Ruzon v People

Ruzon v People of the Philippines

GR Nos. 186739-960, 17 Apr. 2013

Valesco, Jr., J:

FACTS:

            Leovegildo Ruzol was the mayor of General Nakar, Quezon from 2001 to 2004.  During his term, he organized a multi-sectoral consultative assembly composed of civil society groups, public officials and concerned stakeholders with the end in view of regulating and monitoring the transportation of salvaged forest products.  To regulate the said products, the mayor shall issue a permit to transport after payment of corresponding fees to the municipal treasurer.

            There and then, 221 information for violation of Art. 177 of the RPC were filed against Ruzol and the municipal administrator Guillermo Sabiduria claiming that the authority to issue said permit belongs to the DENR.

RUZOL’S DEFENSE

            As mayor, he is authorized to issue said permits pursuant to RA 7160 which give the LGU not only express powers but also those powers that are necessarily implied from the powers granted as well as those that are necessary, appropriate or incidental to the LGU’s efficient and effective governance.  LGU is given powers that are essential to the promotion of the general welfare of the inhabitants.

            RA 7160 has devolved certain functions and responsibilities of DENR and LGU, and the permits to transport were issued pursuant to the devolved function to manage and control communal forests with an area not exceeding 50 square kilometres.

            Under the said law, the municipality is granted the power to create its own sources of revenue and to levy fees in accordance therewith.

            The only kind of document the DENR issues is denominated “certificate of timber origin” and “certificate of lumber origin.”

            There was no proof of conspiracy between the two accused.

            The DENR directly sanctioned and expressly authorized the issuance of the 221 Transport permits through the PENR officer Rogelio Delgado, Sr., in a multi-Sectoral Consultative Assembly.

SANDIGANBAYAN

            Acquitted Sabiduria but found Ruzol guilty as charged.  under Sec 5 of PD 705 (Forestry Code), the DENR shall be responsible for the protection, development, management, regeneration, and reforestation of forest lands; the regulation and supervision of the operation of licensees, lessees and permittees for the taking or use of forest products therefrom or the occupancy or use thereof.

            In RA 7160, it was determined that since the authority relative to salvage forest products was not included in the above enumeration of devolved functions, the correlative authority to issue transport permits remains with the DENR, and thus cannot be exercised by the LGU.

ISSUE:

• W/N the authority to monitor and regulate the transportation of salvaged forest products solely with the DENR and no one else.
• W/N the permits to transport issued by Ruzol are valid.
• W/N Ruzol is guilty of usurpation of official function.

HELD:

            No.  The Court ruled that Ruzol is not guilty of usurpation of official function under Art. 177 of the RPC.  Under said provision, there are two ways of committing this crime:

• By knowingly and falsely representing himself to be an officer, agent or representative of any department or agency of the Philippine Government or of any foreign government [usurpation of authority];
• Shall perform any act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the Philippine Government or any foreign government, or any agency thereof, without being lawfully entitled to do so [usurpation of official functions].

            In the present case, Ruzol stands accused of usurpation of official functions for issuing 221 permits under the alleged pretense of official position and without being lawfully entitled to do so for such authority properly belongs to the DENR. 

• No.  The Court ruled that the authority to issue transport permits does not remain exclusively with the DENR.  LGU, under LGC of 1991, has ample authority to promulgate rules, regulations and ordinances to monitor and regulate salvaged forest products, provided that the parameters set forth by law for their enactment have been faithfully complied with.

            While the DENR is, indeed, the primary government instrumentality charged with the mandate of promulgating rules and regulations for the protection of the environment and conservation of natural resources, it is not the only government instrumentality clothed with such authority. While the law has designated DENR as the primary agency tasked to protect the environment, it was not the intention of the law to arrogate unto the DENR the exclusive prerogative of exercising this function. Whether in ordinary or in legal parlance, the word "primary" can never be taken to be synonymous with "sole" or "exclusive." In fact, neither the pertinent provisions of PD 705 nor EO 192 suggest that the DENR, or any of its bureaus, shall exercise such authority to the exclusion of all other government instrumentalities, i.e., LGUs.

            On the contrary, the claim of DENR’s supposedly exclusive mandate is easily negated by the principle of local autonomy enshrined in the 1987 Constitution in relation to the general welfare clause under Sec. 16 of the LGC of 1991.

            Pursuant to Sec. 16 of the LGC of 1991, municipal governments are clothed with authority to enact such ordinances and issue such regulations as may be necessary to carry out and discharge the responsibilities conferred upon them by law, and such as shall be necessary and proper to provide for the health, safety, comfort and convenience, maintain peace and order, improve public morals, promote the prosperity and general welfare of the municipality and its inhabitants, and ensure the protection of property in the municipality.

            As held in Oposa v. Factoran, Jr., the right of the people "to a balanced and healthful ecology carries with it the correlative duty to refrain from impairing the environment." In ensuring that this duty is upheld and maintained, a local government unit may, if it deems necessary, promulgate ordinances aimed at enhancing the right of the people to a balanced ecology and, accordingly, provide adequate measures in the proper utility and conservation of natural resources within its territorial jurisdiction. As can be deduced from Ruzol’s memoranda, as affirmed by the parties in their Joint Stipulation of Facts, it was in the pursuit of this objective that the subject permits to transport were issued by Ruzol – to regulate the salvaged forest products found within the municipality of General Nakar and, hence, prevent abuse and occurrence of any untoward illegal logging in the area.

            The significant role of the LGUs in environment protection is further echoed in Joint Memorandum Circular No. 98-01(JMC 1998-01) or the Manual of Procedures for DENR-DILG-LGU Partnership on Devolved and other Forest Management Functions, which was promulgated jointly by the DILG and the DENR in 1998.

            The Court ruled that the requirement of permits to transport salvaged forest products is not a manifestation of usurpation of DENR’s authority but rather an additional measure which was meant to complement DENR’s duty to regulate and monitor forest resources within the LGU’s territorial jurisdiction.  If there appears to be an apparent conflict between promulgated statutes, rules or regulations issued by different government instrumentalities, the proper action is not to immediately uphold one and annul the other, but rather give effect to both by harmonizing them if possible.

• No, the Court held that the permits issued by Ruzol are invalid for failure to comply with the procedural requirements set forth by law.

            The Court held that an enabling ordinance is necessary to confer the subject permits with validity. As correctly held by the Sandiganbayan, the power to levy fees or charges under the LGC is exercised by the Sangguniang Bayan through the enactment of an appropriate ordinance wherein the terms, conditions and rates of the fees are prescribed, as stated by Sec. 444 of the LGC that the authority of the municipal mayor to issue licenses and permits should be "pursuant to a law or ordinance."  Needless to say, one of the fundamental principles of local fiscal administration is that "local revenue is generated only from sources expressly authorized by law or ordinance."

• No. Ruzol is not guilty of usurpation of official function for DENR is not the sole government agency vested with the authority to issue said permits pursuant to the general welfare clause, LGUs may also exercise such authority. Also, as can be gleaned from the records, the permits to transport were meant to complement and not to replace the Wood Recovery Permit issued by the DENR. In effect, Ruzol required the issuance of the subject permits under his authority as municipal mayor and independently of the official functions granted to the DENR. The records are likewise bereft of any showing that Ruzol made representations or false pretenses that said permits could be used in lieu of, or at the least as an excuse not to obtain, the Wood Recovery Permit from the DENR.

            Contrary to the claim of Sandiganbayan, Ruzol acted in good faith to regulate and monitor the movement of salvaged forest products to prevent abuse and occurrence of untoward illegal logging.  In fact, the records will bear that the requirement of permits to transport was not Ruzol’s decision alone; it was, as earlier narrated, a result of the collective decision of the participants during the Multi-Sectoral Consultative Assembly. 

             As a final note, the Court emphasize that the burden of protecting the environment is placed not on the shoulders of DENR alone––each and every one of us, whether in an official or private capacity, has his or her significant role to play. Indeed, protecting the environment is not only a responsibility but also a right for which a citizen could and should freely exercise. Considering the rampant forest denudation, environmental degradation and plaguing scarcity of natural resources, each of us is now obligated to contribute and share in the responsibility of protecting and conserving our treasured natural resources.