The People of the Philippine

Islands and Hong Kong & Shanghai

Banking Corporation vs.
Jose O. Vera, Judge of Court of First
Instance of Manila and Mariano Cu
Unijeng
65 Phil 56 G.R. No. L-45685
November 16, 1937
 Facts
• Defendant Mariano Cu Unijeng was convicted of criminal
charges by the trial court of Manila.

• He filed for reconsideration and four motions for a new trial

but all were denied. He then elevated to the Supreme Court
for review, which was also denied. The SC also remanded the
case for execution of the judgment.
 Facts
• While awaiting a new trial, Cu Unijeng appealed for
probation alleging that he was innocent of the crime he was
convicted for.

• Such appeal was directed to the Insular Probation Office

(IPO), who denied the application.
 Facts
• However, Judge Vera, upon request by the petitioner,
allowed the petition to be set in hearing.

• The City Prosecutor countered this action made by Judge

Vera, alleging that Vera has no power to place Cu Unijeng
under probation because it is in violation of Sec. 11 Act No.
4221 which provides the act of Legislature granting
provincial boards the power to provide a system of probation
to a convicted person.
 Facts
• The City Prosecutor also alleged that even if it were valid,
such act is unconstitutional because Sec. 1. Art. 3 of the
Constitution provides for the equal protection of laws.

• The private prosecutor also filed a supplementary

opposition, elaborating on the alleged unconstitutionality on
Act No. 4221, as an undue delegation of legislative power to
the provincial boards.
 Issue
Whether or not the provision in question in Act No.
4221 is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative
power
 Ruling
• Yes. For the purpose of the Probation Act, the provincial
boards may be regarded as administrative bodies endowed
with the power to determine when probation can take effect
in their respective provinces.

• There was no presence of a standard rule of action in the

statute to aid the exercise of the delegated power to these
administrative bodies.
 Ruling
• The Probation Act does not fix and impose upon the
provincial boards any standard or guide in the exercise of
their discretionary power.

• The legislature leaves the entire matter for the provincial

boards to decide, and that makes the whole provision void,
because it is a virtual surrender of legislative power to the
provincial boards.
 Doctrine of Non-Delegation of
Powers
• The legislature may delegate its authority to make findings of
fact, and the fact-finding power may be conferred for
applying the law.

• But where delegation to a fact-finding body empowers an

administrative agency to create conditions which constitutes
the “fact”, the delegation is invalid.
 Ruling
• In the case at bar, a provincial board is bound by no rule—
limited by no principle of expediency announced by the
legislature. It may take into consideration certain conditions,
and it may not. It may have any purpose or no purpose at all.

- Absolute discretion