Nagkakaisang Maralita ng Sitio Masigasig, Inc. v. Military Shrine Services, et. al. | G.R. No. 187587| 2013

G.R. No. 187587| June 5, 2013 

697 SCRA 359

Nagkakaisang Maralita ng Sitio Masigasig, Inc. vs. Military Shrine Services-Philippine Veterans Affairs Office, Department of National Defense;

NMSI, Petitioner, vs. MSS - PVAO, DND, Respondent;

---and---

G.R. No. 187654| June 5, 2013

WBLOA, INC., represented by its Board of Directors, Petitioner, vs.  MSS - PVAO, DND, Respondent.

Ponente: SERENO, CJ.: 

Doctrines: 

(1) Petitioners suggest that there should be no distinction between laws of general applicability and those which are not; that publication means complete publication; and that the publication must be made forthwith in the Official Gazette.

(2) The requirement of publication is indispensable to give effect to the law, unless the law itself has otherwise provided. 

(3) The Supreme Court cannot rely on a handwritten note that was not part of Proclamation No. 2476 as published. Without publication, the note never had any legal force and effect. 

(4) It is well-settled that laws must be published to be valid. (Cojuangco, Jr. vs. Republic, 686 SCRA 472 [2012])

(5) The publication must be of the full text of the law since the purpose of publication is to inform the public of the contents of the law. (Cojuangco, Jr. vs. Republic, 686 SCRA 472 [2012]) 

Acronym/abbreviation used:

NMSMI - NAGKAKAISANG MARALITA NG SITIO MASIGASIG, INC.
MSS - PVAO, DND - Military Shrine Services - Philippine Veterans Affairs Office, Department of National Defense 

WBLOAI - WESTERN BICUTAN LOT OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.

COSLAP - Commission on Settlement of Land Problems 

TFB - Task Force Bantay 

SS-PVAO - Military Shrine Services – Philippine Veterans Affairs Office

FACTS:

President Ferdinand E. Marcos (Marcos) issued Proclamation No. 208, amending Proclamation No. 423, (which reserved parcels of land in the Municipalities of Pasig, Taguig, Parañaque, Province of Rizal and Pasay City for a military reservation.) The military reservation, then known as Fort William McKinley, was later on renamed Fort Andres Bonifacio (Fort Bonifacio) which excluded a certain area of Fort Bonifacio and reserved it for a national shrine. The excluded area is now known as Libingan ng mga Bayani, which is under the administration of herein respondent MSS-PVAO. 

Again, on 7 January 1986, Marcos issued Proclamation No. 2476, further amending Proclamation No. 423, which excluded barangays Lower Bicutan, Upper Bicutan and Signal Village from the operation of Proclamation No. 423 and declared it open for disposition under the provisions of Republic Act Nos. (R.A.) 274 and 730. 

At the bottom of Proclamation No. 2476, President Marcos made a handwritten addendum.

President Corazon C. Aquino (Aquino) issued Proclamation No. 172 which substantially reiterated Proclamation No. 2476, as published, but this time excluded Lots 1 and 2 of Western Bicutan from the operation of Proclamation No. 423 and declared the said lots open for disposition under the provisions of R.A. 274 and 730. 

Memorandum Order No. 119, implementing Proclamation No. 172, was issued on the same day. 

Through the years, informal settlers increased and occupied some areas of Fort Bonifacio including portions of the Libingan ng mga Bayani. Thus, Brigadier General Fredelito Bautista issued General Order No. 1323 creating TFB, primarily to prevent further unauthorized occupation and to cause the demolition of illegal structures at Fort Bonifacio. 

Members of petitioner Nagkakaisang Maralita ng Sitio Masigasig, Inc. (NMSMI) filed a Petition with the COSLAP, where it was docketed as COSLAP Case No. 99-434. The Petition prayed for the following: 

1. the reclassification of the areas they occupied, covering Lot 3 of SWO-13-000-298 of Western Bicutan, from public land to alienable and disposable land pursuant to Proclamation No. 2476; 
2. the subdivision of the subject lot by the Director of Lands; and 
3. the Land Management Bureau’s facilitation of the distribution and sale of the subject lot to its bona fide occupants.

Petitioner (WBLOAI) filed a Petition-in-Intervention substantially praying for the same reliefs as those prayed for by NMSMI with regard to the area the former then occupied. 

COSLAP issued a Resolution granting the Petition and declaring the portions of land in question alienable and disposable, with Associate Commissioner Lina Aguilar-General dissenting.

COSLAP ruled that the handwritten addendum of President Marcos was an integral part of Proclamation No. 2476, and was therefore, controlling. The intention of the President could not be defeated by the negligence or inadvertence of others. Further, considering that Proclamation No. 2476 was done while the former President was exercising legislative powers, it could not be amended, repealed or superseded, by a mere executive enactment. Thus, Proclamation No. 172 could not have superseded much less displaced Proclamation No. 2476, as the latter was issued on October 16, 1987 when President Aquino’s legislative power had ceased. 

Herein respondent MSS-PVAO filed a Motion for Reconsideration, which was denied by the COSLAP in a Resolution dated 24 January 2007.

MSS-PVAO filed a Petition with the Court of Appeals seeking to reverse the COSLAP Resolutions dated 1 September 2006 and 24 January 2007. 

Thus, on 29 April 2009, the then Court of Appeals First Division rendered the assailed Decision granting MSS-PVAO’s Petition.

Both NMSMI and WBLOAI appealed the said Decision by filing their respective Petitions for Review with this Court under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.

ISSUE:

WON the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the subject lots were not alienable and disposable by virtue of Proclamation No. 2476 on the ground that the handwritten addendum of President Marcos was not included in the publication of the said law. 

HELD: 

NO.

Ruling in the case of Tanada vs Tuvera (Click me)

Applying the foregoing ruling (above link in Tanada v. Tuvera, 1986) to the instant case, this Court cannot rely on a handwritten note that was not part of Proclamation No. 2476 as published. Without publication, the note never had any legal force and effect. 

Furthermore, under Section 24, Chapter 6, Book I of the Administrative Code, "the publication of any law, resolution or other official documents in the Official Gazette shall be prima facie evidence of its authority." Thus, whether or not President Marcos intended to include Western Bicutan is not only irrelevant but speculative. Simply put, the courts may not speculate as to the probable intent of the legislature apart from the words appearing in the law. 

This Court cannot rule that a word appears in the law when, evidently, there is none. In Pagpalain Haulers, Inc. v. Hon. Trajano, we ruled that ' This does not mean, however, that courts can create law. The courts exist for inter"under Article 8 of the Civil Code, 'judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines. This does not mean, however, that courts can create law. The courts exist for interpreting the law, not for enacting it. To allow otherwise would be violative of the principle of separation of powers, inasmuch as the sole function of our courts is to apply or interpret the laws, particularly where gaps or lacunae exist or where ambiguities becloud issues, but it will not arrogate unto itself the task of legislating." The remedy sought in these Petitions is not judicial interpretation, but another legislation that would amend the law ‘to include petitioners' lots in the reclassification. 

Dispositive portion:

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the instant petitions are hereby DENIED for lack of merit. The assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 97925 dated 29 April 2009 is AFFIRMED in toto. Accordingly, this Court's status quo order dated 17 June 2009 is hereby LIFTED. Likewise, all pending motions to cite respondent in contempt is DENIED, having been rendered moot. No costs.