Fr. Bernas on the Raissa Robles argument. In essence, he says that even if Section 49 of the Administrative Code could be interpreted as Raissa argues, it would have been rendered inoperative anyway after the 1987 Constitution took effect as its a basic rule on statutory construction that that a later law, and in this case its the Constitution, prevails over a former law. Actually, as one friend pointed out, the Administrative Code was issued by President Aquino after ratification of the 1987 Constitution. Even more then, it should be interpreted consistent with the Constitution or it would be declared unconstitutional. I would add to that my own reading of Section 49 which provides only general purposes for which savings could be applied and does not mention cross-border augmentation at all. I would interpret Section 49 as limited only to transfers within the executive branch and subject to the definition of savings in the GAA. Just the same, while ti does not save the acts of DAP the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional, this could be an argument for good faith.
Posted on: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 09:42:54 +0000