High Court rules used auto importation in Subic legal
By REY G. PANALIGAN, Manila Bulletin
The Supreme Court has ruled that businessmen within the Subic Bay Freeport in Zambales can continue importing and trading used motor vehicles as they are not covered by the importation ban under Executive Order No. 156.
In a unanimous full court decision written by Justice Consuelo Ynares Santiago, the High Court said that the ban in EO 156 applies only to customs territory outside the presently secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area, known as the Subic Bay Freeport.
Section 3.1 of Article 2 of EO 156 prohibits the importation of used motor vehicles into the country. EO 156 was challenged by several businessmen before the trial court which ruled that it was unconstitutional. The trial court’s ruling was upheld by the Court of Appeals. Malacañang, through the Office of the Executive Secretary, elevated the issue before the Supreme Court.
Ruling on the issue, the Supreme Court said that "said provision (Section 3.1, Article 2 of EO 156) is declared valid insofar as it applies to the Philippine territory outside the presently fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area and void with respect to its application to the secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area," the High Court said.
It pointed out that used motor vehicles that come into the Philippine territory through the secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area may be stored, used, or traded therein, or exported out of the Philippine territory, but they cannot be imported into the Philippine territory outside of the secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area.
In voiding the provision of EO 156 as far as it applies to the Subic Bay Freeport, the High Court said that such provision runs afoul of two of the requisites of a valid administrative order – that it is issued within the scope of authority given by the legislature and that it is reasonable.
"The proscription on the importation of used motor vehicles should be operative only outside the Freeport and the inclusion of said zone within the ambit of the prohibition is an invalid modification of RA 7227 (Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992)," it said.
"Indeed, when the application of an administrative issuance modifies existing laws or exceeds the intended scope, the issuance becomes void, not only for being ultra vires, but also for being unreasonable," the Court said. It found no logic in the all encompassing application of the assailed provision to the Freeport which is outside the customs territory," it added.
At the same time, the High Court said that the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7227 define the territory comprising the Subic Bay Freeport as "a separate customs territory consisting of the City of Olongapo and the Municipality of Subic, Province of Zambales, the lands occupied by the Subic Naval Base and its contiguous extensions, among others."
RA 7227 allows the free flow of goods and capital within the Freeport in order to attract investors to invest their capital in a business climate with the least government intervention, it said.
But the High Court said that EO 156 satisfied the first requisite of a valid administrative order, thus it has constitutional and statutory bases, and delegation of legislative powers to the President is permitted in Section 28(2) of Article VI of the Constitution.
It said that the second requisite that the order must be issued or promulgated in accordance with the prescribed procedure was also satisfied, noting that EO 156 is obviously a legislative rule as it seeks to implement or execute primary legislative enactments intended to protect the domestic industry by imposing a ban on the importation of a specified product not previously subject to such provision.
In the present case, the High Court said that the respondents neither questioned before any court the procedure that paved the way for the issuance of EO 156.
"Considering the settled principle that in the absence of strong evidence to the contrary, acts of the other branches of the government are presumed to be valid, and there being no objection from the respondents as to the procedure in the promulgation of EO 156, the presumption is that said executive issuance duly complied with the procedures and limitations imposed by law," it said.
The Supreme Court has ruled that businessmen within the Subic Bay Freeport in Zambales can continue importing and trading used motor vehicles as they are not covered by the importation ban under Executive Order No. 156.
In a unanimous full court decision written by Justice Consuelo Ynares Santiago, the High Court said that the ban in EO 156 applies only to customs territory outside the presently secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area, known as the Subic Bay Freeport.
Section 3.1 of Article 2 of EO 156 prohibits the importation of used motor vehicles into the country. EO 156 was challenged by several businessmen before the trial court which ruled that it was unconstitutional. The trial court’s ruling was upheld by the Court of Appeals. Malacañang, through the Office of the Executive Secretary, elevated the issue before the Supreme Court.
Ruling on the issue, the Supreme Court said that "said provision (Section 3.1, Article 2 of EO 156) is declared valid insofar as it applies to the Philippine territory outside the presently fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area and void with respect to its application to the secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area," the High Court said.
It pointed out that used motor vehicles that come into the Philippine territory through the secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area may be stored, used, or traded therein, or exported out of the Philippine territory, but they cannot be imported into the Philippine territory outside of the secured fenced-in former Subic Naval Base area.
In voiding the provision of EO 156 as far as it applies to the Subic Bay Freeport, the High Court said that such provision runs afoul of two of the requisites of a valid administrative order – that it is issued within the scope of authority given by the legislature and that it is reasonable.
"The proscription on the importation of used motor vehicles should be operative only outside the Freeport and the inclusion of said zone within the ambit of the prohibition is an invalid modification of RA 7227 (Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992)," it said.
"Indeed, when the application of an administrative issuance modifies existing laws or exceeds the intended scope, the issuance becomes void, not only for being ultra vires, but also for being unreasonable," the Court said. It found no logic in the all encompassing application of the assailed provision to the Freeport which is outside the customs territory," it added.
At the same time, the High Court said that the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7227 define the territory comprising the Subic Bay Freeport as "a separate customs territory consisting of the City of Olongapo and the Municipality of Subic, Province of Zambales, the lands occupied by the Subic Naval Base and its contiguous extensions, among others."
RA 7227 allows the free flow of goods and capital within the Freeport in order to attract investors to invest their capital in a business climate with the least government intervention, it said.
But the High Court said that EO 156 satisfied the first requisite of a valid administrative order, thus it has constitutional and statutory bases, and delegation of legislative powers to the President is permitted in Section 28(2) of Article VI of the Constitution.
It said that the second requisite that the order must be issued or promulgated in accordance with the prescribed procedure was also satisfied, noting that EO 156 is obviously a legislative rule as it seeks to implement or execute primary legislative enactments intended to protect the domestic industry by imposing a ban on the importation of a specified product not previously subject to such provision.
In the present case, the High Court said that the respondents neither questioned before any court the procedure that paved the way for the issuance of EO 156.
"Considering the settled principle that in the absence of strong evidence to the contrary, acts of the other branches of the government are presumed to be valid, and there being no objection from the respondents as to the procedure in the promulgation of EO 156, the presumption is that said executive issuance duly complied with the procedures and limitations imposed by law," it said.
posted by OlongapoCity Zambales at
1:40 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home