CIELO S.

BONACHITA

4. Explain the nature of a rules and regulations issued by an administrative body. (cite 2 cases
examples)

Answer:

In general, rules and regulations issued by administrative or executive officers pursuant to the
procedure or authority conferred by law upon the administrative agency have the force and effect, or
partake of the nature, of a statute. The reason is that statutes express the policies, purposes, objectives,
remedies, and sanctions intended by the legislature in general terms. The details and manner of carrying
them out are oftentimes left to the administrative agency entrusted with their enforcement.

It is an elementary rule in administrative law that administrative regulations and policies

enacted by administrative bodies to interpret the law which they are entrusted to enforce, have the
force of law, and are entitled to great respect. (Philippine Administrative Law by Carlo L. Cruz)

1. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Interport Resources Corporation, GR No. 135808, Oct
06, 2008 

It is well established that administrative authorities have the power to promulgate rules and
regulations to implement a given statute and to effectuate its policies, provided such rules and
regulations conform to the terms and standards prescribed by the statute as well as purport to
carry into effect its general policies. Nevertheless, it is undisputable that the rules and
regulations cannot assert for themselves a more extensive prerogative or deviate from the
mandate of the statute. Moreover, where the statute contains sufficient standards and an
unmistakable intent, as in the case of Sections 30 and 36 of the Revised Securities Act, there
should be no impediment to its implementation.

2. ELISEO F. SORIANO v. MA. CONSOLIZA P. LAGUARDIA, GR No. 164785, Apr 29, 2009

Administrative agencies have powers and functions which may be administrative, investigatory,
regulatory, quasi-legislative, or quasi-judicial, or a mix of the five, as may be conferred by the
Constitution or by statute. They have in fine only such powers or authority as are granted or
delegated, expressly or impliedly, by law. And in determining whether an agency has certain
powers, the inquiry should be from the law itself. But once ascertained as existing, the authority
given should be liberally construed.
A perusal of the MTRCB's basic mandate under PD 1986 reveals the possession by the agency of
the authority, albeit impliedly, to issue the challenged order of preventive suspension. And this
authority stems naturally from, and is necessary for the exercise of, its power of regulation and
supervision.
The issuance of a preventive suspension comes well within the scope of the MTRCB's authority
and functions expressly set forth in PD 1986, more particularly under its Sec. 3(d), as quoted
above, which empowers the MTRCB to "supervise, regulate, and grant, deny or cancel, permits
for the exhibition, and/or television broadcast of all motion pictures, television programs and
publicity materials, to the end that no such pictures, programs and materials as are determined
by the BOARD to be objectionable in accordance with paragraph (c) hereof shall be exhibited
and/or broadcast by television."