STATCON PARTS OF A STATUTE: Effectivity Clause
TANADA v. TUVERA
KEY WORDS: Effectivity Clause, Article 2 of NCC, Official Gazette, 15-day
G.R. No. 63915 Court EN Banc, SC
Date Promulgated April 24, 1985 Ponente Escolin, J.
DOCTRINES
New Civil Code of the Philippines
Article 2. Laws shall take effect after fifteen days following the completion of their publication in the Official Gazette, or
in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines, unless it is otherwise provided. This Code shall take effect
one year after such publication.
Publication allows the public sufficient time to learn about new laws, upholding the right to be informed as mandated by
Article 2, which requires a 15-day period post-publication for laws to take effect. This requirement ensures due process
and validates the maxim "ignorantia legis non excusat" by officially informing the public of legal contents, as mandated
by Section 1 of Commonwealth Act 638, enforcing the right to be informed of public matters.
Section 1 of Commonwealth Act 638
Section 1. There shall be published in the Official Gazette [1] all important legislative acts and resolutions of a public
nature of the Congress of the Philippines; [2] all executive and administrative orders and proclamations, except such as
have no general applicability; [3] decisions or abstracts of decisions of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals as
may be deemed by said courts of sufficient importance to be so published; [4] such documents or classes of documents
as may be required so to be published by law; and [5] such documents or classes of documents as the President of the
Philippines shall determine from time to time to have general applicability and legal effect, or which he may authorize so
to be published…"
CASE SUMMARY
In the case filed by Lorenzo Tañada et. al., the petitioners sought a writ of mandamus to compel Juan Tuvera and other
respondents to publish various presidential issuances in the Official Gazette. These issuances included decrees, letters
of instruction, general orders, proclamations, executive orders, letters of implementation, and administrative orders from
the Office of the President.
The petitioners argued that all such issuances, regardless of their applicability, must be fully and promptly published.
The respondents countered that only issuances for internal administration or specific individuals needed no publication,
and necessary publications should be complete and in the Official Gazette, arguing the decision under reconsideration
was not binding without support from eight Supreme Court members.
The Court affirmed that the clause “unless it is otherwise provided” in Article 2 of the Civil Code referred to the effectivity
of laws, not the requirement of publication. Consequently, the Court ordered the respondents to publish all unpublished
presidential issuances of general application in the Official Gazette, stating they would have no binding force until
published.
TLDR: Court ruled that publication is necessary in order for laws, ordinances, decrees and proclamations to be binding
since it is a requirement of due process to give the general public adequate notice of the various laws which are to
regulate their actions and conduct as citizens.
Digest made by: [Lacson, Rishi] | Block C, Batch 2028 | Ateneo de Manila University School of Law
FACTS
● Petitioners Lorenzo Tañada and others files a writ of mandamus to compel Respondent Juan Tuvera, et.al. to
publish in the Official Gazette various presidential decrees, letters of instruction, general orders, proclamations,
executive orders, letter of implementation, and administrative orders issued by the Office of the President.
● Petitioners invoked the due process clause demanding disclosure of presidential decrees that were not
published as required by law.
● Petitioners suggest that there should be no distinction between laws of general applicability and those which
are not; that publication means complete publication; and that the publication must be made forthwith in the
Official Gazette. On the other hand, the respondents argue that issuances intended only for the internal
administration of a government agency or of particular persons did not have to be published; that publication,
when necessary, must be in full and in the Official Gazette; and that, however, the decision under
reconsideration was not binding because it was not supported by eight members of the Supreme Court.
● The government claimed that while publication is generally required, there is an exception when it was
“otherwise provided”
○ The exception includes when decrees declared that they are effective upon approval.
● The Court affirmed the necessity of publication of presidential decrees
○ Court required the respondents to publish the unpublished presidential issuances in the official Gazette
○ All unpublished presidential issuances, of general application, shall have no effect
PETITIONER/S’ ARGUMENTS RESPONDENT/S’ ARGUMENTS
Petition concerns a public right and its object compels the 1. Petitioners have no legal standing. They are not
performance of a public duty so they do not need to show directly affected by the alleged non-publication of
any specific interest. the issuances.
2. They also contend that publication in the Official
Gazette is not a sine que non (absolutely
necessary) for the effectivity of laws where the
laws provides for their own effectivity dates.
ISSUES
1. Whether the clause “unless it is otherwise provided” in Art 2 of the NCC refers to the effectivity of laws and not
to the requirement of publication? - YES.
2. Whether petitioners have legal standing? - YES
RATIO
(Main Issue) W/N the clause “unless it is otherwise provided” in Art 2 of the NCC refers to the YES
effectivity of laws and not to the requirement of publication?
Yes. For the people to have a reasonable amount of time to learn about certain laws or decrees being enacted
by their government, sufficient appropriation of time and publication is necessary.
According to Article 2 of the Civil Code, all laws must be given 15 days upon its publication in the Official Gazette for it
to be enacted. This is to give sufficient time for the people to learn of such laws as well as to respect their right to be
informed. The respondents however brought up the fact that the Official
Gazette may not be the most effective medium for the people to be educated of certain new laws given its erratic
publication dates as well as its limited number of readers, with lieu of more potent mediums of instructions such as
newspapers of general circulation because of its wide readership and regular dates of printing. The court nevertheless
rules that such periodicals are not what is required by the Civil Code and such amendments are left to the legislative
branch of the government. Having said this, the court finds in favor of publishing all laws, presidential decrees, letters of
instructions, general orders, executive orders, and administrative orders with a 15 day leeway, or unless stated, for
them to take into effect.
Digest made by: [Lacson, Rishi] | Block C, Batch 2028 | Ateneo de Manila University School of Law
Such publication is important because there shall be no basis for the application of the Latin maxim, “ignoratia legis non
excusat”, without such notice and publication, especially when the law-making process is not made in public.
Further, the word “shall” in Section 1 of Commonwealth Act 638 imposes upon the Respondent an imperative duty to
enforce the right of the people to be informed of the matters of public concern. The publication of all presidential
issuances of public nature or general applicability is mandated by law. Such publication is a requirement of due process
whereby a person may be bound by law only when he is first officially and specifically informed of its contents.
Publication in the Official Gazette is necessary. Article 2 of the Civil Code does not preclude the requirement of
publication in the Official Gazette even if the law itself provides for the date of its effectivity. According to Section 1 of
Commonwealth Act 638, the clear objective of the provision is to give the general public adequate notice of the various
laws that will regulate their actions and conduct as citizens. The word “shall” in the provision imposes an imperative
duty on respondent officials to ensure that the Constitutional right of the people to be informed on matters of public
concern is given substance and reality. The publication of all presidential issuances "of a public nature" or "of general
applicability" is mandated by law and is also a requirement of due process. It is a rule of law that before a person may
be bound by law, they must first be officially and specifically informed of its contents. The Court, therefore, declares that
those decrees which have not been published shall have no force and effect.
ISSUE #2 W/N petitioners have the legal standing. YES
The right sought to be enforced by petitioners herein is a public right recognized by no less than the fundamental law of
the land. When the question is one of public rights and the object of the mandamus is to procure the enforcement of a
public duty, it is sufficient to show that he is a citizen and as such interested in the execution of the laws. The Court
orders the respondents to publish in the Official Gazette all unpublished presidential issuances which are of general
application, and unless so published, they shall have no binding force and effect.
DISPOSITIVE RULING
WHEREFORE, the Court hereby orders respondents to publish in the Official Gazette all unpublished presidential
issuances which are of general application, and unless so published, they shall have no binding force and effect.
RELEVANCE TO SUBJECT AND TOPIC
The Court's ruling emphasizes that the publication of laws and other governmental issuances is essential to their
validity and enforceability. This case establishes the principle that laws must be published to ensure due process and to
give the public sufficient time to become aware of new regulations, as mandated by the 15-day period post-publication.
The decision also highlights that the requirement of publication is a fundamental aspect of the legal process, providing
citizens with the necessary notice to comply with the law and preventing the application of the maxim "ignorantia legis
non excusat" (ignorance of the law excuses no one) without proper notice.
DICTIONARY
● Effectivity Clause – Declares when the statute takes effect, serving as the penultimate provision of all statutes.
Notes:
For purposes of the prior publication requirement for effectivity, the term “laws” refer not only to those of general
application, but also to laws of local application, private laws; administrative rules enforcing a statute; city charters.
Central Bank circulars to “fill-in the details of the Central Bank Act; but not mere interpretative rules regulating and
providing guidelines for purposes of internal operations only.
All statutes, including those of local application and private laws, shall be published as a condition for their effectivity,
which shall begin fifteen days after publication unless a different effectivity date is fixed by the legislature.
Digest made by: [Lacson, Rishi] | Block C, Batch 2028 | Ateneo de Manila University School of Law
