Wilfredo Mosqueda vs.

Pilipino Banana Growers & Exporters Association,

Inc
G.R. No. 189185, BERSAMIN, 16 Aug 2016

The doctrine of local autonomy and legislative authority granted to local

government units by the national legislature. The doctrine of local autonomy and
legislative authority, in this case, asserts that local government units must exercise
their powers in a manner consistent with the general law and not in contravention
of existing laws. The authority of local government units is derived from the
national legislature, and they cannot defy or modify the will of the national
legislature.

Facts:
The constitutionality of Davao City Ordinance No. 0309-07, which bans aerial
spraying as an agricultural practice in all agricultural activities within Davao City.
The ordinance was enacted by the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Davao City after
several committee hearings and consultations with stakeholders. It defines aerial
spraying as the application of substances through the use of aircraft that dispenses
the substances in the air. It also requires agricultural entities to provide a 30-meter
buffer zone within their agricultural farms/plantations. Violation of the ordinance
is punishable by fines, imprisonment, and suspension or cancellation of permits
and licenses.

The Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association, Inc. (PBGEA) and two
of its members, Davao Fruits Corporation and Lapanday Agricultural and
Development Corporation, filed a petition in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to
challenge the constitutionality of the ordinance. They argued that the ordinance
exemplified the unreasonable exercise of police power, violated the equal
protection clause, amounted to the confiscation of property without due process of
law, and lacked proper publication. The residents living within and adjacent to the
banana plantations in Davao City, led by Wilfredo Mosqueda, intervened in the
case and opposed the issuance of a preliminary injunction.
The RTC upheld the validity and constitutionality of Ordinance No. 0309-07,
finding that the City of Davao had validly exercised police power and that the
ordinance was based on a valid classification. However, the RTC recommended an
extended transition period due to the impracticability of the 3-month transition
period provided in the ordinance.

PBGEA, et al. appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals (CA), which reversed
the RTC's judgment. The CA declared Section 5 of the ordinance as void and
unconstitutional for being unreasonable and oppressive. It also found the three-
month transition period impractical and oppressive and ruled that the ban against
aerial spraying violated the equal protection clause. The CA further held that the
requirement of a 30-meter buffer zone constituted taking of property without due
process and that the ordinance was unconstitutional due to the absence of a
separability clause.

The City of Davao and the intervenors filed motions for reconsideration, but the
CA denied the motions.

Issue/s:
The main issues raised in the case are as follows:

Whether the CA erred in reversing the RTC decision upholding the validity of
Davao City Ordinance No. 0309-07.

Whether the ordinance constitutes an unreasonable exercise of police power, is

violative of the equal protection clause, and results in the taking of property
without compensation.

Whether aerial spraying of fungicides poses serious risks to people and the
environment.

Ruling:
Yes. The petitions for review were denied for lack of merit; the CA decision
declaring Ordinance No. 0309-07 unconstitutional was affirmed.
The Supreme Court ruled that the CA did not err, noting that the ordinance was
unreasonable and oppressive due to the impracticability of the three-month
transition period.
The imposition of a ban solely on aerial spraying, irrespective of the substance or
method, violated the equal protection clause as it was both overinclusive and
underinclusive.
The ordinance's requirement of a 30-meter buffer zone was also deemed arbitrary
and without a rational basis to the purpose of the law.
It was determined that the ordinance was ultra vires, as it contravened the authority
and regulations of the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA).

The principle that local government units are empowered to legislate within their
jurisdiction but must do so in conformity with national laws and policies.

https://www.lexanimo.com/2021/03/12/mosqueda-v-pilipino-banana-growers-and-
exporters-association/ - COMPLETE CASE AND BASIS