Local Government Code of The Philippines
Professor: Atty. Jomar V. Rondolo
Student: Mr. Anthony Ashley B. Wagan
Principle of Local Autonomy
1. Decentralization of Administration
2. Decentralization of Power
Decentralization of Administration
➢ There is decentralization of administration
when the central government delegates
administrative powers to political
subdivisions in order to broaden the base of
government power and in the process make
local governments ‘more responsive and
more accountable’ and ensure their fullest
development as self-reliant communities and
make them more effective partners in the
pursuit of national development and social
progress.
Decentralization of Power
➢ It involves as abdication of political power
in favor of local government units declared
to be autonomous.
➢ This is also termed as Devolution.
Presidential Power of Supervision
➢ Autonomy, however, is not meant to end the
relation of partnership and interdependence
between the central administration and local
government units. Local governments, under
the Constitution, are subject to regulation,
however limited, and for no other purpose
than precisely, albeit paradoxically, to
enhance self-government. (Ganzon v. Court
of Appeals, G.R. No. 93252, August 5,
1991).
The president’s power over LGUs is now
limited to supervision, not
control.
➢ The president exercises “general
supervision” over the LGUs, but only to
“ensure that local affairs are administered
according to law.” It means “overseeing or
the authority of an officer to see that the
subordinate officer performs their duties. If
the subordinate officers fail or neglect to
fulfill their duties, the official may take such
action or steps as prescribed by law to make
them perform their duties.
Dual Personality of Local Government Units
➢ LGUs have a dual personality: political and
corporate. Being political units of
government and as agents of the national
government, LGUs exercise governmental
powers. On the other hand, as a corporate
entity, they exercise powers which are
proprietary in nature but which they can
perform for the benefit of their
constituencies.
➢ Under Philippine laws, the City of Manila is
a political body corporate and as such (is)
endowed with the faculties of municipal
corporations to be exercised by and through
its city government in conformity with law,
and in its proper corporate name. It may sue
and be sued, and contract and be contracted
with.
➢ Its powers are twofold in character-public,
governmental, or political on the one hand,
and corporate, private and proprietary on the
other. Governmental powers are those
exercised in administering the powers of the
state and promoting the public welfare and
they include the legislative, judicial, public
and political. Municipal powers on the one
hand are exercised for the special benefit
and advantage of the community and include
those which are ministerial, private and
corporate (City of Manila v. Intermediate
Appellate Court, G.R. No. 71159, November
15, 1989).
Local Fiscal Autonomy
➢ Fiscal autonomy means that local
governments have the power to create their
own sources of revenue in addition to their
equitable share in the national taxes released
by the national government, as well as the
power to allocate their resources in
accordance with their own priorities.
➢ The shares of the LGUs in the central
government taxes and in the proceeds of
natural resources within their territories shall
be automatically and directly released to
them.
Question: What is the basis of the President’s
General Supervision?
Answer: Under Article X Section 16 of the 1987
Constitution, it states that the President shall
exercise general supervision over autonomous
regions to ensure that the laws are faithfully
executed.
Powers of the LGU
1. Police power
2. Eminent domain
3. Taxation
4. Legislative power
Nature of Police Power
➢ The police power of the LGU is not
inherent. LGUs exercise the police power
under the general welfare clause (LGC, Sec.
16).
General Welfare Clause (LGC, Sec. 16)
➢ Every local government unit shall exercise
powers that are necessary, appropriate, or
incidental for its efficient and effective
governance, and those which are essential to
the promotion of the general welfare.
Two Branches of The General Welfare Clause
1. General Legislative Power
Authorizes the municipal council to
enact ordinances and make regulations not
repugnant to law, as may be necessary to
carry into effect and discharge the powers
and duties conferred upon the municipal
council by law.
2. Police Power Proper
Authorizes the municipality to enact
ordinances as may be necessary and proper
for the health and safety, prosperity, morals,
peace, good order, comfort, and convenience
of the municipality and its inhabitants, and
for the protection of their property.
Limitations for the Proper Exercise of the Police
Power
1. The interests of the public generally, as
distinguished from those of a particular
class, require the interference of the state.
(Equal Protection Clause)
2. The means employed are reasonably
necessary for the attainment of the object
sought to be accomplished and not duly
oppressive (Due Process Clause)
3. Exercisable only within the territorial limits
of the LGU, except for protection of water
supply (LGC, Sec. 16)
4. Must not be contrary to the Constitution and
the laws.
Tests When Police Power is Invoked as the
Rationale for the Valid Passage of an Ordinance
1. Rational Relationship Test
An ordinance must pass the
requisites as discussed above.
2. Strict Scrutiny Test
The focus is on the presence of
compelling, rather than substantial,
governmental interest and on the absence of
less restrictive means for achieving that
interest.
Question: The Sangguniang Panlungsod of Davao
City enacted an ordinance imposing a ban against
aerial spraying as an agricultural practice by all
agricultural entities within Davao City. Pursuant to
the ordinance, the ban against aerial spraying would
be strictly enforced three months thereafter. The
Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters
Association, Inc. (PBGEA) filed a petition in the
RTC to challenge the constitutionality of the
ordinance, alleging that the ordinance exemplified
the unreasonable exercise of police power and
violated the equal protection clause. The RTC
declared that the ordinance is valid and
constitutional saying that the City of Davao had
validly exercised police power under the General
Welfare Clause of the Local Government Code and
that the ordinance was consistent with the Equal
Protection Clause. On appeal, however, the CA
reversed the judgment of the RTC. Is the ordinance
valid?
Answer: No. Requiring the respondents and other
affected individuals to comply with the
consequences of the ban within the three-month
period under pain of penalty like fine, imprisonment
and even cancellation of business permits would
definitely be oppressive as to constitute abuse of
police power.
The ordinance violated the equal protection clause.
The imposition of the ban is too broad because the
ordinance applies irrespective of the substance to be
aerially applied and irrespective of the agricultural
activity to be conducted. Such imposition becomes
unreasonable in as much as it patently bears no
relation to the purported inconvenience, discomfort,
health risk and environmental danger which the
ordinance seeks to address. The burden will now
become more onerous to various entities, including
those with no connection whatsoever to the
intended purpose of the ordinance.
(Mosqueda vs. Pilipino Banana Growers &
Exporters Assoc., G.R. No. 189185 & 189305,
August 16, 2016)
Ministerial Duty of the Local Chief Executive
➢ The LGC imposes upon the city mayor, to
“enforce all laws and ordinances relative to
the governance of the city.” As the chief
executive of the city, he has the duty to
enforce an ordinance as long as it has not
been repealed by the Sanggunian or annulled
by the courts. He has no other choice. It is
his ministerial duty to do so.
Abatement of Nuisance Without Judicial
Proceedings
➢ The abatement of nuisances without judicial
proceedings applies to nuisance per se or
those which affect the immediate safety of
persons and property and may be summarily
abated under the undefined law of necessity.
➢ The LGUs have no power to declare a
particular thing as a nuisance unless such a
thing is a nuisance per se; nor can they
effect the extrajudicial abatement of a
nuisance per accidens. Those things must be
resolved by the courts in the ordinary course
of law.
Question: The Mayor of Malay, Aklan ordered
through Executive Order No. 10 the demolition of
the Boracay West Cove Resort and Hotel without
first conducting judicial proceedings on the ground
that the said hotel was built on a "no build zone" as
demarcated in Municipal Ordinance 2000-131. The
owner of the Boracay West Cove imputed grave
abuse of discretion on the part of the Mayor. Is the
owner correct?
Answer: No. Generally, LGUs have no power to
declare a particular thing as a nuisance unless such
a thing is a nuisance per se. Despite the hotel’s
classification as a nuisance per accidens, however,
the Court still found in this case that the LGU may
nevertheless properly order the hotel’s demolition.
This is because, in the exercise of police power and
the general welfare clause, property rights of
individuals may be subjected to restraints and
burdens in order to fulfill the objectives of the
government.
Otherwise stated, the government may enact
legislation that may interfere with personal liberty,
property, lawful businesses, and occupations to
promote the general welfare.
One such piece of legislation is the LGC, which
authorizes city and municipal governments, acting
through their local chief executives, to issue
demolition orders. Under existing laws, the office of
the mayor is given powers not only relative to its
function as the executive official of the town; it has
also been endowed with authority to hear issues
involving property rights of individuals and to come
out with an effective order or resolution thereon.
Pertinent herein is Sec. 444 (b)(3)(vi) of the LGC,
which empowered the mayor to order the closure
and removal of illegally constructed establishments
for failing to secure the necessary permits.
In the case at bar, Boracay West Cove admittedly
failed to secure the necessary permits, clearances,
and exemptions before the construction, expansion,
and operation of Boracay West Cove’s hotel in
Malay, Aklan. To recall, Boracay West Cove
declared that the application for zoning compliance
was still pending with the office of the mayor even
though construction and operation were already
ongoing at the same time. As such, it could no
longer be denied that it openly violated Municipal
Ordinance 2000-131
(Aquino v. Municipality of Malay, Aklan, G.R. No.
211356, September 29, 2014).
Eminent Domain
➢ Local government units have no inherent
power of eminent domain. Local
governments can exercise such power only
when expressly authorized by the
Legislature. By virtue of the Local
Government Code, Congress conferred upon
local government units the power to
expropriate. (Masikip v. City of Pasig, G.R.
No. 136349, January 23, 2006)
➢ Strictly speaking, the power of eminent
domain delegated to an LGU is in reality not
eminent but “inferior”. The national
 legislature is still the principal of the LGUs,
and the latter cannot go against the
principal’s will or modify the same (Beluso
v. Municipality of Panay, G.R. No. 153974,
August 7, 2006).
Requisites for the Valid Exercise of the Power of
Eminent Domain
1. An Ordinance is enacted by the local
legislative council authorizing the local
chief executive, on behalf of the LGU, to
exercise the power of eminent domain or
pursue expropriation proceeding over a
particular private property.
2. It must be for public use, purpose, or
welfare or for the benefit of the poor or
landless.
3. There must be payment of just
compensation.
4. A valid and definite Offer has been
previously made to the owner of the
property sought to be expropriated, but said
offer was not accepted.
Question: The Sanggunian of San Pablo City made
a resolution expropriating Ultimart shopping plaza
to be turned as a central terminal of all buses going
to Manila, Lucena or Bicol area. The management
of Ultimart accepted it considering that they have
been offered a huge amount of money.
Is the expropriation valid?
Answer: No, the expropriation is not valid.
In the line of jurisprudence decided by the supreme
court, it states that a mere resolution cannot validly
take a private property even though the owner has
given his consent and accepted the offer.
In the instant case, the expropriation is not valid due
to the fact that the Sanggunian Panglungsod of San
Pablo City only issued a resolution of the
expropriation. An ordinance declaring the
expropriation is needed to justify the expropriation.
Due Process Requirements in Eminent Domain
Offer must be in writing specifying:
1. Property sought to be acquired;
2. The reason for acquisition;
3. The price offered.
Element for an Authorized Immediate Entry
1. Filing a complaint for expropriation which is
sufficient in form and substance.
2. Deposit of the amount equivalent to fifteen
percent (15%) of the fair market value of
the property to be expropriated based on its
current tax declaration.
Phases of Expropriation Proceedings
1. The determination of the authority of the
plaintiff to exercise the power of eminent
domain and the propriety of its exercise in
the context of the facts involved in the suit.
2. The determination by the RTC of the just
compensation for the property sought to be
taken.
Public Use
Question: What if only a few people will be
benefited from the expropriation? Is the
expropriation still valid?
Answer: Yes, it is still valid. In case only a few
could actually benefit from the expropriation of the
property, the same does not diminish its public use
character. It is simply not possible to provide for all
at once, land and shelter, for all who need them.
Corollary to the expanded notion of public use,
expropriation is not anymore confined to vast tracts
of land and landed estates. It is therefore of no
moment that the land sought to be expropriated is
less than half a hectare only. Through the years, the
public use requirement in eminent domain has
evolved into a flexible concept, influenced by
changing conditions. Public use now includes the
broader notion of indirect public benefit or
advantage including in particular urban land reform
and housing. (Philippine Columbian Association v.
Panis, G.R. No. L-106528, Dec. 21, 1993)
Question: May LGUs expropriate a property to
provide a right-of-way to residents of a subdivision?
Answer: No. Considering that the residents who
need a feeder road are all subdivision lot owners, it
is the obligation of the subdivision owner to acquire
a right-of-way for them. However, the failure of the
subdivision owner to provide an access road does
not shift the burden to the LGU concerned. To
deprive respondents of their property instead of
compelling the subdivision owner to comply with
his obligation under the law is an abuse of the
power of eminent domain and is patently illegal.
Worse, the expropriation will actually benefit the
subdivision’s owner who will be able to circumvent
his commitment to provide road access to the
subdivision in conjunction with his development
permit and license to sell from the Housing and
Land Use Regulatory Board, and also be relieved of
spending his own funds for a right-of-way.
(Barangay Sindalan v. CA G.R. No. 150640, March
22, 2007)
Taxing Power
➢ It is already well-settled that although the
power to tax is inherent in the State, the
same is not true for the LGUs to whom the
power must be delegated by Congress and
must be exercised within the guidelines and
limitations that Congress may provide.
Question: Can the local governments tax national
government instrumentalities?
Answer: Sec. 133 of the LGC states that “unless
otherwise provided in the Code, local governments
cannot tax national government instrumentalities.
This doctrine emanates from the “supremacy” of
National government over local governments.
Main Sources of Revenues of LGUs
1. Taxes, fees, and charges. (1987 Constitution
Art. X, Sec. 5)
2. Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) - Just
share in the national taxes which shall be
automatically released to them. (1987
Constitution Art. X, Sec. 6)
Principles Governing Exercise of Taxing and
Revenue-Sharing Powers of LGUs
1. Taxation shall be uniform in each LGU.
2. Taxes, fees, charges, and other impositions
shall be equitable and based as far as
practicable on the taxpayer’s ability to pay;
it shall be levied and collected only for
public purpose; it must not be unjust,
excessive, oppressive, or confiscatory; it
must not be contrary to law, public policy,
national economic policy, or restraint of
trade.
3. The collection of local taxes, fees, charges,
and other impositions shall in no case be let
to any private person.
4. The revenue collected shall inure solely to
the benefit of, and be subject to disposition
by, the local government unit, unless
specifically provided therein.
5. Each local government unit shall, as far as
practicable, evolve a progressive system of
taxation. (LGC, Sec. 130)
Requirements for a Valid Tax Ordinance
1. The tax is for a public purpose;
2. The rule on uniformity of taxation is
observed;
3. Either the person or property taxed is within
the jurisdiction of the government levying
the tax; and
4. In the assessment and collection of certain
kinds of taxes, notice and opportunity for
hearing are provided. (Pepsi-Cola Bottling
Co. v. Municipality of Tanauan, G.R. No. L-
31156, February 27, 1976)
Procedural Requirements for a Valid Revenue
Ordinance
1. A prior public hearing on the measure to be
conducted according to the prescribed rules.
2. Publication of the tax ordinance, within 10
days after their approval, for 3 consecutive
days in a newspaper of local circulation,
provided that in provinces, cities, and
municipalities where there are no
newspapers of local circulation, the same
may be posted in at least two (2)
conspicuous and publicly accessible places.
Community Tax
➢ Community tax is a poll or capitation tax
which is imposed upon person who resides
within a specified territory.
Real Property Taxes
➢ These are directly imposed on privilege to
use real property such as land, building,
machinery, and other improvements, unless
specifically exempted.
Instances Where the President May Interfere in
Local Fiscal Matters
1. An unmanaged public sector deficit of the
national government;
2. Consultations with the presiding officers of
the Senate and the House of Representatives
and the presidents of the various local
leagues;
 3. And the corresponding recommendation of
the secretaries of the Department of Finance,
Interior and Local Government, and Budget
and Management (Pimentel, Jr. v. Aguirre,
G.R. No. 132988, July 19, 2000).
Legislative Power
Scope and Limitations
The Following May Exercise Legislative Power:
1. Congress
2. Regional/ Local Government Units
3. The People through Initiative and
Referendum
Legislative Power
➢ The power or competence to propose, enact,
ordain, amend/alter, modify, abrogate or
repeal laws. It is vested in the Congress
which shall consist of a Senate and a House
of Representatives, except to the extent
reserved to the people by the provision on
initiative and referendum.
Legislative Powers of Congress
1. General Plenary Power (Art. VI, Sec. 1)
2. Specific Power of Appropriation
3. Taxation and Expropriation
4. Legislative Investigation
5. Question Hour
Limitations on Legislative Power
Substantive
A. Express:
1. Bill of rights
2. On appropriations
3. On taxation
4. On constitutional appellate jurisdiction of
SC
5. No law granting a title of royalty or nobility
shall be enacted.
6. No specific funds shall be appropriated or
paid for use or benefit or any religion, sect
etc., except for priests assigned to AFP,
penal institutions etc.
B. Implied:
1. Prohibition against irrepealable laws.
2. Non-delegation of powers.
Procedural
1. Only one subject to be stated in the title of
the bill.
2. Three (3) readings on separate days; printed
copies of the bill in its final form to be
distributed to its members 3 days before its
passage, except if the President certifies to
its immediate enactment to meet a public
calamity or emergency; upon its last
reading, no amendment shall be allowed,
and the vote thereon shall be taken
immediately, and the yeas and nays entered
into the Journal.
3. Appropriation bills, revenue bills, tariff bills,
bills authorizing the increase of public debt,
bills of local application and private bills
shall originate exclusively in the House of
Representatives.
Classes of Legislative Power
1. Original: Possessed by the people in their
sovereign capacity i.e., initiative and
referendum.
2. Delegated: Possessed by Congress and other
legislative bodies by the Constitution.
3. Constituent: The power to amend or revise
the Constitution.
4. Ordinary: The power to pass ordinary laws.
Process of Law-Making
1. No bill passed by either House shall become
a law unless it has passed 3 readings on
separate days.
2. Printed copies of the bill in its final form
should be distributed to the Members 3 days
before its passage.
3. Upon the last reading of a bill, no
amendment thereto shall be allowed.
4. The vote on the bill shall be taken
immediately after the last reading of a bill.
5. The yeas and the nays shall be entered in the
Journal.
Exception
The certification of the President, due to the
necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a
public calamity or emergency, dispenses with the
reading on separate days and the printing of the bill
in the final form before its final approval.
(Tolentino v. Secretary of Finance, G.R. No.
115455, October 30, 1995).
Instances when a Bill becomes a Law.
1. Approved and signed by the President.
2. Presidential veto overridden by 2/3 vote of
all members of both Houses.
3. Failure of the President to veto the bill and
to return it with his objections to the House
where it originated, within 30 days after the
date of receipt.
4. A bill calling a special election for President
and Vice-President under Sec. 10. Art. VII
becomes a law upon its approval on the
third reading and final reading.
Presidential Veto
GR:
If the President disapproves a bill enacted by
Congress, he should veto the entire bill. He is not
allowed to veto separate items of a bill.
XPN:
Item-veto is allowed in case of Appropriation,
Revenue, and Tariff bills.
LGU: Legislative Power
Nature of Local Legislative Powers
➢ It is a fundamental principle that municipal
ordinances are inferior in status and
subordinate to the laws of the State. An
ordinance in conflict with a state law of
general character and statewide application
is universally held to be invalid. In every
power to pass ordinances given to a
municipality, there is an implied restriction
that the ordinances shall be consistent with
the general law. (Batangas CATV v. Court
of Appeals, G.R. No. 138810, September 29,
2004)
Sanggunian
➢ A sanggunian is a collegial body.
Legislation, which is the principal function
of the sanggunian, requires the participation
of all its members so that they may not only
represent the interests of their respective
constituents but also help in the making of
decisions, by voting upon every question put
upon the body.
Procedures to be taken by the Presiding Officer
if there is a Question on Quorum
Should there be a question of quorum raised during
a session, the presiding officer shall:
1. Immediately proceed to call the roll of the
members and
2. Announce the results [LGC, Sec. 53 (a)]
If there is No Quorum
The presiding officer may:
1. Declare a recess until such time that quorum
is constituted.
2. Compel immediate attendance of the
members who are absent without justifiable
cause.
3. Declare the session adjourned for lack of
quorum and no business shall be transacted
if there is still no quorum despite
enforcement of attendance [LGC, Sec. 53
(b)(c)]
Fixing of Sessions
Regular Sessions
➢ by resolution on the 1st day of the session
immediately following the election of its
members.
Special Sessions
➢ When public interest so demands, special
session may be called for by the chief
executive or by a majority vote members of
sanggunian.
NOTE: The minimum number of regular sessions
shall be once a week for the sangguniang
panlalawigan, sangguniang panlungsod, and
sangguniang bayan, and twice a month for the
sangguniang barangay. [LGC, Sec. 52 (a)]
Guidelines in the Conduct of a Sanggunian
Session
1. It shall be open to public unless it is a
closed-door session.
2. No two sessions, regular or special, may be
held in a single day.
3. Minutes of the session be recorded and each
sanggunian shall keep a journal and record
of its proceedings which may be published
upon resolution of the sanggunian
concerned.
 session except those stated in the notice
(LGC, Sec. 52).
In case of Special Sessions:
➢ Written notice to the members must be
served personally at least 24 hours before
the special session is held.
➢ Unless otherwise concurred in by 2/3
votes of the sanggunian members present,
there being no quorum, no other matters
may be considered at aspecial.
Requisites for Valid Ordinance
1. Must not contravene the constitution and
any statute.
2. Must not be unfair or oppressive.
3. Must not be partial or discriminatory.
4. Must not prohibit, but may regulate trade.
5. Must not be unreasonable.
6. Must be general in application and
Consistent with public policy. (Magtajas v.
Pryce Properties Corporation, Inc., July 20,
1994)
Ordinance vs. Resolution
Ordinance
➢ Law, general and permanent character, and
third reading is necessary for an ordinance.
Resolution
➢ Merely a declaration of the sentiment or
opinion of a lawmaking body on a specific
matter and it is temporary in nature.
General rule:
➢ Third reading is not necesary in resolution.
Exception:
➢ Unless decided otherwise by a majority of
all the sanggunian members.
Veto of the Local Chief Executive
➢ The Local Chief Executive may veto the
ordinance only once on the ground that the
ordinance is ultra vires and prejudicial to
public welfare. The veto must be
communicated to the sanggunian within:
➢ 5 days for a province
➢ 10 days for a city or municipality (LGC,
Secs. 54 and 55)
Note:
While “to veto or not to veto involves the
exercise of discretion,” a mayor exceeded his/her
authority in an arbitrary manner when he/she vetoes
a resolution where there exist sufficient municipal
funds from which the salary of the officer could be
paid. The Mayor’s refusal in complying with the
directive of the Director of the Bureau of Local
Government that the salary could be provided for is
oppressive. (Pilar v. Sangguniang Bayan of Dasol,
Pangasinan, G.R. No. L-63216, March 12, 1984)
Items that the Local Chief Executive Can Veto
1. Ordinance/resolution adopting local
development plan and public investment
program.
2. Ordinance directing the payment of money
or creating liability (LGC, Sec. 55)
Note:
Ordinances enacted by the sangguniang
barangay shall, upon approval by a majority of all
its members be signed by the punong barangay. The
latter has no veto power.
Approval of Ordinance
1. By affixing the signature of the local chief
executive on each and every page thereof if
he approves the same
2. By overriding the veto of the local chief
executive by 2/3 vote of all members of the
sanggunian if the local chief executive
vetoed the same. (LGC, Sec. 54)
Note:
A sanggunian may provide for a vote
requirement different (not majority vote) from that
prescribed in the LGC for certain (but not all)
ordinances as in amending a zoning ordinance.
(Casino v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 91192, Dec.
2, 1991).
Effectivity of Ordinance or Resolution
GR: After 10 days from the date a copy is posted in
a bulletin board at the entrance of the capitol or
city, municipal or barangay hall and in at least 2
conspicuous spaces [LGC, Sec. 59 (a)].
XPN: Unless otherwise stated in ordinance or
resolution [LGC, Sec. 59 (a)].
Effect of the Enforcement of a Disapproved
Ordinance or Resolution
➢ It shall be a sufficient ground for the
suspension or dismissal of the official or
employee (LGC, Sec. 58).
Ordinance Requiring Publication for its
Effectivity
1. Ordinances that carry with them penal
sanctions. [LGC, Sec. 59 (c)]
2. Ordinances and resolutions passed by highly
urbanized and independent component
cities. [LGC, Sec. 59 (d)]