Digest by Zionel Regina B. Bayan and Alyssa Chrizelle Ng Miclat
Facts: Due to the ravages of typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo declared a state of calamity on October 2, 2009. She issued an E.O. No. 839, directing oil companies to maintain their oil prices for petroleum products during said emergency. This was under R.A. 8479, Section 14(e), giving power to the Department of Energy (DOE) to temporarily take over or direct the operation of any person or entity in the industry in times of national emergency.
Feeling prejudiced, respondent Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation, filed before the RTC a petition for prohibition, mandamus, and injunction with a prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or a writ of preliminary injunction against petitioners Executive Secretary Ermita, the DOE-DOJ joint task force, and Emergency Secretary Reyes. The former assailed the validity of the E.O. No. 839 and Section 14(e) of RA 8479 on the ground that these were unreasonable, oppressive, and invalid delegations of emergency powers to the Executive.
The RTC dismissed the petition for being moot, but upon motion for reconsideration by respondent, it reversed the dismissal and declared R.A. 8479 void.
Affirming the lower courtโs decision, the Court of Appeals declared Section 14(e) of R.A. 8479 unconstitutional for unduly delegating the takeover power to the DOE.
This prompted the petitioners to file a Petition for Review on Certiorari before the Supreme Court, arguing that the power to determine the existence of war or other national emergency lies in the hands of the president, and that the delegation to the DOE was proper. They further argued that Section 14(e) provides the specific duration of and restrictions in wielding the takeover power.
The respondent, on the other hand, contended that Section 14(e) improperly delegated legislative authority to an entity other than the president, amounting to a violation of Article XII, Section 17 and Article VI, Section 23 (2) of the Constitution.
Issue: Whether the delegation of legislative authority to the DOE is improper, thus making Section 14(e) of R.A. 8479 unconstitutional.
Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled in the NEGATIVE.
The Supreme Court held that a temporary takeover of oil industry entities by a presidentโs alter ego, pursuant to the well-established doctrine of qualified political agency, is in line with Article VII, Section 17 of the Constitution.
SECTION 17. The president shall have control of all the executive departments, bureaus and offices. He shall ensure that the laws be faithfully executed.
This doctrine of qualified political agency posits that the heads of various executive departments as the president’s alter egos are permitted to act on behalf of the Office of the President. Nevertheless, the doctrine of qualified political agency cannot apply to situations that call for positive action from the president alone, such as the president’s power to pardon, to declare martial law, and to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
As observed by Justice Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa, the exercise of temporary takeover power, in this case, does not belong to the “special class of constitutionally vested powers” exclusive to the president; hence, the doctrine of qualified political agency applies.
A temporary takeover from the oil industry entities does not require the president to personally handle the takeover since it does not involve a suspension of constitutionally protected liberties.
Furthermore, while the language of Section 14 (e) appears to allow an interpretation that permits the energy secretary to act independently or without instructions from the President, the doctrine of qualified political agency entails that a cabinet secretary may only exercise the authority acting as the president’s alter ego. As such, the acts of the alter ego are valid and binding unless the president disapproves or repudiates them.
Finally, since there is no clear showing that the energy secretary acted without the imprimatur of the president pursuant to the doctrine of qualified political agency, the Supreme Court ruled that the presumption of constitutionality of Section 14(e) of Republic Act No. 8479 must prevail.
THE BARRISTER 