Repeal of Laws Flashcards
Article 7 (1) NCC
Article 7 (1) NCC. Laws are repealed only by subsequent ones, and their violation or non-observance shall not be excused by disuse, or custom or practice to the contrary.
Article 7 (2) NCC
When the courts declare a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the former shall be void and the latter shall govern.
Article 7 (3) NCC
Administrative or executive acts, orders and regulations shall be valid only when they are not contrary to the laws or the Constitution. (5a)
May a law be repealed by a previous law?
No, laws are repealed only by subsequent ones.
Residents of Bario Bukid-bukid engage in the practice of eating the endangered Philippine Eagle as a tradition every time it’s their fiesta. They say that they have always done this long before the times of their great grandfathes. Should they be excused from the violation of R.A. 6147, or the act that protects the Philippine Eagles?
No, the residents of Bario Bukid-bukid shall not be excused from the offenses defined by RA 6147. Article 7 (1) of the Civil Code states that the violation or non-observance of laws shall not be excused by disuse, or custom or practice to the contrary. In this case, despite the long-standing tradition, the people of Bario Bukid-bukid have to follow the law.
The Supreme Court released a decision saying that the Anti-Terrorism Act is declared unconstitutional. However, police officers continue to implement the said act as President Duterte expressly stated not to heed the decision of the Supreme Court. Is this a violation of any of the provisions of law?
Yes, other than it is tantamount to grave abuse of discretion, the President violated Article 7 (2) of the NCC which states that when the courts declare a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the former shall be void and the latter shall govern.
When shall a law be declared void?
Laws inconsistent with the Constitution shall be void, upon the declaration of the courts.
When shall an administrative act be valid?
Administrative acts, orders and regulations shall be valid only when they are not contrary to the laws or the Constitution.
President Aquino issued an administrative order which is clearly inconsistent with RA 12345. Should the administrative order be declared void?
Yes, the administrative order should be declared void because of its inconsistency with RA 12345. According to Article 7 (3) of the Civil Code “Administrative or exercutive acts, orders and regulations shall be valid only when they are not contrary to the laws or the Constitution.”
Article 8 NCC
Judicial decisions applying or interrpeting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines.
________ applying or interpreting the _____ or the _________ shall ____________ of the ________ of the Philippines
JUDICIAL DECISIONS applying or interpreting the LAWS or the CONSTITUTION shall FORM A PART of the LEGAL SYSTEM of the Philippines.
In the case of Guingona v Carague, the Courts declared the automatic appropriations system for debt services of the government as Constitutional despite the dissent of many. What is the effect of this Court decision?
The Court decision in Guingona v Carague formed part of the legal system of the Philippines. The Court’s declaration on the Constitutionality of the system of automatic appropriations for debt services is deemed valid despite the contention of the petitioners saying that it is inconsistent with our current Constitution.
What are the facts of the case of Guingona v Carague
In the case of Guingona v Carague, senator petitioners are assailing the constitutionality of the automatic appropriation for debt service of the 1990 budget.
The said automatic appropriation is pursuant to the presidential derees issued by the previous administration of President Marcos.
Petitioners contend that the ratification of the new Constitution has rendered the presidential decrees which provided for the automatic appropration to be invalid since it inconsistent with the current provisions of the new Constitution. Although the 1987 Constituiton provides that laws not inconsistent with the new Constitution shall remain in force, the same also provides that all appropriations shall be made by Congress. Hence petitioners contend that it should be void.
What did the Court say on the issue in the case of Guingona v Carague
On the issue of the implied repeal of law, the Court held that
“If the intention of the framers thereof were otherwise they should have expressed their decision in a more direct or express manner.
Well-known is the rule that repeal or amendment by implication is frowned upon. Equally fundamental is the principle that the construction of the Constitution and law is generally applied prospectively and not retrospective unless it is so clearly stated.”
