Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 123 views

    Philconsa VS Gimenez

    Uploaded by

    Jhay Carbonel
    PHILCONSA challenged the validity of certain provisions in RA 3836 that allowed retirement gratuity and commutation of vacation and sick leave for Senators, Representatives and other elected officials. The court ruled the provisions were not germane to the subject matter expressed in the act's title and violated the Constitution. Specifically, the title referred to the Government Service Insurance System but the content also included additional benefits for members of Congress, which were unrelated to the GIS. Therefore, the court declared those specific provisions in RA 3836 null and void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Philconsa VS Gimenez

    Uploaded by

    Jhay Carbonel
    123 views2 pages
    PHILCONSA challenged the validity of certain provisions in RA 3836 that allowed retirement gratuity and commutation of vacation and sick leave for Senators, Representatives and other elected officials. The court ruled the provisions were not germane to the subject matter expressed in the act's title and violated the Constitution. Specifically, the title referred to the Government Service Insurance System but the content also included additional benefits for members of Congress, which were unrelated to the GIS. Therefore, the court declared those specific provisions in RA 3836 null and void.

    Original Title

    PHILCONSA VS GIMENEZ

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    PHILCONSA challenged the validity of certain provisions in RA 3836 that allowed retirement gratuity and commutation of vacation and sick leave for Senators, Representatives and other elected officials. The court ruled the provisions were not germane to the subject matter expressed in the act's title and violated the Constitution. Specifically, the title referred to the Government Service Insurance System but the content also included additional benefits for members of Congress, which were unrelated to the GIS. Therefore, the court declared those specific provisions in RA 3836 null and void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    123 views2 pages

    Philconsa VS Gimenez

    Uploaded by

    Jhay Carbonel
    PHILCONSA challenged the validity of certain provisions in RA 3836 that allowed retirement gratuity and commutation of vacation and sick leave for Senators, Representatives and other elected officials. The court ruled the provisions were not germane to the subject matter expressed in the act's title and violated the Constitution. Specifically, the title referred to the Government Service Insurance System but the content also included additional benefits for members of Congress, which were unrelated to the GIS. Therefore, the court declared those specific provisions in RA 3836 null and void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    PHILCONSA VS GIMENEZ

    G.R. No. L-23326 December 18, 1965

    REGALA, J.:

    FACTS:

    Philippine Constitution Association, Inc (PHILCONSA) assails the validity


    of RA 3836 insofar as the same allows retirement gratuity and commutation of
    vacation and sick leave to Senators and Representatives, and to the elective
    officials of both Houses (of Congress).

    The provision is an attempt to circumvent the Constitutional ban on increase


    of salaries of the members of Congress during their term of office, contrary to the
    provisions of Article VI, Section 14 of the Constitution. The same provision
    constitutes “selfish class legislation” because it allows members and officers of
    Congress to retire after twelve (12) years of service and gives them a gratuity
    equivalent to one year salary for every four years of service, which is not
    refundable in case of reinstatement or re-election of the retiree.

    The provision on vacation and sick leave, commutable at the highest rate
    received, insofar as members of Congress are concerned, is another attempt of the
    legislator to further increase their compensation in violation of the Constitution.

    The Solicitor General counter-argued that it is not a forbidden compensation,


    said Act is merely “in the nature of a basis for computing the gratuity due each
    retiring member” and, therefore, is not an indirect scheme to increase their salary.

    ISSUE:

    Whether or not the little of RA No. 3836 is germane to the subject matter
    expressed in the act.
    HELD:

    No. it is not germane. In the light of the history and analysis of Republic Act
    3836, We conclude that the title of said Republic Act 3836 is void as it is not
    germane to the subject matter and is a violation of the aforementioned paragraph 1,
    section 21, Article VI of the Constitution.

    It is to be observed that under Republic Act 3836, amending the first


    paragraph of section 12, subsection (c) of Commonwealth Act 186, as amended by
    Republic Acts Nos. 660 and. 3096, the retirement benefits are granted to members
    of the Government Service Insurance System, who have rendered at least twenty
    years of service regardless of age.

    On the other hand, the succeeding paragraph of Republic Act 3836 refers to
    members of Congress and to elective officers thereof who are not members of the
    Government Service Insurance System. To provide retirement benefits, therefore,
    for these officials, would relate to subject matter which is not germane to
    Commonwealth Act No. 186.

    In other words it is not related in any manner to the subject of


    Commonwealth Act 186 establishing the Government Service Insurance System
    and which provides for both retirement and insurance benefits to its members.

    IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, Republic Act No.


    3836 is hereby declared null and void, in so far as it refers to the retirement of
    Members of Congress and the elected officials thereof. The restraining order issued
    in our resolution on December 6, 1965 is hereby made permanent. No costs.

    You might also like