You are on page 1of 1

Social Justice Society vs.

Sec of DILG Lina, Vilma Santos, Lito Lapid, and Joey Marquez
Facts:

Petitioner, a registered political party, filed a petition for declaratory relief against Sec
Lina (later on impleaded other respondents; look at the title) for the proper construction
of Section 90(a) of LGC which provides:
o All governors, city and municipal mayors are prohibited from practicing their
profession or engaging in any other occupation other than the exercise of their
functions as local chief executives.

The DILG, thru OSG, moved for the dismissal arguing that (1) petitioner had no legal
standing, (2) there is no judicial controversy, (2) declaratory relief is not the propert
remedy.
RTC dismissed the petition for declaratory relief. Hence this petition for review on
certiorari.

ISSUE: WON THE PETITION FOR Declaratory relief will prosper NO. Petition denied.
In the petition filed with the trial court, petitioner failed to allege the ultimate facts which satisfy these
requisites. Not only that, as admitted by the petitioner, the provision the interpretation of which is being
sought has already been breached by the respondents. Declaratory relief cannot thus be availed of.

Ruling:
1. The Court agrees that petitioner has locus standing; however, the action for declaratory
relief is an inappropriate remedy to enforce compliance with Section 90 of LGC.
2. The appearance of incumbent city or municipal mayors and provincial governors, who
are actors in movies and TV programs enhances their income but reduces considerably
the time they should devote their constituents. This in violation of Section 90 of LGC
and Sec 7 of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standars for Public Officials and
Employees. Their appearance further gives them undue advantage in future eletions over
their opponents who are not actors. (take note that there is nothing in the dispositive
portion ordering the respondents to desists from being actors. Kasi mali remedy)
3. Indeed, an action for declaratory relief should be filed by a person interested under a deed, a will,
a contract or other written instrument, and whose rights are affected by a statute, an executive
order, a regulation or an ordinance. The purpose of the remedy is to interpret or to determine the
validity of the written instrument and to seek a judicial declaration of the parties rights or duties
thereunder
For the action to prosper, it must be shown that (1) there is a justiciable controversy; (2) the
controversy is between persons whose interests are adverse; (3) the party seeking the relief has a
legal interest in the controversy; and (4) the issue is ripe for judicial determination.