1.

PREPARATION OF THE BILL

The Member or the Bill Drafting Division of the Reference and Research Bureau
prepares and drafts the bill upon the Member's request.

2. FIRST READING
a. The bill is filed with the Bills and Index Service and the same is numbered
and reproduced.
b. Three days after its filing, the same is included in the Order of Business
for First Reading.
c. On First Reading, the Secretary General reads the title and number of the
bill. The Speaker refers the bill to the appropriate Committee/s.

3. COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION / ACTION

a. The Committee where the bill was referred to evaluates it to determine the
necessity of conducting public hearings.

If the Committee finds it necessary to conduct public hearings, it

schedules the time thereof, issues public notice and invites resource
persons from the public and private sectors, the academe and experts on
the proposed legislation.

If the Committee finds that no public hearing is not needed, it schedules

the bill for Committee discussion/s.
b. Based on the result of the public hearings or Committee discussions, the
Committee may introduce amendments, consolidate bills on the same
subject matter, or propose a substitute bill. It then prepares the
corresponding committee report.

c. The Committee approves the Committee Report and formally transmits

the same to the Plenary Affairs Bureau
4. SECOND READING
a. The Committee Report is registered and numbered by the Bills and Index
Service. It is included in the Order of Business and referred to the
Committee on Rules.
b. The Committee on Rules schedules the bill for consideration on Second
Reading.

c. On Second Reading, the Secretary General reads the number, title and
text of the bill and the following takes place:
 ○ Period of Sponsorship and Debate
○ Period of Amendments
○ Voting which may be by:
i. viva voce
ii. count by tellers
iii. division of the House; or
iv. nominal voting
5. THIRD READING
1. The amendments, if any, are engrossed and printed copies of the bill are
reproduced for Third Reading.
2. The engrossed bill is included in the Calendar of Bills for Third Reading
and copies of the same are distributed to all the Members three days
before its Third Reading.
3. On Third Reading, the Secretary General reads only the number and title
of the bill.
4. A roll call or nominal voting is called and a Member, if he desires, is given
three minutes to explain his vote. No amendment on the bill is allowed at
this stage.
a. The bill is approved by an affirmative vote of a majority of the
Members present.
b. If the bill is disapproved, the same is transmitted to the Archives.

6. TRANSMITTAL OF THE APPROVED BILL TO THE SENATE

The approved bill is transmitted to the Senate for its concurrence.

7. SENATE ACTION ON THE APPROVED BILL

The bill undergoes the same legislative process in the Senate.

8. CONFERENCE COMMITTEE
1. A Conference Committee is constituted and is composed of Members
from each House of Congress to settle, reconcile or thresh out differences
or disagreements on any provision of the bill.
2. The conferees are not limited to reconciling the differences in the bill but
may introduce new provisions germane to the subject matter or may report
out an entirely new bill on the subject.
3. The Conference Committee prepares a report to be signed by all the
conferees and the Chairman.
 4. The Conference Committee Report is submitted for consideration/approval
of both Houses. No amendment is allowed.
9. TRANSMITTAL OF THE BILL TO THE PRESIDENT
Copies of the bill, signed by the Senate President and the Speaker of the House
of Representatives and certified by both the Secretary of the Senate and the
Secretary General of the House, are transmitted to the President.

10. PRESIDENTIAL ACTION ON THE BILL

1. If the bill is approved by the President, the same is assigned an RA number and
transmitted to the House where it originated.
2. If the bill is vetoed, the same, together with a message citing the reason for the
veto, is transmitted to the House where the bill originated.
11. ACTION ON APPROVED BIL

The bill is reproduced and copies are sent to the Official Gazette Office for
publication and distribution to the implementing agencies. It is then included in
the annual compilation of Acts and Resolutions.

12. ACTION ON VETOED BILL

The message is included in the Order of Business. If the Congress decides to

override the veto, the House and the Senate shall proceed separately to
reconsider the bill or the vetoed items of the bill. If the bill or its vetoed items is
passed by a vote of two-thirds of the Members of each House, such bill or items
shall become a law.

Void for Vagueness

A statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men
of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its
application, violates the first essential of due process of law.

Doctrine of Overbreadth

A governmental purpose may not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily

broadly and thereby invade the area of protected freedoms.
Strict Scrutiny Doctrine

Strict scrutiny is a standard of judicial review for determining the quality and the amount
of governmental interest brought to justify the regulation of fundamental freedoms.

A. Verba Legis non Est Recendendum

The Latin phrase "Verba legis non est recedendum" translates to "From the words of a
statute there should be no departure". This is a legal maxim that emphasizes the
importance of adhering to the exact words of a law or statute. It suggests that the
interpretation of a law should be based on its literal wording and not deviate from it. This
principle is often used in legal proceedings to ensure that laws are applied as they are
written.

Sison v. Comelec
Verba legis non est recedendum. From the words of the statute there should be
no departure. The statutory provision cannot be expanded to embrace any other
situation not contemplated therein such as the one at bar where the COMELEC
is not taking any step to suspend or annul a proclamation.

PAGCOR vs. Philippine Gaming Jurisdiction Inc.

It is a well-settled rule in statutory construction that where the words of a statute

are clear, plain, and free from ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning and
applied without attempted interpretation. Verba legis non est recedendum
translates to from the words of a statute there should be no departure.

B. Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam Pereat

The Constitution needs to be interpreted as a whole.

Sajonas v. Court of Appeals

In construing the law aforesaid, care should be taken that every part thereof be
given effect and a construction that could render a provision inoperative should
be avoided, and inconsistent provisions should be reconciled whenever
possible as parts of a harmonious whole. Taken in solitude, a word or phrase
might easily convey a meaning quite different from the one actually intended and
evident when a word or phrase is considered with those which it is associated
 with. In ascertaining the period of effectivity of an inscription of an adverse claim,
we must read the law in its entirety.

C. Ratio Legis Est Anima

The words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the intent of its
framers.

Naval v. Comelec

The drafters of our Constitution are in agreement about the possible attendant
evils if there would be no limit to re-election. Whether the term limit would
disqualify the elected official perpetually or temporarily, they decided that only
three consecutive elections to the same position would be allowed.

BGEN Jose Commenador v. BGEN Demetrio Camua

It is a basic canon of statutory construction that when the reason of the law
ceases, the law itself ceases. Cessante ratione legis, cessat ipsa lex. This
principle is also expressed in the maxim ratio legis est anima: the reason of law
is its soul.

D. Ex Necessiate Legis

From the necessity of the law, the doctrine of necessary implication means that what is
implied in a statute is as much a part thereof as that which is expressed.

Lydia Chua v. CSC

The doctrine of necessity implication is applicable in this case which holds that:
“What is implied in a statute is as much as part thereof as that which is
expressed. Every statute is understood, by implication, to contain all such
provisions as may be necessary to effectuate its object and purpose, or to make
effective rights, powers, privileges or jurisdiction which it grants, including all
such collateral and subsidiary consequences as may be fairly and logically
inferred from its terms.”
E. Casus Omissus pro Omisso Habendus est

A person, object, or thing omitted from an enumeration in a statute must be held to have
been omitted intentionally.

People vs. Manantan

The rule has no applicability to the case at bar. The maxim "casus omisus" can
operate and apply only if and when the omission has been clearly established. In
the case under consideration, it has already been shown that the legislature did
not exclude or omit justices of the peace from the enumeration of officers
precluded from engaging in partisan political activities. Rather, they were merely
called by another term. In the new law, or Section 54 of the Revised Election
Code, justices of the peace were just called "judges."

Spouses Delfino vs. St. James Hospital

According to the rule of casus omissus in statutory construction, a thing omitted

must be considered to have been omitted intentionally. Therefore, with the
omission of the phrase "hospital with not more than ten capacity" in the new 1991
Zoning Ordinance, and the corresponding transfer of said allowable usage to
another zone classification, the only logical conclusion is that the legislative body
had intended that said use be removed from those allowed within a residential
zone. Thus, the construction of medical institutions, such as St. James Hospital,
within a residential zone is now prohibited under the 1991 Zoning Ordinance.

F. Stare Decisis

Whenever the Supreme Court lays down a principle, it becomes a part of the law of the
land. Once that doctrine is laid down, it is almost always followed. The decisions of a
superior court on a point of law are binding on all subordinate courts.

Once a case has been decided one way such decisions stands until it is subsequently
reversed or modified.

J. M. TUASON & CO., INC. vs. Mariano

The Court ruled that considering the governing principle of stare decisis et non
quieta movere (follow past precedents and do not disturb what has been settled)
it becomes evident that respondents Acquial and Cordova cannot maintain their
action in Civil Case No. 8943 without eroding the long settled holding of the
courts that OCT No. 735 is valid and no longer open to attack.
 It is against public policy that matters already decided on the merits be re-
litigated again and again, consuming the court’s time and energies at the
expense of other litigants: Interest rei publicae ut finis sit litium.”

Lazatin v. Disierto

The doctrine of stare decisis enjoins adherence to judicial precedents. It requires

courts in a country to follow the rule established in a decision of the Supreme
Court thereof. That decision becomes a judicial precedent to be followed in
subsequent cases by all courts in the land. The doctrine of stare decisis is based
on the principle that once a question of law has been examined and decided, it
should be deemed settled and closed to further argument

G. Obiter Dictum

An obiter dictum has been defined as an opinion expressed by a court upon some
question of law which is not necessary to the decision of the case before it. It is a
remark made, or opinion expressed, by a judge, in his decision upon a cause, "by the
way," that is, incidentally or collaterally, and not directly upon the question before him,
or upon a point not necessarily involved in the determination of the cause, or introduced
by way of illustration, or analogy or argument. Such are not binding as precedent.

H. Ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemus

Where the law does not distinguish, neither should the court distinguish

Yu v. Samson - Tatad

BP 129, as amended, the substantive law on which the Rules of Court is based,
makes no distinction between the periods to appeal in a civil case and in a
criminal case. Section 39 of BP 129 categorically states that "the period for
appeal from final orders, resolutions, awards, judgments, or decisions of any
court in all cases shall be fifteen (15) days counted from the notice of the final
order, resolution, award, judgment, or decision appealed from." Ubi lex non
distinguit nec nos distinguere debemos. When the law makes no distinction, we
(this Court) also ought not to recognize any distinction
Devilia v. CA

The law does not distinguish the currency involved in the case. As the RTC
correctly ruled, under the Bouncing Checks Law (B.P. Blg. 22), foreign checks,
provided they are either drawn and issued in the Philippines though payable
outside thereof are within the coverage of said law. It is a cardinal principle in
statutory construction that where the law does not distinguish courts should not
distinguish. Parenthetically, the rule is that where the law does not make any
exception, courts may not except something unless compelling reasons exist to
justify it

I. Ejusdem Generis

A latin phrase that means “of the same kind.” The statutory construction principle of
the phrase states that where general words are specifically construed as limited and
apply only to persons or things of the same kind or class as those expressly mentioned.
For example, if a law refers to automobiles, trucks, tractors, motorcycles, and other
motor-powered vehicles, a court might use ejusdem generis to hold that such vehicles
would not include airplanes, because the list included only land-based transportation.

Colgate - Palmolive v. Gimenez

“General terms may be restricted by specific words, with the result that the
general language will be limited by the specific language which indicates the
statute’s object and purpose.” The rule, however, is applicable only to cases
where, except for one general term, all the items in an enumeration belong to or
fall under one specific class (ejusdem generis). In the case at bar, it is true that
the term “stabilizer and flavors” is preceded by a number of articles that may be
classified as food or food products, but it is likewise true that the other items
immediately following it do not belong to the same classification. The rule of
construction (ejusdem generis) that general and unlimited terms are restrained
and limited by particular recitals when used in connection with them, does not
require the rejection of general terms entirely. It is intended merely as an aid in
ascertaining the intention of the legislature and is to be taken in connection with
other rules of construction.

Republic v. Migrino
 Applying the rule in statutory construction known as ejusdem generis, that is—
where general words follow an enumeration of persons or things, by words of a
particular and specific meaning, such general words are not to be construed in
their widest extent but are to be held as applying only to persons or things of the
same kind or class as those specifically mentioned

J. Reddendo singula singulis

When a list of words has a modifying phrase at the end, the phrase refers only to the
last word

K. Expressio Unius est Exclusio Alterius

The express mention of one person, thing, or consequence implies the exclusion of all
other.

San Pablo vs. C.I.R.

Where the law enumerates the subject or condition upon which it applies, it is to
be construed as excluding from its effects all those not expressly mentioned.
Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. Anything that is not included in the
enumeration is excluded therefrom and a meaning that does not appear nor is
intended or reflected in the very language of the statute cannot be placed therein.

L. Noscitur a Sociis
The meaning of an unclear or ambiguous word (as in a statute or contract) should be
determined by considering the words with which it is associated in the context.

M. Use of Proviso

The familiar grammatical rule is that a proviso is to be construed with reference to the
immediately preceding part of the provision to which it is attached, and not to other
sections thereof, unless the clear legislative intent is to restrict or qualify not only the
phrase immediately preceding the proviso but also earlier provisions of the statute or
even the statute itself as a whole.