Philippine Law: Can It Be Repealed?

In the Philippines, laws can be repealed, but only by subsequent ones. There are two types of repeal: express and implied. An express repeal is when the repeal is contained in a special provision of a subsequent law, while an implied repeal occurs when the provisions of the subsequent law are incompatible or inconsistent with those of an earlier law. The Philippines has a history of repealing laws, such as the Anti-Subversion Law, which was repealed in 1992 during the administration of former President Fidel Ramos as part of a peace process with communist insurgents.

Express and implied repeal

In the Philippines, laws can be repealed in two ways: express repeal and implied repeal. An express repeal, or declared repeal, explicitly states that it is repealing an earlier law. This is usually contained in a special provision of a subsequent law. On the other hand, an implied repeal, or tacit repeal, occurs when a subsequent law is irreconcilable or incompatible with an earlier law, even if the new law does not explicitly state that it is repealing the earlier one.

For an implied repeal to occur, the provisions of the two laws must be irreconcilably contradictory, or the latter law must be clearly intended as a substitute covering the same subject as the earlier law. The Philippine courts have established that implied repeals are less favoured but are still valid if the laws cannot be reconciled. It is important to note that all doubts must be resolved against any implied repeal, and efforts should be made to harmonize and give effect to all laws on the subject. The fundamental principle is that the legislature should be presumed to have known the existing laws and not have enacted conflicting statutes.

To illustrate, let's consider an example. Suppose there is an existing law in the Philippines that prohibits smoking in public places. Now, suppose a subsequent law is enacted that allows designated smoking areas within public places, as long as certain conditions are met. In this case, there would be an implied repeal of the earlier law prohibiting smoking in public places. The provisions of the two laws would be considered irreconcilably contradictory, and the latter law would serve as a substitute for the earlier one, providing a more nuanced approach to smoking regulations in public places.

In conclusion, the repeal of laws in the Philippines follows a specific framework that ensures the consistency and harmony of the country's legal system. Both express and implied repeals play a role in shaping the country's legislative landscape, with the ultimate goal of maintaining a coherent and effective body of laws that govern the conduct of its citizens.

Inconsistency with the Constitution

In the Philippines, laws can be repealed if they are found to be inconsistent with the Constitution. This is known as an "express repeal" or "declared repeal", and it occurs when a law is expressly stated to be contrary to the Constitution. The New Civil Code of the Philippines states that "when the courts declare a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the former shall be void and the latter shall govern". This means that if a law is found to be inconsistent with the fundamental principles and provisions of the Constitution, it will be invalidated, and the Constitution will take precedence.

The Constitution of the Philippines sets out the basic social and political creed of the country, as well as the objectives of the government. It includes specific protections against the abuse of state power, such as the right to due process and equal protection under the law, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly. These rights are similar to those found in the U.S. Constitution and are interpreted and enforced by the Supreme Court through case law.

When a law is found to be inconsistent with the Constitution, it is important to note that the courts will declare the law void, but this does not mean that all administrative or executive acts, orders, and regulations made under that law will automatically be invalidated. These acts, orders, and regulations will remain valid as long as they do not contradict the laws or the Constitution themselves.

It is worth noting that the Constitution of the Philippines has undergone several changes and iterations throughout history, including the 1899 Malolos Constitution, the 1935 Constitution, the 1973 Constitution, and the transitional "Freedom Constitution" issued by President Corazon Aquino in 1986. Each of these constitutions has played a role in shaping the country's legal and political landscape, and the current Constitution continues to be the supreme law of the land, guiding the government and protecting the rights of Filipino citizens.

Administrative, executive acts, orders and regulations

In the Philippines, administrative, executive acts, orders, and regulations are subject to the same principles of repeal as other laws. They can be repealed either expressly or impliedly. An express repeal occurs when a subsequent law contains a special provision that directly repeals the administrative, executive act, order, or regulation in question. On the other hand, an implied repeal takes place when the provisions of a subsequent law are incompatible or inconsistent with those of the existing administrative, executive act, order, or regulation. It is important to note that the legislature is presumed to be aware of existing laws and should not enact conflicting statutes. Therefore, all efforts should be made to harmonize and give effect to all laws on a particular subject, and any doubts about an implied repeal should be resolved against it.

The validity of administrative, executive acts, orders, and regulations in the Philippines is contingent upon their consistency with existing laws and the Constitution. According to the New Civil Code of the Philippines, these acts, orders, and regulations are valid only when they do not contradict the laws or the Constitution. This aligns with the principle that when a court declares a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the former becomes void, and the latter prevails.

The Administrative Code of 1987 provides insight into the nature of executive orders. It states that "Acts of the President providing for rules of a general or permanent character in implementation or execution of constitutional or statutory powers shall be promulgated in executive orders." This suggests that executive orders are utilized to implement or execute constitutional or statutory powers through the establishment of general or permanent rules.

The Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines offers a comprehensive list of executive issuances, including administrative orders, executive orders, implementing rules, and regulations. This list encompasses a range of topics, demonstrating the breadth of administrative and executive actions in the country.

Additionally, specific examples of administrative and executive actions in the Philippines can be found. For instance, Executive Order No. 297 outlines the responsibilities of the Provincial or City Probation and Parole Officer and the authority of the Board of Commissioners in parole and probation administration. Meanwhile, Executive Order No. 44 establishes the "Walang Gutom 2027: Food Stamp Program" as a flagship program of the national government. These examples showcase how administrative and executive acts, orders, and regulations are utilized in the Philippines to address various issues and implement specific initiatives.

Anti-subversion law

In the Philippines, laws can be repealed either expressly or impliedly. An express repeal is when the repeal is contained in a special provision of a subsequent law. An implied repeal occurs when the provisions of the subsequent law are incompatible or inconsistent with those of an earlier law.

The Anti-Subversion Act of 1957, also known as Republic Act No. 1700, was a Philippine law that outlawed the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), the Hukbalahap, and any organizations succeeding these two groups. It was enacted during the peak of the Hukbalahap's Communist rebellion in the 1950s and was signed into law by then-President Carlos P. Garcia on June 20, 1957. The Act stated that the CPP was an "organized conspiracy to overthrow the Government of the Republic of the Philippines" and posed a grave danger to the security of the Philippines. It also prohibited association with these groups and penalized membership.

The Anti-Subversion Act was repealed in 1992 by President Fidel V. Ramos through RA 7636, which meant that subversion was no longer a crime. In his speech, Ramos stated that the law was repealed because the country was confident in its national stability and the resilience of its democracy. He also challenged communist insurgents to compete under the constitutional system and free market of ideas. The Act had been criticized for infringing on the constitutional rights of individuals and for being prone to abuse.

In 2019, there were proposals to revive the Anti-Subversion Act in response to reports of students being recruited by front organizations of Communist rebels. However, this proposal was criticized due to the potential for the government to abuse the law by lumping dissenters and critics together with New People's Army rebels.

Republic Act No. 386

In the Philippines, laws can be repealed in two ways: expressly, by a direct act of Congress, or impliedly, when there are occurring inconsistencies on all points between a prior and subsequent law.

• Laws take effect 15 days after their publication in the Official Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines, unless otherwise specified.
• Ignorance of the law is not an excuse for non-compliance.
• Laws do not have retroactive effects unless explicitly stated.
• Acts executed against mandatory or prohibitory laws are void unless the law authorizes their validity.
• Rights may be waived unless doing so goes against the law, public order, public policy, morals, good customs, or causes prejudice to a third person with a legally recognized right.
• Acts executed before diplomatic or consular officials of the Philippines in a foreign country must follow the solemnities established by Philippine laws.
• Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts, or property, as well as those pertaining to public order, public policy, and good customs, cannot be overridden by foreign laws, judgments, or conventions.
• In matters governed by the Code of Commerce and special laws, any deficiencies shall be addressed by the provisions of the Civil Code.
• Every person must act with justice, honesty, and good faith when exercising their rights and performing their duties.
• A petition for legal separation can be filed in cases of adultery or concubinage, or when one spouse attempts the life of the other.
• The court must actively work towards the reconciliation of spouses before granting legal separation.
• Only those who have resided in the Philippines for a year prior to filing can be entitled to legal separation, unless the cause for separation occurred within the Republic.
• After a legal separation is granted, the innocent spouse may revoke donations made to the offending spouse by reason of marriage.
• The husband and wife are expected to live together, maintain mutual respect and fidelity, and provide mutual help and support.
• The husband decides the family's residence, but the court can exempt the wife from living with him if he resides abroad, unless in the service of the Republic.

Frequently asked questions