Constitutional Law Case Digest Matrix Set 1 – Stef Macapagal
FUNDAMENTAL POWERS OF THE STATETitleFactsIssue/sRulingDoctrine
Gerochi v. DOEGR No. 15979617 July 2007
RA 9136, otherwise known asthe Electric Power IndustryReform Act of 2001 (EPIRA),which sought to impose auniversal charge on all end-usersof electricity for the purpose of funding NAPOCOR’s projects,was enacted and took effect in2001.Petitioners contest theconstitutionality of the EPIRA,stating that the imposition of theuniversal charge on all end-usersis oppressive and confiscatoryand amounts to taxation withoutrepresentation for not giving theconsumers a chance to be heardand be represented.W/N the universal charge is atax. NO. The assailed universalcharge is not a tax, but anexaction in the exercise of theState’s police power. That publicwelfare is promoted may begleaned from Sec. 2 of theEPIRA, which enumerates the policies of the State regardingelectrification. Moreover, theSpecial Trust Fund feature of theuniversal charge reasonablyserves and assures the attainmentand perpetuity of the purposesfor which the universal charge isimposed (e.g. to ensure theviability of the country’s electric power industry), further boostingthe position that the same is anexaction primarily in pursuit of the State’s police objectives.If generation of revenue is the primary purpose and regulation ismerely incidental, the impositionis a tax; but if regulation is the primary purpose, the fact thatrevenue is incidentally raiseddoes not make the imposition atax.The taxing power may be used asan implement of police power.The theory behind the exercise of the power to tax emanates fromnecessity; without taxes,government cannot fulfill itsmandate of promoting thegeneral welfare and well-being of the people.Chavez v. RomuloGR No. 1570369 June 2004
Pursuant to PGMA’s speechstressing the need for anationwide gun ban in all public places, PNP Chief Ebdane issuedthe “Guidelines in theImplementation of the Ban onthe Carrying of Firearms Outsideof Residence.” It revoked allexisting Permits to CarryFirearms Outside of Residence(PTCFOR), subject to renewal.Francisco Chavez, a licensed gunowner to whom a PTCFOR has been issued, requested the DILGto reconsider the implementationof the assailed Guidelines. Hisrequest was denied. Thus, hewent to court to challenge theconstitutionality of theW/N the revocation of thePTCFORs pursuant to theGuidelines is a violation of the people’s right to property.W/N the issuance of the assailedGuidelines is a valid exercise of police power. NO. The right to bear arms is amere statutory privilege, not aconstitutional right. Being a merestatutory creation, the right to bear arms cannot be consideredan inalienable or absolute right.A license authorizing a person toenjoy a certain privilege isneither a property nor propertyright.YES. It is apparent from theassailed Guidelines that the basisfor its issuance was the need for peace and order in the society.Undeniably, the motivatingfactor in the issuance of theGuidelines is the interest of the public in general.A license authorizing a person toenjoy a certain privilege isneither a property nor propertyright.