SUBMITTED TO THE JOINT SENATE COMMITTEES ON
HEALTH AND DEMOGRAPHY, JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS,
LOCAL GOVERNMENT, and WAYS AND MEANS
This Position Paper is submitted in response to the invitation of the Hon.
Chairperson of the Senate Committee on Health and Demography, Sen. Christopher
Lawrence “Bong” N. Go, for the League to give its comments and proposals with regard
to the bills filed in the Senate on these matters: the authority of DOH to set hospital bed
capacity; public health infrastructure; amendments to RA 11332 or the Notifiable Diseases
Act; and, the establishment of quarantine stations.
The League lauds the initiatives of the Honorable Senators to further improve the
country’s healthcare system and infrastructure in light of the ongoing public health
emergency caused by the Coronavirus Disease (“Covid-19”). These senate bills are thus
timely, relevant and very much necessary to address the current crisis and similar health
concerns in the future. While the league supports these measures, there is need to balance
the same with regard to its impact to our provincial and district hospitals, and the fiscal
capacity of LGUs, particularly the provinces, in complying with new mandates, by way
of augmenting its funds for these purposes. We urge Congress to simultaneously
empower the LGUs and help enhance its provincial and district hospitals as well with th
infusion of additional funds, facilities, equipment, supplies and technical manpower as
well.
In order, however, to fully achieve the objectives of these bills, the League would
like to highlight the crucial role played by the Local Government Units (“LGUs”) in
implementing programs and projects that will benefit the public. LGUs must, thus, be
engaged in all stages of the policy planning, drafting of implementing rules and
guidelines, and more so during the implementation of these healthcare programs and
projects. Under the Universal Health Care Law, RA 11223, provinces now play a pivotal
role in integrating these province-wide local health systems.
Article X of the 1987 Constitution guarantees local autonomy to our LGUs,
wherein the President exercises supervision over LGUs and not control. The principle of
subsidiarity must be respected as well wherein inter alia, the provinces supervises its
component cities and municipalities and the latter, their component barangays.
I. Senate Bills Authorizing the DOH to Set the Bed Capacity of its Hospitals
Senate Bill Nos. 665,1 698,2 863,3 and 11264 primarily aim to authorize the
Department of Health (“DOH”) to set and approve the bed capacity and service
capability of all DOH hospitals, as well as to appropriate the corresponding funds
pursuant thereto. It is stated in these Senate Bills that a statutory amendment is
required for DOH hospitals to increase their current bed capacities to address the
COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose is to attain the World Health Organization bed
capacity standard level of 20 hospital beds per 10,000 population.
Comments:
a. ON THE VALID DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWER.
All the Senate Bills include a provision which states that the DOH has the
authority to adjust and approve the bed capacities in all DOH hospitals by
an administrative or department order. A perusal of such provision,
specifically Section 3 of each Senate Bill, will give rise to an undue
delegation of legislative power granted by Congress in favor of the DOH. It
can be recalled that for a valid delegation of legislative power by Congress,
the ”sufficient standard test” and “completeness test” must be complied
with, to wit:
“Two tests determine the validity of delegation of legislative power:
(1) the completeness test and (2) the sufficient standard test.
A law is complete when it sets forth therein the policy to be executed,
carried out or implemented by the delegate. It lays down a sufficient
standard when it provides adequate guidelines or limitations in the
law to map out the boundaries of the delegate’s authority and
prevent the delegation from running riot. To be sufficient, the
standard must specify the limits of the delegate’s authority,
announce the legislative policy and identify the conditions under
which it is to be implemented.”5
1 An Act Authorizing The DOH To Set And Approve The Bed Capacity Of All DOH Hospitals
2 An Act Authorizing The DOH To Set And Approve The Bed Capacity And The Service Capability Of All DOH
Retained Hospitals And For Other Purposes
3 An Act Authorizing The DOH To Set And Approve The Bed Capacity Of All DOH Retained Hospitals And For
Other Purposes
4 An Act Authorizing The DOH To Set And Approve The Bed Capacity And Service Capability Of All DOH
Hospitals
5 BOCEA v. Teves, G.R. No. 181704, December 6, 2011.
In this case, although these Senate Bills comply with the sufficient standard
test, as the policy is to ensure the health of the general public, the
completeness test is not complied with since there is a blanket authority
given to the DOH in the approval of bed capacities or the increase of service
capabilities in view of the absence of guidelines or sufficient boundaries.
The DOH can exercise unbridled discretion in the implementation of the
law, which should not be the case, as stated in the case of Eastern Shipping
Lines v. POEA, to wit:
Under the first test, the law must be complete in all its terms and
conditions when it leaves the legislature such that when it reaches
the delegate the only thing he will have to do is enforce it.6
Thus, the DOH should only implement the law. But with the blanket
authority given to the DOH, it could keep on increasing bed capacity and
service capability without any standards given by Congress. We
recommend for Congress to put a cap or a ceiling on the maximum number
of beds in proportion to the existing bed capacity of the hospital, say for
example 20-30% higher, to be determined by Congress, as long as there are
set boundaries to avoid undue delegation of legislative authority to DOH.
Granting that the drafting of the Implementing Rules and Regulations is
likewise delegated to the DOH, there must be sufficient standards and
parameters in the law that will guide the DOH in implementing the same,
and with the proper representation with LGUs in its drafting to comply with
the prior consultation provision guaranteed for LGUs before any national
program or project is implemented.
b. EFFECTS OF INCREASING BED CAPACITY
This increase will require additional manpower in DOH-managed hospitals
and this will impact as well the provincial and district hospitals’ manpower
requirements. Since they can afford to give a higher salary range than the
LGU-managed hospitals, there will be a mass exodus of the nurses, medical
staff and doctors from the provincial hospitals to the DOH managed
hospitals, further aggravating this problem.
It must also be noted that beginning the year 2019, Department of Budget
and Management-Local Budget Memorandum (“DBM-LBM)” No. 77-B had discontinued the cost of devolved Personal Services and Provincial/City-
Funded hospitals (“CODEPS”), putting a big strain on the resources of these affected LGUs. Said fund was used by provinces and highly-urbanized cities
(“HUCs”) as an augmentation fund in addition to the Internal Revenue
Allotment (“IRA”), for devolving health where the management of these
hospitals and its personnel were transferred to LGUs. In 2019, the aggregate
IRA for the eighty-one (81) provinces and municipalities was reduced by
P1.356 Billion and P397M, respectively.
*G.R. No. 76663, October 18, 1988.
CODEPS DISCONTINUED SINCE 2019
It must be noted that beginning 2019, DBM abruptly discontinued the
granting of the CODEPS or the Cost of Devolved Personal Services to the
provinces and cities for the devolved hospitals along with its manpower.
Under Sec 285 of RA 7160, the provinces get a 23% share from the total IRA
although the devolved functions and responsibilities mandated for
Provinces, based on a study made by the Social Watch Philippines, there
was a huge fiscal gap in the case of provinces since the total cost of devolved
functions when the LGCode was implemented in 1993 lodged to provinces
reached 41.6%, of which 81.5% is for the cost of devolved health functions
to provinces. (See Table below)
In 2019, P1.355 Billion was reduced in the total allocation for provinces
where 70 provinces or 86% suffered a decline from their 2019 indicative IRA
share due to DBM LBM 77-B issued on December 2018 and implemented by
January 1, 2019 despite the fact the LGUs have already passed their
respective local budget ordinances. The discontinuance of the CODEPS had
a huge impact in the province’s resources meant for the upkeep of its
provincial and district hospitals.
And for 2020, CODEPS was subsequently discontinued, thus, Provinces are
experiencing a shortfall in their fund allocation for health at a time when the
UHC law will be implemented, and more so now that this Covid-19
pandemic is being addressed. Hence, additional funds are needed by
Provinces managing provincial and district hospitals.
IRA or NTA
The LGUs’ Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA), now referred to as “National
Tax Allotment” or NTA pursuant to the Supreme Court decision in
Mandanas v. Ochoa (GR 199802) and Garcia v. Ochoa (GR No. 208488), is
on the average only 16% of the total GAA. The National Government will
still be implementing this decision that had attained finality on June 10, 2019
by year 2022. By 2022, NTA is estimated to increase from 18% to 24% of the
total GAA. What even made it worse is that under Sec. 286, the IRA or NTA
of LGUs should be automatically released by the Bureau of Treasury on a
“quarterly basis” but it is currently being released on a bi-monthly basis
(which has no basis in law).
In the meantime, we are urging Congress to augment the funds of provinces
to upgrade the quality and bed capacity as well of its provincial and district
hospitals.
c. ON PRIOR CONSULTATION WITH LGUs
All the Senate Bills provide no provision with regard to prior consultations
with the Local Government Unit (“LGU”) concerned, which must be done
in order to comply with the Principle of Local Autonomy7 and the Principle
of Subsidiarity.8
Prior consultation is necessary as to be consistent with the provisions
provided for under Section 27 of the Local Government Code of 1991
(“LGC”), which provides:
Section 27. Prior Consultations Required. – No project or
program shall be implemented by government authorities
unless the consultations mentioned in Sections 2 (c) and 26
hereof are complied with, and prior approval of the
sanggunian concerned is obtained: Provided, That occupants
in areas where such projects are to be implemented shall not
be evicted unless appropriate relocation sites have been
provided, in accordance with the provisions of the
Constitution.
This is necessary in order to pursue the state policy of local autonomy, as
provided for under the 1987 Philippine Constitution9 and the LGC.10
7 Mandanas v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 99802, July 3, 2018.
“The grant of autonomy simply means that Congress will allow the LGUs to perform certain functions and exercise
certain powers in order not for them to be overly dependent on the National Government subject to the limitations
that the 1987 Constitution or Congress may impose. Local autonomy recognizes the wholeness of the Philippine
society in its ethnolinguistic, cultural, and even religious diversities.”
8 See Belgica v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 208566, November 19, 2013.
“The vitalization of local governments will enable their inhabitants to fully exploit their resources and more important,
imbue them with a deepened sense of involvement in public affairs as members of the body politic. This objective
could be blunted by undue interference by the national government in purely local affairs which are best
resolved by the officials and inhabitants of such political units. The decision we reach today conforms not only
to the letter of the pertinent laws but also to the spirit of the Constitution.”
9 Sec. 25, Art. II of the Constitution.
10 Sec. 2 of the Local Government Code of 1991.
Prior consultation with the LGU is necessary since the LGUs are in a better
position to know and determine if such increase is actually needed or
imminent in light of all the circumstances affecting an LGU.
Proposals:
a. For clarity and to avoid vagueness, it is recommended that Congress set a
legislative limitation on the power of the DOH to approve increases in bed
capacities of DOH Hospitals, The LPP specifically recommends to impose an
approval ceiling of say twenty percent (20%) or 30% of the existing number of
beds in each respective DOH hospital.
b. If no additional funds will be downloaded to provinces for the enhancement
of its medical facilities, coupled by a dearth in medical manpower resources, it seems that the other alternative being espoused by DOH would be to re-nationalize these provincial and district hospitals;
But if it will be the will of Congress to further strengthen devolution, which is
what the LGUs would strongly recommend, a corresponding transfer of funds
from the DOH annual budget be downloaded to the LGUs to capacitate the
provincial and city hospitals, its infrastructure, manpower, and financial
resources so that LGUs can cope with health emergencies as well such as this covid-19 pandemic.
c. It is recommended that the LGU be consulted prior to the increase of bed
capacities or service capabilities, as to be able to determine if such increase
necessitates the use of public funds.
II. Public Health Infrastructure
Senate Bill No. 6311 seeks to address the issue of inadequate public health
infrastructures in the Philippines, and the slow progression rate of its increase due
to the rapid growth of the nation’s population, and lack of funds for such purpose.
11 An Act Establishing A Priority Infrastructure Plan For Public Health Facilities, And Appropriating Funds
Therefor
Comments:
a. ON COMPOSITION OF INTER-AGENCY COMMITTEE
Sec. 3 of Senate Bill No. 63 established an Inter-Agency Committee
(“Committee”) for the monitoring of the implementation of this proposed act.
Such committee includes the Secretary of the Department of Health, the
Secretary of the Department of Budget and Management, the Secretary of the
Department of Public Works and Highways, and the Director General of the
National Economic and Development Authority. It must be pointed out that
the LGUs do not have any form representation in this committee, which is a
violation of the Principle of Local Autonomy and the Principle of Subsidiarity.
Pursuant to the Principle of Subsidiarity, since the LGUs are in the best position
to address issues within their locality,12 then the LGU must be entitled to some
form of representation in the Committee, since necessarily, the infrastructures
will be built within the LGUs’ respective territorial jurisdictions. Pursuant to
Supreme Court pronouncements, the LGUs are in the best position to
determine how many infrastructures must be built, and at the same time, how
to build the same to best serve their respective constituents.13
Proper consultation and coordination must be ensured since this five (5)-year
infrastructure plan referred to in the explanatory note of Senate Bill No. 63
must be consistent with the provinces’ Annual Investment Plans (“AIPs”).
b. LGU REPRESENTATION
LGU representation in the Committee is critical also at the Regional level,
especially when the Governor chairs the Regional Development Council
(“RDC”), which approves the Region’s priority infrastructure projects as well.
Without LGU representation in the Committee, the policy of the State to protect
and promote the right to health of all Filipinos and instill health consciousness
among them, as expressly stated under The Universal Health Care Act
(“UHCA”), will be compromised, since the integration of local health systems
into province-wide and city-wide health system, which is essential to achieve
such state policy, will not be effectively implemented.
12 See Belgica v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 208566, November 19, 2013.
13 Id.
c. DOH POLICY
This “centralized approach” has proven to be ineffective specially since LGUs
are the frontliners and are more knowledgeable on the local priority issues and
concerns of its constituents. If LGUs are merely left to be at the receiving end
of the national’s one size fits all instruction for all LGUs, this defeats the very
principle of local autonomy enshrined in the 1987 Constitution.
DOH must clarify its policy whether it recommends to Congress to further
strengthen the capacity of DOH-managed hospitals and/or to simultaneously
empower and capacitate the Provincial and District hospitals as well which are
more accessible to the people in the rural areas.
Proposals:
a. It is recommended that the LGUs be represented in the Inter-Agency
Committee, through its respective Leagues, as duly recognized under the Local
Government Code14 for the monitoring of the implementation of this proposed
act, as to make the implementation of this Senate Bill more effective.
b. There must be adequate LGU representation in the drafting of the
implementing guidelines, especially at the regional levels, and more so for the
province-wide level;
c. Simultaneously empower the LGUs’ capacity to likewise improve the quality
of its provincial and district hospitals for a more efficient and province-wide
health management, especially in times of epidemics or pandemics such as this
Covid-19.
14 RA 7160, 1991 Local Government Code, Book III, Title VI. Leagues of LGUs and Elective Officials,
Chapter I: Leagues of Local Government Units; Articles I, II, III, and IV for Liga ng mga Barangay, League
of Municipalities, League of Cities and League of Provinces, respectively.
Page 10 of 16
III. Amendments to RA 11332, Notifiable Diseases Act
Senate Bill Nos. 1436,15 1416,16 1528,17 and 153318 aim to propose amendments
to several provisions of Republic Act No. 11332, or the Mandatory Reporting
of Notifiable Diseases and Health Events of Public Health Concern Act in
response to numerous cases of discrimination against frontliners and patients.
Said Bills likewise introduce measures such as establishment of sub-national
laboratories as well as epidemiology and surveillance units.
Comments:
a. In Senate Bill 1528, it is proposed that “all provinces, cities and municipalities
shall establish their own epidemiology and surveillance units (“ESUs”) which
shall closely coordinate with ESUs of the DOH. Jurisprudence and statutory
construction teach that the word “shall” connotes mandatory character; it
indicates a word of command, and one which has always or which must be
given a compulsory meaning, and it is generally imperative or mandatory in
nature.19
A review of RA 11332 shows that ESUs are established by DOH, in
coordination with the LGUs. However, with the proposed amendment above,
there seems to be a distinction between ESUs established by the DOH and ESUs
established by LGUs. A question may arise as to the source of funding of the
ESUs established by the latter, especially given the mandatory character of the
proposed amendment. With an additional responsibility such as this for the
LGUs, the appropriate funds necessary to fulfill these obligations must be part
and parcel of the proposed legislation. Pursuant to Book I, Title I, Chapter I,
Sec. 2 of RA 7160, which reiterates Sec. 3, Article X of the 1987 Constitution
15 An Act Amending Republic Act No. 11332, Otherwise Known as the Mandatory Reporting of Notifiable
Diseases and Health Events of Public Health Concern Act
16 An Act Amending Republic Act No. 11332, Otherwise Known as the “Mandatory Reporting of Notifiable
Diseases and Health Events of Public Health Concern Act”, and for Other Purposes
17 An Act Amending Republic Act No. 11332, Otherwise Known as the Mandatory Reporting of Notifiable
Diseases and Health Events of Public Health Concern Act
18 An Act Amending Republic Act No. 11332, Otherwise Known as the Mandatory Reporting of Notifiable
Diseases and Health Events of Public Health Concern Act, and for Other Purposes
19 UCPB General Insurance Company, Inc. vs. Hughes Electronic Corporation, G.R. No. 190385, 16
November 2016.
whereby Congress shall x x x “allocate among different LGUs their powers,
responsibilities, AND RESOURCES20, x x x”, to wit:
“(a) It is hereby declared the policy of the State that the territorial
and political subdivisions of the State shall enjoy genuine and
meaningful local autonomy to enable them to attain their fullest
development as self-reliant communities and make them more
effective partners in the attainment of national goals. Toward this
end, the State shall provide for a more responsive and accountable
local government structure instituted through a system of
decentralization whereby local government units shall be given
more powers, authority, responsibilities, AND RESOURCES. The
process of decentralization shall proceed from the national
government to the local government units.” (underscoring supplied
for emphasis).
It is worth mentioning that, on the average, the Internal Revenue share of LGUs
nationwide, is a measly 16% of the total General Appropriations Act (“GAA”),
and that Provinces only get a measly share of 23% which may not be
commensurate to maintain its provincial and district hospitals.
b. Senate Bill 1528 also penalizes the creating, perpetuating, or spreading of false
information, to wit:
“(F) creating, perpetuating, or spreading false information
regarding an epidemic or public health emergency on social
media and other platforms, such information having no valid or
beneficial effect on the population, and are clearly geared to
promote chaos, panic, anarchy, fear, or confusion; and those
participating in cyber incidents that make use or take advantage
of the current crisis situation to prey on the public through
scams, phishing, fraudulent emails, or other similar acts;”
This provision may trigger an issue on the protection of free speech as
guaranteed by the Constitution. It may be questioned as being vague as well
as overbroad. As held in Disini vs. Secretary of Justice,
21 “
“When a penal statute encroaches upon the freedom of speech, a
facial challenge grounded on the void-for-vagueness doctrine is
acceptable.
20 Sec. 3, Article X, 1987 Constitution.
21 G.R. No. 203335, 11 February 2014
x x x
A petitioner may for instance mount a “facial” challenge to the
constitutionality of a statute even if he claims no violation of his own
rights under the assailed statute where it involves free speech on
grounds of overbreadth or vagueness of the statute.
The rationale for this exception is to counter the “chilling effect”
on protected speech that comes from statutes violating free speech. A
person who does not know whether his speech constitutes a crime
under an overbroad or vague law may simply restrain himself from
speaking in order to avoid being charged of a crime. The overbroad or
vague law thus chills him into silence.”
In the case at hand, “false information” is not defined by the Senate Bill nor by
RA 11332. Thus, an argument may be presented on the validity of the
provision.
Furthermore, the provision punishes “perpetuating or spreading” of false
information through social media. This may be compared to the case of Disini
vs Secretary of Justice22 wherein the Supreme Court struck down as
unconstitutional the part of Cybercrime Law which punishes “aiding and
abetting” in case of cyber libel. The Court ruled in the wise:
The terms “aiding or abetting” constitute broad sweep that
generates chilling effect on those who express themselves through
cyberspace posts, comments, and other messages. Hence, Section 5 of
the cybercrime law that punishes “aiding or abetting” libel on the
cyberspace is a nullity.
Proposal:
a. So as to address the possible difficulties in establishing ESUs, it is suggested
that the term “shall” be replaced with “may”.
22 Id.
IV. Establishing Quarantine Stations
Senate Bill Nos. 1442,23 1408,24 and 152925 aim to establish additional
quarantine stations in response to the continuing emergence of infectious diseases.
The measures proposed in these Bills seek to preempt the spread of communicable
diseases that pose a significant threat to public health.
Comments:
a. In Senate Bill No. 1442, it is proposed that “The Secretary of Health, in
consultation with appropriate government agencies,
26 shall promulgate the
necessary rules and regulations for the implementation of this Act”
Senate Bill No. 1408 likewise proposes the following:
“SEC. 6. Quarantine CENTERS AND Stations. – The Director
of the Bureau shall control, direct and manage all quarantine
CENTERS, stations, grounds and anchorages, and designate
their boundaries. With the approval of Secretary of Health,
he shall establish such additional quarantine CENTERS,
station, grounds and anchorages27 if, in his judgment, these
are necessary to prevent the introduction of diseases of
international concern into the country. The Director, in the
same manner may also order the closure of nonfunctional
quarantine stations, grounds and anchorages.”
It bears the stress that the establishment of quarantine facilities necessarily
involves the LGUs where such stations will be located. Therefore, so as to
harmonize the said Bills with the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC) and
with the Principle of Subsidiarity, it may be appropriate to include in the
abovementioned provisions, consultations with the recognized leagues of
LGUs. The LGC provides:
23 An Act Providing for the Establishment and Operation of Additional Quarantine Stations, Grounds and
Anchorages in All Strategic Areas Throughout the Country, and Appropriating Funds Therefore
24 An Act Strengthening the Capacity of the Department of Health in the Detection and Containment of
Infectious Diseases, Including the Quarantine of Infected Person and Lockdown of Infected Areas,
Amending Republic Act No. 9271, and for Other Purposes
25 An Act Requiring the Establishment of Quarantine Facilities in Every Region in the Country, Providing
Funds Therefore, and For Other Purposes
26 Emphasis and underscoring supplied.
27 Emphasis and underscoring supplied.
“SECTION 2. Declaration of Policy
(c) It is likewise the policy of the State to require all
national agencies and offices to conduct periodic
consultations with appropriate local government units, non-
governmental and people’s organizations, and other
concerned sectors of the community before any project or
program is implemented in their respective jurisdictions.
x x x
SECTION 26. Duty of National Government Agencies in
the Maintenance of Ecological Balance. – It shall be the duty
of every national agency or government-owned or –
controlled corporation authorizing or involved in the
planning and implementation of any project or program that
may cause pollution, climatic change, depletion of non-
renewable resources, loss of crop land, rangeland, or forest
cover, and extinction of animal or plant species, to consult
with the local government units, nongovernmental
organizations, and other sectors concerned and explain the
goals and objectives of project or program, its impact upon
the people and the community in terms of environmental or
ecological balance, and the measures that will be undertaken
to prevent or minimize the adverse effects thereof.
SECTION 27. Prior Consultations Required.- No project
or program shall be implemented by government authorities
unless the consultations mentioned in Sections 2 (c) and 26
hereof are complied with, and prior approval of the
Sanggunian concerned is obtained: Provided, That
occupants in areas where such projects are to be
implemented shall not be evicted unless appropriate
relocation sites have been provided, in accordance with the
provisions of the Constitution.”
It is also worth mentioning that Senate Bill No. 1529, which likewise seeks to
establish quarantine facilities, has rightly included coordination with LGUs as
regards to the establishment of quarantine facilities in every region of the
country. Moreover, the said Bill has proposed that “Within sixty (60) days from
approval of this Act, the DOH, DPWH, DILG, and DENR, in consultation with
relevant stakeholders,
28 shall issue the implementing rules and regulations of
this Act”
In view of the foregoing, given that LGUs are relevant stakeholders, it is
emphasized that they should be consulted not only on matters pertaining to the
establishment of quarantine facilities in their respective jurisdiction, but also in
the formulation of the implementing rules and regulations of the proposed law.
b. In Senate Bill No. 1408, the BOQ is given the authority over local government
units insofar as it is necessary for proper enforcement of the provisions of the
proposed law as well as the power to impose lockdowns on certain areas. The
said provision reads:
“Sec. 3. Jurisdiction and Functions of the Bureau – The
examination at ports of entry and exit in the Philippines of
incoming and outgoing vessels and aircraft, the necessary
surveillance over sanitary conditions, as well as over their
cargoes, passengers, crews, and all personal effects,
issuances of quarantine certificates, bills of health, or other
equivalent documents, LOCKDOWN OF CERTAIN
AREAS, AND SUSPENSION OF CLASSES DURING
HEALTH EMERGENCIES shall be vested in and be
conducted by the Bureau. This Bureau shall have authority
over incoming and outgoing vessels both domestic and
foreign, including those of the army and navy, their
wharfage and anchorage, and over aircraft and airports AS
WELL AS OVER LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS,
SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS insofar as it is necessary for
the proper enforcement of the provisions of this Act.”
It bears to note that this provision may pose a threat to the Local Autonomy
granted by the Constitution to the LGUs. The Constitution and the LGC
respectively provide:
“SECTION 2. The territorial and political subdivisions shall
enjoy local autonomy.”
“SECTION 2. Declaration of Policy. – (a) It is hereby declared
the policy of the State that the territorial and political
subdivisions of the State shall enjoy genuine and meaningful
28 Emphasis and underscoring supplied.
local autonomy to enable them to attain their fullest
development as self-reliant communities and make them
more effective partners in the attainment of national goals.
Toward this end, the State shall provide for a more responsive
and accountable local government structure instituted
through a system of decentralization whereby local
government units shall be given more powers, authority,
responsibilities, and resources. The process of
decentralization shall proceed from the national government
to the local government units.”
Moreover, the said provision encroaches on the Constitution which provides
that the “President of the Philippines shall exercise general supervision over
local governments. Provinces with respect to component cities and
municipalities, and cities and municipalities with respect to component
barangays shall ensure that the acts of their component units are within the
scope of their prescribed powers and functions.”29 Thus, allowing the BOQ to
have undefined authority over LGUs ultimately contravenes the general
supervision principle of the Constitution.
Proposal:
a. There must be proper coordination with LGUs and they should not be
bypassed especially with regard to the establishment of quarantine centers.
#
Submitted by:
(Sgd.) GOV. PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR,
National President