts for the obligation created
therein by Ayuntamiento as its successor, and if it is,
whether the plaintiff is entitled to a writ of execution
against any of the property of the present city for the
purpose of satisfying the liability.
● Then present City of Manila is not liable under the
contract entered into by its predecessor, the Old
Ayuntamiento because it is not its successor and such
obligations are not incurred by the present city.
 Vilas v City of Manila

42 Phil 935
● Vilas was a creditor of the City of Manila. When the City
was incorporated, he brought an action against the City to
recover the sum due to him.
● The new City of Manila is liable to its creditors for
obligations incurred by the old City of Manila. For the mere
change of the sovereign authority does not necessarily
dissolve the municipal corporation under the former
sovereign. Only such governmental functions as are
incompatible with the present sovereignty may be
considered suspended. The juristic identity of the
corporation is not affected by the change of sovereignty.
Sec. 16 - General welfare
● Every lgu shall exercise the powers expressly granted, those
necessarily implied therefrom, as well as powers necessary,
appropriate, or incidental for its efficient and effective governance
and those which are essential to the promotion of the general
welfare.
● The powers of an lgu are not absolute. They are subject to
limitations laid down by the Constitution and the laws such as the
Civil Code. The exercise of such powers should be subservient to
paramount considerations of health and well being of the members
of the community. Every lgu has the sworn obligation to enact
measures that will enhance public health, safety and convenience,
maintain peace and order and promote the general prosperity of
the inhabitants of the lgu. It should refrain from acting towards
that which might prejudice or adversely affect the general welfare.
 General welfare clause
● This clause empowers LGUs to enact and implement
measures for the general well-being of their inhabitants. Its
basis is the police power of the State as DELEGATED to
LGUs. An LGU may enact ordinances upon subjects
already covered by general law as long as the ordinance is
not repugnant to nor in conflict with the law.
● LGUs can exercise power that are 1) expressly granted 2)
necessarily implied from the power that is expressly
granted 3) necessary, appropriate or incidental for its
efficient and effective governance and 4) essential to the
promotion of the general welfare of the inhabitants.
 2 Branches of 

General Welfare Clause
1. General Legislative Power – authorizes the Sanggunian to
enact ordinances and make regulations not repugnant to
law, as may be necessary to carry into effect and discharge
the powers and duties conferred upon the Council by law.
2. Police power proper – authorizes the Sanggunian to enact
ordinances as may be necessary and proper for the
preservation and enrichment of culture, health and safety,
enhance the right of people to a balanced ecology,
development of scientific and technological capabilities,
enhance economic prosperity and social justice, improve
morals, maintain peace and order, promote full
employment among residents, preserve the comfort and
convenience of their inhabitants .
 Requisites for the exercise of 

police power
● Proper exercise of police power: a) that the interest of the
public generally as distinguished from those of a particular
class require such interference, and b) that the means is
reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the
purpose and not unduly oppressive upon individuals.
● The policy of Congress as stated in Sec. 5, par c provides –
THE GENERAL WELFARE PROVISIONS SHALL BE
LIBERALLY INTERPRETED TO GIVE MORE POWERS TO
LGUs IN ACCELERATING ECONLMIC DEVELOPMENT
& UPGRADING THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE
PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY.
Definition of police power
● Police power has not received a full and complete
definition, it is elastic and must be responsive to various
social conditions, it is not confined within the narrow
circumscription of precedents resting on past conditions,
it must follow the legal progress of a democratic way of
life. Such that which may at one time be regarded as not
within such power may, at another time, by reason of
changed conditions, be recognized as a legitimate
exercise of the power. Also, that which may be regarded
as within the power may not be so regarded as to
another (PLDT v City of Davao, 1965).
Sanctions within the police power
● Tano v Socrates 278 SCRA 154 – “preferential right” of subsistence
or marginal fishermen to the use of marine resources; involving
the enforcement of fishery laws in municipal waters including the
conservation of mangroves. Enactment of ordinances banning the
shipment of all live fish and lobster and prohibiting the catching,
buying and selling of live coral dwelling aquatic resources.
● Prohibition of establishment of poultry business within 500m
radius from the poblacion is a valid exercise of police power.
Reason – security of the general health of the community,
environmental reasons (breathe clean air), suppression of animal
disease
● Very recently there is a plan Not to allow structures within 30m
from the coastline in Leyte. – for environmental reasons; for the
protection of life and property from loss and destruction
In such activities
● Abatement of public nuisance – pursuant to the Civil Code
justified under the general welfare clause; Abatement of
nuisance without judicial proceedings is possible only if it is a
nuisance per se. Ex. A gas station is not a nuisance per se or
one affecting the immediate safety of persons and property,
hence it cannot be closed down/transferred summarily to
another location.
● Conduct of raid and closure of business establishments in the
exercise of police power
● Regulation of cockpits, fixing the distance of cockpits and
cabarets within the municipality
● Anti-noise ordinance held valid.
 Nuisance
● Is any act, omission, establishment, business, condition
of property or anything else which 1) injures or
endangers the health or safety of others; or 2)annoys or
offends the senses; or 3)shocks, defies or disregards
decency or morality; or 4) obstructs or interferes with
the free passage of any public highways or street or any
body of water; or 5) hinders or impairs the use of
property (Art. 695, NCC)
● Abatement of nuisance is justified under the
GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE.
 Kinds of Nuisance 

4 general classes
● 1) Nuisance per se – are unquestionably and under all
circumstances nuisances
● 2) Nuisance per accidens – are nuisances only by reason of
their surrounding circumstances
● 3) Public nuisance – one that affects a community or
neighborhood or any considerable number of persons,
although the extent of annoyance, danger or damage upon
individuals may be unequal
● 4) Private nuisance – one that is not included in the
definition of a public nuisance
●
 How abatement effected?
● Nuisances relating to ENVIRONMENT -Except if it
constitutes a pollution case, abatement of nuisance is with
the local government.
● Public nuisance – LGU
● Private nuisance - Courts pursuant to the Rule of
● Procedure for Environmental Cases
● Pollution – Pollution Adjudication Board
● REMEDIES against public nuisance: 1) prosecution under
the Penal Code or local ORDINANCE or 2) civil action or
3) abatement without judicial proceedings
● Private nuisance –1) civil action or 2)abatement without
judicial proceedings
● MMDA has no police and legislative powers to enact
ordinances for the general welfare of the inhabitants of MM –
it is not an LGU.
● Although the sanggunian may exercise certain powers under
the general welfare clause, citing nonmembers of the
sanggunian for contempt or issuing subpoena to compel
nonmembers to attend public hearings or investigations is
NOT one of them. (Negros Oriental Electric Coop vs
Sangguniang Panlungsod of Dumaguete 421 SCRA
● Lina v Pano 129093 Aug 30, 2001 Ordinances should not
contravene an existing statute enacted by Congress.
Sec. 17 – Basic Services and Facilities
● LGUs shall endeavor to be self reliant and continue exercising the
powers and discharging the duties and functions vested upon them.
They shall also discharge the functions and responsibilities of
national agencies and offices devolved to them pursuant to the Code.
● Each lgu is tasked to provide specific basic services and facilities:
● Barangay – agricultural support services, health and
● social services, barangay roads and
● bridges, water supply systems, sports center,
● plaza, reading center, public market,
● maintenance of katarungang pambarangay
●
 Powers devolved
● Certain powers that used to be exercised by the national
government 1) public works 2) health 3) agriculture 4)
social welfare 5) certain tourism functions and 6)
construction of school buildings and facilities are now
devolved to LGUs.
● Purely barangay roads will be the responsibility of the
barangay, municipal roads that of the municipality and
provincial roads, of the province.
● In solid waste management, collection at source is the
responsibility of the barangay, while segregation is that
of the municipality.
 Health services
● Barangays are now mandated to establish and maintain
barangay health and day care centers; municipalities
have power over the delivery of primary health care,
maternal and child care, communicable and non-
communicable diseases control services. Provinces may
establish and run hospitals and other tertiary health
services. Cities may exercise the powers vested in
municipalities and provinces on the matter of health
services. The purchase of medicines, medical equipment
and supplies is also lodged with LGUs.
 Agriculture
● Agricultural support services such as distribution of planting
materials and operation of collecting and buying stations for
farm produce will now be placed under the authority of
barangays. Municipalities will take charge of agriculture
extension and research services and delivery of services and
facilities related to fisheries and agriculture and the
enforcement of fishery laws and DENR laws relative to forestry
conservation projects. Provinces will do agricultural extension
and on-site research and on-site facilities as well as the
organization of dairy farms, livestock markets and farmers and
fishermen cooperatives. The cities will exercise the powers over
agriculture and fishing that provinces and municipalities have.
 Social welfare
● Municipalities will now have powers over the welfare of
children and youth, family and community, women,
elderly and disabled persons, vagrants, beggars, street
children scavengers, juvenile delinquents, victims of
drug abuse, nutrition and family planning services and
other pro-poor services. Provinces will handle rebel
returness and evacuees programs, relief operations and
population development services. Cities will exercise
the powers of the provinces and the municipalities over
the social welfare.
● The power to build schools is now lodged with LGUs.
Sec. 18 – power to generate and
apply resources
● Having fiscal autonomy, lgus can create their own sources of
revenue and free to charter their own destiny. This autonomy
includes:
● - Levy taxes and charges which shall accrue exclusively for their
use and disposition and which shall be retained by them;
● - have a just share in national taxes which shall be automatically
and directly released to them without need of any further action;
● - have an equitable share in the proceeds from the utilization and
development of the national wealth and resources within their
respective territorial jurisdiction including sharing the same with
the inhabitants by way of direct benefits
● - acquire, develop, lease, encumber or otherwise dispose of real or
personal property held by them in their proprietary capacity and
to apply their resources and assets for welfare purposes.
 Tax share
● The tax share of LGUs is now 40% of the national taxes;
apportioned as follows: 23% provinces; 23% cities; 34%
municipalities and 20% barangays.
● Aside from this share, LGUs are invested with powers to
tax, empowering them with a wider capacity to raise their
own revenues within their territory.
● LGUs are entitled to definite shares in 1) proceeds from
development and utilization of mines, forests, and marine
resources up to 40% of the gross collection therefrom by the
national government 2) proceeds of GOCC engaged in the
utilization and development of the national wealth up to
1% of the gross sales or 40% of the gross collections made
by the national government therefrom, whichever is higher.
The distribution of shares of the LGUs derived from the
development and use of natural resources located in a
province are: 1) 20% to the province; 2) 45% to the
component city/municipality where located;
and 3) 35% to the barangay where located.
If the natural resources is located in a highly urbanized city,
the distribution of shares are: 1) 65% to the city and
2) 35% to the barangay.
Idle lands in provinces, cities or municipalities in MM may
be additionally taxed at not exceeding 5% of their assessed
value.
 Levy
● A real estate levy may be imposed by the province or
city: province – not exceeding 1% of the assessed value
of the property and city – not exceeding 2%
● A special education fund may also be assessed in
provinces, cities or MM municipalities up to a max of
1% of the assessed value of the real property.
● Lands benefited by public works projects or
improvements in provinces, cities and municipalities
may be levied a special tax of not exceeding 60% of the
actual cost of the project.
 LGU taxes
● Provinces may impose tax on 1) transfers of real property 2)
businesses of printing and publication (not on newspapers) 3)
franchises 4) sand & gravel 5)professions 6) amusement
enterprises 7) delivery vans of all kinds of products
● Municipalities on 1) manufacturers, processors, brewers,
distillers, rectifiers and compounders of liquors & distilled spirits
2) wholesalers, distributors or dealers of any article of commerce
3) exporters, manufacturers, millers, producers, wholesalers,
distributors, dealers or retailers of essential commodities; 4)
retailers 5) banks & other financial institutions and 6)
peddlers of merchandise. May also levy fees for sealing and
licensing weights & measures and impose fishery fees and for use
of MUNICIPAL WATERS.
● Cities may levy taxes, fees and charges which provinces and
municipalities may impose. Like municipalities, they may also
impose a community tax.
● City barangays may tax stores and retails whose gross sales do
not exceed P50,000/yr. Municipal barangays whose sales do
not exceed P30,000/yr
● Barangays: 1) services rendered 2) barangay clearances 3)
commercial breeding of fighting cocks 4) cockfights 5) cockpits
6) billboards 7) neon signs
● 8) places of recreation which charge admission fees
● LGUs have common revenue powers. They may impose fees
for services rendered by them and toll fees.


Section 19 – Eminent Domain
● The power of eminent domain is one of the fundamental
powers of the State. This section is an express grant
( delegation) of the power to local governments. The
power may now be exercised by the LGU without need
of approval by the national government. The exercise of
the power though is not absolute.
● Neither the LGC nor the CARP law requires a LGU to
secure approval of the DAR as a condition precedent to
institute the necessary expropriation proceedings.
(Province of CamSur v CA 222 SCRA 173)
● The rules on conversion of agricultural lands as provided in
Sec 65 of the CARP law as implemented by EO 129-A, Series
of 1987 cannot be the source of authority of the DAR to
determine the suitability of a parcel of agri land for the
purpose to which it would be devoted by the expropriating
authority. While these rules vest in the DAR the exclusive
authority to approve or disapprove conversions of agri
lands for residential, commercial or industrial uses, such
authority is limited to the applications for reclassification
submitted by the land owners or tenant beneficiaries.
● Read: RA 1899 (Reclamation of Foreshore lands) and
● RA 2348 (Reconveyance of lands donated to the
National Government)
Requisites of Eminent Domain
● 1. An ordinance is enacted by the Sanggunian
authorizing the local chief executive, on behalf of the
LGU to exercise the power or pursue expropriation
proceedings over a particular private property
● 2. The power is exercised for public use, purpose or
welfare, or for the benefit of the poor and the landless
● 3. There is payment of just compensation and
● 4. A valid and definite offer has been previously made to
the owner of the property but said offer was not
accepted.
When can the LGU immediately take
possession of the property?
● Read: City of Iloilo v Legaspi Nov 2004
● The power may be effected only by ORDINANCE not by a mere
Resolution (is merely a declaration of the sentiment or opinion of
the lawmaking body on a specific matter.) Mun of Paranaque v
VM Realty 292 SCRA 678
● The assessed value of a property cannot be made the sole basis of
just compensation since it constitutes only a percentage of its
current fair market value (Mun of Daet vCA 93 SCRA 503)
● Section 19 expressly provides that just compensation shall be
determined as of the time of ACTUAL taking and not as of the
date of the filing of the complaint (City of Cebu v Dedamo 142971
may 7, 2002 ). Read also: Beluso v Mun of Panay 153974 Aug
7,2006 and Jesus is Lord Christian v Mun of Pasig 466 SCRA 235
● The burden is on the LGU to prove its compliance with the
mandatory requirement of a valid and definite offer to the
owner of the property before its filing of its complaint for
expropriation. Failure to prove compliance with the
mandatory requirement will result in the dismissal of the
complaint. Proper party to appeal the dismissal is the LGU
which filed the case.
● The rules for determining just compensation are those laid
down in the Rules of Court, Rule 67 which allow the
owners to submit evidence on what they consider shall be
the just compensation for their property (Mun of Talisay v
Ramirez 183 SCRA 528)
Power of eminent domain as
exercised by LGU strictly construed
● The power, being in derogation of property rights, is
justified only by a clear public necessity of an urgentn
public policy. The power must be strictly construed against
the LGU. The purpose and the procedure prescribed for it s
exercise must be strictly followed in all substantial matters.
This rule of strict construction is mandatory and should
within reasonable limits, be inflexibly adhered to and
applied.
● Ex. Authority to appropriate private property for streets,
lanes, alleys, public plazas or parks cannot include by
implication the authority to take private property for the
construction thereon of a jail.
Eminent Domain by GOCCs
● Governed by RA 8974 -An Act to Facilitate the
Acquisition of right of way. Site or location for National
Government Infrastructure projects. Includes those
projects covered by the Build Operate and Transfer Law
(RA 7718).
● Upon filing of the expropriation complaint, the
plaintiff has the right to take or enter into possession
( entitled to a writ of possession) of the real property
involved if he deposits with the authorized government
depositary an amount equivalent to 100% of the zonal
value of the property to be expropriated.
 Sec 20 – Reclassification of
agricultural lands; Conditions:
● 1. land has ceased to be economically feasible & sound for agri
purposes as determined by Dept of Agriculture
● 2. land has substantially greater economic value for
residential, commercial or industrial purposes as determined
by the sanggunian
● 3. the ff percentages of agri land area at the time of the passage
of the reclassification ordinance are not exceeded: HUC – 15%
and CC/ 1-3rd class Mun – 10% and 4th-6th class Mun – 5%
● 4. land already distributed to agrarian reform beneficiaries
pursuant to CARP law shall not be reclassified
● 5. conversion of such land into other purposes shall be done
pursuant to sec 65 of the CARP law
● The percentage limitation may be expanded by the President when
public interest so requires upon recommendation of the NEDA.
● LGUs are mandated to prepare their comprehensive land use plans
which thru zoning ordinances shall be the primary and dominant
bases for the future use of land resources.
● LGUs need not obtain the approval of the DAR to convert or
reclassify lands from agri to non-agri use. (Fortich v Corona 298
SCRA 678) Relate: DAR v Sarangani Agri Co. Inc. GR 165547 Jan
24, 2007 saying:
● The conversion of agri lands into non-agri uses shall be strictly
regulated and may be allowed only when the conditions
prescribed under RA 6657 are present.
● Pursuant to RA 6657 and EO 127-A, actions on applications for land
use conversions on individual landholdings shall remain as the
responsibility of the DAR, which shall utilize as its primary reference
documents the comprehensive land use plans and accompanying
ordinance passed upon and approved by the LGUs concerned,
together with the National Land Use Policy. Thus: Argi lands that
have been reclassified for non agri uses by the LGU, the DAR should
refer to the comprehensive land use plans and the ordinances of the
Sanggunian in assessing land use conversion applications. DAR’s
SCOPE OF AUTHORITY IN ASSESSING LAND USE CONVERSION
APPLICATIONS IS LIMITED TO EXAMINING WHETHER THE
REQUIREMENTS PRESCRIBED BY LAW AND EXISTING RULES
AND REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH.
Requirements of Sec 20
● 1. requests for reclassification have to be acted upon by the proper
central government agency and its failure to act upon a proper
and complete application within three (3) months from receipt of
the application results in the approval thereof;
● 2. that nothing in the section repeals, amends or modifies in any
manner the provisions of the CARP law
● Distinction:
● CONVERSION - by DAR of agricultural lands to non agricultural
to conform to actual land use upon compliance with the
conditions prescribed by RA 6657. Applications are filed by
individual landowners
● RECLASSIFICATION -by LGUs to non-agri uses as when land is
no longer economically feasible for agri purposes. Reclassification
is pursuant to an ordinance by the Sanggunian.
Newsounds Broadcasting Network Inc
v Cesar Dy et al. April 2,2009
● GR 170270 and 179411
● Conversion of property on which radio stations were built
from agricultural to commercial in relation to authority of
LGUs to enact ordinances authorizing the issuance of
permits.
● Since nothing in the Ordinance requires an applicant for a
mayor’s permit to submit either an “approved land
conversion papers from the DAR showing that its property
was converted from agri to commercial land, or an
approved resolution from the Sbayan authorizing
reclassification of the property from agri to commercial,
failure to submit same is not a ground to deny mayor’s
permit much less close the establishment.
Laynesa vs Uy 149553, 2008
● Issue is whether the reclassification of a lot by a
municipal ordinance, without the DAR’s approval,
suffices to oust the jurisdiction of the DARAB over a
petition for legal redemption filed by the tenants. – The
SC ruled that despite the reclassification of an
agricultural land to non-agri land by the LGU, the
DARAB still retains jurisdiction over a complaint filed
by a tenant of the land in question for threatened
ejectment and redemption. Nothing in sec 20(e) shall be
construed as repealing, amending or modifying in any
manner the provisions of RA 6657.
Validity of Reclassification
● Nicolas and Santos Laynesa v Paquito and Pacita Uy, GR
149553, Feb 28, 2008
● The Local Government Code, being a later law, which
grants local government units to reclassify land, the Code
shall govern in case of conflict between it and RA 6657, as
to the issue of reclassification.
● Certification from the Municipal Agricultural Office that
the land is not prime agricultural property and
certification from the Municipal Agrarian Reform Office
that the land was not covered by the Operation Land
Transfer is not sufficient compliance with the conditions
and requirements for reclassification.
 Sec. 21 – 

Closure and opening of roads
● The power can only be exercised thru an ORDINANCE. The closure
of city streets is within the power of the city council while the closure
of provincial roads is within the powers of the provincial board.
● The Sanggunian has the power to adopt zoning and subdivision
ordinances or regulations subject to the provisions of existing laws,
and to provide for the construction, improvement, repair and
maintenance of streets, alleys, bridges and other public places,
regulate the use thereof and prohibit the construction or placing of
obstacles or encroachments on them. A municipality has the
authority to 1)prepare and adopt a land use map 2) promulgate a
zoning ordinace which may consider among others the municipal
roads to be constructed and 3) close any municipal road. (Pilapil v
CA 216 SCRA 33)
Kind/Class of property of LGU
significant
● Art 424, Civil Code lays down the principle that properties
of public dominion devoted to public use and made
available to the public in general are outside the commerce
of man and cannot be disposed of or leased by the LGU to
private persons. Aside from the requirement of due
process which should be complied with before closing a
road, street or park, the closure should be for the sole
purpose of withdrawing the road or other public property
from public use when circumstances show that such
property is no longer intended or necessary for public use
or public service. (Makasiano vs Diokno 211 SCRA 464).
● When the property is already withdrawn from public use, the
property then becomes patrimonial property of the LGU (Art 422,
Civil Code). It is only then that the LGU can use or convey them for
any purpose for which other real property belonging to the LGU
might be lawfully used or conveyed (Pilapil v CA 216 S )
● Roads and streets which are available to the public in general and
ordinary used for vehicular traffic are still considered public property
devoted to public use. In such case, the LGU has no power to use it
for another purpose or to dispose of or lease it to private persons. The
general public has a legal right to demand the demolition of illegal
stalls in public roads and streets and the officials of the LGU have the
corresponding duty arising from public office to clear the city streets
and restore them to their specific public purpose (Dacanay v Mayor
Assistio May 1992)
 Freedom Parks
● Designation of freedom parks in compliance with Sec 15 of BP
880. No freedom park shall however, be closed permanently
without provision for its transfer or relocation to a new site.
● In Bayan v Ermita, 169838, April 25, 2006, the SC said to deny
the permit to assemble because there is no public park or
plaza designated in compliance with BP 880, is in effect
denying the right to peacefully assemble.
● This section allowing closing and opening of roads by LGUs
provides an alternative for the LGU to raise revenues. Ex.
Basis of establishment of NIGHT CAFE
 Sec. 22 – Corporate Powers
● LGUs have dual functions – governmental and proprietary. This
section enumerates the powers that local governments possess as
corporate entities. This section also provides the consent of the State
allowing LGUs to sue and be sued.
● The distinction of powers becomes important for purposes of
determining the liability of the LGU for the acts of its agents which
result in an injury to 3rd persons. If the injury is caused in the
performance of a governmental function/duty, no recovery as a rule,
can be had from the LGU unless there is an existing statute on the
matter, nor from its officers, so long as they performed their duties
honestly and in good faith or they did not act wantonly or
maliciously. If function is proprietary, it can be held liable to 3rd
persons EX CONTRACTU or EX DELICTO (Torio vs Fontanilla
1978).
● The SC said there is no hard and fast rule for purposes of
determining the true nature of an undertaking or function
of a municipality (LGU); the surrounding circumstances of
a particular case are to be considered and will be decisive.
The basic element, however beneficial to the public the
undertaking may be, is that it is governmental in essence.
Otherwise, the function becomes private or proprietary in
character.
● A municipal corporation may sue and be sued and contract
and be contracted with. It can be held liable to 3rd persons
ex contractu (City of Manila v IAC 179 SCRA 428).
Sec. 23 – Authority to Negotiate and
Secure Grants
● LGUs are now authorized to negotiate and secure
financial grants or donations in kind from local and
foreign assistance agencies to get the basic services and
facilities required of them. They can do this even
without any clearance or approval from the national
government or from any of its agencies or offices except
when the grant or assistance has national security
implications. Neither is the clearance or approval of a
higher level LGU needed when the financial grant or
donation in kind is secured by a lower agency category.
When central government approval
necessary
● When the grant or assistance has NATIONAL SECURITY
IMPLICATIONS. Ex. If the financial grant or donation in kind
involves weapons or needs the supervision of foreign agents for
implementation purposes, the approval of the central government
must be obtained. The approval is deemed granted if the national
government agency concerned fails to act upon the request within
30 days from its receipt of the application for approval.
● Once the grant agreement or deed of donation is signed, the local
chief executive has to report the terms and conditions thereof to
both houses of Congress and to the President thru the DILG (Art
52, IRR). The NEDA and DILG are required to assist the LGUs
and the granting institutions or donors in the execution and
implementation of the agreements.
Sec 24 – Liability for Damages
● LGUs and their officials are liable for damages for the
malicious or negligent conduct of the officials. They can be
sued for damages for death or injury to persons or damage
to property. They do not enjoy immunity from suits and
their liability does not preclude the criminal liability of the
officials concerned.
● Read Art 34 and 2189 of the Civil Code on some liabilities of
LGUs. The test of liability is where the LGU is performing
governmental functions as an agency of the state, it shares
the states’s exemption from tort liability; where it is
attending to what are primarily local matters, it is liable.
 Exception
● It is said that liability for defects in streets is an exception to
the rule of immunity in case of governmental functions, if
it be shown that the municipality had notice of the defects
of the streets. It is not necessary for liability to attach to the
City of Manila that the defective road/ street belong to it.
It is sufficient that it has either control or supervision over
the street/road (City of Mnla v Teotico 22 SCRA 267).
● Province of Pangasinan is liable for constructing a
pumping plant in such close proximity to plaintiff’s
residence practically rendering the same uninhabitable.
The maintenance of the nuisance is tantamount to an
expropriation (Bengzon v Province 62 Phil 816).
● The province is not liable for the acts of its driver in the
construction of roads which is a governmental activity
(Palafox v Prov Ilocos Norte 102 Phil 1186).
● Since the holding of a town fiesta is an exercise of a
proprietary function, the Municipality is liable for any
injury sustained on the occasion thereof (Torio v
Fontanilla 85 SCRA 599).
● Breach of a contractual obligation between the City of
Mnla and plaintiff, involving property which is
patrimonial in character entitles the latter to damages
(City of Mnla v IAC 179 SCRA 428).
 Properties not subject to 

Levy and Execution
● Properties of an LGU, whether real or personal, which
are necessary for public use cannot be attached and sold
at execution sale to satisfy a money judgment against
the LGU. Revenues derived from taxes, licenses and
market fees and which are intended primarily and
exclusively for the purpose of financing the government
activities and functions of the LGU, are exempt from
execution. Public funds are not subject to levy and
execution (Mun of Makati v CA 190 SCRA 206).
Sec 25 – National Supervision over
LGUs
● President’s power of supervision done 1) DIRECTLY
over provinces, HUC & ICC or 2) INDIRECTLY over
ComCities, Mun & Barangays
● Par c says - The Pres MAY upon request of the LGU . . If
there is no request from the LGU, can the Pres withhold
assistance, ex during a calamity? Par b says – National
Agencies SHALL coordinate with the LGU in the
discharge of these functions. Does the Sec DILG or DND
in case of calamity have to refer to the President before
rendering assistance?
Relevance of doctrine of qualified
agency to the power of supervision
● The President has control of all executive departments and the
acts of the Secretaries, performed and promulgated in the
regular course of business are, unless disapproved or
reprobated by the Chief Executive presumptively the acts of
the President. (Carpio v ES 206 SCRA 290). The rule does not
apply to LG officials. The President can only interfere in the
affairs and activities of a LGU if he finds that the latter has
acted contrary to law. The Pres or his alter egos cannot
interfere in local affairs as long as the LGU acts within the
parameters of the law and the Constitution. Any directive by
the Pres or his alter egos seeking to alter wisdom of a law
conforming judgment on local affairs of a LGU is a patent
nullity because it violates the principle of local autonomy and
separation of powers in governing LGUs.
● Although heads of local governments may be under the
supervision of the Secretary of Local governments, local
governments are not attached to the DILG. LGUs have their
own legislative and executive powers under the LG Code Local autonomy
(Radia v Review Committee under EO 17, 157 SCRA 749).
● Finance Secretary has no power to review LGU Tax
Ordinances. (explained in Estanislao v Costales 196 SCRA 853)
● The power of the DOJ Secretary to review tax ordinances
under Sec 187 of the LGC authorizes the Secretary to declare
the passage of the ordinance illegal for failure to follow the
prescribed procedure for the enactment of tax ordinances. It is
not an act of control but of mere supervision (Drilon v Lim 235
SCRA 135)


sec 26 – DUTY of Nat Ag in the maintenance of
ecological balance
● This section has to be read in conjunction with sec 27, the so
called Prior Consultation Rule where the National Agencies
on environmental concerns are mandated to CONSULT and
get the PRIOR APPROVAL (Consent) of the LGU before any
project is implemented. The section requires mandatory
consultation.
● Read: Province of Rizal v ES, 477 SCRA 436
● Absent either of these two mandatory requirements of
CONSULTATION or PRIOR APPROVAL by the appropriate
Sanggunian, a national project’s implementation is illegal.
 Lina v Pano 129093 

Aug 30, 2001
● The projects and programs mentioned in Sec 27
should be interpreted to mean projects and programs
whose effects are among those enumerated in Sec 26.
The introduction of lotto in the province of Laguna is
not covered by the sections. Lotto is neither a
program nor a project of the national government but
of a charitable institution, the PCSO.
Sec 28 – Power of Local Chief
Executives over the units of PNP
● LGU powers over the police, fire protection unit and jails are
defined in RA 6975 (DILG and Local Government Act of 1990).
The choice as to who becomes the Police Director is lodged with
the governor or mayor. The Police Chief is chosen by the
governor or mayor from a list of 3 qualified nominees submitted
by the NAPOLCOM. The governor or mayor has no power of
appointment, and has only limited power of selecting one from
among the list of five eligibles to be named chief of police. The
mayor cannot require the Regional Director to include the name
of any officer, no matter how qualified in the list. The purpose is
to enhance police professionalism and to isolate the police service
from political domination (Andaya v RTC 319 SCRA Dec 3,1999).
Sec 29 – Provincial Relations with
Component Cities &Municipalities
● This section provides for the Governor’s supervisory
powers over the component cities and municipalities
within its territorial jurisdiction. The provincial
sanggunian also has the power to REVIEW
● 1) component city or municipal ordinances and even
resolutions approving the development plans and public
investment programs formulated by the city or
municipal development councils and
● 2) component city or municipality annual or
supplemental appropriations.
 Governor’s Coordinative powers
● With the component cities and municipalities with the province
and with national agencies. Such activities may cover:
● 1) law and order plans of the province with PNP and NAPOLCOM
● 2. measures to safeguard and conserve land, mineral, forest and
other natural resources of the province which may be coordinated
with the mayors concerned
● 3. efforts of city/municipalities to host sports contests (national or
regional palaro) or promote sports development activities
● 4) convening of meetings or calling of conventions of elective and
appointive officials of the province and its cities/mun and
● 5) the review pursuant to Sec 30 of the Executive Orders of the
mayor
 Sec 30 - Review of 

Executive orders
● The Governor has the power of review over Mayor’s
Executive Orders and the Mayor has the power of
review over the Executive Orders of the Punong
Barangay in his jurisdiction. The purpose of review is to
ensure that such EOs are within the powers granted by
law and in conformity with provincial, city or
municipal ordinances. Review is a reconsideration or
reexamination for purposes of correction.
● If the governor or mayor fails to act on the said EO
within 30 days after their submission, the orders are
considered valid.
Sec 31 – Submission of Municipal
Questions to Legal Officer/Pros
● The Provincial Legal Officer or in the absence of one, the
Provincial Prosecutor is the legal adviser of the
municipality. These officers cannot refuse a request from the
LGUs of an opinion on the matter.
● Legal Officer as provided in Sec 481 is now mandatory for
provinces and cities, optional for municipalities depending
on the availability of funds.
● This section does not cover the situation wherein the LGU is
a party litigant. The authority of LGU to employ a private
lawyer is expressly limited only to situations where the
provincial pros is disqualified to represent it. (Prov of Cebu
v CA 147 SCRA 447)
Sec 32 – City and Municipal
supervision over their barangays
● The general supervision exercised by the Mayor over
the acts of his barangays is an extension of the
supervisory power of the President over local
governments.
Sec 33 – Cooperative Undertakings
among LGUs
● This section expressly grants to LGUs the power to
cooperate with one another, consolidate their efforts
and coordinate their activities for any legal purpose
that is beneficial to them. The LGUs may therefore
contribute funds, equipment, or property and assign
personnel pursuant to an agreement they may enter
into among themselves.
Sec 34 – Role of POs and NGOs
● This provision recognizes the Pos and NGOs as active
partners in the pursuit of local autonomy.
● POs are groups of people outside of government,
who are organized for the attainment of some
legitimate aspirations. They may also be profit
oriented.
● NGOs are groups of people who are involved in a
more or less systematic pursuit of some
particularized sectoral activity.
 Sec 35 – Linkages with 

POs and NGOs
● This is a new provision recognizing Pos and NGOs as effective
partners of the LGUs for local development. It allows LGUs to
establish joint ventures and cooperative arrangements in the
areas of 1) delivery of basic services 2) capability-building and
livelihood projects and 3) development of local enterprises to
improve productivity and income; diversify agriculture, spur
rural industrialization, promote ecological balance and
enhance the economic and social well-being of the people.
● Ex. Solid Waste Mgmt Law allows LGUs to enter in contracts
for the collection of solid waste, for establishment of recycling
and reuse facilities.
● The provision is so encompassing to include any activity that
promotes the development of a locality.
 Sec 36 – Assistance to 

POs and NGOs
● This is also a new provision allowing LGUs to provide
financial or other assistance to NGOs for economic,
socially oriented, environmental or cultural projects
located within its territorial jurisdiction.
● Ex. Reforestation projects and the rehabilitation of
fish habitats.
● Tuna industry, local drama and choir groups,
development of springs, lakes or rivers as tourist
spots
Sec. 37 – Local PBAC

Sec 38 – Local Technical Comm
● Relate with the Electronic Bids and Awards Law
(RA ).
 Sec 39 – Qualifications of 

Elective officials
● With variations on age and residence requirements, all
candidates for elective local offices must be FILIPINO citizens,
registered as voters of the place where they are standing as
candidates and able to read and write.
● Age requirement: at least 23 yrs for governor, vice governor or
member of the SPanglalawigan or mayor, vice mayor or
member of SPanglungsod of a HUC
● 21 yrs for a mayor, vice mayor of an ICC
● 18 yrs for member of Spanglungsod of component city or
municipal council or punong barangay or member of
Sbarangay
● 15 yrs but nor more than 21 yrs for SK
 Qualifications
● There is a LITERACY requirement of local elective official; such
that he must be able to read and write.
● There is NO PROPERTY qualification. It is not required that a
person should have a house in order to establish his residence and
domicile. It is enough that he sould live in the municipality or in
a rented house or in that of a friend or relative. Nowhere it is
required by the Constitution that the candidate should also own
property in order to be qualified to run. On the other hand, mere
ownership of a house and lot is not equivalent to residence for
purposes of election.
● The LGC requires an elective official to be a registered voter. It
does not require him to vote actually. The requirement is to
ensure that the prospective official is actually registered in the
area he seeks to govern and not anywhere else.
Residence Requirement
● Must be resident of the province, city, municipality or
barangay where he is seeking election, for at least 1 yr
immediately preceding the election. Candidates for the
various sanggunian districts except the barangay have to be
residents of the districts where they are seeking election. Domicile of origin
● The term residence is synonymous with DOMICILE, which
imports not only intention to reside in a fixed place but also
personal presence in that place, coupled with conduct
indicative of such intention. In order to acquire a domicile by
choice, there must concur 1) residence or bodily presence in
the new locality 2) intention to remain, there and 3) an
intention to abandon the old domicile. The purpose to remain
in or at the domicile of choice must be for an indefinite period
of time. Actual & physically present
● Domicile of origin is not easily lost. Without clear and positive
proof of concurrence of the 3 requirements, the domicile of
origin continues. (Dumpit-Michelena v Boado 475 S 290)
● Residence means actual and physical presence – while
discharging the duties as governor of Misamis Oriental, he
owned a house in the city and resided there together with his
family. (Torayno v Comelec 337 S 574)
● The mere absence from one’s residence or origin, domicile – to
pursue studies, engage in business or practice his vocation is not
sufficient to constitute abandonment or loss of such residence.
(Abella v Comelec 201 S 253; Faypon v Quirino 98 Phil 294)
● Read: Coquilla v Comelec 151914 July 31, 2002
 Citizenship requirement
● The citizenship requirement is to be possessed by an
elective official at the latest as of the time he is
proclaimed and at the start of the term of office to which
he has been elected. Registration for naturalization
under PD 725 is valid and effective and retroacts to the
date of the application. (Fivaldo v Comelec 257 SCRA
727)
● The citizenship requirement need not be by birth.
Naturalized Filipinos may qualify for local elective
positions.
Dual Citizen may qualify as
candidate for local elective office
● Dual citizenship arise when, as a result of the concurrent
application of the different laws of two or more states, a
person is simultaneously considered a national by the said
states. Ex. When a person whose parents are citizens of a
state which adheres to the principle of jus sanguinis (by
blood) is born in a state which follows the doctrine of jus
soli. Such a person, ipso facto and without any voluntary
act on his part, is concurrently considered a citizen of both
states.
● With the passage of RA 9225, natural born citizens who have
lost their Phil citizenship by reason of their naturalization as
citizens of a foreign country may re-acquire Phil citizenship
upon taking the oath provided for in the Act.
 Classes of dual citizens
● 1. those born of Filipino fathers and/or mothers in
foreign countries which follow the principle of jus soli;
● 2. those born in the Philippine of Filipino mothers and
alien fathers if by the laws of their father’s country
such children are citizens of that country;
● 3. those who marry aliens if by the laws of the latter’s
country the former are considered citizens, unless by
their act or omission they are deemed to have
renounced Philippine citizenship.
 Qualification of Candidate

Dual Citizen
● Lopez vs COMELEC GR 182701, July 23, 2008
● Lopez was born a Filipino but he deliberately sought
American citizenship and renounced his Filipino
citizenship. He later on became a dual citizen by re-
acquiring Filipino citizenship. COMELEC disqualified him
when it found that he was not able to regain his Filipino
citizenship in the manner provided by law. He failed to
make a personal and sworn renunciation of any and all
foreign citizenship. Lopez argued that his filing of a
certificate of candidacy for barangay chairman operated as
an effective renunciation of foreign citizenship as held in
Valles vs COMELEC 337 SCRA 543.
Dual Citizen – Requirements before
one may run for a public office
● The ruling in Valles has been superseded by the
enactment of RA 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re-
Acquisition Act of 2003). The law expressly provides for
the conditions before those who re-acquired Filipino
citizenship may run for a public office in the Philippines.
● Section 5. Civil and Political Rights and Liabilities.
Those who retain or re-acquire Philippine citizenship
under this Act shall enjoy full civil and political rights and
be subject to all attendant liabilities and responsibilities
under existing laws and the ff conditions:
 Condition
● 2. ) Those seeking elective public office in the
Philippines shall meet the qualification for holding
such public office as required by the Constitution and
existing laws and at the same time of the filing of the
certificate of candidacy, MAKE A PERSONAL AND
SWORN RENUNCIATION OF ANY AND ALL
FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP BEFORE ANY PUBLIC
OFFICER AUTHORIZED TO ADMINISTER AN
OATH.
 Ruling
● While Lopez was able to regain Filipino Citizenship
by virtue of the Dual Citizenship Law when he took
his oath of allegiance before the Vice Consul of the
Philippine Consulate General’s Office in LA,
California, the same is not enough to allow him to
run for a public office. There is no evidence
presented that will show that Lopez complied with
the provision of RA 9225. Absent such proof, Lopez
cannot run for barangay chairman.
Distinguished from Valles case
● Rosalind Lopez was a dual citizen by accident of
birth on foreign soil, being born of Filipino parents in
Australia, a country which follows the principle of jus
soli. As a result, she acquired Australian citizenship
by operation of Australian law, but she was also
considered a Filipino citizen under Philippine. She
did not perform any act to swear allegiance to a
country other than the Philippines.
Sec 40 - Disqualifications
a) Sentenced by final judgment for an offense involving
moral turpitude (everything done contrary to justice,m
honesty, modesty or good morals). It covers any act of
baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social
duties which a man owes his fellow men, to society in
general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of
the right and duty between man and woman or conduct
contrary to justice, honesty or good morals. It implies
something immoral in itself, regardless of the fact that it is
punishable by law or not. The act itself and its prohibition
by statute fixes the moral turpitude (Court Adm v san
Andres 197 SCRA 704). Ex. Vio of BP 22, estafa
Within 2 yrs after serving sentence
● Service of sentence applies only to a convict who has
been confined in a penal facility for some time, and does
not apply to a probationer, whose principal and
accessory penalties were suspended upon the grant of
probation. Period of probation cannot be equated with
service of sentence because the grant of probation
suspends the execution of the sentence. Thus, one who
is serving probation should not be disqualified from
running for local elective office because the 2 yr period
of ineligibility under the LGC does not even begin to
run (Moreno v Comelec 168550 Aug 10, 2006)
 Removal as disqualification
● The PENALTY of REMOVAL from local elective
office bars the official concerned from qualifying as a
candidate. Sec 66 reiterates the disqualification.
● “ The penalty of removal from office as a result of an
administrative investigation shall be considered a bar
to the candidacy of the respondent for any elective
position.”
 Dual Citizenship
● Must be distinguished from dual ALLEGIANCE which
refers to a situation in which a person simultaneously
owes, by some positive act, loyalty to two or more
states. While dual citizenship is involuntary, dual
allegiance is the result of an individual’s volition. The
Constitution in Art 4, Sec 5 provides “ Dual allegiance of
citizens is inimical to the national interest and shall be
dealt with by law.” Hence, the disqualification must be
understood as referring to dual allegiance. Persons with
mere dual citizenship do not fall under this
disqualification. (Mercado v Manzano 2006).
Fugitives from justice in criminal or
non-political cases here or abroad
● Fugitive from justice includes not only those who flee after
conviction to avoid punishment but likewise who after
being charged flee to avoid prosecution. (Rodriguez v
Comelec 259 S 296 and Marquez Jr v Comelec 243 S 538).
Intent to evade on the part of a candidate must therefore be
established by proof that there has already been a
conviction or at least, a charge has already been filed, at the
time of flight.
● The SC in the Marquez case held that Art 73 of the IRR
which limited the term ‘fugitive from justice” to refer only
to a person ‘who has been convicted by final judgment,” as
an inordinate and undue circumscription of the law.
 Permanent residents – 

green card holders
● Refer to so called green card holders, Filipino citizens who have
acquired permanent residency status in the US or elsewhere and
have continued to use it even after Jan 1, 1992. To be qualified to
run for elective office, the law requires that the candidate who is a
green card holder must have waived his status as a permanent
resident or immigrant of a foreign country. The waiver of the
green card should be manifested by some act/s independent of
and done prior to the filing of the candidacy. Without such prior
waiver, the candidate is disqualified to run for elective office.
(Caasi v CA 191 S 229).
● Reason – Congress has laid down a clear policy of excluding
from the right to hold elective public office those Philippine
citizens who possess dual loyalties and allegiance.
 Sec 41 – Manner of Election

amended by RA 8553
● a. Governor & Vice Governor – at large in the entire Province
● Mayor & Vice Mayor – by the entire city/municipality
● Punong Barangay – by the entire barangay
● b. By district for the regular members of the various
sanggunians whether provincial, city or municipality
● c. By barangay for members of the Sang Barangay
● d. By league for presidents of 1) the league of sang of CC &
Mun 2) the Sang ng mga Barangay and 3) the Pederasyon ng
mga S Kabataan
● e. By sector for rep of 1) women 2) workers 3) one or the other
of the ff sectors – urban poor, ind cultural comm, disabled
persons, any other sector as determined by the Sang within 90
days prior to the holding of the next local elections
 RA 7166
Provided for election of Sangguniang Members by District not
at large. The purposes of districting or apportionment of
the sangguniang seats is to reduce the number of positions
to be voted for in the May 11, 1992 synchronized elections
and ensure the efficiency of the electoral processes.
The presidents of the Leagues of sang members of CC and
Mun are ex officio members of the Sangguniang
Panlalawigan .
The presidents of the Liga ng mga Barangay and the
Pederasyon ng mga Sang Kabataan shall be ex officio
members of the Sang Panlalawigan, Panglungsod and
Bayan as the case may be.
 Sec 42 -Term of Office
● The term of local elective officials is 3 years. Their eligibility for
reelection purposes is limited to 3 consecutive terms. Their
voluntary renunciation of office is not considered as an interruption
in the continuity of service for the full term for which they have
been elected. The term limit must be taken to refer to the right to be
elected as well as the right to serve in the same elective position. For
the 3 term limit to apply, the ff requisites/conditions must concur:
1) the official concerned has been elected for 3 consecutive terms to
the same local government post and 2) that he has fully served 3
consecutive terms (Ong v Alegre 479 S 473). It is not enough that an
individual has served 3 consecutive terms in an elective local office,
he must also have been elected to the same position for the same
number of times before the disqualification can apply.
● The term of office starts from noon of June 30 or such
date as may be provided by law. The term is not
extendible, such that they shall hold over until their
successors are elected and qualified. The Constitution
has clearly fixed the day on which the official term shall
begin, there is no legislative authority to continue
beyond that period, even though the successors fail to
qualify within the time (Osmena v Comelec 199 S 750).
● Read: Dizon vs Comelec & Morales 182099
● Jan 30, 2009
Sec 44 – Permanent Vacancies
● Permanent vacancy arises when an elective local official fills
a higher vacant office, refuses to assume office, fails to
qualify, dies, is removed from office, voluntarily resigns,
or is otherwise permanently incapacitated to discharge the
functions of his office. Included in the phrase “voluntary
resigns” is the act of local officials who file certificates of
candidacies for offices other than the ones they are
occupying or for the vice presidency or the presidency.
● There is no vacancy whenever the office is occupied by a
legally qualified incumbent; thus, there is a vacancy when
there is no person lawfully authorized to assume and
exercise at present the duties of the office (Menzon v Petilla
197n SCRA 257).
Permanent vacancy in the office of
vice governor/mayor
● The Sanggunian member who received the highest
ranking on the basis of the proportion of votes obtained
by each winning candidate to the total number of
registered voters in each district should assume the office
of the vice governor (Victoria v Comelec 229 S 169).
● actually voted x votes obtained/ registered voters = %
● For purposes of the right of succession, ranking in the
sanggunian shall be determined on the basis of the
proportion of votes in each district in the immediately
preceding local election.
● The vacancy in the position of vice-mayor due to the ineligibility
of the winning candidate should be filled up in accordance with
Section 44 of the Code. The disqualification or non-qualification of
the winner in a vice-mayoralty race does not justify the
proclamation of the defeated candidate who obtained the second
highest number of votes. (Recabo v Comelec 308 SCRA 793).
● In case of temporary vacancy in the same office, the mode of
succession provided for permanent vacancies may likewise be
observed. (Unda v Comelec 190 S 827).
● Where there is permanent vacancy in the office of the Punong
Barangay, the second highest ranking Sangguniang Barangay
member or in case of his permanent disability, the second highest
ranking sanggunian and so on down the line shall become the
Punong Barangay.
Sec 45 - Permanent Vacancies in the
Sanggunian
● The section deals with permanent vacancies in the
sanggunians where Sec 44 does not apply. The vacancy will
be filled up by appointment which power is lodged with
the President, governor or mayor. The appointment can be
extended by the 1) President thru the ESecretary where the
vacancy exists in the SPanlalawigan and Panglungsod of
HUC and ICC
● 2) the Governor where the vacancy exists in the
Spanglunsod of CC and the Sbayan and 3) the City or
Municipal Mayor where the vacancy exists in the
Sbarangay, upon recommendation of the Sbarangay
concerned.
Party Nomination
● To maintain the party representation in the sanggunian
as willed by the people in the election, it is required that
ONLY the nominee of the political party under which
the sanggunian member concerned had been elected
and whose elevation to the position next higher in rank
created the last vacancy in the sanggunian shall be
appointed. The appointee shall come from the same
political party as that of the sanggunian member who
caused the vacancy and shall serve the unexpired term
of the vacant office.
Two Certificates Required
● The section also requires that the party to which the nominee and
the person being replaced belong shall issue 2 certificates: a
certificate of nomination to the nominee and a certificate of
membership of the nominee duly signed by the highest official of
the political party concerned. Without those certificates, the
appointment is void ab initio and the person issuing the
appointment may be charged administratively.
● The certificates are NOT required when: 1) the person who caused
the vacancy does not belong to any political party; 2) when the
vacancy occurs in the SBarangay; 3) when the vacancy refers to
the position of youth representatives; or 4) when the vacancy
concerns the position of barangay representatives in the
sanggunian of a municipality, city or province
Is appointing authority limited to
those recommended to him?
● When vacancy is caused by a Sanggunian Bayan member
not belonging to a political party, the Governor, upon
recommendation by the Sanggunian Bayan, appoints the
replacement (Farinas v Barba, 256 SCRA 396). The power of
appointment is a discretionary power, however, neither is
the appointing power vested with so large a discretion that
he can disregard the recommendation of the Sanggunian
concerned. Since the recommendation takes the place of
nomination by political party, the recommendation must
likewise be considered a condition precedent for the
validity of the appointment.
Who is the appointing authority?
● Sec 45 is a recognition of the policy to vest in the
President, the governor, and the mayor in descending
order the executive power to appoint in order to fill
vacancies in local councils or to suspend local officials
(as provided in Sec. 63).
● The President is not the local chief executive referred to
in par c but refers to the governor or the mayor with
respect to the vacancies in the Sanggunian concerned
which should be understood as referring to the
sanggunian in which the vacancy is created.
Sec 46 – Temporary Vacancy in the
office of the local chief executive
● When there is temporary vacancy in the office of the
governor, mayor or punong barangay, the vice
governor, vice mayor or the highest ranking Sbarangay
member shall automatically exercise the powers and
duties of the temporarily absent or incapacitated local
chief executive. The automatic exercise of the powers
does not need an appointment, however, the temporary
occupant of the office cannot exercise the powers of
APPOINTMENT, SUSPENSION or DISMISSAL of
employees unless the period of temporary incapacity
exceeds 30 WORKING days.
Reason for the Temporary vacancy
● If the temporary vacancy is caused by physical reasons, the local
chief exe must submit a written declaration to the sanggunian upon
his return to terminate the temporary incapacity. If it is caused by
legal reasons such as suspension or arrest, the local chief exe has to
submit documents to show that the legal causes no longer subsist.
● When the LCEx travels outside of the territorial jurisdiction but
within the country for 3 days or less, - not considered physically
absent. There is no temporary vacancy and the LCE may therefore
designate OIC of the office. If he fails to designate, the failure
authorizes the vice governor/mayor or the highest ranking
sanggunian member to assume the office on the 4th day of absence
of the LCE concerned.
● When the travel exceeds 3 days, the vice governor/mayor or
highest ranking sanggunian member assumes the office.
Designation of OICs
● The designation by the LCExe of officials OTHER than
their respective vice governor/mayor or the highest
ranking sanggunian member as OIC is PROHIBITED.
The only EXCEPTION is when the LCE is traveling for
3days or less outside the jurisdiction but within the
country.
● Subordinate local executives like mayors of component
cities and municipalities need permission (travel
authority) from their respective governors and the
punong barangays from their mayors to travel outside
their urisdictiions.
Sec 47 – Approval of Leaves of
Absences
● The leaves of absence have to be acted upon by the
officials mentioned WITHIN 5 WORKING DAYS
from the date of receipt of the application for leave.
If the application is not acted upon as specified, the
leave is considered APPROVED.
● The provision is intended to prevent harassment of
political enemies thru inaction or other methods by
those who have the power to allow leaves of absence
of local elective officials.
Sec 48 – Local Legislative Power
● LGUs as agents of the State have the power of
subordinate legislation – able to legislate by virtue of a
valid delegation of legislative power from the national
legislature EXCEPT the power to create their own
sources of revenue and to levy taxes is conferred by the
Constitution itself.
● The four local legislative bodies 1) Sangguniang
Panlalawigan as set out in Sec 468 2) Sangguniang
Panlungsod in Sec 458 3) Sangguniang Bayan in Sec
447 and 4) Sangguniang Barangay in Sec 391.
● LGUs do not have CONTEMPT powers.
Municipal Ordinances and resolutions
● Are the legislative acts passed by the Sanggunian in the exercise of its
law-making authority. They are of general and permanent character
as distinguished from resolutions which refer to acts which are
temporary in nature or relating to proprietary functions and private
concerns or which involve ministerial duties. An ordinance is a law
but a resolution is merely a declaration of the sentiment or opinion of
a lawmaking body on a specific matter. As to enactment, a 3rd reading
is necessary for an ordinance, but not for a resolution, unless decided
otherwise by a majority of all the Sanggunian members.
● The power to enact ordinances carries with it the power to change or
repeal them, provided that vested rights are not thereby impaired and
repeals are valid only when passed in a certain manner which should
be definite and should relate specifically to the ordinance which
should be repealed. No ordinance may be changed by a mere
resolution.
● Congress has an implied power to repeal any municipal
ordinance either in express terms or necessary implication.
If the subsequent statute is necessarily repugnant to an
ordinance and the intention to repeal is obvious, then the
ordinance is thereby impliedly repealed.
● Ex. The SPanlalawigan has the authority to disapprove
any ordinance of a municipality on one ground alone: that
the ordinance is not within the powers granted by the
charter. The Sanggunian exceeds its authority when it
disapproves an ordinance on other grounds, such as
reasonableness of the ordinance or its supposed
unconstitutionality or its inconsistency to public policy.
Validity of Ordinances
● Whenever there is a conflict between an ordinance
and a statute, the ordinance must give way (Primicias
v Mun of Urdaneta 93 S 462). A local legislative body
intending to control traffic in public highways is
supposed to classify first, and then mark them with
proper signs, all to be approved by the Land
transportation office.
● Read: Magtajas v Pryce Properties Corp 234 S 255
● Lagcao v Labra 440 S 279
Sec 49 – Presiding Officer
● The vice governor for the Spanlalawigan; the city vice
mayor for the Spanglungsod and municipal vice mayor for
the sessions of the Sbayan. The presiding officer votes only
in case of a tie.
● Whenever the regular presiding officer fails to preside at the
sanggunian session, the members present, there being a
quorum, shall elect from among themselves a temporary
presiding officer. There is NO AUTOMATIC succession to
the position of presiding officer in the event that the regular
presiding officer is temporarily unable to preside at a
session of the sanggunian.
Sec 50 – Internal Rules of Procedure
● The section deals with procedural matters on the
organization and conduct of the sessions of the various
sanggunian. The Code does not require the completion
of the updating or adoption of the internal rules of
procedure before the sanggunian could act on any
matter like the enactment of an ordinance (Malonzo v
Zamora 323 S 875). It simply requires that the matter of
adopting or updating the internal rules of procedure be
taken up during the first day of session. There is also
nothing in the law which prohibits that the 3 readings of
a proposed ordinance be held in just one day.
Mandatory Committees
● While allowed to create committees, the Code makes the ff 5 comms
mandatory: 1) appropriations 2) women and family
● 3) youth and sports development 4) environmental protection, and
5) cooperatives
● The section also recognizes 2 general causes a member of a
sanggunian may be subjected to disciplinary action by the
sanggunian concerned: 1) disorderly behavior and 2) four
consecutive absences without justifiable cause.
● Sanctions may be censure, reprimand, exclusion from the session,
suspension for not more than 60 days and expulsion for either or
both of the causes cited. A vote of at least 2/3 of ALL the members of
the sanggunian is needed to suspend or expel. The conviction by
final judgment of a member for any crime involving moral turpitude
with a sentence of more than 1 year shall cause his automatic
expulsion from the sanggunian.
Sec 51–Full Disclosure of Financial &
Business Interests of SMembers
● SMembers are OBLIGED to make full disclosures of
● 1) own interests in business or financial matters and 2)
their relationships business-wise financially, professionally,
or by blood or affinity within the 4th civil degree with any
person, firm, entity, where such relationship may result in a
conflict of interest between their performance of duty and
their preference for professional or family ties or their own
business or financial interests.
● 4th civil degree by consaguinity/affinity extends to
● 1) great, great grandparents 2) great great grandchildren
● 3) first cousins; and 4) great grand uncles and aunts
● Time of disclosure – Upon assumption of office. It is an
absolute requirement demanded of the members by virtue
of their membership in the body, whether or not the member
does anything at all during his entire term. A member is
also required to make a disclosure of the interests of his 4th
degree relatives in business, finance or in the profession
before he discharges his duties in the sanggunian as when
he 1) participates in the discussion of an ordinance or
resolution that may affect the business interest, financial
connection or professional relationship mentioned or 2)
votes on 2nd or 3rd reading of the said ordinance; or 3)
delivers a privilege speech; or 4) takes a position thereon.
Sec 52 – Sessions; requirements,
● The day, time and place of the regular sessions of the sanggunian
are fixed by the members on the 1st session day after their election.
● The sanggunians of the province, city and mun will have at least
ONE REGULAR session a week; the barangay at least TWO
regular sessions a week. Aside from meeting in regular session,
the sanggunian may meet in special session upon CALL 1) of the
LCEx or 2) of a majority of the members. Special sessions are
called for reasons of public interest.
● Written notices containing the matters to be considered must be
sent to the members and served personally at their usual place of
residence at least 24 hrs before the special session is held. The law
specifies that the notice be served at the member’s residence; if it
is in fact served at their offices or elsewhere and received by them,
the law is deemed sufficiently complied with.
● In special sessions, only the agenda specified in the
notice will be considered, unless at least 2/3 of the
members present, there being a QUORUM should vote
in favor of considering other items.
● Sessions are open to the public, except if a majority of
those present, there being a quorum, shall vote in favor
of a closed session, which is justified for reasons of
public interest, security, decency or morality.
● Sanggunian journals and records of its proceedings are
required to be kept. These may be published upon
resolution of the sanggunian.
Sec 52 - Sessions
● The power of a municipal council must be exercised at a meeting
which is legally called. Action of all the members of the council
separately is not the action of the council, and an agreement
entered into separately by the members of the council outside a
regular meeting is not binding. Members of a municipal council
may pass a resolution or decision thereof only when duly
assembled in session, as such body. Their individual separate acts,
when not gathered in session, held in accordance with law are not
acts of the council and do not carry the authority thereof. While
the mandatory prerequisites to enactment must be substantially
observed, exactness in the manner may not be required, since
noncompliance with merely formal requirements in the manner of
enactment ordinarily is considered by the courts as no ground for
declaring an ordinance void (Subido v City of Manila 108 Phili 462).
Sec 54 – Quorum
● It is a majority of ALL the members of the sanggunian who have
been elected and qualified. Without a quorum, there can be no
valid session. Any transaction or business conducted during a
session without a quorum is void ab initio.
● The meanng of quorum is best explained in the case of former
cong Manuel “walay kurat” Zamora v Caballero (Jan 2004) when
the former was a member of the Sanggunian Panlalawigan.
● When a session is called on a certain day but there is no quorum,
the presiding officer or the majority of the members present may
adjourn from day to day and compel the attendance of the absent
members by ordering their ARREST by the police and their
presentation at the session. The arrest is not for the purpose of
jailing the absent members but to compel their attendance at the
session.


Sec 54 – Approval of Ordinances
● Requisites for validity: Read Magtajas case. 1) it must not
contravene the Constitution or any statute 2) it must not be unfair
or oppressive 3) it must not be partial or discriminatory 4) it must
not prohibit but may regulate trade 5) it must be general and
consistent with public policy and 6) it must not be unreasonable.
● Ordinances enacted by the Spanlalwigan are approved by the
Governor; Ordinances enacted by the Spanglungsod are
approved by the city mayor and those enacted by the SBayan by
the mun mayor; those by the SBarangay by the Punong
Barangay.
● The approval covered in this section deals ONLY with approval
of the governor for provincial ordinances or resolutions and the
mayor for city ordinances/resolutions.
Approval not ministerial act
● The approval of an ordinance where the LCEx affixes his signature is
not a purely ministerial act. He has veto power. (De los Reyes v
Sandiganbayan 281 S 631).
● Approval may be done: 1) the governor’s or mayor’s signing all the
pages of the ordinance or 2) the governor’s inaction on a pr0vincial
ordinance within 15 days from the date of its receipt, or mayor’s
inaction on a city/mun ordinance within 10 days from the date of
receipt. The inaction results in the approval of the ordinance. In the
case of barangay ordinances, once approved by a majority of all the
members of the Sbarangay, the approval of the punong barangay is
not required to make the ordinances effective, because the PB is a
member of the SBarangay. The action of the majority of all the
members binds the PB who just have to sign and implement them. He
has no veto power.
Judicial Notice of municipal
ordinances
● While courts are required to take judicial notice of the laws
enacted by Congress, the rule with respect to local
ordinances is different. Ordinances are not included in the
enumeration of matters covered by MANDATORY
JUDICIAL NOTICE under Section 1, Rule 129 of the Rules of
Court.
● Trial Courts should take judicial notice of municipal
ordinances within their respective jurisdiction. The
enactment of an ordinance and its provisions are supposed
to be known by the courts of the area where the municipality
concerned may be located and therefore, need not be proven
at proceedings in such courts (Gallego v Pp 8 S 813).
● HOWEVER,
Social Justice Society v Atienza
156052 Feb 13, 2008
● Even where there is a statute that requires a court to take
judicial notice of ordinances, a court is not required to take
judicial notice of ordinances that are not before it and to
which it does not have access. The party asking the court to
take judicial notice is obligated to supply the court with the
full text of the rules the party desires it to have notice of.
Counsel should take the initiative in requesting that a trial
court take judicial notice of an ordinance even where a statute
requires courts to take judicial notice of local ordinances.. .
Such a statute does not direct the court to act on its own in
obtaining evidence for the record and a party must make the
ordinance available to the court for it to take notice.
Sec 55 – Veto power of the LCExe
● The grant of the veto power confers authority beyond the
simple mechanical act of signing an ordinance or
resolution, as a requisite to its enforceability. Such power
accords the LCE the discretion to sustain a reso or ordinance
in the 1st instance or to veto it and return it with his
objections to the Sanggunian, which may proceed to
reconsider the same
● The Sanggunian may override the veto by a 2/3 vote of all
its members thereby making the ordinance effective for all
intents and purposes.
● This is a case where special quorum is required. The
number of members present at a session to override a veto
must be more than the usual majority.
Grounds for Veto
● 1.) ordinances or parts thereof are ULTRA VIRES
● 2.) ordinances or parts thereof are prejudicial to the public welfare
● Ultra vires – ordinance/parts thereof are BEYOND the power of
the sanggunian to enact, as when the ordinance amends and
violates a national law by imposing additional requirements to
those which the national law imposes (Villacorta v Bernardo 143 S
480).
● The veto may apply to 1) entire ordinances or
● 2) particular items of certain ordinances such as:
● appropriation ordinances; ordinances adopting local
● development plans and public investment programs and
● ordinances directing payment of money or creating a liability
● against the province, city or municipality
● Generally, only ordinances are subject to veto. The section
allows the veto of resolutions dealing with local
development plans and public investment programs.
(involve investment of public money).
● If an entire ordinance is vetoed, the ordinance is considered
dead, unenforceable for all intents and purposes. If only
certain items are vetoed as in appropriation ordinances,
only the vetoed items are rendered ineffectual.
● The LCE must inform the Sanggunian concerned of the veto
within 15/10 days as the case may be. The override makes
the ordinance effective as if approved and signed. Once
overridden, the veto may not be reimposed on the same
ordinance or subject matter.
Sec 56 – Review of CCity & Mun
Ordinances/Resolutions by SPanllw
● The Sangguniang Panlalawigan, not the Governor, has the
power of review of component city or municipal ordinances
of all kinds and resolutions dealing with local development
plans and public investment programs formulated by the
local development councils. The ordinances/resolutions
have to be submitted to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan for
review within 3 days after their approval.
● From submittal , the SP has 30 days to determine whether
or not the ordinance/reso is valid. The review may result in
either approval or invalidation. Approval may be:
● 1) formally, by passing a resolution of approval or
● 2) informally, by its inaction on the ordinance/reso within
30 days from their submittal for review.
● The Spanlalawigan may declare such ordinance/reso invalid or in
whole or in part if they are found to be outside the powers of the
sanggunian of the Component City or Municipality. The action
has to be communicated to the LGU concerned within 30 days
from the submission of the ordinances or resolutions.
● The SP is without authority to disapprove the municipal resolution
authorizing the mayor to initiate expropriation proceedings for the
municipality which clearly has the power to exercise the right of
eminent domain and its SBayan the capacity to promulgate said
resolution. The SP disapproval of the resolution is an infirm action
which does not render the said resolution null and void. (Moday v
CA 268 S 586). The Code grants the SP the power to declare a
mun reso invalid on the SOLE GROUND THAT IT IS BEYOND
THE POWER of the Sbayan or the mayor to issue.
Sec 57 – Review of Barangay
Ordinances by SPanglungsod or SB
● Barangay ordinances are subject to review by the
Spanglungsod or Sbayan of the city/municipality to which
it belongs. The sanggunian may approve the ordinances if
these are consistent with law or with city/mun ordinances.
Approval is the same as the SPanlalawigan - by reso of the
sanggunian or inaction.
● The sanggunian may disapprove the ordinances on the
ground of inconsistency with law or city/mun ordinances,
in which case, the sanggunian shall return the ordinances
with its comments or recommendations to the barangay of
origin for their adjustment, amendment or modification.
Until the revisions called for are made, the effectivity of the
ordinances in question is suspended.
Sec 58 – Enforcement of Disapproved
Ordinances/reso
● LGU officials or employees who attempt to enforce
any ordinance or resolution that has been
disapproved by the sanggunian concerned are liable
for suspension or dismissal, whether they are elective
or appointed officials. This is an additional ground
for disciplinary action against erring LGU officials or
employees.
Sec 59 – Effectivity of ordinances or
Resolutions
● Requisite of publication (by posting). - The effectivity of an ordinance
or resolution approving the local development plan and public
investment program may be fixed in the ordinance or resolution itself.
If it is not so stated, then it is effective on the 11th day from the date a
copy thereof is posted in a bulletin board at the entrance of the
provincial or city, municipal or barangay hall as the case may be and
in two other conspicuous places in the local government unit
concerned.
● Ordinances/resolutions passed by HUC and ICC have to be
published at least once in a local newspaper of general circulation
within the city. If there is no such local newspaper, then in a
newspaper of general circulation. It should be sufficient compliance
with the law if the main features, not necessarily the entire texts of
the ordinance/reso are published in any newspaper of general
circulation.
Publication how done
● The ordinance/resolution shall be disseminated and
posted in FILIPINO or ENGLISH AND in the language
or dialect understood by the majority of the people
within the territorial jurisdiction of the province, city ,
municipality, or barangay concerned. In addition, the
gist of all ordinances which have PENAL sanctions shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation
within the province where the sanggunian concerned
belongs. If there is no such newspaper in the province,
the ordinance has to be posted in all the municipalities
and cities concerned.
Sec 60 – Grounds for Disciplinary
action against elective local official
● A. DISLOYALTY to the Republic - an administrative case
based on this ground only requires substantial evidence.
(Aguinaldo v Santos 212 S 768).
● A public official cannot be removed for administrative
misconduct committed during a prior term. His reelection
expresses the sovereign will of the electorate to forgive or
condone any act or omission constituting a ground for
administrative discipline which was committed during the
previous term. Sound public policy dictates it. This doctrine
of forgiveness or condonation cannot however, apply to
criminal acts which the reelected official may have
committed during his previous term.
● B. Culpable violation of the Constitution
● C. Dishonesty, oppression, misconduct in office, gross
negligence or dereliction of duty
● D. Commission of any offense involving moral turpitude or an
offense punishable by at least prision mayor (above 6yrs 1day)
● E. Abuse of authority
● F. Unauthorized absence for 15 consecutive working days,
except in the case of members of the Sanggunian
● G. Application for, or acquisition of, foreign citizenship or
residence or the status of an immigrant of another country; H.
Such other grounds as may be provided in this Code and
other laws
 Other Grounds for Disciplinary
action
● Violation of special laws such as 1) Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, RA 6713
2) Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, RA 3019 3) The
Administrative Code of 1987 4) Revised Penal Code 5) Clean
Water Act
● 5) Solid Waste Management Act and all other applicable
general and special laws.
● Desistance of the complainant does not necessarily prevent
the continuation of the investigation of the cause of the
complaint and even the punishment of the official if warranted
by the circumstances (Cruz v Dalisay 152 S 482).
Power to remove erring exclusive
with the courts
● An elective local official may be removed from office on the
grounds enumerated BY ORDER OF THE PROPER COURT.
● The penalty of dismissal from service upon an erring
elective local official may be decreed only by a court of law
(Pablico v Sandiganbayan 147870 July 31, 2002). The
Office of the President is without any power to remove
elected officials, since such power is exclusively vested in
the proper courts as expressly provided for in Sec. 60 of the
Code. (Salalima v Guingona 257 S 55).
● The law on suspension or removal of elective public
officials must be strictly construed and applied.
Sec 61 – Form and filing of 

administrative complaints
● Complaints where filed:
● 1) against elective officials of a province or city
regardless of classification, - with the Office of the
President whose decision is final
● 2) against elective officials of a municipality – with the
Sanggunian Panlalawigan whose decision may be
appealed with the Office of the President
● 3) against elective barangay officials – with the
Sangguniang Panglungsod or Bayan concerned whose
decision shall be final and executory
Sec 62 – Notice of Hearing
● Reglementary Periods. The section lays down the various periods
which must be complied with in the administrative investigation
to conform with the requirements of due process. The
investigating official or agency is directed to comply with 2
periods:
● a) require within 7 days from the filing of the complaint, the
official being investigated to submit his verified answer and
● b) commence the investigation within 10 days from receipt of the
VERIFIED answer.
● The answer must contain a statement at the end thereof that the
person answering is the very person being investigated and that
the answer was prepared by him or at his instance and that he has
read the answer and the statements made therein are true of his
own knowledge.
● The respondent is directed to submit his verified answer
within 15 days from receipt of the complaint.
● VENUE of investigation . Provincial and HUC officials shall
be investigated at their respective offices. Other local
elective officials shall be investigated at the office of their
respective Sanggunian.
● Election BAN on Investigations or Suspensions.
Investigations are not allowed within 90 days immediately
prior to any local election. Neither may preventive
suspensions be imposed during the said period. If a
preventive suspension has been imposed prior to the period
mentioned, it shall be lifted automatically at the start of the
90 days stated.
Sec 63 – Preventive Suspension
● May be ordered even before the charges are heard and
before he is given an opportunity to prove his innocence, -
to prevent the officer from performing the functions of his
office. Power to suspend may be exercised without notice
to person suspended. Such temporary suspension without
previous hearing is in accord with the law.
● Who can suspend? 1) President over local elective officials
of a province, HUC and ICC. 2) Governor over those of
ComC and municipalities 3) Mayor over barangay
officials.
● The Ombudsman has concurrent jurisdiction to impose
preventive suspension in the conduct of administrative
investigation over elective local officials.
Requisites for preventive suspension
under the LGC
● 1. there is reasonable ground to believe that the
respondent has committed the act/s complained of;
● 2. the evidence of culpability is strong
● 3. the gravity of the offense so warrants or
● 4. the continuance in office of the respondent could
influence the witnesses or pose a threat to the safety
and integrity of the records and other evidence.
Conditions under the Ombudsman
Act for preventive suspension
● 1. the evidence of guilt should be strong,
● 2. the charge against the officer / employee should
involve dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct
or neglect in the performance of duty
● 3. the charges should warrant removal from the
service
● 4. the respondent’s continued stay in office would
prejudice the case filed against him
When imposed
● May be imposed after the issues are joined – meaning
the complaint has been answered and there are no
longer any substantial preliminary issue that remains to
be threshed out. The period of suspension for one
administrative case cannot exceed 60days; and if there
are several administrative cases, the period cannot
exceed 90days within a single year on the same
ground/s existing and known at the time of first
suspension. Interruption of the investigation caused by
the person being investigated or upon his request is not
counted in computing the 60 or 90 day suspension.
Period of preventive suspension
● The period of suspension under this section does not limit the
period of suspension under the Ombudsman Act. Suspension
ordered by the Ombudsman, whose independence is guaranteed
by the Constitution is governed not by the LGC but by RA 6770.
● Elective officials may also be preventively suspended as a result
of the filing of criminal charges against them pursuant to Sec 13
of the RA 3019. Preventive suspension is mandatory (Bunye v
Escareal 226 S 332), once the validity of the information is
determined. The period however, may not exceed 90 days.
● Preventive suspension is NOT an INTERRUPTION of term and
is not a reason to avoid the 3- term limitation (Aldovino v
Comelec 184836 Dec 23 2009).
Automatic reinstatement
● At the end of the period of preventive suspension, the
official is reinstated to office. The proceedings shall
continue and be terminated within 120 days from the
date he received formal notice of the case against him.
Delays attributable to respondent’s fault, neglect or
request are not counted in reckoning the 120 days
during which the case is to be resolved. The time during
which appeals from rulings of the investigator of the
case are pending are not included in computing the 120
days.
Sec 64 – salary of respondent
pending suspension
● The respondent official preventively suspended from
office shall receive no salary or compensation during
such suspension; but upon subsequent exoneration
and reinstatement, he shall be paid full salary or
compensation including emoluments accruing during
such suspension.
Sec 65 – Rights of Respondent
● The respondent shall be accorded full opportunity to
appear and defend himself in person or by counsel,
to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against
him, and to require the attendance of witnesses and
the production of documentary evidence in his favor
thru the compulsory process of subpoena or
subpoena duces tecum.
● These are the same rights guaranteed by the
Constitution.
Sec 66 – Form and Notice of Decision
● The investigation shall be terminated within 90 days from
the start thereof and a decision to be rendered within 30
days thereafter. The decision shall be in writing stating
clearly and distinctly the facts and reasons for the decision.
Copies of the decision shall immediately be furnished the
respondent and all interested parties.
● The Code sets the limits of the PENALTY of SUSPENSION
to six (6) months or the unexpired portion of the term of
office of the respondent for every administrative case.
● If there are several administrative offenses, the suspension
for each offense should not exceed six months and the
successive service of the suspension should not exceed the
unexpired portion of the term of office of respondent.
What constitutes a Decision
● An administrative offense means every act or conduct or
omission which amounts to, or constitutes, any of the
grounds for disciplinary action as enumerated in Sec 60.
● In Malinao v Reyes 255 S 616, the SC said in order to
render a decision in administrative cases, the decision of
the Sanggunian must be in writing stating clearly and
distinctly the facts and reasons for such decision. It is not a
Decision if it lacks the signature of the requisite majority.
Like the procedure in the SC, the voting following the
deliberation of the members of the Sanggunian did not
necessarily constitute their decision unless this was
embodied in an opinion prepared by one of them and
concurred in by the others.
● The penalty of suspension nor the sanction of preventive
suspension is NOT a BAR to the candidacy of the
official concerned. The penalty of REMOVAL is a bar to
the candidacy for any elective position.
● A reelected local official may not be held
administratively accountable for misconduct committed
during his prior term of office. There is no distinction as
to the precise timing or period when the misconduct
was committed, reckoned from the date of the official’s
reelection, except that it must be prior to said date
(Garcia v Mojica 314 S 207).
Sec 67 – Administrative Appeals
● Appeals for administrative decisions may be made
within 30 days from receipt of the decision.
● Where to appeal:
● 1. Sangguniang Panlalawigan – from the decision of the
Spanglungsod of Com Cities and the Sbayan
● 2. Office of the President – from the decision of the
Spanlalawigan and the Spanglungsod of HUC and ICC

● Decisions of the Office of the President shall be final

and executory.
Sec 68 – Execution Pending Appeal
● Only applies to administrative decisions rendered by the
Office of the President or the appropriate Sanggunian
against elective local officials and NOT to administrative
decisions of the Ombudsman (Lapid v CA 334 S 741).
● Administrative appeals no longer prevent decisions from
being enforced. If an elective official (governor) is
penalized with removal, he may be removed even if he
appeals to the Court (CA) to question the decision. During
the pendency of the appeal, he is considered as having
been placed under preventive suspension. He cannot
discharge his duties nor collect salary or other emoluments
attached to his office. Once he is exonerated, he is entitled
to reinstatement and to his salary and emoluments.
 Failure of Party to appear before
the Lupon or Pangkat
● Spouses Valdez vs Sps Tabisula GR 175510, July 28, 2008
● A party is precluded from filing any counterclaim in light
of Art. 199 of Rule XXVI of the Rules and Regulations
Implementing the LGC. . .
● Such refusal or willful failure to appear shall be
reflected in the records of the lupon secretary or in the
minutes of the pangkat secretary and shall BAR the
COMPLAINANT who fails to appear from seeking judicial
recourse for the same course of action, and the
RESPONDENT who refuses to appear, from filing any
counterclaim arising out of, or necessarily connected with
the complaint.
Art. 199 IRR – Penalty for refusal or
failure of party/witness to appear
● Refusal or willful failure of any party or witness to
appear before the lupon or pangkat in compliance with
summons issued pursuant to this Rule may be
punished by the city or municipal court as for indirect
contempt of court upon application filed therewith by
the lupon chairman, the pangkat chairman, or by any of
the contending parties. Such refusal or failure to appear
shall be reflected in the records of the lupon secretary or
in the minutes of the pangkat secretary and shall bar the
complainant from seeking judicial recourse. . .