MUNICIPAL LAW – October 8, 2018

(by Sol Barzuela)

SECTION 51. FULL DISCLOSURE OF FINANCIAL AND BUSINESS INTERESTS OF SANGGUNIAN MEMBERS (SM)

It is the duty of the SB Member to disclose that the information concerning public interest that the public may
be informed. Like, if SM Member is a business man and the subject matter of the legislative measure is an
ordinance in the conduct of business, the SM Member is bound to disclose his interest WHICH MUST BE IN
WRITING because there is now a conflict of interest.

SECTION 52. SESSIONS.

Regular Session – like regular siopao. Session which is conducted every week in case of Sanngunians in the
provinces, cities or municipalities. In the barangay, twice a month. There is a schedule that is constant, weekly
or twice a month as the case may be.

Here, there is no need of notice to the members because they already know, based on their internal rules of
procedure, the time and date of the session. As to the place of session, it is within the territorial jurisdiction of
that LGU. In other words, it may not be conducted outside. Kung sa Itogon, it cannot be conducted in Baguio
City. The validity of the proceedings then will be questioned.

Special Session – there are some ingredients that are different from that ordinary. Session which is conducted
outside the regular day.

Here, NOTICE IS REQUIRED which must be in WRITING and DELVIERED to the SM to his usual residence within
24 hours prior to that special session that is provided by the said SM himself.

As to the place of session, it is the same which is within the territorial jurisdiction of that LGU

 BOTH SESSIONS must be/is open the public owing to the maxim that “public office is a public trust”,
hence the public is entitled to know what is going on in the session of the Sanggunian.
o EXN: When majority of the SM vote to hold a closed door session by reason of security,
morality or decency.
o In all other instances, session is open to the public.
o If session is about a supplemental budget, it will not justify a closed door session because the
justification does not fall under security, morality or decency.

SECTION 53. QUORUM

It is the number which is greater than ½ of the members of the body or members of Sanggunian. So if
Sanngunian has 15 members, 8 is the quorum.

50% plus 1 is NOT ACCURATE because in a Sanggunian with 15 members, ½ is 7.5, so plus 1 is 8.5 but as we
have said there is NO “.5”/FRACTIONAL PERSON which has been decided by the Supreme Court even in cases
involving the Commission on Appointments as well as in Congress.

So when we talk about number of persons in a given body in the Sanggunian, specifically, we are talking of
WHOLE NUMBER. So that if you consider FRACTIONAL PERSON, there is now a sort of UNCLEAR number.

 As to MEMBERSHIP, the PRESIDING OFFICER is a member.

o Case of councilor who has manifested that he is residing as councilor during the session, it so
happened that there were 6 members plus the presiding officer, so Vice Mayor plus 6 members
of the Sanggunian who were present, so there were 7 of them. The councilor designation was
recorded and entered in the journal. Thereafter, the following day, the Vice Mayor appointed
 his resigned councilor as secretary to the Sanggunian. Somebody questioned the validity of the
appointment on the ground that:
 When he manifested his resignation, there is no quorum and therefore there is no valid
transaction or proceeding on that day is invalid.
 Bakit daw? There are 12 elected members, 6 is 50% at ang sabi niya, considering that
there are 12 members, 6 is only 50% and therefore there is no quorum.
 Sabi naman ng Vice Mayor, there is a quorum because we have to include the presiding
officer which makes the total number 13, ½ of which is 6.5. There are 7 who are present
including the presiding officer, 7 being greater than 6.5, there is a quorum.
o SC sustained the argument of the Vice Mayor and the councilor who resigned.
o SC said that in the determination of quorum, the presiding officer is included because if you
consider the term ‘member’ in its generic sense, the presiding officer is INCLUDED.

POSTING AND PUBLICATION

Publication does not necessarily mean publishing it in a newspaper. POSTING is also considered as publication.
As long as you make a certain information public, then that is already publication.

But there are instances where publication in the newspaper is required. Just read your LGC such that of an
ordinance for development plan effective. If the ordinance does not say anything about the period of
publication, you follow what is stated in the LGC which is atleast 10 days

RATIONALE: To inform the public and being part of the due process.

PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF

Nothing found in the LGC but see your Rules of Court.

Basically, if a person is adversely affected by a legislative measure, such that of an ordinance, hindi siguro
resolution kasi temporary lang siya, and there is a question on its validity or adverse affected, notwithstanding
that it is legal, then a person may go to court and file a petition for declaratory relief as a remedy.

TAX MEASURES; ORDINANCES – CONSTRUCTION OR INTERPRETATION

Tax measures are strictly construed against the body or the LGU that enacted the said measure. Liberally
construed in favor of the tax payers.

Tax exemptions are strictly construed against the taxpayer claimant.

Double taxation is not really illegal per se and not also a prohibition

RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF ORDINANCES

If it has penal provisions favorable to the accused, then it shall be given retroactive effect.

If an ordinance has penal provision which is the same with a law/national law, the one having a lesser penalty
will be considered by the court in the imposition of penalty for a crime or offense covered by national and a
local ordinance.

MUNICIPAL LAW – October 27, 2018

(by Nazz Ordillo)

There is that such other grounds as may be provided by the LGU code so it is not limited only on those
enumerated on that section, but what is more important is that last statement that says that “an elective official
may be removed from office by an order of the proper court, I emphasized this because this has been settled
in jurisprudence that when a person avails of a remedy against an elective official based on the local
government code then there is no penalty of removal of office it has to be by the order of the proper court. In
other words if you look at the grounds, any of the ground for filing of a complaint against an elective official.

WHERE TO FILE?

If an elective official is from the Province, HUC, ICC or Component city the complaint is certified in the Office of
the President, take note may twist jan diba it is a division from the other things that we learned that when it
comes to a component city it is the province that has authority over it but this time, when it is a complaint
against an elective official in a component city it goes to the Office of the President, so for complaint against
an elective official of a municipality it goes to the sangguniang panlalawigan and for elective barangay officials
to the Sanggunian Bayan or Sangguniang Pangluungsod as the case may be.

Take note of the last statement that say “removal shall be by the order of the proper court, in other words even
the OP may not impose the penalty of the removal from office even if that is the proper..(inaudible)

So kung ikaw yung complainant and you want to remove the mayor, do not avail of the provisions of the LGU
code, you file the case before the ombudsman or before the proper court if your intention is to remove the
mayor from his office, pero kung gusto mong masuspend lang punta aka sa Sanggunian or LGU provisions.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

- So there is a verification, we might also add that aside that the complaint should be verified, it is also
required that the complaint shall be accompanied by Certification of non- forum shopping, in fact that
could be part of the verification.
- Non- Compliance results from dismissal without prejudice.

Take note also that an answer need to be verified under the provisions of the LGU code.

PROCEDURE:

1. 7 days from receipt of the verified complaint the respondent shall be required to file his verified answer
within 15 days from the receipt.
2. The investigation shall commence within 10 days from receipt of the verified answer.

Sanggunians may however come up with their own procedure, ang problem kasi this is a quasi- judicial function,
maghehearing sial parang judges, specially for far- flung areas they have no idea of conducting an administrative
procedure. So naelect ung member dahil gwapo, so may complaint na nafile and he will say anya ngay
aramidek dita? Anya ngay ammuk dita. KUNANA NGAY!

So that’s an added function of the sanggunian, to act as an administrative body in cases filed against barangay
officials. SO hnid lang pala sila legislators they could also act as administrative bodies with quasi- judicial
functions.

PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION

- It is not a penalty, it is only done beacause of certain grounds like to prevent tampering of evidence
under the care of the respondent or danger to life and property.
- Since it is not a penalty the requirement of due process may not be complied with. In other words there
could be preventive suspension even without notice and hearing.
- Take note also of those authorities who are given the power to issue a preventive suspension order, It
is not the Sanggunian in case of barangay elective officials, it is the Local Chief Executive as
 recommended by the sanggunian bayan concerned. The office of the President of course it is the one
who issues the preventive suspension order.

LIMITATION OF PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION:

- Prohibited within the 90 days prior to a local election. So second Monday of may 90 days prior to it no
preventive suspension.
- LGU code also provides that preventive suspension is automatically lifted upon the commencement of
the 90 day period.

EFFECT OF PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION:

- If tin the end the respondent is found guilty as charged the preventive suspension could be part of the
penalty.
- If respondent is exonerated the the respondent shall receive his salary for the period of suspension.

Preventive Suspension can be issued after the issues has been joined that’s is after the last pleading has been
filed.

Judicial Affidavit Rule is also applicable in administrative cases because the purpose of the judicial affidavit rule
is to fast track the proceedings.

Awarding of damages is not allowed otherwise it is in the nature already of civil case.

MUNICIPAL LAW – November 5, 2018

(by Sol Barzuela)

SEC. 68. EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL

The highest penalty could be SUPENSION and NOT removal from office then LGC authorizes execution pending
appeal which means that even if the respondent appeals the decision of the Sanngunian or the Office of the
President as the case may be, it does not stop the execution of that decision.

In cases covered by Rules of Summary Procedure, especially if there is no supersedeas bond filed, then there
could be execution ending appeal.

But in the LGC, there is no need for a bond.

A decision that is appealed where the penalty is suspension, whatever the length of the period, it is
IMMEDIATELY EXECUTORY. That is the meaning of execution pending appeal.

LGC also tells us that the execution or implementation of a decision shall be treated same as PREVENTIVE
SUSPENSION. (Sec. 63)

 In case the respondent would be exonerated, then such period where he has not receive his salary shall
be treated as period of preventive suspension and he shall be paid. The equivalent salary or wages is
that period that lapse from the time that there is an execution pending appeal.
 Ang problema lang, syempre elective official, kunware after 3 yrs tsaka na lng na-exonerate, he could
get back his salary for the period he is supposed to serve.
 PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION IS AUTOMATICALLY LIFTED within the 90-day period prior to the local
election

READ: Disciplinary Action

 CHAPTER 5: SEC. 69. RECALL

Recall is a unique way of removing local elective officials. Local meaning, it does not apply to members of
Congress, Senate, the President or the Vice President. They are not covered by the provisions on recall

READ: Amendatory Law – RA 9244 Feb. 19, 2004. (See Appendix A)

Under LGC, it speaks recall having two methods:

1. Preparatory Recall Assembly (PRA)

2. Registered Voters

 RA 9244 had eliminated the Preparatory Recall Assembly so DISREGARD PRA.

 Under the LGC, PRA shall be composed of the elective officials depending on who is to be recalled but
this has been eliminated by RA 9244. In other words, there is only one method now of recall which is
through registered voters.

REGISTERED VOTERS

It could be 25%, 15% or 10% depending on the number of registered voters.

OF COURSE THERE IS A PROCESS

 Registered voters would come up with a petition;

 Required number of assignatories by those who initiated the recall;
 Verified by the COMELEC;
 Will be open to questions by the officer or elective officials to be recalled.
 If the COMELEC finds it to be sufficient in form and substance, COMELEC will now schedule a recall
election
o Case: Socrates Reyes vs. Hagedorn
 The incumbent official to be recalled is automatically a candidate in the recall election
o BLACKOUT 

RECALL is a remedy to remove elective officials in the LGU not in the national level.

 Once upon a time in Baguio, there was a move to recall the present Mayor and this is a former RTC
Judge, former councilor and a lawyer, whereas during a live interview, he commented that he welcome
the recall proceedings against him but he also said that “let us include the Congressman.”
o Ai apo met daytoy nga Mayor!
o How could you recall a Congressman when the provisions of the law on recall applied only to
local elective officials. REMEMBER THIS!
 Here, we are talking, PROVINCIAL, CITY, MUNICIPAL, and BARANGAY ELECTIVE OFFICIALS.

LIMITATIONS ON RECALL

 Within one year from assumption of office, there shall be NO RECALL proceedings
 It is only within 1 year window between 1 year from assumption of office and 1 year prior to local
election. In other words, recall can be done within the 2nd period of the term of the local elective official.

Anyway the term of 3 years in uniform, except in case of a Barangay Officials whereby Congress may reset or
postpone or cancel the local election for Barangay but for provinces, municipalities and cities, it is uniform of 3
years.

The 2nd year is the only window where there can be a recall proceedings.

 An elective official may only be recalled once.

 o In other words, if the recall election is not successful, meaning, he is re-elected, then it is
already prohibited to conduct another recall election for the same election. So minsan lang per
term.
 RATIO: If the person/elected official sought to be recalled is re-elected, that means to say that he has
regained the trust and confidence of the electorate
 REMEMBER: Ground for recall is lose of trust and confidence. Kaya nga nagpetition yung mga tao, kasi
they feel that they no longer trust that official. That is the ONLY ground.
 So if there is recall election and he is re-elected, we could say that, only those petitioners, whether
25%, 20%, 15% or 10% do not trust that elective official BUT the rest has still trust and confifence upon
that elective official.

WHAT IS THAT LOCAL ELECTION BEING REFERRED

Cases decided by SC: If there is a SK or Brgy. Election, it does not affect the recall proceedings referring to the
1 yr after assumption of office and 1 yr prior to the election limitations.

Illustration:

Term of Office – July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2019

July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 – 1 year from assumption of office, NO RECALL.

July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018 – 2nd yr of term or office, 2nd yr window, MAY RECALL.

July 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019 – last year of assumption of office, 1 yr prior to election (May 2018 to May
2019), NO RECALL.

 2nd Monday of May 2019 – backtrack 1 year from this date so the window is not exactly 1 year but
within the 2nd year.

Within that window for recall, if there would be Barangay election, it is not considered a local election to
determine the 1 year.

If during the window where recall could be done, there is a Barangay election, it is not the local election being
referred to by the LGC but refers to the regular election for the positions in LGU EXCEPT SK and BRGY election.

MUNICIPAL LAW – November 9, 2018

(by Drew Arellano)

Title III. Human Resource Development (sec. 76 – 97)

As mandated by the LGC there are positions that are mandatory to be appointed. You could find them
in the latter part of the LGC. There are those that are mandatory and there are those which are optional and
there are also those which are co-terminus positions.

Co-terminus position

 When we say co-terminus, these are confidential employees that may have something to do
with the political aspect of governance in the LGU.

Appointment
 As to appointment, what governs are the Civil Service Laws, Rules and Regulations. So you have
the process of hiring from the publication of vacancies, documentary screening and interview
then finally appointment.
 The LOCAL CHIEF EXECUTIVE generally has the power to appoint but there are also some other
positions particularly in the Sanggunian that the Vice-Mayor or Vice-Gov would appoint. So
they also have the power to appoint those personnel in the Sanggunian within the observance
ofcouse of separation of power b/n the executive and legislative department.
 In appointment there are certain rules such as:

 Rule against nepotism – So the appointing authority may not appoint somebody whom
he is related to within the 4th civil degree of affinity or consanguinity except for
confidential employees.
 Confidential employees are employees imbued with trust and confidence as
far as the appointing authority is concerned ( if you want to know the
confidential employees there are memorandum circulars issued by the Civil
Service Commission(CSC) which defines who and what are these confidential
positions. Some of these are private secretaries, drivers or security as far as
the local chief executive is concerned)
 It is not really the title that defines the confidentiality of the employment, it is
more on the function.
 City or Municipality Administrator is also considered as Confidential Official.
The position is also co-terminus meaning it is up to the Local Chief Executive
whether to continue to work as such and also coincides with the term of the
appointing authority.
 Principle of next in rank
 The SC ruled in one case that there is no such thing as the right of the next in
rank. This is a Baguio City case, Baroso vs. CSV. So there is this City Eng’r who
retired because he reached the mandatory age of 65. He retired and the
position was declared vacant. So the Assistant City Eng’r expected that he
would be appointed. So when the position was declared vacant some Eng’rs,
the Assistant City Eng’r and Junior Eng’r applied for the position. After the
process the list of applicants was submitted to the office of the Mayor and the
Mayor appoint the Junior Eng’r. So what happened is that the Assistant City
Eng’r was disappointed and filed a case questioning the validity of the
appointment and invoking his so called “Next in Rank Right.” SC ruled that as
long as the appointee meets the minimum requirement, then it is the
discretion of the appointing authority to appoint that person. So the
appointing officer may choose any of those that are determined as qualified in
the list of applicants regardless of the so called “next in rank principle.”
 Recently this “next in rank” principle has been disregarded. The City Tourism
officer retired, 65 ulit so bakante yung office. There is one there that is sure
that he will be appointed by the mayor to succeed because he considers
himself as next in rank. So there is this one who came from the private sector
and the mayor appointed the person who came from the private sector. This
demonstrate that indeed there is no such thing as “next in rank principle” or
the right of the next in rank in government appointive positions.
 The appointing official has the wide latitude when it comes to appointing.
 Disciplinary Actions
  Just like elective officials there is also disciplinary actions when it comes to
those that are appointed.
 The rules that may be applied are the rules promulgated by the CSC and there
is that obligation of the LGU to establish a grievance machinery as far as
complaints from the citizens as against the employees or complaints within the
workforce of the LGU.
 This time we do not apply the rule that there can be no removal from office
because the LGC made mention of removal from office as penalty of appointive
officers from office. So yung elective walang removal pero ung appointed
meron.
 Preventive Suspension – the principle is also the same as for appointive
officials but it is the local chief executive that will impose the order of
preventive suspension. The same principles apply, if exonerated he is entitled
to backwages, if found guilty then it is part of the penalty.
 Hiring and Human Resource Action
 Ora Ora – Omnibus Rules on Appointments and Other Human Resource
Actions.
 Even if the appointment is made by the Local Chief Executive it has to be
reviewed and confirmed by the CSC. Otherwise, the appointed will be
considered as invalid.
 For Job Orders(JO), Casual Employees and those considered as contractual
employees in the LGU, their appointment need not be reviewed by the CSC.
 Difference of JO, Casual Employees and contractual – Casual employees has all
the rights and benefits of a regular employee except for security of tenure, in
other words they have a definite period of employment. JO’s and contractual
employees are technically not employees of the government, they cannot
enjoy security of tenure and they do not have the same benefits and rights as
to casual or regular employees.
 Compensation
 As to compensation they are not governed by the minimum wage law but we
have salary standardization law and that is what governs the compensation
of government officials and employees.
 The amount depends on the class of that LGU. The higher the class the higher
the salary.
 The problem now is that there were no reclassifications done for the past 10
years.
 The Sanggunian has the power to increase the salaries of the employees
including themselves of course in a LGU provided that such increase shall be
applicable after their term but it has to comply with the Salary Standardization
law. If it does not comply or is beyond the Salary Standardization Law then the
Department of Budget and Management and even the COA would disallow
such increase.
 Resignation of Elective Officials ( Naligaw na provision )
 Included in the midterm exam. (focused more on quorum)
 Implication of resigning during a session in the Sanggunian by a member of the
sanggunian. So that is a valid way of resignin but for others there must be
acceptance of the resignation. Take note however if it is duly recorded and
included in the minutes, then, that is a valid resignation. So if you are elected
as a sanggunian member, be very careful in blurting out “I am now resigning”
 because if it is recorded in the minutes then that is already a valid and effective
resignation.

Please Read RA 6713 ( something to do with appointive officials- see APPENDIX B)

SALN

MUNICIPAL LAW – November 12, 2018

(by Nazz Ordillo)

RESIGNATION OF ELECTIVE OFFICIALS:

GR: IT has to be accepted to be effective, likewise it applies to appointive officials to be effective.

Unlike in private institutions where resignation must be tendered at least 30 days prior to the date of
resignation, in government there is no limit so if you want to resign you just tender your resignation and it will
be accepted.

Rule on clearance

- So maski nagresign ka ngayon you might not be able to get necessary last salary or benefits unless you
are cleared by necessary offices concerned

REPUBLIC ACT 6713: CODE OF ETHICS AND CONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES( SEE
ATTACHMENT)

Sec 4: Norms of Conduct

1. Commitment to Public Interest- Foremost is Public Interest and not Private Interest.
2. Professionalism- Excellence, Professionalism, Intelligence, Skill. (EPIS)
3. Justness and Sincerity- A public official is expected to be true to the public.
4. Political Neutrality
-Does not mean that you do away to your political aspirations or leanings but as a Public Official
or Employee whatever your political leanings you must not do things that would compromise
your being Public Official or Employee.

Ex. DDS vs Dilawan- You should not consider the political aspiration of a person who is
transacting with your office.

-It also includes the neutrality when it comes to campaigning for or against a candidate. But it
does not mean to say that you cannot support the person, you support him by your vote.

-You are not precluded to discuss political issues or concerns but you should not promote a
particular candidate person or party. You discuss Political Issues but not personalities.

-If you want to support a candidate and you want to support him/her by actively participating
you take a leave of absence during the campaign period

-For those who are holding confidential positions, they could also campaign for their leader or
elective official that is not prohibited beacause of the nature of their appointment.
 5. Responsiveness to the Public.- Wag laging nakasimangot! Because when you smile the world smiles
with you, You cry and you cry alone.
6. Nationalism and Patriotism
7. Commitment to Democracy- advocating a revolutionary government is a violation of this principle
because if you have a revolutionary government the power of the state is in the hands of a one man.
8. Simple Living- Public Office is a Public Trust, Do not flaunt your wealth.

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: (SEE APPENDIX B)

1. Act Promptly on Request and Papers- The law requires that whenever there is a request then the action
from the government office is not more than 15 days from receipt of the letter or request.

- IF the office cannot provide you because of confidentiality of the paper then that is already an action
but if it is deliberate then there is violation of this Duty and responsibility as well as the Freedom of
Information

2. Submit Annual Performance Reports- LGU and Regional Line Agencies are require to submit annual
performance report within 45 days or not later than 45 days counted from the end of the year.

To whom It is submitted
-For LGU it is required to be submitted to the Office of the President through the DILG.

3. Process Document and other Transactions Expeditiously- Standing Order that Government Paper
should not Contain more than 3 signatures.

4. Act immediately on Public Personal Transactions.- Do not delay the giving of a Document.

5. Make Documents Accessible to the Public- Even without the Freedom of Information Law, It is the duty
of the government to make documents accessible to the public except those that are imbued with
confidentiality or safety or national security of the nation

-Without court order a confidential document may not be given to a person.

Case: Record of loans issued or released by GSIS to government officials. The media wanted to see who
are those who availed of loans but GSIS refused to divulge the Information because of the
Confidentiality. The media wanted to know who aavailed of the loan, how much is the loan and where
it was used.

SC Decision: There is a limit as far as access to documents by the public is concerned, so kung ung
pangalan lang, date of loan that’s ok but to supply the details that is already against privacy.

- This may change because if you already have a freedom of information Law, pero sa ngayon, the
freedom of Information or the executive order is based on the constitution they are still very general.
So yun parin ang principle that is to be followed that when it comes to financial transactions it is only
limited to the list of names who availed of the transactions.
- Banks however have different rules because of the bank secrecy law. So pwede ka lang maka access ng
information regarding transactions of Government Officials if there is a court order or consent from
the concerned Public Official.
 MUNICIPAL LAW – November 17, 2018
(by Nazz Ordillo)

Disclosure of Business and Financial transactions is mandated even by the constitution so all public Officials and
employees are required to submit that so the submission is required for those who assume office within 30
days from assumption of office so every public official or employee is required to submit that so there are
offices that could admit such documents.

So sa mga National and Constitutional Offices: To the Office of the President

The Ombudsman- the Local Government unit concerned(Hndi ako sure, inaudible)

So there are offices are required to keep this documents submitted by Public officials and employees.

What Covered?

All those who work in the Govt except those are acting in honorary capacity, they are not required to submit
SALN or those who are contractual or casual employees, laborers are not also required to submit

This document includes a waiver authorizing the ombudsman to look into the records that has something to do
with the statements or the entries in the SALN including the BIR and they could inquire as to the verification or
validation that are mentioned or documents mentioned in the SALN.

It is also required that every year thereafter before april 30 of every year an updated SALN would be submitted
and for those who would be leaving the govt they are also required to submit their SALN after they leave the
govt within 30 days from their last day of office in the government

Contents of SALN:

1. Assets- real properties and personal properties

2. Liabilities- Loans and debts.
3. Business and Financial Interest of the Official himself and also the spouse so it includes the assets and
liabilities of the spouse including unmarried children who are under 18 years of age who are living in
the household.
4. Names and Identities relatives within the 4th civil affinity or consanguinity working in the govt.

So all public officials and employees are required whether regular or temporary status.

So the SALN should be under oath or it should be notarized.

Where to File

- Office of the president, Office of the Ombudsman, Civil Sevice Commission

- For LGU Official and ombudsman- file it with the Deputy Ombudsman of Luzon as far as LGU’s of Luzon
are concerned

SALN will be available for inspection by the public but there is also a prohibition as far as the use and security
of the SALN is concerned, if such will be used for any purpose contrary to morals, public policy then it is
prohibited or if it will be used for any commercial purpose it is prohibited except if the use is for the
dissemination for the public.

So what they do in the government for those retiring employees is that SALN is part of the clearance.

Other employees other than those indicated in R.A 6713 are reuired to submit the SALN in the CSC.
Penalty for not Filing: Ground for an administrative case or ground for impeachment because that is culpable
violation of the constitution.

MUNICIPAL LAW – November 26, 2018

(by Carla Kindahan)

WHENEVER THERE IS A BOUNDARY DISPUTE BETWEEN BARANGAYS WITHIN THE SAME MUNICIPALITY OR
CITY, it is the sanguniang bayan or sanguniang panglungsod that has jurisdiction.

So in the barangay, 2 or more barangays, within the same city or municipality.

Now if it involves a Barangay Y from the municipality A, which have a boundary dispute with barangay X in
municipality B, this is already technically treated as a boundary dispute case between 2 municipalities, no longer
between 2 barangays.

So, you have to determine again where A and B belong. If they are within the same province, then it goes to
the Sanguniang Panlalawigan of that province.

So same province, goes to Sanguniang Panlalawigan.

IF THE DISPUTE INVOLVES MUNICIPALITIES OR COMPONENT CITIES BELONGING TO DIFFERENT PROVINCE,

that dispute shall be heard by or the jurisdiction will be with the sanguniang panlalawigans jointly holding
session or trial.

So, if A is in province W, and B is in province Z, then that is already an interprovincial dispute. According
to the law, the sangunian of both provinces shall convene and shall jointly hear the case.

AS TO HIGHLY URBANIZED CITIES, they are treated as separate independent political units, you also apply the
rule. But, this time, it involves 2 highly urbanized cities. Then, parehas din na joint.

It is the sangunian who has the jurisdiction to hear boundary dispute. And accordingly, within 60 days from
submission or filing the petition for the dispute for boundary the sangunian shall resolve the case amicably. So
it is called amicable settlement.

If the 60 days has passed and there is no resolution, the sangunian shall issue a certification that there is failure
to settle. The certification stating that the parties failed to settle amicably.

Then, the sangunian shall start the hearing after notice, and it is given 60 days from issue of certificate to settle
the case. (decision)

That is the process in the sangunian.

THE SAME PROCESS GOES TO THE SANGUNIAN BAYAN, in the case of 2 barangays or in the joint sangunian
panlalawigan between 2 provinces.

File--60 days, no amicable settlement--issue CERTIFICATE of failure to settle--Hearing--60 days—Decision

What happens after the decision is rendered? The party concerned may appeal the decision over the RTC having
jurisdiction over the case.
So we do not have a process where the case be appealed to the sanguniang panlalawigan. From the sangunian,
it goes to the RTC, whether it is a boundary dispute between the barangays, or it is inter-provincial dispute,

Case where the SC explained the appellate jurisdiction of the RTC is in Municipality of Santa Fe vs Mun. of
Aritao, GR.140474:

The RTC has no original jurisdiction over boundary dispute, it only has appellate jurisdiction.

Therefore, one may not go directly to the RTC for the court to settle a boundary dispute. It has to go to the
sangunian. For the procedure, you will find it in the IRR of the Local Gov. Code. The sangunian will usually come
up with its own rules and procedure when it comes to boundary dispute based on the IRR an d the LGC.

SANGUNIAN---RTC---CA---SC

Calanza et al vs PICOP || Gr 146622

Civil case but it involves a parcel of land within a boundary dispute between 2 LGUs. The SC said that even it is
a civil case, it is a boundary dispute so it is wrong for the parties to litigate or initiate the litigation in the RTC.
In boundary dispute cases, the court has no original jurisdiction.

It is really a civil case, but the supreme court said it is a boundary dispute case.

READ THIS CASE:

The prov. Of Antique vs Calabocal || Gr 209146

There is a particular island whereby there is a boundary dispute between Antique and Mindoro yata. And, one
of the provinces issued a resolution calling the other province so that they can discuss the matter and settle
amicably. The other province answered through the office of the vice governor that they are willing to discuss
the matter. After several discussions, suddenly Antique enacted a resolution stating among others that they
are not open to any amicable settlement of the issue. So instead of pursuing the case in the joint sangunian,
the other party filed a case in the RTC. They tried to change the title so it will not become a boundary dispute
case. They canceled the BOUNDARY DISPUTE word.

The RTC issued summon requiring the province of Antique to file an Answer. What the province of Antique did
was to file a motion to dismiss, on what ground? Province of Antique argued that this is a boundary dispute
case, and it should be filed before the joint sangunian.

The RTC denied the motion to dismiss, saying that it is not a boundary dispute case; therefore, the RTC has
jurisdiction. Unsatisfied, Antique filed a petition of certiorari in the SC.

SC did not agree with the RTC, although the case is not titled as a boundary dispute case. The question now is,
does the RTC has jurisdiction?

Yes, when the province of Antique issued a resolution stating that it is not open to any kind or settlement, that
already made it impossible for the resolution of the boundary dispute in the joint sangunian. Therefore, the
jurisdiction now lies in the RTC, exercising now its appellate jurisdiction.

Note that although the SC did not say this, it seems that the SC treated the failure to settle and the resolution
of Antique as a decision that is now appealable to the RTC in the boundary dispute case.

The SC remanded the case to the RTC. What is significant there is that, here now comes a case that it is evident
that it is a boundary dispute as stated by the SC, there was no hearing or trial conducted by the joint sangunian
as they are still exploring the possibility of an amicable settlement. (as compared to the process, Na shortcut
kasi walang hearing sa sangunian nung walang possibility of amicable settlement, deretso sa RTC.)

AS TO THE MANNER OF INITIATING A BOUNDARY DISPUTE CASE, REFER TO THE IRR OF THE LGC.

It is initiated through a Petition resolution

Initially, the sangunian will have a resolution but with that resolution, they will attach
a pleading which is more or less the same with a petition or complaint under the rules
of court. So yun ang ginagwa ng mga LGUs. Although it says by petition resolution, pag
resolution ng sangunian, it may not capture what the petitioner wants.
Yung resolution is parang cover letter lang, yung main petition is yung nakaattach.
You have to state what is the nature of the case, area covered, and other allegations-
your claim-whole or portion of the area. After that, the sangunian now requires the
other party to file an answer. Parang pareho lng yung sa regular case. Then there is a
meeting of the parties and try to settle amicably, then if not settled, the sangunian
concerned especially the board members would not want to settle the case especially
if between two municipalities. Why? Pano kung hindi sila iboto.

By the way, as to the APPEAL, what RTC has jurisdiction over the case if it is between two provinces?

Logically, the party who appeals bring the matter to the RTC within his province. Claim mo nga eh. And
because you allege that the property is within the jurisdiction of the RTC within your province.

Please read the cases that I gave, especially the last one.

Next lesson: Katarungang Pambarangay

MUNICIPAL LAW – December 3, 2018

(by Drew Arellano)

Katarungang Pambarangay (KP)

 It refers to the barangay judicial system

 The katarungang pambarangay is not part of the judiciary but it is a unique setup in the local
government.
 “It is the only good thing that came out of the Marcos regime” – Atty. Sanidad
 In Civ. Pro. One of the grounds for a motion to dismiss is failure to comply with a condition precedent.
One of the condition precedent is the referral to the Katarungang Pambarangay.
 Under the LGC, generally, all cases shall be referred to the Katarungang Pambarangay subject to some
exception such as when the case involves the government or any of its instrumentalities. That is one of
the exceptions, so if you have a case against the municipality and it is a civil case even if the property
is within the barangay, it may not be referred to the KP.
Lupong Tagapamayapa (LT)
 Council or committee of peace, a Tagapamayapa (Peacemaker) and Lupon ( A council or committee)
 Lupon is the body which is composed of:
1. Punong Barangay as the Chair
2. Members which are 10 -20 members ( minimum of 10 to 20 )
 How are they selected?
 The Punong Barangay is ofcourse elected
  The Punong Barangay is obligated by law to come up with the members of the LT. He must
choose members of the community with the sterling qualifications. From this members of the
community, he shall prepare a list to be posted for a certain period of time where the members
of the barangay or the community would be given an opportunity to scrutinize and give their
comment as to the persons who are nominated to become members of the LT.
 They are supposed to occupy as lupon members for a period of 3 years. In other words it coincides with
the term of office of the elective barangay officials.
 For indigenous cultural communities, they also have LT but most of the time, preference for indigenous
practices for some sort of judicial system shall be observed in the indigenous cultural communities but
if it is applicable we still follow the rules under the LGC.
 If somebody objects the nomination or appointment of the lupon member then the Punong Barangay
must reconsider and he shall appoint those whose nomination or identification are not objected to.
 Within the LT is the Pangkat

Pangkat Tagapagkasundo (Pangkat)

 Composed of 3 members
1. 1 Chairman
2. 1 Secretary
3. 1 Member
 For the Lupon the secretary is the same as the secretary of the barangay ( 2 roles of the secretary)
 The 3 members comes from the Lupon
 How are they chosen? They are chosen if there is a dispute or a case.
 Whenever there is a dispute or a necessity to constitute the Pangkat, the disputing parties shall select
among the members of the Lupon to sit as members of the Pangkat.
EX: A and B have a dispute because of certain property, they referred the matter to the KP. Then the
Punong Barangay will try to resolve the dispute. We call that process as the process of Mediation which
is the process of resolving the dispute before the chairman of the Lupon. The Chairman of the Lupon
will try to convince the parties to settle the dispute amicably. That process is called mediation. If the
chairman fails to mediate or when mediation fails before the Punong Barangay as the chairman, then,
the Punong Barangay shall constitute the Pangkat. 3 members of which is selected by the parties from
the 10 – 20 members of the Lupon who will sit in the Pangkat. So the 3 members of the Pangkat will
come together and select among themselves who will become the chairman and the secretary and the
other member shall simply be a member.
 Chairman presides the proceeding
 Secretary notes the proceedings then submit reports as required by the LGC to the Punong Barangay
as well as to the court the proceedings in the Pangkat.
 When the dispute is before the Punong Barangay, it is called mediation. In Pangkat, it is called
conciliation. If you look at the meaning of the two, it is just the same but just to differentiate as to the
process undertaken, the law refers to mediation as the process before the chairman of the Lupon while
conciliation is the process before the Pangkat. The objective is the same which is to arrive at an
amicable settlement.
 Amicable settlement should be by mutual agreement among the parties. So kung ayaw nung isa the
chairman would not have any choice ( hindi nila pwedeng ipilit kung ano ang proposal)

Arbitration

 So there is mediation before the Lupon, conciliation before the Pangkat.

 Arbitration may be before the Punong Barangay or the Pangkat
  But the difference, when we say arbitration, either before the Lupon or the Pangkat, shall determine
what is the proper resolution of the dispute and the parties shall adhere or follow what has been
determined by the Punong Barangay or the Pangkat as an arbitrator.
 Technically speaking, there is a decision to be rendered either by the Punong Barangay or the Pangkat.
Process
 If there is a dispute, the complainant goes to the Katarungang Pambarangay, seeks the Punong
Barangay. Sabi sa law it is not required that the complaint shall be in writing. If a party has a complaint
against somebody else provided that the case or dispute falls within or does not fall under the
exceptions as provided for by law, whether it is oral or in writing it is the obligation of the Punong
Barangay to admit or accept the complaint. If it is oral, it is the obligation of the Punong Barangay to
reduce that oral complaint in writing. Under the LGC, it is the duty of the Punong Barangay to reduce
that complaint in writing if it is done orally. The complaint need not be notarized nor verified. There
are forms provided for by the DILG as far as complaints are concerned.
 Lawyers are not allowed to appear as counsel in the KP under the LGC even if the party is a relative or
a minor. What should represent the minor are any members of his household.
 It is not the value of the property that determines the authority of the KP. Authority and not jurisdiction
because it is not among those are covered by the term jurisdiction. So whatever is the value if it is
within the territory where the KP and the disputants are members of both barangays or may be of
different barangays but within the same municipality or city then it is still within the authority of KP.

Exceptions to filing the complaint in KP

 Government or its instrumentality is a party

 A Public official or employee is one of the party and the COA is related to his official duties or
performance of duties and responsibilities.

Actual case: the wife of the Punong Barangay has been spreading rumors so the aggrieved party filed a
case of slander against the wife. But it was not filed in the Barangay because he believes that nothing
would come out of the case since she is the wife and the Punong Barangay would side with the wife.
The Prosec said “ no need to go to the Katarungang Pambarangay because anyway it is a mockery of
justice if you will go through the mediation or conciliation proceedings where the Punong Barangay
would preside.” So they filed the case, then the other party filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground of
failure to comply with a condition precedent. Thus, the court dismissed the case for failure to comply
with a condition precedent.

There can be no miscarriage of justice because the spouse of the respondent who being the
Punong Barangay can always inhibit from the proceeding. The more important ground that the case
was dismissed is because it is not among those exception as provided by law.
 Properties located outside the Barangay. In such case the KP has no authority but if the parties are
residing in the same Barangay and they agree to go through the KP proceedings then that is allowed
by law but there should be a mutual agreement.

Ex: 2 parties belongs to the same Barangay in Baguio and the property in dispute is located in Tuba.
They went to the KP and agreed that they will submit to it. That is allowed.
 Labor cases are not covered by the KP even if it is no among those enumerated. Labor cases are within
the exclusive jurisdiction of the NLRC
 Agrarian cases although there are some instances where the parties mutually agreed to settle their
dispute in the KP. So minsan pinapayagan ng DAR provided that they submit the records to the
appropriate office of the DAR
  Cases against Juridical Persons ( Corpo. PSHIP)

READ more about KP as provided in the LGC – See APPENDIX C

>>>>>>>> END <<<<<<<<

It is only through labor and painful effort, by grim energy and resolute courage, that we move on
to better things. – Theodore Roosevelt