You are on page 1of 4

Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice Facts Leo Echegaray was convicted of rape and sentenced to death.

Upon appeal, he questioned the validity of the actions made by the Secretary of Justice and the Director of the Bureau of Corrections. He averred that RA 8177 and its implementing rules are unconstitutional for unduly delegating legislative powers to the Secretary of Justice and the Director of the Bureau of Corrections Issue Whether there was undue delegation of legislative powers within RA 8177 and to the two officials Held No Ratio An exception to the Constitutional precept of non delegation of powers lies with the delegation to administrative bodies. This is due to the increasing complexity of governmental functions and the growing need for specialization in order to cope with the exigencies of the times. RA 8177 is complete in itself and it sets a standard. It’s complete because it sufficiently describes the job to be done, who is to do it and what is the scope of his authority. It also provides the standards as well as the conditions in which it will be carried out. It also does not unduly delegate legislative power from the Sec of Justice to the Director of the Bureau of Corrections since the latter is mere constituent of the former since the DoJ is tasked with the administration of the correctional system. However, the implementing rules suffer flaws since it: unduly delegates to the Director of the BoC the discretion to make the procedure of the death sentence and it prescribes that the manual be confidential and its distribution limited to prison personnel. It gives the Director of the BoC unbridled discretion to make rules without DoJ discretion It is unduly oppressive upon the prisoner. Rubi vs Provincial Board of Mindoro Facts Rubi alleged that he and his friends were held in a reservation in Mindoro against their will. He also said that a Dagobo native was held in custody of the provincial sheriff for having run away from the reservation Issue

the power of the IT to revoke a certificate or permit in lieu of “public interest” is valid since the IT is best suited to address the concerns of fly-by-night concerns and other fraudulent matters. the local govt’s are most qualified in selecting sites better suited for people in a “backward state”. otherwise known as the Blue Sky Law is being questioned for not setting a sufficient standard for the Insular Treasurer (IT) to adhere to. such guideline is simple enough to be followed by the IT. Public interest is not without settled meaning. Moreover. Respondents alleged that the act fixes no standard or rule which can guide the IT in determining the cases on which a certificate or permit ought to issue ergo undue delegation of Legislative powers Issue Whether there was a sufficient standard provided to guide the IT in promulgating decisions Held Yes Ratio Said Act empowers the IT to merely execute the law. Rosenthal and Osmena Facts Act No. It says that a permit or certificate will be issued only upon fulfilment of the requirements of Act 2581. . only the execution of the law was conferred upon the local government.Whether there was undue delegation of legislative power Held No Ratio It is commonplace that the Legislative delegates certain legislative powers to local governments since the latter are more suited to address the needs of their respective regions. 2581. Said law requires every natural and juridical entity to obtain a permit from the IT before offering speculative securities to the public. The IT also has the power to revoke previously awarded certificates and permits. As officials charged with the administration of the province and the protection of their inhabitants. In the case at bar. People vs.

The standard was set and the policy was fixed. Only films which are of moral. vs. They get their precision from the sense and experience of . educational. Issue Whether the law is unconstitutional for undue delegation of Legislative powers Held No Ratio The statute. However. by its provisions guards against the variances entailed by the standard given by the Legislative. economy and efficiency” within the GOCC’s for the President to adhere to. it was disapproved. when such resolution was submitted to the Control Committee of the Government Enterprises Council (GEC). The latter is empowered to examine and censor motion films before they are showed to the public.Cervantes vs. economy and efficiency”. RA 51’s constitutionality is questioned since it allegedly delegates legislative power to the President Issue Whether there was undue delegation of Legislative powers in Ra 51 Held No Ratio The Legislature already laid down the standard of simplicity. educational. All the President needed to do is promulgate and execute it. Mutual Film Co. MFC avers that the law fixes no standard as to what films are “moral. Auditor General Facts C worked with NAFCO and he used to have 400 Pesos worth of quarter allowance each month due to a resolution of the BoD of NAFCO. The GEC was created by the President pursuant to RA 51 which empowers him to effect reforms and changes in GOCC’s for the purpose of promoting “simplicity. amusing and harmless” ergo giving the BoC unbridled discretion. amusing and harmless character will be approved. Industrial Commission of Ohio Facts MFC questions an Ohio law delegating to the Board of Censors (BoC) to examine and censor films.

.men and become certain and useful guides in reasoning and conduct. Exact specification is impossible hence the law is proper.