Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 13 views

    Navarro v. EA Rodolfo G. Navarro V. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, (D) G.R. No. 180050, April 12, 2011

    Uploaded by

    A M I R A
    The Supreme Court upheld the creation of Dinagat Islands province through Republic Act 9355, which was passed by Congress exempting it from the minimum land area requirement under the Local Government Code. While Dinagat had an area of only 802.12 square kilometers, below the minimum under the Code, Congress acted within its legislative powers to create a specific exemption for it. The Court also noted that Dinagat had sufficient average annual income and capacity to deliver basic services as a province. Upholding its creation aligns with the intent of Congress and spirit of the law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Navarro v. EA Rodolfo G. Navarro V. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, (D) G.R. No. 180050, April 12, 2011

    Uploaded by

    A M I R A
    13 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court upheld the creation of Dinagat Islands province through Republic Act 9355, which was passed by Congress exempting it from the minimum land area requirement under the Local Government Code. While Dinagat had an area of only 802.12 square kilometers, below the minimum under the Code, Congress acted within its legislative powers to create a specific exemption for it. The Court also noted that Dinagat had sufficient average annual income and capacity to deliver basic services as a province. Upholding its creation aligns with the intent of Congress and spirit of the law.

    Original Title

    57.-Navarro

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court upheld the creation of Dinagat Islands province through Republic Act 9355, which was passed by Congress exempting it from the minimum land area requirement under the Local Government Code. While Dinagat had an area of only 802.12 square kilometers, below the minimum under the Code, Congress acted within its legislative powers to create a specific exemption for it. The Court also noted that Dinagat had sufficient average annual income and capacity to deliver basic services as a province. Upholding its creation aligns with the intent of Congress and spirit of the law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    13 views2 pages

    Navarro v. EA Rodolfo G. Navarro V. Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, (D) G.R. No. 180050, April 12, 2011

    Uploaded by

    A M I R A
    The Supreme Court upheld the creation of Dinagat Islands province through Republic Act 9355, which was passed by Congress exempting it from the minimum land area requirement under the Local Government Code. While Dinagat had an area of only 802.12 square kilometers, below the minimum under the Code, Congress acted within its legislative powers to create a specific exemption for it. The Court also noted that Dinagat had sufficient average annual income and capacity to deliver basic services as a province. Upholding its creation aligns with the intent of Congress and spirit of the law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    57. Navarro v.

    EA
    RODOLFO G. NAVARRO v. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY EDUARDO ERMITA, (D)
    G.R. No. 180050, April 12, 2011
    NACHURA, J.:

    FACTS:
    October 2, 2006, the President of the Republic approved into law Republic Act (R.A.)
    No. 9355 (An Act Creating the Province of Dinagat Islands).
    December 3, 2006, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) conducted the
    mandatory plebiscite for the ratification of the creation of the province under the Local
    Government Code (LGC). The plebiscite yielded 69,943 affirmative votes and 63,502
    negative votes. With the approval of the people from both the mother province of
    Surigao del Norte and the Province of Dinagat Islands (Dinagat).
    November 10, 2006, petitioners filed before this Court a petition for certiorari and
    prohibition challenging the constitutionality of R.A. No. 9355. The Court dismissed the
    petition on technical grounds. Their motion for reconsideration was also denied.
    Undaunted, petitioners filed another petition for certiorari seeking to nullify R.A. No.
    9355 for being unconstitutional. They alleged that the creation of Dinagat as a new
    province, if uncorrected, would perpetuate an illegal act of Congress, and would unjustly
    deprive the people of Surigao del Norte of a large chunk of the provincial territory,
    Internal Revenue Allocation (IRA), and rich resources from the area. They pointed out
    that when the law was passed, Dinagat had a land area of 802.12 square kilometers
    only and a population of only 106,951, failing to comply with Section 10, Article X of the
    Constitution and of Section 461 of the LGC.
    May 12, 2010, movants-intervenors raised three (3) main arguments to challenge the
    above Resolution, namely: (1) that the passage of R.A. No. 9355 operates as an act of
    Congress amending Section 461 of the LGC; (2) that the exemption from territorial
    contiguity, when the intended province consists of two or more islands, includes the
    exemption from the application of the minimum land area requirement; and (3) that the
    Operative Fact Doctrine is applicable in the instant case.
    July 20, 2010, the Court denied the Motion for Leave to Intervene and to File and to
    Admit Intervenors’ Motion for Reconsideration of the Resolution dated May 12, 2010 on
    the ground that the allowance or disallowance of a motion to intervene is addressed to
    the sound discretion of the Court, and that the appropriate time to file the said motion
    was before and not after the resolution of this case.
    September 7, 2010, movants-intervenors filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the July
    20, 2010 Resolution, citing several rulings of the Court, allowing intervention as an
    exception to Section 2, Rule 19 of the Rules of Court that it should be filed at any time
    before the rendition of judgment. They alleged that, prior to the May 10, 2010 elections,
    their legal interest in this case was not yet existent. They averred that prior to the May
    10, 2010 elections, they were unaware of the proceedings in this case.
    October 5, 2010, the Court issued an order for Entry of Judgment, stating that the
    decision in this case had become final and executory on May 18, 2010.

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not the provision in Article 9(2) of the Rules and Regulations Implementing
    the Local Government Code of 1991 valid.

    HELD:
    Yes, the Congress, recognizing the capacity and viability of Dinagat to become a full-
    fledged province, enacted R.A. No. 9355, following the exemption from the land area
    requirement, which, with respect to the creation of provinces, can only be found as an
    express provision in the LGC-IRR. In effect, pursuant to its plenary legislative powers,
    Congress breathed flesh and blood into that exemption in Article 9(2) of the LGC-IRR
    and transformed it into law when it enacted R.A. No. 9355 creating the Island Province
    of Dinagat.
    The land area, while considered as an indicator of viability of a local government unit, is
    not conclusive in showing that Dinagat cannot become a province, taking into account
    its average annual income of P82,696,433.23 at the time of its creation, as certified by
    the Bureau of Local Government Finance, which is four times more than the minimum
    requirement of P20,000,000.00 for the creation of a province. The delivery of basic
    services to its constituents has been proven possible and sustainable. Rather than
    looking at the results of the plebiscite and the May 10, 2010 elections as mere fait
    accompli circumstances which cannot operate in favor of Dinagat’s existence as a
    province, they must be seen from the perspective that Dinagat is ready and capable of
    becoming a province. This Court should not be instrumental in stunting such capacity.
    Ratio legis est anima. The spirit rather than the letter of the law. A statute must be read
    according to its spirit or intent, for what is within the spirit is within the statute although it
    is not within its letter, and that which is within the letter but not within the spirit is not
    within the statute. Put a bit differently, that which is within the intent of the lawmaker is
    as much within the statute as if within the letter, and that which is within the letter of the
    statute is not within the statute unless within the intent of the lawmakers. Withal, courts
    ought not to interpret and should not accept an interpretation that would defeat the
    intent of the law and its legislators.

    You might also like