By Dominic B. dela Cruz
Staff reporter
Laoag City—This city’s Sangguniang Panlungsod and the Ilocos Norte Sangguniang Panlalawigan may be headed for another showdown, this time regarding Ordinance No. 2018-078.
The ordinance, authored by Laoag councilor Roger John C. Fariñas prohibits and penalizes the entry of illegal drugs and paraphernalia, firearms and ammunitions, bladed weapons, cellular phones and similar devices used for communication, cigarettes or tobaccos, electric cigarettes and liquor or other forms of intoxicating beverages to the Laoag City jail.
The provincial board sent a communication to the Laoag council stating the said ordinance as “invalid”. The board cited “ultra vires” as the main reason. It means the council passed an ordinance that was beyond its powers, since there are already national laws that carry the same prohibition.
Mr. Fariñas, however stressed that city will still enforce the ordinance.
He said he has asked council secretary Enrico Aurelio about the date the said ordinance was transmitted to the higher sanggunian. Mr. Aurelio, he said, told him it was transmitted on November 6, 2018.
The provincial board, based on their own documents, only tackled the said ordinance on April 1, 2019, or almost five months after the council’s transmission.
The Local Government Code mandates a 30-day mandatory review of ordinances by higher sanggunian. After the said period lapses, the ordinance is deemed approved.
Mr. Fariñas noted that the ordinance was recommended by Laoag City jail warden Herminigildo Rivera. He added that other local government units have also already passed similar ordinances.
Penalties for violating the ordinance carry a PHP5,000 fine and one-month, one-year, and lifetime bans for first, second and third offenses, respectively.
Similar situation
Council secretary Mr. Aurelio, for his part, said a similar situation also occurred in the past.
Another ordinance, which he did not specify, was also declared “invalid” by the provincial board long after the 30-day mandatory review has lapsed.
He said the council replied to the provincial board through a formal communication that they consider the ordinance “valid” using the lapsed mandatory review period as reason.
In the said communication, Mr. Aurelio stated, “xxxx during the mandatory period of the ordinance which is within 30 days upon receipt thereof, the Sangguniang Panlalawigan should have issued their legislative action in the form of a Resolution containing their disapproval in whole or in part of any ordinance submitted to them for review. It is not enough that they deliberated, debated and voted on the measure ought to be reviewed, because what is required of them is the enactment of a legislative document to formally and finally put to rest a given measure or issue. After the lapse of such period, and no official and/or formal document, such as a resolution which shall contain the findings of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan on review of the municipal ordinance or resolution, was issued by the Sangguniang Panlalawigan, it can be validly stated that the Sangguniang Panlalawigan failed to act within the 30 days and the ordinance or resolution under review can be presumed consistent with law and therefore valid.”
He also disclosed that he personally asked the city BJMP officials if the council still needs tom craft the ordinance since there is already national laws that prohibit such; the jail officials replied that a local ordinance is necessary in order to address the local situation peculiar to the Laoag jail. Meanwhile, the earlier ordinance, also declared as “invalid” by the board, was enforced without any complications, according to Mr. Aurelio.
In view of this, the secretary said they will do the same and consider the ordinance currently in question also as valid.
He added that only a court can now declare the said ordinance as “invalid” as the provincial board’s power over it has long lapsed.