STATCON REPORTING OUTLINE: Strict
Statues authorizing suits against
Construction
Generally
A statute the question of when it will be
given a strict or liberal construction depends
on four requisites:
a. nature of the statute
b. purpose to be subserved
c. mischief to be remedied
d. interpretation (either strict or liberal)
to be followed; and by following such
will give accomplishment in the desire
of finding the statute’s legislative intent
Strict Construction, generally
Strict Construction
- construction according to the letter of a
statute, which recognizes nothing that
is not expressed, takes the language
used in its exact meaning, and admits
no equitable consideration
- scope of a statute shall not be extended
or enlarged by implication, intendment
or equitable consideration beyond the
literal meaning of its terms
- close and conservative adherence to
the literal or textual interpretation
- does not mean giving a statute its
narrowest meaning nor restricting
words as not to have their full meaning
Statutes to be Strictly Construed
a. Penal Statutes
b. Acts mala in se and mala prohibita
c. Statues in derogation of rights
d. Statutes authorizing expropriations
e. Statutes granting privileges
f. Legislative grants to local
government units
g. Statutory grounds for removal of
officials
h. Naturalization laws
i. Statutes imposing taxes and
customs duties
j. Statutes granting tax exemptions
k. Statutes concerning the sovereign
l.
government
m. Statutes prescribing formalities of
will
n. Exceptions and provisos
Penal Statues
Penal Statues
- laws by which punishments are
imposed for violation or transgression
of their provisions
- acts of legislature which prohibit certain
acts and establish penalties for their
violations
- define crimes, treat of their nature, and
provide for their punishment
- impose punishment for an offense
committed against the state
- all statues which command or prohibit
certain acts, and establishes for their
violation, and even those which, without
expressly prohibiting certain acts,
impose a penalty upon their
commission
 To test if a statute employed is penal
in nature, is to check whether or not a
penalty is imposed for the punishment
of a wrong to the public or for the
redress of an injury to an individual
Penal Statues strictly construed.
- Penal laws are strictly construed
against the State and liberally in favor
of the accused.
- Thus, penal statues shall not be
extended or enlarged by implication,
intendment or equitable consideration.
- The court must not bring cases that are
not clearly embraced by statute. Nor
bring a narrow, technical or forced
construction excluded in a statute.
- Only penalties clearly included will be
considered within the operation of a
statute.
- Whatever is not plainly within the
provisions of a penal statue should be
regarded as without its intendment.
- When there is reasonable doubt, it must
be resolved in favor of the accused.

 To point out as well, penal statues are
different from procedural laws.
Procedural laws are rules of court
determining what happens in lawsuits
both civil and criminal, as well as
administrative proceedings. Again,
penal statues must be strictly construed
while procedural laws can are liberally
construed as presented in our former
case, Buensada v. Flavier.
Reason why penal statutes are strictly
construed:
- According to the court in United States
v. Go Chico, 14 Phil. 128 (1909), penal
statues must be construed with
strictness as to carefully safeguard
the rights of the defendant and at the
same time preserve the obvious
intention of the legislature.
- It also founded on the tenderness of
the law for the rights of individuals
and on the plain principle that the
power of punishment is vested in
Congress and not the judiciary.
- Establishment of a certain rule by
conformity where mankind would be
safe and the discretion of the court
is limited.
- The purpose of strict construction is not
provide punishment for the guilty but to
provide a precise definition of a
forbidden act.
Acts mala in se and mala prohibita
Mala in se are those penalized under the
Revised Penal Code, criminal intent apart from
the act itself is required.
The words “voluntarily”, “knowingly”, or
“willfully” impart criminal intent. These are acts
male in se.
Mala prohibita only inquires on whether or not
a law has been violated.
 Whether a statute is to be construed
depends upon the intent of the
legislature, taking into consideration
the nature of the offense, the
purpose to be accomplished and
such other factors that will throw light
upon the meaning of the language.
 When a crime is punishable both by the
Revise Penal Code and by a special
law, where each prescribes a different
prescriptive period, where one is longer
than the other, the shorter period
should apply as it is more favorable to
the accused.
Limitations
 Strict construction should not be
permitted to defeat the intent, policy,
and purpose of the statute.
 When a statute is capable of two
interpretations, one which will operate
to exempt an accused from liability and
the other, which will give effect to the
manifest intent and object of the
statute, one must follow that of
construction that will provide for the
intent and object of the statute. Why
so? For although penal statues are to be
strictly construed, they shall not defeat the
obvious purpose of the legislature. But
when the law is ambiguous and there is
doubt to its meaning, such law must be
construed against the State.
Statutes in derogation (partial suspension of a
law) of rights
 Our rights are not absolute, that is why
the State in exercise its police power
(constitution-granted power to govern, and
to make, adopt, and enforce laws for the
protection and preservation of public
health, justice, morals, order, safety and
security, and welfare. It also gives a
government the right to take private
property for public use under the doctrine
of eminent domain), may enact laws that
curtail or restrict enjoyment of
rights.
Statutes authorizing expropriations
 Statutes authorizing expropriations of
property are strictly construed against
 the expropriating authority and
liberally in favor of property owners.
 The reason is the exercise of the right
of eminent domain, (the action by the
state or an authority of taking property from
its owner for public use or benefit),
whether by the State or by its
authorized agents, is necessarily in
derogation of private rights.
Statutes granting privileges
 The grant of privileges to private
persons and/or entities have in many
instances created special privileges or
monopolies and have been viewed with
suspicion. Such suspicion only allows
that laws granting privileges must be
strictly construed. Where one who fails
to strictly comply with the will of the
grantor loses such privileges.
 Privilegia recipiunt largam
interpretationem voluntati consonam
concedentis – privileges are to be
interpreted in accordance with the will
of him who grants them
Legislative grants to local government units
 These are grants of public nature, they
should be strictly construed against
the grantee.
 Why? These grants may carry the
potentiality of unjust public money
or property which results in an unfair
advantage to the grantee and for that
reason the grant should be narrowly
restricted in favor of the public.
Statutory grounds for removal of officials
 Removal of officials must be confined
within the limited prescriptions and
specifications provided for by the
statute: consider causes, manners
and conditions fixed by the statute.
 Why? The removal of an official is
drastic and penal in nature. Injustice
and harm to the public interest might
become a result of such removal from
office.
Naturalization Laws (CA 473: Revised
Naturalization Act; RA 9225: Citizenship Retention
and Reacquisition Act)
 These are strictly construed against
the applicant.
 Why? Right of an alien to be a citizen
by naturalization is statutory in nature
rather than a natural right.
 An alien must file a petition and secure
for himself competent and satisfactory
evidence that he possesses such
qualifications prescribed by law.
Statutes imposing taxes and customs duties
 Why? The power to tax is a result of
sovereignty and is unlimited in its
range.
Statutes granting tax exemptions
 To be construed strictissimi juris
(strictest letter of the law) against the
taxpayer and liberally favor of the
taxing authority. The taxpayer must
prove that the claim for exemption is in
fact covered by the exemption as
provided by the law.
 Why? For the law frowns against
exemption to be claimed. The basis
for this rule is to minimize the different
treatment, and foster impartiality,
fairness and equality of treatment
among taxpayers.
 Where a statute grants exemptions in
express terms, this must be understood
that these are the only exemptions to be
considered.
 The exemption to be claimed must be
shown to undoubtedly exist. When such
claim is nonexistent, court has no
liberty to supply one.
 There is no difference in nature
between tax exemption and tax
exclusion. Exemption is a privilege; it
is freedom from a charge or burden to
which others are exempted. On the
other hand, exclusion is the removable
of tax from taxable items.
Statutes concerning the sovereign legislative policy. On the other hand,
 Restrictive statues which impose the proviso provides exemptions which
burdens on the public treasury or which should be excluded from the operation
of the statute.
diminish rights and interests are strictly
construed.
 No matter how broad the terms are in a
statute, it does not embrace the
sovereign unless the sovereign is
specifically mentioned.

Statutes authorizing suits against the

government
 A statute that gives the consent of the
State to be sued must be strictly
construed.
 Why? This is founded on the ground
that since the government is the
authority that provides for what our
rights are, they could possibly be no
suits against it. The grant to be sued
without waiver of the State provides for
an inefficiency of the Government.
 Nullum tempus occurrit regi: literally
meaning: “no time run against the king”;
the crown is not subject to statutes of
limitations
 A statute that gives the consent of the
State to be sued is strictly construed.

Statutes prescribing formalities of will

 A will must be executed in
accordance with statutory
requirements, otherwise it will be void.
 Why? The court seeks to ascertain and
apply the intent of the legislators and
not of the testator.

Exceptions and provisos

 Exceptions should be strictly but
reasonably construed. General
provisions prevail over exceptions
when there is doubt to be resolved.
 An express exception excludes all
others.
 A proviso should be construed
consistently with the legislative
intent. Why? The legislative intent in
the general enactment expresses the