Republic of the Philippines DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT A. Francisco Gold Condominium il Bldg, EDSA corner Mapagmahal st., Diliman, Quezon City OFFICE OF THE UNDERSECRETARY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT ULE UPINGN NUS, 26327 March 23, 2009 MR. CARLITO T. TARIMAN 10 Faisal St., Filinvest I Quezon City Dear Mr. Tariman This pertains to your letter seeking clarification on the proper interpretation of Article 110(d) of the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Local Government Code which provides, “If no action has been taken by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan within thirty (30) days after submission of such ordinances or resolutions, the same shall be presumed consistent with the law, and therefore, valid" Your inquiry is premised on the following facts, which we deem best to reproduce for better appreciation, viz: * On 19 January 2009, the Sangguniang Bayan of Virac, Catanduanes approved Municipal Resolution No. 2009-1-006 enacting Municipal Ordinance No. 2009-01, reclassifying the two (2) properties situated at Virac, Catanduanes, from residential to commercial areas. * On 29 January 2009, the Office of the Sangguniang Bayan of Virac endorsed Municipal Resolution No. 2009-01-006 enacting Municipal Ordinance No. 2009-01 to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Catanduanes for review * On 18 February 2009, in its 7 regular session, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Catanduanes, upon motion of a member, voied to declare the above Resolution and Ordinance as invalid for being ultra vires.Oe * On 19 February 2009, Mr. Leo B. Bisenio, Legislative Staff Officer | of the Sangguniang Pantalawigan of Catanduanes, wrote a letter addressed fo Vice Mayor and Sangguniang Bayan Presiding Officer Roy V. Laynes, informing that the subject ordinance had been considered and reviewed by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan and was found to be “detective and invalid" The next regular session of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Catanduanes was scheduled last 25 February 2009 but no session was held for allegedly lack of quorum. Thus, the Minutes of the 7 regular session of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan held last 18 February 2009, which continued the deliberation and voting declaring the Resolution and Ordinance as invalid, was not considered nor approved. * 28 February 2009 is the 30% day on which the Sangguniang Panlalawigan has to take action on the review of the above Resolution and Ordinance under Article 110 (d) of the IRR of the Local Government Code. We take it that you are now in a quandary vis-é-vis the above stated provision of the Local Government Code as to whether: 1. The 30 day prescribed period is absolute so as to be reckoned with from the date of receipt by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan regardless of the intervening actions taken in between by the body such as referrals to committee, committee hearings/amendments; 2. The prescriptive period is automatically extinguished by the intervening actions taken by the august body as enumerated above. In resolving your query, may we first cite specific provisions of the Local Government Code of 199) [RA 7160] relevant thereto, to wit: “SEC. 56. Review of Component City and Municipal Ordinances or Resolutions by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan.- (a) Within three (3) days after approval, the Secretary to the Sangguniang panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan shall forward to the Sangguniang Panlalawigan for review, copies of approval ordinances and the resolutions approving thelocal development plans and public investment programs formulated by the local development councils. (b) Within thirty (30) days after receipt of copies of such ordinances and resolutions, the sangguniang panlalawigan shall examine the documents or transmit ‘them to the provincial attorney, or if there be none, to the provincial prosecutor for prompt examinations. The provincial attorney or provincial prosecutor shall, within a period of ten (10) days from receipt of the documents, inform the sangguniang panlalawigan in writing of his comments or recommendations, which maybe considered by the sangguniang panlalawigan in making the decision. (c) If the sangguniang panlalawigan finds that such an ordinance or resolution is beyond the power conferred upon the sangguniang panlungsod or sangguniang bayan concerned, it shall declare such ordinance or resolution invalid in whole or in part. The sangguniang panlalawigan shall enter its action in the minutes and shall advise the corresponding city or municipal authorities of the action it has taken. (a) If no action has been taken by the sangguniang panlalawigan within thirty (30) days after submission of such an ordinance or resolution, the same shall be presumed consistent with law and therefore valid.” Basing from the above quoted provisions, we are of the view that the 30-day period is absolute and is not interrupted by the intervening actions taken in between by the body, such as referrals to committee meetings/hearings, public hearings, period of debates. amendments, etc. Be it noted that the phrase “take action” on the part of the Sanggunian within the prescribed period fixed by law should be construed as eilher approval or disapproval of the ordinance and not just any other action of the reviewing Sanggunian, such as referrals to committee, etc. This reasonable conclusion is imperative in order to give stability in the enforcement and implementation of the City and Municipal ordinances by ensuring that any findings on its validity or invalidity on review is made al the earliest opportune time considering that the effectivity date of said ordinances is not dependent on ihe on-going review of the SP but rather isof determined by the effectivity date fixed in the effectivity clause of the ordinance or in case of silence, by the provisions of Section 59 of the Local Government Code. May it be also emphasized that during the mandatory review period of the ordinance which is within 30 days upon receipt thereof, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan should have issued their legislative action in the form of a Resolution containing their disapproval in whole or in part of any ordinance submitted to them for review. It is not enough that they deliberated, debated and voted on the measure ought to be reviewed, because what is required of them is the enactment of a legislative document to formally and finally put to rest a given measure or issue. It is not fo be denied that legislative actions, either for purposes of permanently enforcing a rule of action or simply the expression of a sentiment should be done or expressed through a document proving the collegial and collective stand the members of a local legislative body have taken. This could take the form of an ordinance if it provides a permanent rule of conduct or a resolution of the Sanggunian, as a collegial body, shall express its views, sentiments or findings on any matter put before them. This document so enacted is imbued with public interest, so much so that, it shall be the basis of the general public to rely upon in performing their respective obligations or asserting their rights in a given territory. Absent this document, all local legislative debates are left as silent records, thus, unenforceable as against third persons. Perforce, after the lapse of such period, and no official and/or formal document, such as a resolution which shall contain the findings of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan on review of the municipal ordinance or resolution, was issued by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, it can be validly stated that the Sangguniang Panlalawigan failed to act within thirty (30) days and the ordinance or resolution under review can be presumed consistent with law and therefore valid. Please be informed also that this Deparlment has consistently opined that when a power is given, and that the power is to be exercised within a prescriptive period, then such prescriptive period is considered a limitation to such power. This is consistent with the principle that “where a statute prescribes a time within which a public officer is to perform official acts affecting the rights of others, it is directory as to the time, unless from the nature of the act, the designation oftime must be considered a limitation on the power of the officer” (50 AM Jur, 23, p. 46, cited by Alcantara, Samson, Statutes, 1990 ED.) Apropos to the above disquisition, we are of the opinion that Virac, Catanduanes Municipal Ordinance No. 2009-01, which was submitted for review to the Sangguniang Panialawigan of Catanduanes, is to be Presumed consistent with law and thus, valid on 28 February 2009, or thirly (30) days after it was submitted and received by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan for review. in view of the latter's failure to take the necessary formal action thereon Hoping that we have enlightened you accordingly. Very truly yours, AUSTERE A. PANADERO Undersecretary 9 Legals7/a ce: © Director Blandino M. Maced DILG Regional Office No. 05 Legazpi City