By Dominic B. dela Cruz
Staff reporter
Laoag
City—This city’s Sangguniang Panlungsod and
the Ilocos Norte Sangguniang Panlalawigan may be headed for another showdown,
this time regarding Ordinance No. 2018-078.
The ordinance, authored by
Laoag councilor Roger John C. Fariñas prohibits and penalizes the entry of
illegal drugs and paraphernalia, firearms and ammunitions, bladed weapons,
cellular phones and similar devices used for communication, cigarettes or tobaccos,
electric cigarettes and liquor or other forms of intoxicating beverages to the Laoag
City jail.
The provincial board sent a
communication to the Laoag council stating the said ordinance as “invalid”. The
board cited “ultra vires” as the main reason. It means the council passed an
ordinance that was beyond its powers, since there are already national laws
that carry the same prohibition.
Mr. Fariñas, however stressed
that city will still enforce the ordinance.
He said he has asked council
secretary Enrico Aurelio about the date the said ordinance was transmitted to
the higher sanggunian. Mr. Aurelio, he said, told him it was transmitted on
November 6, 2018.
The provincial board, based
on their own documents, only tackled the said ordinance on April 1, 2019, or
almost five months after the council’s transmission.
The Local Government Code
mandates a 30-day mandatory review of ordinances by higher sanggunian. After
the said period lapses, the ordinance is deemed approved.
Mr. Fariñas noted that the
ordinance was recommended by Laoag City jail warden Herminigildo Rivera. He
added that other local government units have also already passed similar ordinances.
Penalties for violating the
ordinance carry a PHP5,000 fine and one-month, one-year, and lifetime bans for
first, second and third offenses, respectively.
Similar situation
Council secretary Mr. Aurelio, for his part, said a similar
situation also occurred in the past.
Another ordinance, which he
did not specify, was also declared “invalid” by the provincial board long after
the 30-day mandatory review has lapsed.
He said the council replied
to the provincial board through a formal communication that they consider the
ordinance “valid” using the lapsed mandatory review period as reason.
In the said communication,
Mr. Aurelio stated, “xxxx during the
mandatory period of the ordinance which is within 30 days upon receipt thereof,
the Sangguniang Panlalawigan should have issued their legislative action in the
form of a Resolution containing their disapproval in whole or in part of any
ordinance submitted to them for review. It is not enough that they deliberated,
debated and voted on the measure ought to be reviewed, because what is required
of them is the enactment of a legislative document to formally and finally put
to rest a given measure or issue. After the lapse of such period, and no
official and/or formal document, such as a resolution which shall contain the
findings of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan on review of the municipal ordinance
or resolution, was issued by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, it can be validly
stated that the Sangguniang Panlalawigan failed to act within the 30 days and
the ordinance or resolution under review can be presumed consistent with law
and therefore valid.”
He also disclosed that he
personally asked the city BJMP officials if the council still needs tom craft
the ordinance since there is already national laws that prohibit such; the jail
officials replied that a local ordinance is necessary in order to address the
local situation peculiar to the Laoag jail. Meanwhile, the earlier ordinance, also
declared as “invalid” by the board, was enforced without any complications,
according to Mr. Aurelio.
In view of this, the
secretary said they will do the same and consider the ordinance currently in
question also as valid.
He added that only a court
can now declare the said ordinance as “invalid” as the provincial board’s power
over it has long lapsed.
Comments
Post a Comment