Friday, September 16, 2022

Sultan Osop Camid vs. Office of the President G. R. No. 161414 January 17, 2005

 CASE DIGEST

SUBJECT: LAW ON PUBLIC CORPORATION

Sultan Osop Camid vs. Office of the President

G. R. No. 161414

 January 17, 2005


Re: De Facto Municipal Corporations

 

FACTS: Among the EOs annuled in the case of Pelaez v. Auditor General was EO No. 107 creating the Municipality of Andong. Petitioner herein contends that Andong is still in existence and the same is evidenced by the presence chairmen in its 17 barangays, public officials, high school, etc.

 

ISSUES:

(1) WON a municipality, such as Andong, whose creation by executive fiat was previously voided by this Court may attain recognition in the absence of any curative or reimplementing statute.

 

(2) WON Andong is entitled to recognition as De Facto Municipal Corporation.

 

HELD:

(1) No. The Municipality of Andong never existed as EO N0. 107 establishing Andong was declared void ab initio (from inception) by the court in 1965 in the case of Pelaez v. Auditor, along with thirty-three (33) other executive orders. General. Further, the Pelaez case was never reversed by the court but was rather affirmed in many cases. Finally, No subsequent legislation has been passed since 1965 creating a Municipality of Andong. Given these facts, there is hardly any reason to elaborate why Andong does not exist as a duly constituted municipality.

 

(2) No. We have since held that where a municipality created as such by executive order is later impliedly recognized and its acts are accorded legal validity, its creation can no longer be questioned. In Municipality of San Narciso, Quezon v. Mendez, Sr., and this Court considered the following factors as having validated the creation of a municipal corporation.

With the promulgation of the Local Government Code in 1991, the legal cloud was lifted over the municipalities similarly created by executive order but not judicially annulled. The de facto status of such municipalities as San Andres, Alicia and Sinacaban was recognized by this Court, and Section 442(b) of the Local Government Code deemed curative whatever legal  defects to title these municipalities had laboured under. Whatever doubt there might be as to the de jure character of the municipality must be deemed to have been put to rest by the Local Government Code of 1991 (R. A. No. 7160), 442(d) of which provides that "municipal districts organized pursuant to presidential issuances or executive orders and which have their respective sets of elective officials holding office at the time of the effectivity of this Code shall henceforth be considered as regular municipalities."

 

Is Andong similarly entitled to recognition as a de facto municipal corporation? NO.

There are eminent differences between Andong and municipalities such as San Andres, Alicia and Sinacaban. Most prominent is the fact that the executive order creating Andong was expressly annulled by order of this Court in 1965. The passing of the Local Government Code does not serve to affirm or reconstitute the judicially dissolved municipalities such as Andong. The municipalities judicially dissolved in cases remain inexistent, unless recreated through specific legislative enactments.

 

DE FACTO MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS

It has been opined that municipal corporations may exist by prescription where it is shown that the community has claimed and exercised corporate functions, with the knowledge and acquiescence of the legislature, and without interruption or objection for period long enough to afford title by prescription.

 These municipal corporations have exercised their powers for a long period without objection on the part of the government that although no charter is in existence, it is presumed that they were duly incorporated in the first place and that their charters had been lost. What is clearly essential is a factual demonstration of the continuous exercise by the municipal corporation of its corporate powers, as well as the acquiescence thereto by the other instrumentalities of the state.


Click Here: To view full text version of the case.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Easycall Communications Phils., Inc. vs. Edward King, G.R. No. 145901, December 15, 2005

 CASE DIGEST Easycall Communications Phils., Inc. vs. Edward King G.R. No. 145901, December 15, 2005 THIRD DIVISION, CORONA J.     C...