Scribd
Upload
14 views1 page

43 Phil. 1 - Political Law - Delegation of Power - Administrative Bodies Act Penalizing The Monopoly and Hoarding of Rice, Palay and Corn. The Said Act, Under Extraordinary Circumstances

United States vs Ang Tang Ho was a case regarding the delegation of power to administrative bodies. The Philippine Legislature passed an act penalizing rice hoarding and authorizing the Governor General to issue rules regulating rice distribution. The Governor General issued an executive order fixing rice prices. Ang Tang Ho sold rice above the fixed price before the order was published and was convicted. The court reversed the conviction as the sale occurred before publication. The court also found the act failed to provide a clear standard for the Governor General's rules, resulting in an undue delegation of legislative power.

Uploaded by

carlo_tabangcura
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
14 views1 page

43 Phil. 1 - Political Law - Delegation of Power - Administrative Bodies Act Penalizing The Monopoly and Hoarding of Rice, Palay and Corn. The Said Act, Under Extraordinary Circumstances

United States vs Ang Tang Ho was a case regarding the delegation of power to administrative bodies. The Philippine Legislature passed an act penalizing rice hoarding and authorizing the Governor General to issue rules regulating rice distribution. The Governor General issued an executive order fixing rice prices. Ang Tang Ho sold rice above the fixed price before the order was published and was convicted. The court reversed the conviction as the sale occurred before publication. The court also found the act failed to provide a clear standard for the Governor General's rules, resulting in an undue delegation of legislative power.

Uploaded by

carlo_tabangcura
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1

United States vs Ang Tang Ho

43 Phil. 1 – Political Law – Delegation of Power – Administrative Bodies


FACTS: In July 1919, the Philippine Legislature (during special session) passed and approved Act No. 2868 entitled An
Act Penalizing the Monopoly and Hoarding of Rice, Palay and Corn. The said act, under extraordinary circumstances,
authorizes the Governor General (GG) to issue the necessary Rules and Regulations in regulating the distribution of
such products. Pursuant to this Act, in August 1919, the GG issued Executive Order No. 53 which was published on
August 20, 1919. The said EO fixed the price at which rice should be sold. On the other hand, Ang Tang Ho, a rice
dealer, sold a ganta of rice to Pedro Trinidad at the price of eighty centavos. The said amount was way higher than
that prescribed by the EO. The sale was done on the 6th of August 1919. On August 8, 1919, he was charged
for violation of the said EO. He was found guilty as charged and was sentenced to 5 months imprisonment plus a
P500.00 fine. He appealed the sentence countering that there is an undue delegation of power to the Governor
General.
ISSUE: Whether or not there is undue delegation to the Governor General.
HELD: First of, Ang Tang Ho’s conviction must be reversed because he committed the act prior to the publication of
the EO. Hence, he cannot be ex post facto charged of the crime. Further, one cannot be convicted of a violation of a
law or of an order issued pursuant to the law when both the law and the order fail to set up an ascertainable standard
of guilt.
Anent the issue of undue delegation, the said Act wholly fails to provide definitely and clearly what the standard
policy should contain, so that it could be put in use as a uniform policy required to take the place of all others without
the determination of the insurance commissioner in respect to matters involving the exercise of a legislative
discretion that could not be delegated, and without which the act could not possibly be put in use. The law must be
complete in all its terms and provisions when it leaves the legislative branch of the government and nothing must
be left to the judgment of the electors or other appointee or delegate of the legislature, so that, in form and
substance, it is a law in all its details in presenti, but which may be left to take effect in future, if necessary, upon
the ascertainment of any prescribed fact or event.

You might also like