POLITICAL LAW REVIEWER FOR THE 2013 BAR EXAMS; Oldies but Goodies:As a unit of government, the barangay antedated the Spanish conquest of the Philippines. The word “barangay” is derived from the Malay “balangay,” a boat which transported them (the Malays) to these shores.Quoting from Juan de Plasencia, a Franciscan missionary in 1577, Historian Conrado Benitez wrote that the barangay was ruled by a dato who exercised absolute powers of government. While the Spaniards kept the barangay as the basic structure of government, they stripped the dato or rajah of his powers. Instead, power was centralized nationally in the governor general and locally in the encomiendero and later, in the alcalde mayor and the gobernadorcillo. The dato or rajah was much later renamed cabeza de barangay, who was elected by the local citizens possessing property. The position degenerated from a title of honor to that of a “mere government employee. Only the poor who needed a salary, no matter how low, accepted the post.” After the Americans colonized the Philippines, the barangays became known as “barrios.” For some time, the laws governing barrio governments were found in the Revised Administrative Code of 1916 and later in the Revised Administrative Code of 1917.[16] Barrios were granted autonomy by the original Barrio Charter, RA 2370, and formally recognized as quasi-municipal corporations by the Revised Barrio Charter, RA 3590. During the martial law regime, barrios were “declared” or renamed “barangays” -- a reversion really to their pre-Spanish names -- by PD. No. 86 and PD No. 557. Their basic organization and functions under RA 3590, which was expressly “adopted as the Barangay Charter,” were retained. However, the titles of the officials were changed to “barangay captain,” “barangay councilman,” “barangay secretary” and “barangay treasurer.” Pursuant to Sec. 6 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 222,“a Punong Barangay (Barangay Captain) and six Kagawads ng Sangguniang Barangay (Barangay Councilmen), who shall constitute the presiding officer and members of the Sangguniang Barangay (Barangay Council) respectively” were first elected on May 17, 1982. They had a term of six years which began on June 7, 1982. The Local Government Code of 1983 also fixed the term of office of local elective officials at six years.Under this Code, the chief officials of the barangay were the punong barangay, six elective sangguniang barangay members, the kabataang barangay chairman, a barangay secretary and a barangay treasurer. B.P. Blg. 881, the Omnibus Election Code,reiterated that barangay officials “shall hold office for six years,” and stated that their election was to be held “on the second Monday of May nineteen hundred and eighty eight and on the same day every six years thereafter.” This election scheduled by B.P. Blg. 881 on the second Monday of May 1988 was reset to “the second Monday of November 1988 and every five years thereafter by RA 6653. Under this law, the term of office of the barangay officials was cut to five years and the punong barangay was to be chosen from among themselves by seven kagawads, who in turn were to be elected at large by the barangay electorate. But the election date set by RA 6653 on the second Monday of November 1988 was again “postponed and reset to March 28, 1989” by RA 6679,and the term of office of barangay officials was to begin on May 1, 1989 and to end on May 31, 1994. RA 6679 further provided that “there shall be held a regular election of barangay officials on the second Monday of May 1994 and on the same day every five (5) years thereafter. Their term shall be for five years x x x.” Significantly, the manner of election of the punong barangay was changed. Sec. 5 of said law ordained that while the seven kagawads were to be elected by the registered voters of the barangay, “(t)he candidate who obtains the highest number of votes shall be the punong barangay and in the event of a tie, there shall be a drawing of lots under the supervision of the Commission on Elections.” Under the Local Government Code of 1991, RA 7160,several provisions concerning barangay officials were introduced: (1) The term of office was reduced to three years, as follows: “SEC. 43. Term of Office. -- x x x x x x x x x (c) The term of office of barangay officials and members of the sangguniang kabataan shall be for three (3) years, which shall begin after the regular election of barangay officials on the second Monday of May, 1994” (Underscoring supplied.) (2) The composition of the Sangguniang Barangay and the manner of electing its officials were altered, inter alia, the barangay chairman was to be elected directly by the electorate, as follows: SEC. 387. Chief Officials and Offices. -- (a) There shall be in each barangay a punong barangay, seven (7) sanggunian barangay members, the sanggunian kabataan chairman, a barangay secretary and a barangay treasurer. x x x x x x x x x SEC. 390. Composition. -- The Sangguniang barangay, the legislative body of the barangay, shall be composed of the punong barangay as presiding officer, and the seven (7) regular sanguniang barangay members elected at large and the sanguniang kabataan chairman as members.” SEC. 41. Manner of Election. -- (a) The x x x punong barangay shall be elected at large x x x by the qualified voters” in the barangay.” (Underscoring supplied.) Pursuant to the foregoing mandates of the Local Autonomy Code, the qualified barangay voters actually voted for one punong barangay and seven (7) kagawads during the barangay elections held on May 9, 1994. In other words, the punong barangay was elected directly and separately by the electorate, and not by the seven (7) kagawads from among themselves. The First Issue: Clear Legislative Intent and Design to Limit Term to Three Years In light of the foregoing brief historical background, the intent and design of the legislature to limit the term of barangay officials to only three (3) years as provided under the Local Government Code emerges as bright as the sunlight. The cardinal rule in the interpretation of all laws is to ascertain and give effect to the intent of the law.And three years is the obvious intent. First. RA 7160, the Local Government Code, was enacted later than RA 6679. It is basic that in case of an irreconciliable conflict between two laws of different vintages, the later enactment prevails. Legis posteriores priores contrarias abrogant. The rationale is simple: a later law repeals an earlier one because it is the later legislative will. It is to be presumed that the lawmakers knew the older law and intended to change it. In enacting the older law, the legislators could not have known the newer one and hence could not have intended to change what they did not know. Under the Civil Code, laws are repealed only by subsequent ones (Citations omitted) (2013 TACORDA BIDO BERNABE DE LA VEGA & NAPAY LITUSQUEN NOTES 1492088- NOTES SEPT ). CO-AUTHOR OF THIS NOTES, ATTY. ANDREW A. BIDO obtained 97% in POLITICAL LAW AND INTERNATIONAL LAW DURING BAR EXAMS.
Posted on: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 13:58:04 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015