INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION

VI. INTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION Appointments because of the period that

Intrinsic aids separates the 1st from the 2nd sentence.
Aids that you will find in the printed page of
the law. The moment you step out on the
printed page of the law, it is already
extrinsic aids Hyphen
Topacio v. Paredes
Context (fav top ni atty) There are two candidates, vice governor-
You cannot isolate the provision from the elect(w/ hyphen) and third member
rest of the law. Understand the provision elect(w/o hyphen). This could mean that
vis-à-vis the entirety of the law. A particular there is a difference but the SC said that
phrase, sentence or provision of a law, there is no difference.
standing alone may mean one thing, but
when you contextualize, it means another Comma
thing. Moreno v. COMELEC
SWS v. COMELEC Punong barangay ran for public office, but
Subscribers name should be published. If he was sentenced for a crime involving
we look on the provision that compels moral turpitude. The law says “if you are
survey firms to publish the names, it really convicted for moral turpitude or any other
is prior restraint(Unconstitutional). But crime that carries with it 1 year
when you look at the intent/context, it is imprisonment or more, within two years of
not prior restraint because the purpose of service of sentence, are disqualified”. SC
the law is to equalize opportunities. SC said said that the comma is actually a modifier.
do not limit yourself in that specific You must serve two years of sentence first
provision. SC contextualized. before you are going to be qualified again.
Regardless if you are convicted for moral
Matibag v. Benipayo turpitude or you are convicted for any crime
The appointment was done when the that carries with it a 1 year imprisonment or
congress was in recess. When congress was more.
in recess, it is an ad interim appointment.
Black’s Law dictionary defined ad interim as Capitalization
“for the time being/in the mean time” or Unabia v. City Mayor
temporary. But the SC defined ad interim Security of tenure of the foreman. The issue
as permanent. While the black’s law won the foreman is classified. An argument
dictionary defined ad interim as temporary, arose whether the capitalization C and S of
the supreme court contextualized. Civil Service matters. The SC held that there
is no difference. If at all there is, Capital C
Punctuation and S only pertain to group of people while
Low degree in aid of construction. You can small C and S pertain to the system. But
actually this regard this. It does not really insofar as the security of tenure of the
matter. Except when there is a meaning foremen is concerned, it has no bearing.
why there is a punctuation. Punctuation is a low degree in aid of
construction. It does not really matter.
Period
Except when there is a meaning why there Language or lingual text
is a punctuation as in the case of Calderon The RPC was promulgated in Spanish. It was
Calderon v. Carale(42:25) translated into English. If there is difference
art 7 Sec. 16. The President shall nominate and, with the between the language of promulgation and
consent of the Commission on Appointments, appoint the the language of translation, the language of
heads of the executive departments, ambassadors, other
public ministers and consuls, or officers of the armed promulgation will prevail.
forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain, and other
officers whose appointments are vested in him in this Title
Constitution. He shall also appoint all other officers of the
Government whose appointments are not otherwise Poe v. COMELEC
provided for by law, and those whom he may be The SC used the adoption laws to justify
authorized by law to appoint.
that grace poe is a Filipino. Look at the title
We are confident then that the of the law. “Laws governing the Adoption of
appointment of NLRC chair does not require Filipino Children”. It implies that you cannot
the consent of the Commission on be adopted if you are not a Filipino child to

Transcribed by Turbonis - 2019

 INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION

begin with. Considering that Poe was It is similar to legislative purpose. What was
adopted, it presupposes that she is a the evil sought to be remedied. The
Filipino. Otherwise, she could not have problems that the lawmakers identified that
been legally adopted. That’s how the SC prompted the congress to pass a law to
justified insofar as title is concerned. solve that problem.

Declaration of Policy Legislative history

Oposa v. Facturan You cannot find history in the text of the
There is an executive order that justified the law already.
liberal interpretation of locus standi. That Ejercito v. COMELEC
EO contains the declaration of policy. It says The case is about campaign expenses.
there “intergenerational responsibility”. Ejercito was disqualified on the ground that
he exceeded campaign expenses. The
Chapter, article and section headings maximum for campaign expenses in laguna
Gi skip ni atty. was 4.5million, but Ejercito spent 23million
Head notes or epigraphs on ABS CBN ad alone. Ejercito argued that
In RPC, every article has an epigraph. It is he did not pay for that, it was donated. The
the first line which is italicized. It is the ambiguity here is law where it says “cost to
introduction of the text of the law. If there be spent by the candidate “. It is not very
is a discrepancy between the epigraph and clear if it pertains to personal expenses or
the text of the law, the text of the law will does it include donations. In resolving the
prevail. case, SC referred to the history of the law. 4
Marginal notes laws was traced by the SC, the 4 laws were
Gi skip ni atty. very consistent pointing to the fact that
Preamble donations and contributions from third
Laws have preambles in the form of parties are included in campaign expenses.
whereas clauses. Clauses that tell us what President’s message to legislature
the law is all about. Can be a source of aid An example would be the state of the
in construction. It is intrinsic because you nation address. E.g. Duterte, presents his
can find that in the printed text of the law. priority legislation telling the congress to
Legislative definitions pass these bills. It becomes an extrinsic aid
Definition of terms is not mandatory. If the because it implies that the president
law does not define terms, we can use the justifies the necessity to pass it. And those
plain meaning of the language used in the justifications can be used as extrinsic aid.
law, or go to the dictionary, or you can go to But the question is, when the president
the debates and deliberations. does that, and congress obliges, does it not
Interpretative clauses violate separation of powers? Not
Katung “in case of doubt, resolve in favor of necessarily because while they are
bla bla bla”. However, it is not mandatory independent from each other, it does not
because it encroach the power of the SC to mean that they are compartmentalized.
construe. They have to meet half-way, and when they
do that, it is called blending of powers.
VII. EXTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION
Extrinsic aids The separation of powers does not
The moment you step out to the printed necessary follows that the powers are
copy of the law, it becomes extrinsic. completely separated. Somewhere along
the way they’re going to blend. E.g. The
When do we resort to extrinsic aids? power to legislate solely belongs to the
The rule is-we resort to extrinsic aids if you congress. But how come that the bill
have exhausted all intrinsic aids and yet the becomes a law upon the signature of the
ambiguity remains. However, it is not president? In other words the president
mandatory. The rules of construction do not participates in legislation. But that
bind the SC. You cannot compel the sc to participation does not encroach the power
exhaust all intrinsic aids first before to legislate, it merely blends.
proceeding to extrinsic aids.
Explanatory note
Contemporaneous circumstances Placed on top of the bill. The purpose is the
same as that of a covering letter. It is not

Transcribed by Turbonis - 2019

 INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION

part of the bill, it merely introduces the bill. It means that there was a construction
Hence, extrinsic. made by the congress in another enactment
Federation of free farmers v. CA or separate law. Legislative construction
There is no ambiguity in the law. But the sc found in the law is not extrinsic but
set aside the expressed language of the law intrinsic. But this one is in a separate law,
and go to the intent. Otherwise, if we limit prior/later enactment.
our interpretation to the expressed
language of the law, it will defeat the Judicial Construction
purpose of the law. What was the Jurisprudence that was decided by the SC is
justification? Look at the explanatory note. a source of extrinsic aids. Judicial
Legislative debates, views and construction is very authoritative.
deliberations
Poe v. Comelec Doctrine of Stare Decisis
Poe was born in 1968 so the 1935 If today, the SC was confronted with a more
constitution applies. But if look at the 1935 or less similar set of facts applying the same
constitution insofar as citizenship article is principles of law,
concerned, it does not mention foundlings.
SC went into the debates and deliberations if 10 years after, the supreme court is
of the framers of the 1935 consi. SC found confronted with a similar set of facts and
that “basta foundling, Filipino citizen” pero applying the same principles of law, it is
wala nila gi apil sa enumeration sa 1935 bound to decide the same way it did 10
consti kay gamay ra daw kayo ang cases sa years before.
foundling at that time. SC used the debates
and deliberation to aid in their decision. We need to follow precedence to stabilize
Public policy the judiciary system. Otherwise, no one
Usually, public policy is not written in the would believe the SC, if lahi lahi ang
law. It is more of an unwritten law. E.g. Void decision. However this is not absolute
public marriage because against public because there are times when the SC will
policy. Marriage between second degree revisit an old doctrine and say “we did
cousins is not allowed. But why? Because of something wrong there. We are going to
public policy. Unsay naandan, Kultura. It is abandon it”
not in the law but ngil-ad tan-awon. Morales v. CA
Condonation doctrine. If an incumbent
Construction by executive officers mayor has a pending admin case, and was
It is said that it is only the SC that construes re-elected. It is said that if you are re-
the law. That is correct insofar as the SC is elected and has a pending admin case. Your
the final arbiter. However the SC is not the re-election actually erases the pending
first to construe. The first to construe is admin case because the fact that you are
executive department. When the executive re-elected despite the people knowing the
enforces the law, they must read the law admin case means that the people condone
and when they read the law, they must you. This is a 1959 doctrine. For 70 long
construe it. For they could not enforce years, politician always invokes this
something they do not understand to begin precedent
with.
However this doctrine was revisited in the
Executive construction is not binding to the case of Jun Jun Binay. The SC realized that if
SC. However, it must be given respect you look at the law and jurisprudence, it has
especially if it was enforced in the longest no support at all.
time. Executive construction is a source of
extrinsic aid. Another argument raised by the SC that if at
all, the bases of the doctrine is foreign
Kinds of executive construction jurisprudence. While foreign jurisprudence
1. Issue and advisory opinion is a source of extrinsic aid, but it is merely
2. Adversary proceedings – resolution persuasive. Because in another case, the SC
by administrative bodies to resolve said “although our bill of rights was
legal controversies. patterned after the consti of US, we have
cut the umbilical cord”
Legislative Construction Obiter dictum

Transcribed by Turbonis - 2019

 INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION

a mere passing statement made by the analyzed by Jose Churva. His textbook was
supreme court in a case and it does not used as an extrinsic aid by the SC to
address the crux of the controversy. It does interpret the deliberation and come up with
not bind as a precedent a conclusion that foundlings were included
in the deliberations.
There are times when the supreme court
writes lengthy cases, chances are you might Dictionaries
go as far as making a ruling that is not really Wasn’t discussed, prolly was discussed
the main point of the case. When the SC earlier.
makes a ruling that is not really the main
issue/crux of the controversy, it becomes an Foreign Jurisprudence
obiter dictum. CLUE: merely persuasive
If you are confronted with a problem about
as opposed to ratio decidendi, ratio foreign jurisprudence – answer “it is merely
decidendi is actually the reason for the persuasive”. Regardless of the problem
decision. Ratio decidendi addresses the presented about foreign jurisprudence as
main issue of the case. Must be followed as long as you knew that it is just persuasive,
a precedent. you will never be lost.

Morales v. CA
Maquiling v. COMELEC Condonation doctrine. If an incumbent
There was a mayor who is dual citizen. He mayor has a pending admin case, and was
was then disqualified. The problem here re-elected. It is said that if you are re-
was if the first placer candidate of mayor elected and has a pending admin case. Your
was disqualified who becomes the mayor? re-election actually erases the pending
Is it the 2nd placer or is it the vice mayor? admin case because the fact that you are
re-elected despite the people knowing the
Before, the supreme court said that if you admin case means that the people condone
are the 2nd placer, under no circumstance you. This is a 1959 doctrine. For 70 long
can you be proclaimed the mayor. The years, politician always invokes this
reason is simply because you are not the precedent
choice of the people.
However this doctrine was revisited in the
However, the SC in the case of maquiling case of Jun Jun Binay. The SC realized that if
realized that the bases for that ruling is you look at the law and jurisprudence, it has
merely an obiter dictum. It did not really no support at all.
address the crux of the controversy
presented in the case. Now the SC said that Another argument raised by the SC that if at
we are going to reverse and modify partially all, the bases of the doctrine is foreign
that ruling. If you are the first placer and jurisprudence. While foreign jurisprudence
you were disqualified, the 2nd placer can be is a source of extrinsic aid, but it is merely
proclaimed the mayor depending the persuasive. Because in another case, the SC
reason for your disqualification. If the said “although our bill of rights was
reason for the disqualification is that you patterned after the consti of US, we have
are not a candidate to begin with then the cut the umbilical cord”
2nd placer will be proclaimed the mayor. If
the reason for the disqualification is that Doctrine of implications and inferences
you are a candidate to begin with but got Disregard, we’re done with this
disqualified along the way(ex. Exceeded
campaign expenses), then the vice mayor Presumptions in aid of construction
will succeed. e.g. Presumption in favor of
constitutionality. Presumption if favor of
Construction by the bar validity. In other words, if there is a 50-50
Wasn’t discussed doubt as to WON the law is constitutional,
go to constitutionality because it enjoys
Textbook that presumption. The burden of proof
Poe v. Comelec belongs to the one that challenges the
The deliberation of the 1935 consti was constitutionality.

Transcribed by Turbonis - 2019