JMM PROMOTION VS.

COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 120095, August 5, 1996
Justice Santiago Kapunan

FACTS:

After the gruesome death of a Filipino entertainer in Japan, POEA came up with program
that would aim to improve the deployment system and ensure this kind of tragedy will not happen
again.
The POEA created the Entertainment Industry Advisory Council which was tasked with
issuing guidelines on the training, testing certification and deployment of performing artists
abroad. Consequently, Department Order No. 3 was issued establishing procedures and
requirements for screening of these artists. These procedures proved to be more strict and high-
standard which gave burden to some performers.
FETMOP, JMM Productions and Kary International Inc, filed a class suit assailing these
guidelines contending that these orders violated the right to travel, curtailed existing contracts for
employment and deprived artists of their licenses without due process. The group prayed for the
issuance of preliminary injunction.
The RTC dismissed the case. On appeal, the CA affirmed the RTC’s decision concluding
that POEA constituted a valid exercise of the police power.

ISSUE:

- Whether or not Department Order No. 3 of POEA is in violation of the constitution

RULING:

The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioners’ claim of violation of the constitution does
not carry enough merit. It explained that police power concerns government enactments which
interfere with personal liberty or property in order to promote the general welfare or common
good. The court did not see any error on the part of POEA of creating these orders as they were
established for the protection of OCW’s.
The court cited Art II Sec 18 of the Constitution as well as the previous ruling in PASEI vs
Drilon which talks about the protection of the rights of the workers and promotion of their welfare.