PERSONS - REVIEWER.docx - PERSONS FAMILY RELATIONS REVIEWER...

PERSONS & FAMILY RELATIONS REVIEWER
ARTICLE 2: Effectivity of Law
- Law will take effect base on the provision of the
law itself.
- When it provides for its own effectivity: it
becomes effective of the specific date, as long as
it has been published.
- Then apply Article 2 which provides that law
shall take effect after 15 days following the
complete publication in the official gazette or
newspaper of general circulation unless
otherwise provided.
- What is indispensable, however is the
publication regardless the kinds of laws that has
been passed by the congress, even if the law that
would only benefit a specific person as long as it
is a law, then it has to be published to be
effective otherwise it will run counter to that due
process clause of the constitution.
- “unless otherwise provided” refers to the
effectivity of the law precisely if the law itself
provides for its own effectivity then it becomes
effective – for as long as it has been published
with what is mandatory in the compliance with
the requirements of publication.
- Under the case of Tanada vs. Tavera, this refers
to several laws that were passed during the time
of former President Marcos which were not
published but were given effect and thus when
Cory Aquino assumed office this was questioned
before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court
said that all laws, presidential decrees, executive
orders, as well as other laws that were not
published are considered without any effect
whatsoever likewise it also made mention of all
laws that must be published for its effectivity but
not when we speak of the decisions of the
Supreme Court. Decisions of the Supreme Court
are not laws, they merely serve in relation to
Article 8 to interpret and apply the provisions of
the law and the Constitution. While it may be
true that it forms part of the judicial system of
the Philippines, however, they are not laws, they
merely serve to interpret the law or the
Constitution.
- In the case of De Roy v. CA, the Court said, it’s
not the duty of the Supreme Court to publish
judicial decisions rather it is the bounded duty of
the lawyer to be abreast to the latest decisions of
the Court.
CASES under Article 2
TANADA v TUVERA, 136 SCRA 27 April 24, 1985
FACTS: The PETITIONERS, Tanada et al, seek a writ of
mandamus to compel RESPONDENTS to publish, and/or
cause the publication of various presidential issuances by
invoking the people’s right to be informed under the
Constitution as well as the principle that laws to be valid
and enforceable must be published in the Official Gazette
or otherwise effectively promulgated.
Respondents contended that publication in the Official
Gazette is not a sine qua non requirement for the
effectivity of laws where the laws themselves provide for
their own effectivity dates.