Tanada v. Tuvera (Case Digest) G.R. No. L-63915

Tanada v. Tuvera
G.R. No. L-63915
April 24, 1985

LORENZO M. TAÑADA, ABRAHAM F. SARMIENTO, and MOVEMENT OF ATTORNEYS FOR BROTHERHOOD,
INTEGRITY AND NATIONALISM, INC. [MABINI], petitioners,
vs.
HON. JUAN C. TUVERA, in his capacity as Executive Assistant to the President, HON. JOAQUIN VENUS, in his capacity as Deputy Executive Assistant to the President , MELQUIADES P. DE LA CRUZ, in his capacity as Director, Malacañang Records Office, and FLORENDO S. PABLO, in his capacity as Director, Bureau of Printing, respondents.

Facts:
The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus from the Court in order to compel the respondent public officials to publish in the Official Gazette various presidential decrees, letters of instructions, general orders, proclamations, executive implementations, and administrative orders. They did so because of the right of the people to be informed on matters of public concern, a right recognized in Section 6, Article IV of the 1973 Constitution. In addition, petitioners stress that Article 2 of the Civil Code requires the publication of laws as a requirement for their effectivity.

Issue:
Can laws of general application take effect even without being published as long as it provides the date of effectivity?

Ruling:
No. “Article 2 does not preclude the requirement of publication in the Official Gazette, even if the law itself provides for the date of its effectivity.” This is because if laws are allowed to take effect without publication, the public would not be informed of the existence of the law that essentially governs them. Without such publication, Article 3 of the Civil Code, which provides that “ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith” would have no basis. Thus, the Court ruled that all unpublished laws which are of general application have no binding force and effect.

NOTES
Another Issue
• There is another issue in this case, which is the legal standing of the petitioners. It has been ruled by the Court that since the matter involves a public right and therefore a concern for the public, the petitioners have the standing in this case.
Legislative Powers of the President
• The Court recognized in this case the importance of publication of laws since the president now has the power to make laws. They point out that while the public can be aware of the laws made by the legislative department through the broadcasting of debates and deliberations in the Batasang Pambansa, they do not have the same privilege with legislation made by the president.