You are on page 1of 2

Kilusang Mayo Uno v.

Director General, NEDA (April 19, 2006) The Constitution also mandates the President to ensure that the laws are faithfully
executed. There are several laws mandating government entities to reduce cost,
FACTS:
increase efficiency, and improve public services. The ID format provided by EO 420
In April 13, 2005, President GMA issued EO 420 which authorized the director- only includes the first 5 items, fingerprints, agency number and a common
general of NEDA to streamline and harmonize the ID systems of all government reference number, which is used to cross validate Owners data among govt
agencies and government-owned and -controlled corporations that. EO 420 aims to entities. The ID format, as such, only contains 8 items which is less than the IDs
reduce cost, achieve efficiency and reliability, insure compatibility and provide issued by the Court which has 16 items. Under the unified ID system of EO 420,
convenience to the people. benefits such as savings in procurement of equipment and supplies, compatibility in
systems, ease of verification, increased data reliability and user-friendliness of a
The data required for the unified ID system are: (1) Name, (2) Home Address, (3) single ID format for all government entities are achieved. Thus, the issuance of the
Sex, (4) Picture, (5) Signature, (6) Date of Birth, (7) Place of Birth, (8) Marital Status, President of EO 420 ensures that laws are faithfully executed.
(9) Names of Parents, (10) Height, (11) Weight, (12) Two index fingers and two
thumbmarks, (13) Any prominent distinguishing features like moles and other and Furthermore, legislative power is the authority to make laws and to alter or repeal
(14) TIN. At least the first 5 items and the print of fingerprints shall appear on the them. EO 420 does not alter or repeal any law but ensures that the existing laws are
front or back of the ID card. These are the only data/information that the unified ID faithfully executed. What require legislation in terms of ID card system are (1) when
system is limited to collect. The data collected are strictly confidential and shall be a special appropriation is needed for the implementation of the system, (2) when
protected by advanced security. A personal or written authorization of the datas the ID card is compulsory on all branches of government and (3) when the system
owner is needed for access and disclosure of the data. A written request of the requires personal data beyond what is routinely used for identification purposes.
owner is also needed for any correction or revision of relevant data.
EO 420 does not require any special appropriation because the govt entities
ISSUES: covered by the EO already have proper appropriation. EO 420 is not compulsory to
all govt entities since it does not establish a national ID card system. The data
1) Whether EO 420 is unconstitutional because it constitutes usurpation of needed under EO 420 are less than the data collected under ID systems prior to EO
legislative functions by the President (executive) 420.Even the Supreme Court has its own ID system and is even trying to unify this
2) Whether EO 420 infringe the citizens right to privacy system. There is nothing legislative in this initiative of the Judiciary which is the
same for the entities under the Executive branch.
RULING:
On the Alleged Infringement of the Right to Privacy
On the Alleged Usurpation of Legislative Power
NO. Prior to EO 420, govt entities were free to determine the nature and extent of
NO. Section 17, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution provides that the President
data were collected and there were also no executive issuances which prescribe
shall have control of all executive departments, bureaus, and offices. The same
safeguards to the collected data. However, there were no complaints from the
section also mandates that the President to ensure that the laws be faithfully
citizens that their rights to privacy were violated and that govt entities abuse the
executed.
collection and recording of identification data. EO 420 further provides a strict set
Under this constitutional power of the President can direct all government entities of safeguards to protect the confidentiality of the data and the right to privacy.
to adopt a uniform ID data collection and ID format to achieve savings, efficiency,
In US Justice Department v Reporters Committee for Freedom of the press, the
reliability, compatibility, and convenience to the public. However, the power of the
issue is whether the State could withhold information of individuals from the press.
President is limited to the Executive branch. Given this, EO 420 does not apply to
In pursuant to Freedom of Information Act, a reporter demanded the criminal
the Judiciary or to the COMELEC which issues voters ID. Thus, EO 420 does not
records of 4 members of a family. The US Supreme court ruled that the Freedom of
establish a national ID system because legislation is needed to establish a single ID
Information Act expressly exempts release of information that constitute an
system that is compulsory for all branches of government.
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, and the demanded information falls
under the category of exempt information.

In Whalen v Roe, the law that required doctors to furnish govt reports identifying
patients who received prescription drugs that have a potential for abuse was
assailed because the database alleged infringe the right to privacy of individuals
who want their personal matters confidential. The US Supreme Court rejected the
petition because the disclosure of private medical information to the State which
has responsibility for the health of the community does not automatically amount
to an impermissible invasion of privacy. The US Supreme Court reiterated Whalen in
cases where right to privacy was allegedly infringed because personal medical
information was disclosed to the State. Since the collected information for the
unified ID system is less sensitive as compare to personal medical info, EO 420
cannot violate the right to privacy.

Ople v Torres is not authority to hold that EO 420 violates the right to privacy. In
Ople v Torres, the petition is granted because the assailed executive issuance
sought to establish a National Computerized Identification where legislation is
needed.

The petitions are DISMISSED. EO 420 is declared VALID.