STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION – ATTY.

DEVONA JUMAMIL

Statutory construction – the art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning and intention of
the authors of the law

Eg. RA 9185

If there is doubt as to the meaning or if there is a provision which needs to be interpreted, dun papasok
ang statutory construction

We have to know how it is constructed or how can it be interpreted

There always must be doubt on the law

Book (not recommended, but if you want, you can buy)– Agpalo (very good but baga), ….villa (concise
and okay),

IMPORTANT THINGS TO REMEMBER!

Construction is the drawing of conclusions with respect to subjects that are beyond the direct
expression of the text, while interpretation is the process of discovering the true meaning of the
language used.

Substantial difference:
Interpretation is limited to exploring the written text

Ex. There’s a word na naa sa law, and then, that word is ambiguous…marami syang
interpretation. So that is how you find kung ano ang meaning or ano ang interpretation ng law. Murag
dili bitaw ninyo I interpret as it is lang.

Construction is the art of finding out the true sense of any form of words (?). in construction, we need
an intrinsic aid to interpret the law or to pano ba? Yeah.
Ex. Nagbuhat ug law ang congress, and then, karon gi interpret sa judicial. Then dili nila Makita
ang true meaning…they go to the intrinsic aid…meaning the contstruction of the law…they will go to the
journals, to the minutes of the congress. Kung unsa ang naa sa sulod didto, unsa ang ilang pasabot ani
na balaod. Then dira nila hatagan ug interpretation. Through looking at the construction.

So mao na sya ang brief background lang sa construction and interpretation

Legislative – makes the law

Executive – executes the law
Judicial – interprets the law

So maski unsaon pa na sa congress, ang interpretation will always go to the judiciary…that’s why they
always argue in court because we have different interpretations of the law, then the courts will resolve.
Uhm yes, ambiguity of the law.
2 requisites to construe and interpret the law
1. There must be an actual case or controversy – meaning a case brought to a court by parties to
hear and settle their dispute. if there is no case or controversy, there is no way for the court to
construe or interpret the law. So normally diba there are lots of law that na…nahimo na syang
law before but karon pa giquestion ang interpretation and construction because maybe, there
was no case or controversy when it was implemented. So karon lang nato ma question. So mao
na, that’s why…naay mga ginarepeal atng law to cater the…ayun; and the second…
2. There must be ambiguity In the law involved in the controversy. Meaning the law involves
susceptible of two or more interpretations

Let’s define ambiguity.

Ambiguity exists if reasonable persons can find different meanings in a statute or document…etc.

So we will haaaaaave…1 2 3 4…4 cases

so where the law speaks in clear and categorical language, there is no room for interpretation,
calculation or …tion, there’s room only for application. (translated to bisaya)

When the law is clear, it is not susceptible of interpretation; it must be applied regardless of who may be
affected even if the law may be harsh or erroneous. What is dura lex sed lex?

The first and fundamental duty of the court is to apply the law not to interpret the law. Because, from
the face of the law it must be…dapat dili sya ambiguous

The duty of the court is to apply the law discarding their feeling of empathy or pity for the accused.
Daghan gyung judges na…di nalang ko mag tell.

So, sa new students kabalo na mo mag search?....

Also…and then…we are going to talk about statutes, unsa pa ba, yeah interpretation of the law and
also…the most exciting paaaart, the legal maxims. Hehehe

So I will prepare all the legal maxims and I will let you memorize…very easy. (part of 2 nd exam)

Also…let’s add more cases.

Let’s start with the easy……..