STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION

Part I: OVERVIEW
What is Statutory Construction?
• Construction is the art or process of discovering and expounding the
meaning and
Construction is the art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning and
intention of the authors of the law with respect to its application to a given case , where
that intention is rendered doubtful, amongst others, by reason of the fact that the given
case is not explicitly provided for in the law. (Caltex v. PALOMAR)

Elements of Statutory Construction:

1. Art or Process
2. Determination of Legislative Intent
3. Ambiguity
4. Judicial Function

Statutory construction as an art or process

Why is it an art or process?
o There is no silver bullet (no one solution to construction).
• Two types of aids of Construction:
o Intrinsic – interpret what is in the law itself; words & phrases
o Extrinsic – outside the law; i.e. legal history, other statute, factual circumstances,
deliberations
• What should be considered in using the Intrinsic aids of Construction?
o Principle of effectiveness
! Statutes and provisions are construed in order to give it full effect. It is
the intention of the legislature to give full effect to a statute and its
provisions.
o Constitutionality
! Statutes should be consistent with the Constitution; as far as practicable,
statutes should not be construed as to make it inconsistent with the
Constitution. It should be clearly repugnant to the Constitution before it
should be stricken down. This is in relation to Art. 7 of the Civil Code on
the Hierarchy of Laws where if there is a conflict between a statute and
the Constitution, the former is void and the latter shall prevail.
Avoid absurdity
! Statutes should not be construed as to make it absurd or result to
absurdity. This is in line with the task of the courts to feel in the gaps. It
is due to the presumption that the legislature, in enacting a law, wanted
just to prevail.
o Other presumptions
! See General Principle/Presumptions on the Interpretation of Certain
Statutes.
o Wholeness – statutes should be construed as a whole
• Why do we consider the factors abovementioned?
o It is important in order to resolve the conflicts.
Statutory Construction as a determination of legislative intent
• What is legislative intent?
o It is the purpose of the law. It is the evil sought to be avoided by the authors of
the law.
• How to determine legislative intent?
o VERBA LEGIS – “Letter of the Law”
o RATIO LEGIS – “Spirit of the Law”
• In conflict, which would prevail? Why?
Ratio Legis. Because if spirit is not in the letter, we include it while if the letter is
not in the spirit, we exclude it.
o However, the “Letter of the Law” is an outward manifestation of the intention of
the lawmakers. Speech is the index of intention. Thus, even though the spirit
prevails in times of conflict, Ratio Legis cannot be used as an excuse not to look
at the “Letter of the Law.” Again, where the law is clear and unambiguous, there
is no room for interpretation, only application.
• Can the judiciary legislate?
o No. In the determination of legislative intent, the Courts only determine what the
law is and not what the law ought to be. There is no room of judicial legislation
o However, Courts are tasked to feel in the gaps as to avoid absurdity or lapses
where the legislative intent is clear. This mandate is expressly provided by Art. 9
of the Civil Code.

Statutory Construction as resorted only when there is Ambiguity

• What is Ambiguity?
o There is Ambiguity when the law is capable of two or more reasonable
interpretations.
• What does “reasonable” mean?
o That a regular person on the street is capable of understanding it in that manner
on its face
Kinds of Ambiguity
o Patent – the actual word of the law are ambiguous because the lawmakers
wanted it to be ambiguous. Example is Art. 26 of the Family Code on
Psychological Incapacity (ambiguity was resorted in order that ejusdem generis
would not restrict circumstances).
o Latent – as applied to a set of facts

Statutory Construction as a Judicial Function

• Why is it a Judicial Function?
o Because courts are tasked to interpret the laws. However, the recourse to
statutory construction can only be done if the following are present:
! An actual controversy
! Ambiguity in the statute
Why should there be an actual controversy for the courts to construe?
o If a person not affected would be permitted to assail the ambiguous statute, it
may prejudice those who are affected by the statute. A construction might result
to an adverse effect to which the unaffected person would not be subjected to
and that would result to a burden to those under the coverage of the statute.
Thus, only those whose rights are affected can assail the ambiguous statute.
o Also, the courts cannot rule on purely academic questions.
• What is stare decisis?
o It is the doctrine that, when courts has once laid down a principle, and apply it to
all future cases, where facts are substantially the same, regardless whether the
parties and properties are the same (doctrine of precedence).
• Does this mean that lawyers and the courts are restricted to only one interpretation
and
that there is no room for change in the interpretation of the statute?
o No. As observed from the cases, the Supreme Court can change its mind. The job
of the lawyer therefore is to differentiate the situation from another in order that
stare decisis will render inapplicable such as in the case of De Castro v. JBC vis- à -
vis In re: Valenzuela. The lawyer is not only to follow rules but also to advocate.
• As a judicial function, can the legislature and executive construe statutes?
For the legislature, strictly no. The reason for the prohibition is that it does away
with the requirement of deliberations within the Congress, i.e. three separate
readings, as it will unduly expand the statute and making it possible to approve
a statute without the required concurrence of Congress. An example would be
Navarro v. Executive Secretary where the Oversight Committee was composed
of the legislature in enacting the IRR. It encroaches not only the judiciary as well
as the executive.
o However, the executive can construe since it is necessary in the exercise of their
function – to implement laws. This is likewise called contemporaneous
construction.
• How does the executive exercise contemporaneous construction and is its bearing in
the courts?
o Contemporaneous construction can be done by the executive through: a)
Implementing Rules and Regulations; and b) Opinions, i.e. DOJ opinions. It is
not conclusive evidence of the legislative intent but it is merely persuasive to the
courts.

Steps in reconciling:
1. Special over general (with the exception that when a special provision in the general
law,
as opposed to a general provisions in a special statute, and when the general statute is
broad enough to cover cases in the special law)
Example: tax exemption of GOCCs repealed by the Tax Code in NPC vs Cabanatuan
If you can’t reconcile these, you look at which was enacted later (as it shows the more
recent intent of the legislature)

What is the codification of statutes?

• The term codification denotes the creation of codes, which are compilations of
written statutes, rules, and regulations that inform the public of acceptable and
unacceptable behavior. Normally, the special statutes are codified, jurisprudence
on those special statutes can be used in interpreting the Code.
What is a re-enacment?
• Reenactment rule is a principle of statutory construction that when reenacting a law,
the
legislature implicitly adopts well-settled judicial or administrative interpretations of
the
law.
• Follow the intention. The reason we follow the language of the law is that it is
presumed
that the language is supposed to express the intention.
Two kinds of implied repeals:
• Irreconcilable conflict
• Complete substitute

Part II: As Discussed on the Syllabus

Week 1: Introduction
Definition of Statutory Construction
Construction is the art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning and
intention of the authors of the law, where that intention is rendered doubtful by reason
of the ambiguity in its language or of the fact that the given case is not explicitly
provided for in the law.
It is the drawing of warranted conclusions respecting subjects that lie beyond
the direct expression of the text, conclusions which are in the spirit, though not within
the letter of the text.
Caltex v. Palomar, G.R. No.L-19650, 29 September 1966
• Construction is the art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning
and intention of the authors of the law with respect to its application to a given case,
where that intention is rendered doubtful, amongst others, by reason of the fact that
the given case is not explicitly provided for in the law.

When Construction is necessary

• It is said that a law which is ambiguous and deficient is a bad law. And a bad law
makes
cases hard. Rules of statutory construction help the court resolve bad cases. Thus,
where
there is ambiguity in the language of a statute, courts employ canons of
statutory
construction to ascertain its true intent and meaning.
• Canons of statutory construction do not, however, solve the special difficulties
in
construing a particular statute. Hence, the courts may utilize, in construing a statue not
unambiguous, all the light relevantly shed upon the words and the clause of the statute
that express the purpose of the legislature.
People v. Mapa, G.R. No. L-22301, 30 August 1967
• Construction and interpretation come only after it has been demonstrated that
application is impossible or inadequate without them.

Alonzo v. IAC, G.R. No.72873, 28 May 1987

• The spirit, rather than the letter of a statute determines its construction, hence, a
statute must be read according to its spirit or intent. For what is within the spirit is
within the letter but although it is not within the letter thereof, and that which is
within the letter but not within the spirit is not within the statute. Stated
differently, a thing which is within the intent of the lawmaker is as much within the
statute as if within the letter; and a thing which is within the letter of the statute is not
within the statute unless within the intent of the lawmakers.

Endencia v. David, G.R. Nos. L-6355-56, 31 August 1953

• The rule is recognized elsewhere that the legislature cannot pass any declaratory act,
or act declaratory of what the law was before its passage, so as to give it any binding
weight with the courts. A legislative definition of a word as used in a statute is not
conclusive of its meaning as used elsewhere; otherwise, the legislature would be
usurping a judicial function in defining a term.
We have already said that the Legislature under our form of government is assigned
the task and the power to make and enact laws, but not to interpret them. This is more
true with regard to the interpretation of the basic law, the Constitution, which is not
within the sphere of the Legislative department. If the Legislature may declare
what a law means, or what a specific portion of the Constitution means, especially
after the courts have in actual case ascertain its meaning by interpretation and applied
it in a decision, this would surely cause confusion and instability in judicial
processes and court decisions.
• The legislature cannot, upon passing a law which violates a constitutional
provision, validate it so as to prevent an attack thereon in the courts, by a declaration
that it shall be so construed as not to violate the constitutional inhibition.

Purpose of construction
The cardinal rule in the interpretation of all laws is to ascertain, and give effect to, the
intent of the law. Hence, all rules of construction or interpretation have for their
sole object the ascertainment of the true intent of the legislature.

What is legislative intent?

• Legislative intent is the vital part, the essence of the law. The intent of the legislature
is the law, and the key to, and the controlling factor in, its construction or
interpretation.
Intent is the spirit which gives life to legislative. It must be enforced when ascertained,
although it may not be consistent with the strict letter of the statute. Courts will
not follow the letter of the statute when it leads away from the true intent of the
legislature and to conclusions inconsistent with the general purpose of the act.
Hence, where a statute can have more than one construction, that construction should
be adopted which will most tend to give effect to the manifest intent of the legislature.
Subject matter of construction
• Constitution
• Statutes – An act of legislature as an organized body, expressed in the form, and
passed
according to the procedure, required to constitute it as part of the law of the land.
• Executive issuances
Ordinances
• Related Legal Principles
o Separation of Powers
o Checks and balances
o Hierarchy of laws (Civil Code, Art. 7)
o Stare decisis (Civil Code, Art. 8) " Once the Supreme Court has once laid down
a principle of the law as applicable to a certain state of facts, it will adhere to that
principle and apply it to all future cases where the facts are substantially the
same. This principle assures certainty and stability in the legal system.

Why is it an art or process?

o There is no silver bullet (no one
solution to construction).
• Two types of aids of
Construction:
o Intrinsic – interpret what is in
the law itself; words & phrases
o Extrinsic – outside the law; i.e.
legal history, other statute, factual
circumstances,
• Why is it an art or process?
o There is no silver bullet (no one solution to construction).
• Two types of aids of Construction:
o Intrinsic – interpret what is in the law itself; words & phrases
o Extrinsic – outside the law; i.e. legal history, other statute, factual circumstances,
deliberations
• What should be considered in using the Intrinsic aids of Construction?