Case Digest (G.R. No. 195390)
Facts:
In G.R. No. 195390 decided December 10, 2014, Gov. Luis Raymund F. Villafuerte, Jr. and the Province of Camarines Sur (Petitioners) filed a Rule 65 petition to annul and set aside DILG Secretary Hon. Jesse M. Robredo's MC No. 2010‑83, MC No. 2010‑138, and MC No. 2011‑08, which required public posting of budgets and restricted certain uses of the 20% component of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA). The petitioners alleged the circulars were unconstitutional and issued with grave abuse of discretion; the record showed implementation had begun, including issuance of Audit Observation Memorandum No. 2011‑009 requiring the Governor to comment.Issues:
- Did the Secretary commit grave abuse of discretion in issuing the memorandum circulars in violation of local and fiscal autonomy under the 1987 Constitution and the Local Government Code (R.A. No. 7160)?
- Did the Secretary invalidly assume legislative power by promulgating the assailed memorandum circulars?
Ruling:
The petition Case Digest (G.R. No. 195390)
Facts:
- Background and parties
- Gov. Luis Raymund F. Villafuerte, Jr. and The Province of Camarines Sur filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition under Rule 65 challenging issuances by Hon. Jesse M. Robredo in his capacity as Secretary of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG).
- Petitioners sought annulment of three DILG issuances: Memorandum Circular No. 2010-83 (Aug. 31, 2010), Memorandum Circular No. 2010-138 (Dec. 2, 2010), and Memorandum Circular No. 2011-08 (Jan. 13, 2011).
- Preceding administrative context motivating the issuances
- In 1995 the Commission on Audit (COA) audited LGU utilization of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) for 1993–1994 and reported diversion of the 20% development fund to MOOE, violating R.A. No. 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991), Section 287.
- In response, DILG issued MC No. 95-216 (Dec. 14, 1995) setting policies on the development fund; later, Joint MC No. 1, s. 2005 (DILG and DBM) reiterated guidelines on use of the 20% IRA for development projects.
- Substance of the assailed memoranda
- MC No. 2010-83 (Aug. 31, 2010) titled "Full Disclosure of Local Budget and Finances, and Bids and Public Offerings" directed posting of specified budgetary and procurement information in public places and on LGU websites, citing Section 352, R.A. No. 7160, and R.A. No. 9184 (Government Procurement Reform Act); stated non-compliance would be meted sanctions under pertinent laws.
- MC No. 2010-138 (Dec. 2, 2010) reiterated that the 20% IRA component must be used for development projects (characterized as social, economic, and environmental outcomes) and listed categories of expenses that "must not" be utilized from the 20% component (e.g., administrative expenses, salaries, traveling, office construction, vehicle purchases except ambulances).
- MC No. 2011-08 (Jan. 13, 2011) mandated strict adherence to Section 90, R.A. No. 10147 (General Appropriations Act, FY 2011) and to DILG Memorandum Circular No. 2010-83, required posting of detailed use and status of programs on LGU websites, and warned that failure to comply would subject responsible officials to disciplinary action unde...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Constitutional and jurisdictional questions raised by petitioners
- Whether the Hon. Secretary of the Interior and Local Government committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction by issuing the assailed memorandum circulars in violation of the principles of local autonomy and fiscal autonomy enshrined in the 1987 Constitution and the Local Government Code of 1991 (R.A. No. 7160).
- Whether the Hon. Secretary of the Interior and Local Government invalidly assumed legislative powers in promulgating the assai...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)