Top Banner
O Repubric orthe phihppines b rt. b !iiy,, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT DILG-NAPOLCOM Building, EDSAcorner Quezon Avenue, euezon Ciry OFFICE OF THE UNDERSECRETARY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT HON. RAU], C, RIVERA Member, Sal rgrrniang Panlungsod (SP) Kabankalan (''ii', Negros Occidental DILG Legal Opinion No. 5, S. 2014 10 FtB 2014 Dear SP Memt'er Rivera: This refers to your 10 Decernber 2013 letter seeking rhis Department's opinion on whether the Commission on Audit's (COA) prescribed salary grade of a City Vice-Mayor (SG26/S1) prevails/supersedes Section 9 (a) of Republic Act No. 8297, otherwise known as t}ne "Charter ofthe City ofKabankalan." ( It is alleged jn your letter that you were the Kabankalan City Vice Mayor from 0l July 1998 to 30 Ju:re 2007 and that from 01 July 1998 to 3l December 1999, you received an annual salarl ,. f P243,348.00 corresponding ro Salary Grade (SG) 28/S l. Allegedly, fanuary 2000, the COA prescribed the salary grade ofthe Vice Mayor as SG 26151. , '!re4fter, you received a compensarion corresponding to SG 26151 unril the expiration ot your term on 30 fune 2007. Hence, this rcquest. Below are the following discussions that will help elucidate on the issue raised: Legal Bases of Local Eleoive Officials' ComPensatirt Republic Arr No. 7160, otherwise known as the ':Local Governmenr Code of 1991" (hereinafte':. ):.: "Code"), in relation to Republic Act No.675$ otherwise known as the "Compens; ', - .nd Position Classilication Act of 1989" (hereifafter, "RA 6758), provides the compe . :;',:n ratelsalary grade of local elective officials based on the prescribed salary sche' - es implemented by the Department of Budger and Management (DBM) pursuant to ,r-dministrative Order No. 42, s. 1993. The city vice-mayor's compensation is specifically governed by Section 456 (b) of the Code, yrZ: "Sectiorr 455. Powers, Duties and Compensatiott.-xxx (b) Tltc city uice-nnyor slnll receil.te a nnntlxly conxpensntiotx corresponding to funlr fylft!-six Q6) for n cot@ as prescribed under R.A. No.6758 nnd tl rc h u i :',t: tt rc tr t itt g gu i tle lines i ss ue d pur suant therc to, " (Underscoring ours) (
3

Dilg Legalopinions 201491 Ea87bbe8c9

Jan 05, 2016

Download

Documents

Marlene Tongson

legbib
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Dilg Legalopinions 201491 Ea87bbe8c9

O Repubric orthe phihppines b rt. b !iiy,,DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

DILG-NAPOLCOM Building, EDSAcorner Quezon Avenue, euezon Ciry

OFFICE OF THE UNDERSECRETARY FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT

HON. RAU], C, RIVERAMember, Sal rgrrniang Panlungsod (SP)

Kabankalan (''ii', Negros Occidental

DILG Legal Opinion No. 5, S. 2014

10 FtB 2014

Dear SP Memt'er Rivera:

This refers to your 10 Decernber 2013 letter seeking rhis Department's opinion onwhether the Commission on Audit's (COA) prescribed salary grade of a City Vice-Mayor(SG26/S1) prevails/supersedes Section 9 (a) of Republic Act No. 8297, otherwise known as

t}ne "Charter ofthe City ofKabankalan." (It is alleged jn your letter that you were the Kabankalan City Vice Mayor from 0l July1998 to 30 Ju:re 2007 and that from 01 July 1998 to 3l December 1999, you received anannual salarl ,. f P243,348.00 corresponding ro Salary Grade (SG) 28/S l.

Allegedly, fanuary 2000, the COA prescribed the salary grade ofthe Vice Mayor as

SG 26151. , '!re4fter, you received a compensarion corresponding to SG 26151 unril theexpiration ot your term on 30 fune 2007.

Hence, this rcquest.

Below are the following discussions that will help elucidate on the issue raised:

Legal Bases of Local Eleoive Officials'ComPensatirt

Republic Arr No. 7160, otherwise known as the ':Local Governmenr Code of 1991"(hereinafte':. ):.: "Code"), in relation to Republic Act No.675$ otherwise known as the"Compens; ', - .nd Position Classilication Act of 1989" (hereifafter, "RA 6758), providesthe compe . :;',:n ratelsalary grade of local elective officials based on the prescribedsalary sche' - es implemented by the Department of Budger and Management (DBM)pursuant to ,r-dministrative Order No. 42, s. 1993. The city vice-mayor's compensation is

specifically governed by Section 456 (b) of the Code, yrZ:

"Sectiorr 455. Powers, Duties and Compensatiott.-xxx

(b) Tltc city uice-nnyor slnll receil.te a nnntlxly conxpensntiotx corresponding to

funlrfylft!-six Q6) for n cot@ as prescribed under R.A. No.6758 nndtl rc h u i :',t: tt rc tr t itt g gu i tle lines i ss ue d pur suant therc to, " (Underscoring ours)

(

Page 2: Dilg Legalopinions 201491 Ea87bbe8c9

,**tu*.t*t ^Repubfjc Act No. 8297 (RA 8297), otherwise known as tii'e "Charter of the City ofKabankalan," ronverts the Municipality of Kabankalan into a component ciry of the-Province of F.iegros Occidental. Section 9 thereof prescribes the compensation rate of thecity vice-ma.r,.-rr :s SG 28, viz.:

{"Sec. 9. The City Vice-Mayor. - (t) Tlrre slnll be Lt uice'nnyor rpln slnllbe electtd in tlu smrc mnnfler is tlrc city nnyor nfid slnll, nt tlrc tinrc of hiselection, possess tlrc snnte tlur ificntions ns tlrc citrl trnyor. He shnll lnld office

for three (3) yenrs, utrless sooner rcnroTted, nnd slmll receizte a nronthlltconrpens iott corresponding to Snlnry Gradc Tnen4t-eight (28) as prescribedunder Republic Act No. 6758, nnd tlrc intplementitLg guidelines isatedpursuvrt tlrcreto. xxx" (Underscoring ours)

Section 456 (!), of the Code ds-i-visSection 9 of R.! $297

It is a princilie in statutory construction that 'b general law and a special law on the samesubject are ::..t,rtes in pari materiat and should, accordingly, be read together andharmonized, :t possible, with a view to giving effect to both."

In Corona, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. (G.R. No. 97356. 30 September 1992), theSupreme Court held that rhe assumprion is that whenever thelgislature enacrs a law, irhas in mind the previous statutes relating to the same subject iratter, and in the absenceof any express repeal or amendment, the new statute is deemed enacted in accordancewith the legislative policy embodied in those prior statues.

Moreover, in .liryl of Naga, et aI. vs. Agna, et aI. (G.R. No. 36049. 31 May 1976), t]neSupreme Courr" held that in cases involving the harmonization of two or more lawsrelating to the same subject matter, the usual quesrion is whether the later act hasimpliediy amer-ded or repealed the earlier statute. A statute will not, however, beconstrued as '. ,;aling prior act or acts on the sarre subject in the absence ofwords to thateffect, unler, ': , qew law is evidently intended to supersede ali prior acts on the matterand to compri e itself the sole and complete system of legislation on the subject.

Nonetheless, tiiis also admits of the rule that if two or more laws on the same subjecrcannot.possibly be reconciled or harmonized, one has to give way in favor of the other. Inthe case of two acts where one is a special law and the other general which, if standing-alone, would include that matter and thus conflict with the special act, the special mustprevail since it evinces the legislative intent more clearly than that ofa general statute.Z

Notably, the .rle rhar rhe general law must yield to the specl(I law in the specific andparticulaf subiecr embraced in the latter, irrespective of the date of passage of the speciallaw, is not absrt'ute. One exception is that where the legislature clearly intended the larergeneral ena::r::'{''rt to cover the whole subject and to repeal all prior laws inconsistent

I Statues ale ih I t: ;t, ieriu when they relate to the sante person or thing, or havc the same purpose or objecr,or cover the sarr : ',)ecifrc or particular subject nralter as beld itt city o/ Nugtt vs. lgnu (c.R. No. 36019, J I Mayt976)r Agpalo, Statutorl, Construction, 4rh Ed. ( 1998), p. 278

Page 3: Dilg Legalopinions 201491 Ea87bbe8c9

therewith, thc general tu?p."rr"ir over a special law on the r"fi. ,r such case, there is'repeal ofthe special 1aw.3 This exception obtains in the qase of Section 456 (b) ofthe Code

yrs-:i-vl3 Sectir:r: 9 of R-{ 8297.

Of particularly i.nportance herein is Section 325 (b) of the Code, which includes as a

general limiL.':!ll to the use of LGU funds, the ploscription on conferring a higher salaryrate than the rraximum fixed for the position of an official or employee or other positrons

of eauivalent rank. viz.:

" Sectiort 325. General Lirnitations.- Tfu use oJ' tln prouincinl, city, rtttd)ttutticipttl flnds slnlL be sub ject to tlt foLloroing linLitntions:

g12gfutbit Lnzos or rules rmd regul.ntions issued thereLuder:" (Underscoringours)

'fhis was arrrl,lified in Administrarive Order No. 42, s. i993, entitled, Clarifi,ing the Roleof the Departntent of Budget and Management in the Compensation and Classilication ofLocal Government Positions Under Republic Act No. 7160, wfudn mandates the DBM,through its appropriate bureau, in the administration of the compensarion and positionclassification systems in local government units.

Clearly, the Code purposely intended for the uniformiry of the sa1ary grade of localelective and appointive officials/employee of equivalent rank as fixed by law or rules andregulations i,:s:.rgd in relation rhereto. In enacting RA 8297, it is assumed that rhelegislaiure dici not intend to create an exceprion ro Section 456 (b) of the Code as the

-Code itself r.'|,.:rrJy and categorically provided a proscription in granting a salary ratehigher than rr j.naximum fixed for the local elective and appointive official/employee'sposition or ,- 'r.,rr "rosition of equivalent rank under Section 325r&) thereof.

In view.of ti;': foregoing, the compensation rate/salary grade of a city vice-mayor of a

component citl'is SG 26 as prescribed under the Code in relation to RA 6758.

We hope to have enlightened you on the matter.

Very truly yorrrs,

./f ,,,1 .lLft{ed

AUSTEREI, III.NADEROUndersecre:.': ,. tiir) ,,.. ou.r"

y' , rr':-:rtt t,,,*,'t,,,t,,t!, \^|),\nhnt. ],,

(r lbid., p.288