The Philippine Fisheries Code of 1998

Purpose:

Provides measures for the development and conservation of the fisheries and
aquatic resources of the Philippines.

It integrates all laws pertinent thereto.

Application of the law:

All Philippine waters including other waters over which the Philippines has sovereignty and
jurisdiction, and the countrys 200-nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and continental
shelf;

All aquatic and fishery resources whether inland, coastal or offshore fishing areas, including but
not limited to fishponds, fish pens, cages; and

All lands devoted to aquaculture, or businesses and activities relating to fishery, whether private
or public lands.

DEFINITION OF TERMS:
Aquaculture fishery operations involving all forms of raising and culturing fish and other fishery
species in fresh, brackish and marine water areas;
Aquatic resources includes fish, all other aquatic flora and fauna and other living resources of
the aquatic environment, including, but not limited to, salt and corals.
Catch ceilings the annual catch limits allowed to be taken, gathered or harvested from any
fishing area in consideration of the need to prevent overfishing and harmful depletion of breeding
stocks of aquatic organisms.
Closed season the period during which the taking of specified fishery species by a specified
fishing gear is prohibited in a specified area or areas in Philippine waters.
Coastal area/zone a band of dry land and adjacent ocean space (water and submerged land)
in which terrestrial processes and uses directly affect oceanic processes and uses, and vice
versa; extent: areas within a landmark limit of 1 kilometer from the shoreline at high tide to include
mangrove swamps, brackish water ponds, nipa swamps, estuarine rivers, sandy beaches and
other areas within seaward limit of 200 meters isobaths to include coral reefs, algal flats,
seagrass beds and other soft-bottom areas.
Commercial fishing the taking of fishery species by passive or active gear for trade, business
and profit beyond subsistence or sports fishing, further classified as:
1.) Small scale fishing with passive or active gear utilizing fishing vessels of 3.1 gross tons
(GT) up to 20 GT.
2.) Medium scale fishing utilizing active gears and vessels of 20.1 GT up to 150 GT.
3.) Large fishing utilizing active gears and vessels of more than 150 GT..
Commercial scale a scheme of producing a minimum harvest per hectare per year of milkfish
or other species including those raised in pens, cages, and tanks to be determined by the
Department in consultation with the concerned sectors;
Coral the hard calcareous substance made up of skeleton of marine coelenterate polyps which
include reefs, shelves and atolls, or any of the marine coelenterate animals living in colonies
where their skeletons form a stony mass.
Coral reef a natural aggregation of coral skeleton, with or without living coral polyps, occurring
in intertidal and subtidal marine waters.
Demarcated areas boundaries defined by markers and assigned exclusively to specific
individuals or organizations for certain specified and limited uses.
Electrofishing the use of electricity generated by batteries, electric generators and other
source of electric power to kill, stupefy, disable or render unconscious fishery species, whether or
not the same are subsequently recovered.
Endangered rare and/or threatened species aquatic plants, animals, including some varieties
of corals and sea shells in danger of extinction as provided for in existing fishery laws, rules and
regulations or in the Biodiversity Management Bureau (before its called PAWB) of DENR and in
the Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES).

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) an area beyond and adjacent to the territorial sea which
shall be not extend beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines as defined under existing laws.
Fisher folk people directly or personally and physically engaged in taking and/or culturing and
processing fishery and/or aquatic resources.
Fishing the taking of fishery species from their wild state of habitat, with or without the use of
fishing vessel.
Foreshore land a string of land margining a body of water; the part of seashore between the
low tide terrace and the upper limit of wave wash at high tide usually marked by a beach scarp or
berm.
Mangroves a community of intertidal plants including all species of trees, shrubs, vines, and
herbs found on coasts, swamps, or border of swamps.
Municipal fishing refers to fishing within municipal waters using fishing vessels of 3 GT or
less, or fishing not requiring the use of fishing vessel.
Municipal waters include not only streams, lakes, inland bodies of water and tidal waters
within the municipality which are not included within the protected areas as defined under RA
7586 (NIPAS Law), public forest, timber lands, forest reserves or fishery reserves, but also
marine waters included between 2 lines drawn perpendicular to the general coastline from points
where the boundary lines of the municipality touch the sea at low tide and a 3 rd line parallel with
the general coastline including offshore islands and 15 kms from such coastline. Where 2
municipalities are so situated on opposite shores that there is less than 30 kms of marine waters
between them, the 3rd line shall be equally distant from opposite shore of the respective
municipalities.
Philippine waters - Include all bodies of water within the Philippine territory such as lakes, rivers,
streams, creeks, brooks, ponds, swamps, lagoons, gulfs, bays and seas and other bodies of
water now existing or which may hereafter exist in the provinces, cities, municipalities, and
barangays and the waters around, between and connecting the islands of the archipelago
regardless of their breadth and dimensions, the territorial sea, the sea beds, the insular shelves,
and all other waters over which the Philippines has sovereignty and jurisdiction including the 200
nautical mile EEZ and the continental shelf.
Internal water are all water (part of the sea, rivers, lakes,etc.) landwards from the baseline of
the territory.
Archipelagic waters are internal water which include the water around, between and
connecting the islands of the archipelago.
Territorial sea a belt of sea outwards from the baseline up to 12 nautical miles from beyond.
High seas these are water beyond the territorial waters.
Contiguous zones an area of water not exceeding 24 nautical miles from the baseline.
Exclusice Economic Zone (EEZ) an are extending not more than 200 nautical miles beyond
the baseline.
Who may have access to fishery resources:

organizations/cooperatives shall have priority to exploit municipal and demarcated fishery areas
of the said municipality.*

For commercial fishing, only citizens of the Philippines, partnerships or associations, cooperatives
or corporations duly registered in the Philippines at least 60% of the capital stock of which is
owned by Filipino citizens.

Fishpond lease agreements (FLA) may be issued for public lands that may be declared available
for fishpond development primarily to qualified fisherfolk cooperatives/associations.

Operations of fish pens, fish cages, fish corrals/traps and other similar structures in municipal
areas shall be granted only to municipal fisher folk and their organizations.

* Preferential right of subsistence or marginal fishermen to the use of marine resources is not absolute. In
accordance with the Regalian Doctrine, marine resources belong to the State, and, pursuant to the 1 st
paragraph of Section 2, Article XII of the Constitution, their exploration, development and utilizationshall
be under the full control and supervision of the State. Moreover, their mandated protection, development
and conservation imply certain restrictions on whatever right of enjoyment there may be in favor of
anyone.

Prohibitions and Penalties:

1. Unauthorized fishing or engaging in other unauthorized fisheries activities.

It is prohibited to exploit, occupy, produce, breed, culture, capture or gather fish, fry, or
fingerlings of any fishery species or fishery products, or engage in any fishery activity in
Philippine waters without a license, lease or permit.

Any person found in an area where he has no permit or registration papers for fishing
vessel shall be presumed as engaged in unauthorized fishing. (exempted: fishing for daily
sustenance or for leisure not carried for commercial, occupation or livelihood purposes)

It shall also be unlawful for any commercial fishing vessel to fish in bays and in such
other fishery management areas which have been declared as over-exploited.

2. Poaching in Philippine waters.

It shall be unlawful for any foreign person, corporation or entity to fish or operate any
fishing vessel Philippine waters.

Entry in Philippine waters shall constitute prima facie evidence that the vessel is engaged
in fishing in Philippine waters.

Aside from the fine, the violation shall include the confiscation of its catch, fishing
equipment and fishing vessel.

3. Other violations:

Fishing through explosives, noxious or poisonous substance, and/or electricity, and to

deal in, sell or in any manner dispose of, any fish or fishery species which have been
illegally caught, taken or gathered.

Use of fine mesh net.

Use of active gear in the municipal waters and bays and other fishery management
areas.

Ban on coral exploitation and exportation.

Ban on muro-ami, pother methods and gear destructive to coral reefs and other marine
habitat.

Illegal use of superlights.

Conversion of mangroves into fishponds for any other purpose.

4. Fishing in overfished area and during closed season

5. Fishing in fishery reserves, refuge and sanctuaries
6. Fishing or taking of rare, threatened or endangered species
7. Capture of sabalo and other breeders/spawners.
8. Exportation of breeders, spawners, eggs or fry
9. Imporation or exporation of fish or fishery species
10. Violation of catch ceilings
11. Aquatic pollution

LAGUNA LAKE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

AN ACT CREATING THE LAGUNA LAKE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
(LLDA), PRESCRIBING ITS POWERS, FUNCTIONS AND DUTIES,
PROVIDING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Lake

- a body of fresh or salt water of considerable size, surrounded by land (Dictionary.com)

- a large area of water surrounded by land and not connected to the sea except
by rivers or streams (Cambridge Dictionary)

GEOGRAPHICAL JURISDICTION
The Laguna de Bay Region covers Metro Manila and other five neighboring provinces - Laguna,
Rizal, Batangas, Cavite, and Quezon. All cities and municipalities located in Laguna and Rizal are
part of the watershed.
The jurisdiction and scope of authority of Laguna Lake Development Authority comprises the
towns of Rizal and Laguna Provinces, towns of Silang, General Mariano Alvarez, Carmona,
Tagaytay City in Cavite, Lucban, Quezon, City of Tanauan, towns of Sto. Tomas and Malvar in
Batangas, Cities of Marikina, Pasig, Taguig, Muntinlupa, Pasay, Caloocan, Quezon and town of
Pateros in Metro Manila.
DECLARATION OF POLICY AND CREATION OF AUTHORITY
Sec. 1. Declaration of Policy. It is hereby declared to be the national policy to promote, and
accelerate the development and balanced growth of the Laguna Lake area and the surrounding
provinces, cities and towns hereinafter referred to as the region, within the context of the national
and regional plans and policies for social and economic development and to carry out the
development of the Laguna Lake region with due regard and adequate provisions for
environmental management and control, preservation of the quality of human life and ecological
systems, and the prevention of undue ecological disturbances, deterioration and pollution.
The Laguna de Bay region is managed through the Laguna Lake Development Authority
(LLDA). It is the only lake in the Philippines managed by a special agency of the Philippines
government. LLDA was formed in 1966 to institute an organized system of lake usage
regulations. Its mission is to catalyze a climate change-sensitive Integrated Water Resource
Management in the Laguna de Bay Region, with clear focus on preserving ecological integrity
and promoting sustainable economic growth (LLDA Mission statement). LLDA develops and
enforces environmental management, water quality monitoring, conservation of natural
resources, and community-based natural resource management. It enforces the licensing of fish
pens and cages and the environmental user fee system. They work with municipalities to control
and treat both industrial and household waste, and help to determine how much water can be
withdrawn for what purpose.
Area forming part of the Laguna de Bay, which is a lake, are neither agricultural nor disposable
lands of the public domain.

Any title issued over non-disposable lots, even in the hands of an alleged innocent purchaser for
value, shall be cancelled

Republic v. Reyes it was held that free patents and certificates of title issued to the applicants
covering portions of the lake, due to misrepresentations and false reports, should be cancelled.

Any false statement in an application for public land shall ipso facto produce the cancellation of
the title granted. Possession of non-disposable land does not divest the land of its public
character.

Sec. 4. Special Powers and Functions. The Authority shall exercise perform the following powers and
functions:
xxx (i) To reclaim or cause to the reclaimed portions of the Lake or undertake reclamation projects
and/or acquire such bodies of land from the lake which may be necessary to accomplish the aims
and purposes of the Authority subject to the approval of the NEDA Board: Provided, That the land
so reclaimed shall be the property of the Authority and title thereto shall be vested in the
Authority: Provided, further, That the resulting lake shore shall continue to be owned by the
national government.

 (k) For the purpose of effectively regulating and monitoring activities in Laguna de Bay, the
Authority shall have including navigation, construction, aexclusive jurisdiction to issue new permit
for the use of the lake waters for any projects or activities in or affecting the said lakend operation
of fishpens, fish enclosures, fish corrals and the like, and to impose necessary safeguards for
lake quality control and management and to collect necessary fees for said activities and projects
What Part may be Registered
Area beyond the natural bed of the laguna de Bay may be registered

The extent of a lake bed the natural bed or basin of lakes, ponds, or pools, is the
ground covered by their waters when at their highest ordinary depth

P.I. v. Colegio de San Jose the phrase highest ordinary depth means the highest depth of the
waters of laguna de Bay during the dry season, such depth being the regular, common, natural,
which occurs always or most of the time during the year
Republic v. CA and Del Rio PR, application for registration of a portion of a land

Dir. of Lands, opposed it contending that a portion of the land in question is covered with
the waters of the Laguna de bay 4-5 months a year; therefore, a part of the lake bed of
Laguna de Bay; hence a part of public domain

SC: Land is not part of the lake bed since it is not covered by the waters of the lake at
their highest ordinary depth and, hence, it is registrable as private property.

VIOLATIONS:
Sec. 39-A. Penal and Civil Liability Clause. Any person, natural or juridical, who shall violate any
of the provisions of this Act or any rules or regulation promulgated by the Authority pursuant
thereto shall be liable to imprisonment of not exceeding three years or to a fine not exceeding
Five Thousand Pesos or both at the discretion of the Court.
If the violator be a corporation, partnership or association, the officer or officers of the
organization concerned shall be liable therefor.
The authority is hereby authorized to pursue separate civil actions for damages resulting from
infractions of the provisions of this Act, rules or regulations issued pursuant thereto and/or
conditions embodied in the clearances or permits issued by the Authority.

WATER CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES

PD 1067

Revised and consolidated the laws governing the ownership, appropriation, utilization,
exploitation, development, conservation, and protection of water resources.

Repealed several provisions of the Civil Code on ownerships of and easements relating
to waters, RA 6395 which originally vested appropriation of waters to NAPOCOR, and Irrigation
Act.
PRINCIPLES:

All waters belong to the State.

All waters that belong to the State cannot be subjected to acquisitive prescription.

The State may allow the use or development of waters by administrative concession.

The utilization, exploitation, development, conservation, and protection of water

resources shall be subject to the control and regulation of the government through the National
Water Resources Council.

Preference in the use and development of waters should be responsive to the changing
needs of the country.
STATE OWNERSHIP Of waters:

The following waters belong to the State.

Rivers and their natural beds;


Continuous or intermittent waters of springs and brooks in their natural beds and the
beds themselves;

Natural lakes and lagoons;

All other categories of surface waters such as water flowing over the lands, water from
rainfall whether natural or artificial, and water from agriculture run-off, seepage and drainage;

Atmospheric water;

Subterranean or ground waters; and

Seawaters
The following waters found on private lands belong to the State:

Continuous or intermittent waters rising on such lands;

Lakes and lagoons naturally occurring on such lands;

Rain water falling on such lands;

Subterranean or ground waters; and

Water in swamps and marshes.

The owner of the land where the water is found may use the same for domestic purposes without
securing a permit, provided that such use shall be registered when required by the Council. Any
person who captures or collects water by means of cisterns, tanks, or pools shall have exclusive
control over such water and the right to dispose of the same.
APPROPRIATION OF WATER:

Appropriation of water is the acquisition of rights over the use of waters or the taking or
diverting of waters from a natural source in the manner and for any purpose allowed by law.

Water may be appropriated for following purposes: domestic, municipal, irrigation, power
generation, fisheries, livestock raising, industrial, recreational, and other purposes.

When priority in time of appropriation from a certain source of supply cannot be

determined, the order of preference in the use of waters shall be in accordance with the above
enumeration.
APPROPRIATION OF WATER: citizenship requirement

Citizenship requirement: Only citizens of the Philippines, of legal age, as well as juridical
persons who are duly qualified by law to exploit and develop water resources, may apply for
water permits.

However, once removed from its natural source, waters cease to be part of the natural
resources of the country and are subject to ordinary commerce and they can be acquired by
foreigners.

Any person who wants to obtain a water permit shall file an application with the Council
who shall make known said application to the public for any protests.

All water permits granted are subject to conditions of beneficial use. Such water rights
may be leased or transferred, in whole or in part, to another person qualified subject to the
approval of the Council after due notice and hearing.

Right to use of water is deemed acquired as of the date of the filing of application for a
water permit in case of approved permits, or as of the date of actual use in the case where no
permit is required.
WATER RIGHTS AND PERMITS:

Any person may appropriate or use natural bodies of water without securing a water
permit for any of the following:
a.) Appropriation of water by means of handcarried receptacles;
b.) Washing or bathing, watering or dipping of domestic or farm animals, and navigation of
watercrafts or transportation of logs and other objects by flotation.

A holder of water permit may demand the establishment of easements necessary for the
construction and maintenance of works and facilities needed for the beneficial use of waters to be
appropriated, subject to the requirements of just compensation.

Water permits may be revoked after due notice and hearing on grounds of non-use.

Conditions for use:EASEMENTS

Lower estates have the obligation to receive water which naturally flow from higher
estates.

However, where the waters which flow from a higher state are those which are artificially
collected in reservoirs or man-made lagoons, any damage occasioned thereby entitles the owner
of the lower estate to compensation.

Easements of public use. Banks of rivers and streams and the shores of the seas and
lakes throughout their entire length, along their margins, and within a zone of :
a) 3 meters in urban areas
b) 20 meters in agricultural areas
c)40 meters in forest areas
are subject to easement of public use in the interest of recreation, navigation, floatage, fishing,
and salvage.
CONTROL OF WATERS: FLOOD CONTROL AREAS

DPWH may promulgate rules and regulations to prohibit or control activities that may
damage or cause deterioration of lakes and dikes, obstruct the flow of water, change the natural
flow of water, increase flood losses, or aggravate flood problems.

Upon recommendation of the Philippines Coast Guard, rivers, lakes, and lagoons may be
declared navigable either in whole or in part, subject to test of navigability.

DPWH Secretary has fact-finding power to declare as a public navigable stream any
alleged depressions or bodies of water inside the titled properties.

When a river or stream suddenly changes it course to traverse private lands, the owners
of the affected lands may not compel the government to restore the river to its former bed. They
are also not entitled to compensation for the damage sustained thereby. However, the former
owners of the new bed shall be the owners of the abandoned bed in proportion to the area lost by
each.

The owners of affected lands may undertake to return the river or stream to its old bet at
their own expense upon a permit first secured by DPWH.

National Water Resources Council shall approve the manner, location, depth, and
spacing in which borings for subterranean or ground water may be made, determine the
requirements for the registration of every boring or alteration to existing borings as well as other
control measures for the exploitation of subterranean or ground water resources.
CONTROL OF WATERS: CONSERVATION

After due notice and hearing, the National Water Resources Council may establish
minimum water levels as may be necessary for the protection of the environment, control of
pollution, navigation, prevention of salt damage, and general public use.

Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) will provide permission to build any works
that may produce dangerous or noxious substances or perform any act which may introduce
sewage or industrial waste into any source of water supply. This includes tailings from mining
operations and sediments from placer mining.

Department of Health may promulgate rules and regulations regarding any waste
disposal which may affect the source of water supply or reservoir for domestic or municipal use

Any watershed or any area of land adjacent to any surface water or overlying any ground
water may be declared by the DENR as protected area.

A watershed reservation is not susceptible of occupancy, disposition, conveyance, or

alienation.
National water resources council

Created by PD 424.


As a regulatory and executory agency, it coordinates and integrates water resources
development activities, and grants, and determines and adjudicates water rights.

It is also responsible for formulating framework plans for water supply, and promulgating
rules and regulations for the exploitation and optimum utilization of water resources, including the
imposition on water appropriators of such fees and charges.

The Council may enter upon private lands, with previous notice to the owner, for the
purpose of conducting surveys and hydrologic investigations, and to perform such other acts as
are necessary in carrying out their functions including the power to exercise the right of eminent
domain.
National water resources council: JURISDICTION

The Council has original jurisdiction over all disputes relating to appropriation, utilization,
exploitation, development, control, conservation, and protection of waters.

This does not extend to conflicting rights over real properties, jurisdiction over which is
vested by law with the regular courts.

The decisions of the Council on water rights controversies may be appealed to the Court
of Appeals (amended by BP 129).

Where the case does not involve the settlement of a water rights dispute, but the
enjoyment of a right to water use for which a permit was already granted, the regular court has
jurisdiction over the dispute. Examples:

Annulment of title and reversion to the government of a lot covering the reservoir, alleged
to have been illegally titled in the name of petitioners;

Whether or not the construction of the dike obstructed the natural water course or the
free flow of water from petitioners higher estate to intervenors lower estate, thereby causing
injury to petitioners rights

Suits involving title to, and possession of real property.

Rule on exhaustion of administrative remedies: Grievances must be ventilated first with

the Council which is the administrative agency exclusively vested with original jurisdiction to settle
water rights disputes under the Water Code.
PENALTIES:

The Water Code imposes penalties of suspension of water permit or other right to the use
of water and/or fine from P1,000.00 and in some cases up to P10,000.00 and/or imprisonment up
to 12 years.

Articles 90 and 91 enumerated the acts which may be penalized under the Water Code.
Some offenses are cognizable by the Council, while the others shall be brought before the proper
courts.
WATER DISTRICTS:

PD No. 198 or Provincial Water Utilities Act of 1973, as amended by PD No. 768 and PD
No. 1479, authorizes the formation and governs the operation of water districts throughout the
country.

Primary Function: To sell water to residents within their territory, under such schedules of
rates and charges as may be determined by their boards.

They shall manage, administer, operate, and maintain all watersheds within their
territorial boundaries, safeguard and protect the use of waters therein, supervise and control
structures within their service areas, and prohibit any person from selling or otherwise disposing
of water for public purposes within their services areas where district facilities are available to
provide such services.

Water districts are considered quasi-public corporations, performing public services and
supplying public wants.

They are authorized to exercise all powers granted by the decree, including those implied
from or incidental to such powers, and also power of eminent domain subject to review by Local
Water Utilities Administration.

A district may be dissolved by resolution of its board of directors filed to the Local Water
Utilities Administration.

LOCAL WATER UTILITIES ADMINISTRATION (LWUA):

PD No. 198 established a government corporation known as LWUA, attached to the

Office of the President, to function primarily as a specialized lending institution for promotion,
development, and financing of local water utilities.

LWUA has quasi-judicial power only as regards rates and charges fixed by water districts,
which it may review to establish compliance with PD No. 198.

This is without prejudice to appeal being taken therefrom by a water concessionaire to

the National Water Resources Council

Although water districts created by PD No. 18 are considered quasi-public corporations,

they are entirely distinct from corporations organized under Corporation Code, PD No. 902-A as
amended.

The resolutions creating them, their charters, are filed not with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) but with the LWUA. The SEC has no power of supervision or
control over the activities of water districts.

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9136

EPIRA LAW
Electric Power Industry Reform Act
Scope. This Act shall provide a framework for the restructuring of the electric power industry, including
the privatization of the assets of National Power Corporation (NPC), the transition to the desired
competitive structure, and the definition of the responsibilities of the various government agencies and
private entities.
The law ordains the division of the industry into four (4) distinct sectors , namely; generartion,
transmission, distribution and supply. Corollary, the National Power Corporation (NPC) generating plants
have to be privatized and its transmission business spun off and privatized thereafter.
ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION OF THE ELECTRIC POWER INDUSTRY:
Generation Sector. Generation of electric power, a business affected with public interest, shall be
competitive and open. Any new generation company shall, before it operates, secure from the Energy
Regulatory Commission (ERC) a certificate of compliance pursuant to the standards set forth in this Act,
as well as health, safety and environmental clearances from the appropriate government agencies under
existing laws. Pursuant to the objective of lowering electricity rates to end-users, sales of generated
power by generation companies shall be value added tax zero-rated.The ERC shall, in determining the
existence of market power abuse or anti-competitive behavior, require from generation companies the
submission of their financial statements.
Transmission Sector.- The transmission of electric power shall be regulated common electricity carries
business, subject to the ratemaking powers of the ERC.
The ERC shall set the standards of the voltage transmission that shall distinguish the transmission from
the sub transmission assets. Pending the issuance of such new standards, the distinction between the
transmission and sub transmission assets shall be as follows: 230 kilovolts and above in the Luzon grid,
69kilovolts and above in the Visayas and in the isolated distribution systems, and 138 kilovolts and above
in the Mindanao Grid: Provided, That for the Visayas and the isolated distribution system, should the 69
kilovolt line not form part of the main transmission grid and be directly connected to the substation of the
distribution utility, it shall form part of the sub transmission system.
Creation of the National Transmission Company.- There is hereby created a National Transmission
Corporation, hereinafter referred to as TRANSCO, which shall assume the electrical transmission function
of the National Power Corporation (NPC), and have the powers and functions hereinafter granted. The
TRANSCO shall assume the authority and responsibility of NPC for the planning, construction and
centralized operation and maintenance of its high voltage transmission facilities, including grid
interconnections and ancillary services.
Distribution Sector. The distribution of electricity to end-users shall be a regulated common carrier
business requiring a national franchise. Distribution of electric power to all end-users may be undertaken

by private distribution utilities, cooperatives, local government units presently undertaking this function
and other duly authorized entities, subject to regulation by the ERC.
A distribution utility shall have the obligation to provide distribution services and connections to its system
for any end-user within its franchise area consistent with the distribution code. Any entity engaged therein
shall provide open and non-discriminatory access to its distribution system to all users.
Supply Sector. The supply sector is a business affected with public interest. Except for distribution
utilities and electric cooperatives with respect to their existing franchise areas, all suppliers of electricity to
the contestable market shall require a license from the ERC.
The ERC shall promulgate rules and regulations prescribing the qualifications of electricity suppliers
which shall include, among other requirements, a demonstration of their technical capability, financial
capability, and creditworthiness: Provided, That the ERC shall have authority to require electricity
suppliers to furnish a bond or other evidence of the ability of a supplier to withstand market disturbances
or other events that may increase the cost of providing service.
Electricity suppliers shall be subject to the rules and regulations concerning abuse of market power,
cartelization, and other anti-competitive or discriminatory behavior to be promulgated by the ERC.

On June 8 2001,Congress enacted RA No, 9136 known as the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of
2001 (EPIRA) Among others, EPIRA declares as policy of the state the following:
(a)To ensure and accelerate the total electrification of the country;
(b) To ensure the quality, reliability, security and affordability of the supply of electric power;
(c) To ensure transparent and reasonable prices of electricity in a regime of free and fair competition and
full public accountability to achieve greater operational and economic efficiency and enhance the
competitiveness of Philippine products in the global market;
(d) To enhance the inflow of private capital and broaden the ownership base of the power generation,
transmission and distribution sectors;
(e) To ensure fair and non-discriminatory treatment of public and private sector entities in the process of
restructuring the electric power industry;
The Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) is an independent, quasi judicial Regulatory agency created
under the EPIRA. It abolished the Energy Regulatory Board (ERB) which was created under EO No.172
ERB abolished, powers and functions transferred to ERC.
Are the Following:
(a) Enforce the rules and regulations governing the operations of the electricity spot market and activities
of the spot market operator and other participants in the spot market for the purpose of ensuring a greater
supply and rational pricing of electricity;
(b) Amend or revoke, after due notice and hearing, the authority to operate of any person or entity which
fails to comply with the provisions hereof, the IRR or any order or resolution of the ERC. In the event that
a divestment
Is required, the ERC shall allow the affected party sufficient time to remedy the infraction or for an orderly
disposal, but in no case exceed twelve(12) months from the issuance of the order;
(c) Exercise original and exclusive jurisdiction over all cases contesting rates, fees, fines and penalties
imposed by the ERC in the exercise of the above mentioned powers, functions and responsibilities and
over all cases involving disputes between and among participants or players in the energy sector.
Joint Congressional Power Commission. a congressional commission, hereinafter referred to as the
Power Commission, is hereby constituted. The Power Commission shall be composed of fourteen (14)
members with the chairmen of the Committee on Energy of the Senate and the House of Representatives
and six (6) additional members from each House, to be designated by the Senate President and the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, respectively. The minority shall be entitled to pro rata
representation but shall have at least one (1) representative in the Power Commission.
The Commission shall, in aid of legislation, perform the following functions, among others:
(a) Set the guidelines and overall framework to monitor and ensure the proper implementation of this Act;

(b) Endorse the initial privatization plan within one (1) month from submission of such plan to the Power
Commission by PSALM Corp. for approval by the President of the Philippines;
ACTS PUNISHABLE
The Power Commission is hereby empowered to require the DOE, ERC, NEA, TRANSCO, generation
companies, distribution utilities, suppliers and other electric power industry participants to submit reports
and all pertinent data and information relating to the performance of their respective functions in the
industry. Any person who willfully and deliberately refuses without just cause to extend the support and
assistance required by the Power Commission to effectively attain its objectives shall, upon conviction, be
punished by imprisonment of not less than one (1) year but not more than six (6) years or a fine of not
less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) but not more than Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000.00) or both at the discretion of the court
SEC. 45. Cross Ownership, Market Power Abuse and Anti-Competitive Behavior. No participant in the
electricity industry or any other person may engage in any anti-competitive behavior including, but not
limited to, cross-subsidization, price or market manipulation, or other unfair trade practices detrimental to
the encouragement and protection of contestable markets.
No generation company, distribution utility, or its respective subsidiary or affiliate or stockholder or official
of a generation company or distribution utility, or other entity engaged in generating and supplying
electricity specified by ERC within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, shall be allowed to
hold any interest, directly or indirectly, in TRANSCO or its concessionaire. Likewise, the TRANSCO, or its
concessionaire or any of its stockholders or officials or any of their relatives within the fourth civil degree
of consanguinity or affinity, shall not hold any interest, whether directly or indirectly, in any generation
company or distribution utility. Except for ex officio government-appointed representatives, no person who
is an officer or director of the TRANSCO or its concessionaire shall be an officer or director of any
generation company, distribution utility or supplier.
FINES AND PENALTIES
The fines and penalties that shall be imposed by the ERC for any violation of or non-compliance with this
Act or the IRR shall range from a minimum of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) to a maximum of Fifty
million pesos (P50,000,000.00).
Any person who is found guilty of any of the prohibited acts pursuant to Section 45 hereof shall suffer the
penalty of prison mayor and fine ranging from Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) to Ten million pesos
(P10,000,000.00), or both, at the discretion of the court.
The members of the Board of Directors of the juridical companies participating in or covered in the
generation companies, the distribution utilities, the TRANSCO or its concessionaire or supplier who
violate the provisions of this Act may be fined by an amount not exceeding double the amount of
damages caused by the offender or by imprisonment of one (1) year or two (2) years or both at the
discretion of the court. This rule shall apply to the members of the Board who knowingly or by neglect
allows the commission or omission under the law. If the offender is a government official or employee, he
shall, in addition, be dismissed from the government service with prejudice to reinstatement and with
perpetual or temporary disqualification from holding any elective or appointive office. If the offender is an
alien, he may, in addition to the penalties prescribed, be deported without further proceedings after
service of sentence. Any case which involves question of fact shall be appealable to the Court of Appeals
and those which involve question of law shall be directly appealable to the Supreme Court.

Downstream Oil Industry Deregulation Act of 1998

It shall be the policy of the state to liberalize and deregulate the downstream oil industry in order
to ensure a truly competitive market under a regime of fair prices, adequate and continuous
supply of environmentally-clean and high quality petroleum products. To this end, the State shall
promote and encourage the entry of new participants in the downstream oil industry, and
introduce adequate measures to ensure the attainment of these goals.

Oil Deregulation - is the lifting of certain government controls (such as price control) on several aspects
of a specific industry, specifically the oil industry.

Under the Oil Deregulation Law (Republic Act No. 8479) enacted by the Tenth Congress in 1998

*government does not interfere with the pricing

*export and importation of oil products, nor the

*establishment of retail outlets (gasoline stations)

storage depots ocean-receiving facilities, and refineries.

People can put up these installations practically wherever and whenever they want. In the case
of retail outlets, they can even be set up beside or across the street each other * Provided of
course the owners/operators of these installations & facilities notify and give prior notice to
the Department of Energy (DOE)

The location of these installations & facilities must of course conform to the zoning laws of the
local government unit concerned, as well as secure the requisite permits from the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources.

Large business establishments and government corporations can also import their fuel
requirements without securing any permit from the government; they just have to inform the DOE

They can also choose any local or foreign supplier to provide these requirements

There is a need to deregulate the industry because under a regulated environment, prices are not
allowed to rise and fall with market levels. This means that when prices went up, government
had to shell out money to subsidize the difference between the old and the new price

According to the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA), the P 8.3-B is equivalent to
the construction of more than 4,500 kilometers of provincial roads, 51,000 deep wells of potable
water, 25,000 school houses, or free rice for 20% of the poorest Filipinos

But with the deregulation of the industry, government would be able to use the money for vital
services and infrastructure, such as school buildings, bridges, roads, and hospitals.

It should be noted further that the industry is not limited only to the retail aspect: gasoline
stations. There are also the commercial-industrial (e. g., transportation, factories, power plants);
refining; trading; and bulk storage sectors of the market.

Deregulation does not mean that government has no control over the industry.

While importers can import the volume they need and from wherever source, they have to notify
the DOE of any importation.

The importer also needs to make sure that any importation conforms to international standards of
quality and to the specifications of the Clean Air Act of 1999.

Likewise, an environmental compliance certificate (ECC) has to be secured from the Department
of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) before a retail station; storage depot; oceanreceiving facility; or a refinery can be established

The deregulation law prohibits cartelization and predatory pricing on the part of oil companies and
dealers.

The law defines cartelization as any agreement, combination or concerted action by refiners,
importers and/or dealers, or their representatives, to fix prices, restrict outputs or divide markets,
either by products or by areas, or allocate markets, either by products or by areas, in restraint of
trade or free competition, including any contractual stipulation which prescribes pricing levels and
profit margins.

On the other hand, predatory pricing is selling or offering to sell any oil product at a price below
the sellers or offerors average variable cost for the purpose of destroying competition,
eliminating a competitor or discouraging a potential competitor from entering the market.
However, pricing below average variable cost in order to match the lower price of the competitor,
and not for the purpose of destroying competition, shall not be considered predatory pricing under
the law.

Likewise, the DOE Secretary canon his owninvestigate any unreasonable increase in the
prices of oil products.

The ordinary consumer, under Section 13 (b) of the law, can report any violation of the law to
the Joint DOE-DOJ Task Force:

The Joint Task Force shall investigate such reports in aid of which the DOE Secretary may
exercise the powers under the law. The Joint Task Force shall prepare a report embodying its
findings and recommendations as a result of any such investigation, and the report shall be made
at the discretion of the Joint Task Force. In the event that the Joint Task Force determines that
thederegulation law has been violated, the consumer shall be entitled to sue for and obtain

injunctive relief, as well as damages, in the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over any of the
parties, under the same conditions and principles as injunctive relief is granted under the Rules of
Court.

Under Section 9 of the law:

SEC. 9. Incentives for New Investments. To the extent applicable, persons with new
investments as determined by the DOE and registered with the BOI in refining, storage,
marketing and distribution of petroleum products, shall be extended the same incentives granted
to BOI-registered enterprises engaged in a preferred area of investments pursuant to Executive
Order No. 226, otherwise known as the Omnibus Investments Code of 1987.

What incentives are available for new entrants in the deregulated oil industry?
Such incentives shall include:

(1)

Income tax holiday;

(2)

Additional deduction for labor expenses;

(3)
Minimum tax and duty of three percent (3%) and value-added tax (VAT) on imported capital
equipment;

(4)

Tax credit on domestic capital equipment;

(5)

Exemption from contractors tax;

(6)

Unrestricted use of consigned equipment;

(7)

Exemption from the real property tax on production equipment or machineries;

(8)

Exemption from taxes and duties on imported spare parts; and

(9)

Such other applicable incentives under Article 39 of Executive Order No. 226.

JURISPRUDENCE:
HIZON VS CA
Facts:
Hizon et al. were charged with violating PD 704 for supposedly fishing without the use of a poisonous
substance (sodium cyanide). A report that some fishing boats were fishing by "muroami" led to the
apprehension of such boat (F/BRobinson), where Hizon et al were present. The police (PNP Maritime
Command and the Task Force BantayDagat) directed the boat captain to get random sample of the fish
from the fish cage for testing. The initial results tested the fish positivefor sodium cyanide and that was
the basis of the information against Hizon et al.However, a second set of fish samples yielded a negative
result on the sodium cyanide. Notwithstanding this, the RTC found Hizon et al. guilty and sentenced them
to imprisonment and forfeiture of the fishes. The CA affirmed this decision. Hizon et al., together with the
Solicitor general now question the admissibility of the evidence against petitioners in view of the
warrantless search of the fishing boat and the subsequent arrest of petitioners.
Issue: (1) Whether fish samples seized by the Task ForceBantay Dagat in the F/B Robinson without a
search warrant is admissible in evidence.
(2) Whether Hizon et. al are in violation of PD 704, Section 33, fishing with the use of sodium cyanide.
Held: 1.) Yes, it is an admissible evidence, As a general rule, any evidence obtained without a judicial
warrant is inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. The rule is, however, subject to certain
exceptions. Some of these are: (a) a search incident to a lawful arrest: (b) seizure of evidence in plain
view; (c) search of a moving motor vehicle; and (d) search in violation of customs laws and (e) breaching
of fishery laws, however, the Chemist of NBI who examined samples, testified that when she opened the
package, she found two ends of the same plastic bag knotted hence, the circumstances as well as the
time interval from the taking of fish samples and their actual examination, fail to assure the impartial mind
that the integrity of the specimens had been properly safeguarded.
2.) No, Since Muro Ami is need a 200 fishermen to execute upon the discovery by the PNP-MC there
were only 28 fishermen in the sampans fishing by hook and line and absence of obnoxious substance in
the boat or vessel justified that that they are not engage in illegal fishing.

Hence, the accused was acquitted.

Ratio: The law creates a presumption that illegal fishing has been committed when: (a) explosives,
obnoxious or poisonous substances or equipment or device for electric fishing are found in a fishing boat
or in the possession of a fisherman; or (b) when fish caught or killed with the use of explosives, obnoxious
or poisonous substances or by electricity are found in a fishing boat. Under these instances, the boat
owner, operator or fishermen are presumed to have engaged in illegal fishing. PD704, Section 33 or also
known as REVISING AND CONSOLIDATING ALL LAWS AND DECREES
AFFECTING FISHING AND FISHERIES. S. 1975

MMDA vs MBAY
G.R. Nos. 171947-48 December 18, 2008
574 SCRA 661
METROPOLITAN MANILA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS, DEPARTMENT
OF HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND
HIGHWAYS, DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT, PHILIPPINE COAST GUARD,
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE MARITIME GROUP, and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT, petitioners,
vs.
CONCERNED RESIDENTS OF MANILA BAY, represented and joined by DIVINA V. ILAS, SABINIANO
ALBARRACIN, MANUEL SANTOS, JR., DINAH DELA PEA, PAUL DENNIS QUINTERO, MA.
VICTORIA LLENOS, DONNA CALOZA, FATIMA QUITAIN, VENICE SEGARRA, FRITZIE TANGKIA,
SARAH JOELLE LINTAG, HANNIBAL AUGUSTUS BOBIS, FELIMON SANTIAGUEL, and JAIME
AGUSTIN R. OPOSA, respondents.
EN BANC
Facts:
Ministerial vs Discretionary Functions Mandamus
Constitutional Law Right to a Healthful Ecology
On January 29, 1999, respondents Concerned Residents of Manila Bay filed a complaint before the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) in Imus, Cavite against several government agencies, for the cleanup,
rehabilitation, and protection of the Manila Bay.
The complaint alleged that the water quality of the Manila Bay had fallen way below the allowable
standards set by law, specifically Presidential Decree No. (PD) 1152 or the Philippine Environment Code.
In their individual causes of action, respondents alleged that the continued neglect of petitioners in
abating the pollution of the Manila Bay constitutes a violation of, among others:
(1) Respondents constitutional right to life, health, and a balanced ecology;
(2) The Environment Code (PD 1152);
(3) The Pollution Control Law (PD 984);
(4) The Water Code (PD 1067);
(5) The Sanitation Code (PD 856);
(6) The Illegal Disposal of Wastes Decree (PD 825);
(7) The Marine Pollution Law (PD 979);
(8) Executive Order No. 192;
(9) The Toxic and Hazardous Wastes Law (Republic Act No. 6969);
(10) Civil Code provisions on nuisance and human relations;
(11) The Trust Doctrine and the Principle of Guardianship; and
(12) International Law
Inter alia, respondents, as plaintiffs a quo, prayed that petitioners be ordered to clean the Manila Bay and
submit to the RTC a concerted concrete plan of action for the purpose.

The RTC rendered a Decision in favor of respondents. Finding merit in the complaint, the Court ordered
defendant-government agencies, jointly and solidarily, to clean up and rehabilitate Manila Bay and restore
its waters to SB classification to make it fit for swimming, skin-diving and other forms of contact
recreation.
To attain this, defendant-agencies, with defendant DENR as the lead agency, are directed, within six (6)
months from receipt hereof, to act and perform their respective duties by devising a consolidated,
coordinated and concerted scheme of action for the rehabilitation and restoration of the bay.
In particular:
Defendant MWSS is directed to install, operate and maintain adequate [sewerage] treatment facilities in
strategic places under its jurisdiction and increase their capacities.
Defendant LWUA, to see to it that the water districts under its wings, provide, construct and operate
sewage facilities for the proper disposal of waste.
Defendant DENR, which is the lead agency in cleaning up Manila Bay, to install, operate and maintain
waste facilities to rid the bay of toxic and hazardous substances.
Defendant PPA, to prevent and also to treat the discharge not only of ship-generated wastes but also of
other solid and liquid wastes from docking vessels that contribute to the pollution of the bay.
Defendant MMDA, to establish, operate and maintain an adequate and appropriate sanitary landfill and/or
adequate solid waste and liquid disposal as well as other alternative garbage disposal system such as reuse or recycling of wastes.
Defendant DA, through the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, to revitalize the marine life in
Manila Bay and restock its waters with indigenous fish and other aquatic animals.
Defendant DBM, to provide and set aside an adequate budget solely for the purpose of cleaning up and
rehabilitation of Manila Bay.
Defendant DPWH, to remove and demolish structures and other nuisances that obstruct the free flow of
waters to the bay. These nuisances discharge solid and liquid wastes which eventually end up in Manila
Bay. As the construction and engineering arm of the government, DPWH is ordered to actively participate
in removing debris, such as carcass of sunken vessels, and other non-biodegradable garbage in the bay.
Defendant DOH, to closely supervise and monitor the operations of septic and sludge companies and
require them to have proper facilities for the treatment and disposal of fecal sludge and sewage coming
from septic tanks.
Defendant DECS, to inculcate in the minds and hearts of the people through education the importance of
preserving and protecting the environment.
Defendant Philippine Coast Guard and the PNP Maritime Group, to protect at all costs the Manila Bay
from all forms of illegal fishing.
The MWSS, Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA), and PPA filed before the Court of Appeals (CA)
individual Notices of Appeal. On the other hand, the DENR, Department of Public Works and Highways
(DPWH), Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA), Philippine Coast Guard (PCG), Philippine
National Police (PNP) Maritime Group, and five other executive departments and agencies filed directly
with this Court a petition for review under Rule 45.
MMDA assailed the decision on the ground that MMDAs duty under the Environmental Code is merely a
discretionary duty hence it cannot be compelled by mandamus. Further, MMDA argued that the RTCs
order was for a general clean up of the Manila Bay yet under the Environmental Code, MMDA was only
tasked to attend to specific incidents of pollution and not to undertake a massive clean up such as that
ordered by the court.
Issues:
a) Whether or not pertinent provisions of the Environment Code (PD 1152) relate only to the cleaning of
specific pollution incidents and do not cover cleaning in general.
b) Whether or not the cleaning of the Manila Bay is not a ministerial act which can be compelled by
mandamus.
Held:
Yes. It is true that in order for MMDA to implement laws like the Environmental Code, the process of
implementing usually involves the exercise of discretion i.e., where to set up landfills. But this does not
mean that their function or mandate under the law is already discretionary. Looking closer, MMDAs
function to alleviate the problem on solid and liquid waste disposal problems is a ministerial function. In

short, MMDA does not have the discretion to whether or not alleviate the garbage disposal problem in
Metro Manila, particularly in the Manila Bay area. While the implementation of the MMDAs mandated
tasks may entail a decision-making process, the enforcement of the law or the very act of doing what the
law exacts to be done is ministerial in nature and may be compelled by mandamus.
Anent the issue on whether or not MMDAs task under the Environmental Code involves a general clean
up, the Supreme Court ruled that MMDAs mandate under the Environmental Code is to perform cleaning
in general and not just to attend to specific incidents of pollution.
In the light of the ongoing environmental degradation, the Court wishes to emphasize the extreme
necessity for all concerned executive departments and agencies to immediately act and discharge their
respective official duties and obligations. Indeed, time is of the essence; hence, there is a need to set
timetables for the performance and completion of the tasks, some of them as defined for them by law and
the nature of their respective offices and mandates.
The importance of the Manila Bay as a sea resource, playground, and as a historical landmark cannot be
over-emphasized. It is not yet too late in the day to restore the Manila Bay to its former splendor and bring
back the plants and sea life that once thrived in its blue waters. But the tasks ahead, daunting as they
may be, could only be accomplished if those mandated, with the help and cooperation of all civic-minded
individuals, would put their minds to these tasks and take responsibility. This means that the State,
through petitioners, has to take the lead in the preservation and protection of the Manila Bay.
So it was that in Oposa v. Factoran, Jr. the Court stated that the right to a balanced and healthful ecology
need not even be written in the Constitution for it is assumed, like other civil and political rights
guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, to exist from the inception of mankind and it is an issue of transcendental
importance with intergenerational implications. Even assuming the absence of a categorical legal
provision specifically prodding petitioners to clean up the bay, they and the men and women representing
them cannot escape their obligation to future generations of Filipinos to keep the waters of the Manila Bay
clean and clear as humanly as possible. Anything less would be a betrayal of the trust reposed in them.

PEOPLE vs VERGARA
People of the Philippines versus Renerio P. Vergara, Ernesto T. Cuesta Jr., Pedro G. Dagao and
Bernardo P. Cuesta, G.R. No. 110286, April 2, 1997.
Facts: At about 7:30 in the morning of July 4, 1992, a team consisting of deputized Fish Warden and
President of the Leyte Fish Warden Association Jesus P. Bindoy, Police Officers Casimiro Villas and
Diosdado Moron of the Palo PNP Station, Leyte, Fish Wardens Mario Castillote and Estanislao Cabreros
and Fish Examiner Nestor Aldas of the Department of Agriculture were on board, "Bantay-Dagat," a
pumpboat, on "preventive patrol" along the municipal waters fronting barangays Baras and Candahug of
Palo, Leyte, stumbled upon a blue-colored fishing boat at a distance of approximately 200 meters away.
On the said boat were Renerio Vergara and his three co-accused Bernardo Cuesta, Pedro Dagao and
Ernesto Cuesta, Jr., They were on a parallel course toward the general direction of Samar. Momentarily,
the team saw Vergara throw into the sea a bottle known in the locality as "badil" containing ammonium
nitrate and having a blasting cap on top which, when ignited and thrown into the water, could explode.
The explosion would indiscriminately kill schools and various species of fish within a certain radius.
Approximately three seconds after appellant had thrown the "badil" into the sea, the explosion occurred.
Vergara and Cuesta then dove into the sea with their gear while Dagao and Cuesta, Jr., stayed on board
to tend to the air hose for the divers. The team approached the fishing boat. SPO2 Casimiro Villas
boarded the fishing boat while Fish Warden Jesus Bindoy held on to one end of the boat. Moments later,
Vergara and Cuesta surfaced, each carrying a fishnet or "sibot" filled with about a kilo of "bolinao" fish
scooped from under the water. Having been caught red-handed, the four accused were apprehended and
taken by the patrol team to the "Bantay-Dagat" station at Baras, and later to the police station in Palo,
Leyte. The fishing boat and its paraphernalia, as well as the two fishnets of "bolinao," were impounded.
The accused, however, refused to sign and acknowledge the corresponding receipts therefor. On
February 10, 1993, the trial court rendered judgment convicting Vergara. Vergara then appealed to the
CA.
Issue: Whether the Court committed grave abuse of authority when it completely ignored the testimony of
Emilio Linde.
Held: No. Emilio Linde sought to corroborate the claim of appellant that it was another unidentified group
of fishermen who threw the bottle of explosives at a school of "bolinao" fish. It was obvious, however, said
the trial court, that the statement of this defense witness was incredulous since he apparently had not at
all been on board the fishing boat in the company of the accused at the time of the incident. Even the
rather lengthy counter- affidavit f he our ccused ompletely issed o ention inde. The court a quo went on to
observe that the demeanor of the accused at the witness stand and the substance of his testimony failed
to elicit belief. Trial courts are tasked to initially rule on the credibility of witnesses for both the prosecution
and the defense. Appellate courts seldom would subordinate, with their own, the findings of trial courts

which concededly have good vantage points in assessing the credibility of those who take the witness
stand. Nevertheless, it is not all too uncommon for this Court, in particular, to peruse through the
transcript of proceedings in order to satisfy itself that the records of a case do support the conclusions of
trial courts.The Court is convinced that the trial court has acted correctly in finding accused-appellant
guilty of the offense charged.
TANO VS. SOCRATES
FACTS: The Sangguniang Panglungsod ng Puerto Princesa City enacted Ordinance 15-92 (an
ordinances banning the shipment of all live fish and lobster outside PPC and providing exemption;
penalties and for other purposes thereof. To implement the ordinance, Acting Mayor Lucero issued Office
Order 23 authorizing the inspection of cargoes shipped out from PPC. The Sangguniang Lalawigan of
Palawan enacted Resolution 33 (A resolution prohibiting the catching, gathering, possessing, buying,
selling and shipment of live marine coral dwelling aquatic organism for 5 year in and coming from
Palawan waters. Petitioners were charged with violating of said resolution and ordinance and questioned
the validity if said ordinances.
ISSUE: W/N the ordinances in question is unconstitutional.
HELD: The SC finds petitioners contention baseless and holds that the ordinances, do not suffer from any
infirmity both under the constitution and the applicable laws. In the light of the principles of
decentralization and devolution enshrined in the Local Government Code and the power granted therein
to local government units under the General Welfare Clause and Section 149 and 468, which involve
exercise of power, the validity of Ordinances cannot be doubted.