Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC G.R. Nos. L-8895 and L-9191 April 30 195!

SAL"A#OR A. ARANETA ETC. ET AL. petitioners, vs. T$E $ON. MAGNO S. GATMA%TAN ETC. ET AL. respondents. E&E'U%EL SOR%ANO ET AL. petitioners-appellees, vs. SAL"A#OR ARANETA ETC. ET AL. respondents-appellants. Office of the Solicitor General Ambrosio Padilla, Assistant Solicitor General Jose G. Bautista and Solicitor Troadio T. Quiazon for petitioners. San Juan, Africa and Benedicto for respondents. (EL%& J.) San Miguel Ba , located bet!een the provinces of Ca"arines Norte and Ca"arines Sur, a part of the National !aters of the Philippines !ith an e#tension of about $%& s'uare "iles and an average depth of appro#i"atel ( fatho"s )*tter tra!l e#plorations in Philippine !aters p. $+, E#h. B,, is considered as the "ost i"portant fishing area in the Pacific side of the Bicol region. So"eti"e in +-%&, tra!l+ operators fro" Malabon, Navotas and other places "igrated to this region "ost of the" settling at Sabang, Calabanga, Ca"arines Sur, for the purpose of using this particular "ethod of fishing in said ba . *n account of the belief of sustenance fisher"en that the operation of this .ind of gear caused the depletion of the "arine resources of that area, there arose a general cla"or a"ong the "a/orit of the inhabitants of coastal to!ns to prohibit the operation of tra!ls in San Miguel Ba . 0his "ove !as "anifested in the resolution of 1ece"ber +2, +-%3 )E#h. 4,, passed b the Municipal Ma ors5 6eague conde"ning the operation of tra!ls as the cause of the !anton destruction of the shri"p specie and resolving to petition the President of the Philippines to regulate fishing in San Miguel Ba b declaring it closed for tra!l fishing at a certain period of the ear. 7n another resolution dated March $8, +-%9, the sa"e 6eague of Municipal Ma or, pra ed the President to protect the" and the fish resources of San Miguel Ba b banning the operation of tra!ls therein )E#h. 9,. 0he Provincial :overnor also "ade proper presentations to this effect and petitions in behalf of the non-tra!l fisher"en !ere li.e!ise presented to the President b social and civic organi;ations as the NAM4RE6 )National Move"ent for 4ree Elections, and the C*MPA1RE )Co""ittee for Philippine Action in 1evelop"ent, Reconstruction and Education,, reco""ending the cancellation of the licenses of tra!l operators after investigation, if such in'uir !ould substantiate the charges that the operation of said fishing "ethod !as detri"ental to the !elfare of the "a/orit of the inhabitants )E#h. $,. 7n response to these pleas, the President issued on April %, +-%9, E#ecutive *rder No. $$ )%& *ff. :a;., +9$+, prohibiting the use of tra!ls in San Miguel Ba , but said e#ecutive order !as a"ended b E#ecutive *rder No. ((, issued on Septe"ber $3, +-%9 )%& *ff. :a;., 9&38,, apparentl in ans!er to a resolution of the Provincial Board of Ca"arines Sur reco""ending the allo!ance of tra!l fishing during the t phoon season onl . *n Nove"ber $, +-%9, ho!ever, E#ecutive *rder No. 2& )%& *ff. :a;., %+-2, !as issued reviving E#ecutive *rder No. $$, to ta.e effect after 1ece"ber 3+, +-%9. A group of *tter tra!l operators too. the "atter to the court b filing a co"plaint for in/unction and<or declarator relief !ith preli"inar in/unction !ith the Court of 4irst 7nstance of Manila,

doc.eted as Civil Case No. $92(8, pra ing that a !rit of preli"inar in/unction be issued to restrain the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the 1irector of 4isheries fro" enforcing said e#ecutive order= to declare the sa"e null and void, and for such other relief as "a be /ust and e'uitable in the pre"ises. 0he Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the 1irector of 4isheries, represented b the 6egal Adviser of said 1epart"ent and a Special Attorne of the *ffice of the Solicitor :eneral, ans!ered the co"plaint alleging, a"ong other things, that of the +2 plaintiff )E#e'uiel Soriano, 0eodora 1onato, 4elipe Concepcion, >enancio Correa, Santo :aviana, Alfredo :eneral, Constancio :utierre;, Arsenio de :u;"an, Pedro 6a;aro, Porfirio 6a;aro, 1el/ie de 6eon, ?ose Nepo"uceno, Ba ani Pingol, Claudio Salgado, Porfirio, San ?uan, 6uis Sioco, Casi"iro >illar and Enri'ue >oluntad,, onl ++ !ere issued license to operate fishing boats for the ear +-%9 )Anne# B, petition @ 6-22-%,= that the e#ecutive orders in 'uestion !ere issued accordance !ith la!= that the encourage"ent b the Bureau of 4isheries of the use of *tter tra!ls should not be construed to "ean that the general !elfare of the public could be disregarded, and set up the defenses that since plaintiffs 'uestion the validit of the e#ecutive orders issued b the President, then the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the 1irector of 4isheries !ere not the real parties in interest= that said e#ecutive orders do not constitute a deprivation of propert !ithout due process of la!, and therefore pra ed that the co"plaint be dis"issed )E#h. B, petition, 6-22-%,. 1uring the trial of the case, the :overnor of Ca"arines Sur appearing for the "unicipalities of Siru"a, 0ina"bac, Calabanga, Cabusao and Sipocot, in said province, called the attention of the Court that the Solicitor :eneral had not been notified of the proceeding. 0o this "anifestation, the Court ruled that in vie! of the circu"stances of the case, and as the Solicitor :eneral !ould onl be interested in "aintaining the legalit of the e#ecutive orders sought to be i"pugned, section 9 of Rule (( could be interpreted to "ean that the trial could go on and the Solicitor :eneral could be notified before /udge"ent is entered. After the evidence for both parties !as sub"itted and the Solicitor :eneral !as allo!ed to file his "e"orandu", the Court rendered decision on 4ebruar $, +-%%, the last part of !hich reads as follo!sA 0he po!er to close an definite area of the Philippine !aters, fro" the fact that Congress has seen fit to define under !hat conditions it "a be done b the enact"ent of the sections cited, in the "ind of Congress "ust be of transcendental significance. 7t is pri"aril !ithin the fields of legislation not of e#ecutionA for it goes far and sa s !ho can and !ho can not fish in definite territorial !aters. 0he court can not accept that Congress had intended to abdicate its inherent right to legislate on this "atter of national i"portance. 0o accept respondents5 vie! !ould be to sanction the e#ercise of legislative po!er b e#ecutive decrees. 7f it is San Miguel Ba no!, it "a be 1avao :ulf to"orro!, and so on. 0hat "a be done onl b Congress. 0his being the conclusion, there is hardl need to go an further. Bntil the tra!ler is outla!ed b legislative enact"ent, it cannot be banned fro" San Miguel Ba b e#ecutive procla"ation. 0he re"ed for respondents and population of the coastal to!ns of Ca"arines Sur is to go to the 6egislature. 0he result !ill be to issue the !rit pra ed for, even though this be to stri.e at public cla"or and to annul the orders of the President issued in response therefor. 0his is a tas. un!elco"e and unpleasant= unfortunatel , courts of /ustice use onl one "easure for both the rich and poor, and are not bound b the "ore popular cause !hen the give /udg"ents. 7N >7EC CDERE*4, granted= E#ecutive *rder Nos. $$, (( and 2& are declared invalid= the in/unction pra ed for is ordered to issue= no pronounce"ent as to costs. Petitioners i""ediatel filed an e#-parte "otion for the issuance of a !rit of in/unction !hich !as opposed b the Solicitor :eneral and after the parties had filed their respective "e"oranda, the

Court issued an order dated 4ebruar +-, +-%%, den ing respondents5 "otion to set aside /udge"ent and ordering the" to file a bond in the su" of P3&,&&& on or before March +, +-%%, as a condition for the non-issuance of the in/unction pra ed for b petitioners pending appeal. 0he Solicitor :eneral filed a "otion for reconsideration !hich !as denied for lac. of "erit, and the Court, acting upon the "otion for ne! trial filed b respondents, issued another order on March 3, +-(%, den ing said "otion and granting the in/unction pra ed for b petitioners upon the latter5s filing a bond for P3&,&&& unless respondents could secure a !rit of preli"inar in/unction fro" the Supre"e Court on or before March +%, +-%%. Respondents, therefore, brought the "atter to this Court in a petition for prohibition and certiorari!ith preli"inar in/unction, doc.eted as :.R. No. 6-22-%, and on the sa"e da filed a notice to appeal fro" the order of the lo!er court dated 4ebruar $, +-%%, !hich appeal !as doc.eted in this Court as :.R. No. 6--+-+. 7n the petition for prohibition and certiorari, petitioners )respondents therein, contended a"ong other things, that the order of, the respondent ?udge re'uiring petitioners Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the 1irector of 4isheries to post a bond in the su" of P3&,&&& on or before March +, +-%%, had been issued !ithout /urisdiction or in e#cess thereof, or at the ver least !ith grave abuse of discretion, because b re'uiring the bond, the Republic of the Philippines !as in effect "ade a part defendant and therefore transfor"ed the suit into one against the :overn"ent !hich is be ond the /urisdiction of the respondent ?udge to entertain= that the failure to give the Solicitor :eneral the opportunit to defend the validit of the challenged e#ecutive orders resulted in the receipt of ob/ectionable "atters at the hearing= that Rule (( of the Rules of Court does not e"po!er a court of la! to pass upon the validit of an e#ecutive order in a declarator relief proceeding= that the respondent ?udge did not have the po!er to grant the in/unction as Section 9 of Rule 3- does not appl to declarator relief proceedings but onl to in/unction, receivership and patent accounting proceedings= and pra ed that a !rit of preli"inar in/unction be issued to en/oin the respondent ?udge fro" enforcing its order of March 3, +-%%, and for such other relief as "a be dee" /ust and e'uitable in the pre"ises. 0his petition !as given due course and the hearing on the "erits !as set b this Court for April +$, +-%%, but no !rit of preli"inar in/unction !as issued. Mean!hile, the appeal ):.R. No. 6--+-+, !as heard on *ctober 3, +-%(, !herein respondentsappellants ascribed to the lo!er court the co""ission of the follo!ing errorsA +. 7n ruling that the President has no authorit to issue E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2& banning the operation of tra!ls in San Miguel Ba = $. 7n holding that the po!er to declare a closed area for fishing purposes has not been delegated to the President of the Philippines under the 4isheries Act= 3. 7n not considering E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2& as declaring a closed season pursuant to Section 8, Act 9&&3, as a"ended, other!ise .no!n as the 4isheries Act= 9. 7n holding that to uphold the validit of E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$ and 2& !ould be to sanction the e#ercise of legislative po!er b e#ecutive decrees= %. 7n its suggestion that the onl re"ed for respondents and the people of the coastal to!ns of Ca"arines Sur and Ca"arines Norte is to go to the 6egislature= and (. 7n declaring E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2& invalid and in ordering the in/unction pra ed for to issue. As *ur decision in the prohibition and certiorari case ):.R. No. 6-22-%, !ould depend, in the last anal sis, on *ur ruling in the appeal of the respondents in case :.R. No. 6--+-+, Ce shall first proceed to dispose of the latter case.

7t is indisputable that the President issued E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2& in response to the cla"or of the inhabitants of the "unicipalities along the coastline of San Miguel Ba . 0he read as follo!sA EEECB07>E *R1ER No. $$ PR*D7B707N: 0DE BSE *4 0RAC6S 7N SAN M7:BE6 BAF 7n order to effectivel protect the "unicipal fisheries of San Miguel Ba , Ca"arines Norte and Ca"arines Sur, and to conserve fish and other a'uatic resources of the area, 7, RAM*N MA:SAFSAF, President of the Philippines, b virtue of the po!ers vested in "e b la!, do hereb order thatA +. 4ishing b "eans of tra!ls )utase, otter and<or peren;ella, of an .ind, in the !aters co"prised !ithin San Miguel Ba , is hereb prohibited. $. 0ra!l shall "ean, for the purpose of this *rder, a fishing net "ade in the for" of a bag !ith the "outh .ept open b a device, the !hole affair being to!ed, dragged, trailed or tra!led on the botto" of the sea to capture de"ersal, ground or botto" species. 3. >iolation of the provisions of this *rder shall sub/ect the offender to the penalt provided under Section 23 of Act 9--3, or "ore than si# "onths, or both, in the discretion of the Court. 1one in the Cit of Manila, this %th da of April, nineteen hundred and fift -four and of the 7ndependence of the Philippines, the eighth. )%& *ff. :a;. +9$+, EEECB07>E *R1ER No. (( AMEN17N: EEECB07>E *R1ER No. $$, 1A0E1 APR76 %, +-%9, EN0706E1 GPR*D7B707N: 0DE BSE *4 0RAC6S 7N SAN M7:BE6 BAFG B virtue of the po!ers voted in "e b la!, 7, RAM*N MA:SAFSAF, President of the Philippines, do hereb a"end E#ecutive *rder No. $$, dated April %, +-%9, so as to allo! fishing b "eans of tra!ls, as defined in said E#ecutive *rder, !ithin that portion of San Miguel Ba north of a straight line dra!n fro" 0acubtacuban Dill in the Municipalit of 0ina"bac, Province of Ca"arines Sur. 4ishing b "eans of tra!ls south of said line shall still be absolutel prohibited. 1one in the Cit of Manila, this $3rd da of Septe"ber, in the ear of our 6ord, nineteen hundred and fift -four, and of the 7ndependence of the Philippines, the ninth.G )%& *ff. :a;. 9&38,. EEECB07>E *R1ER No. 2&. 4BR0DER AMEN17N: EEECB07>E *R1ER No. $$, 1A0E1 APR76 %, +-%9, AS AMEN1E1 BF EEECB07>E *R1ER No. ((, 1A0E1 SEP0EMBER $3, +-%9. B virtue of the po!ers vested in "e b la!, 7, RAM*N MA:SAFSAF, President of the Philippines, do hereb a"end E#ecutive *rder No. (( dated Septe"ber $3, +-%9, so as to allo! fishing b "eans of tra!ls, as defined in E#ecutive *rder No. $$, dated April %, +-%9, !ithin the portion of San Miguel Ba North of a straight line dra!n fro" 0acubtacuban Dill in the Municipalit of Mercedes, Province of Ca"arines Norte to Balocbaloc Point in the Municipalit of 0ina"bac, Province of Ca"arines Sur, until 1ece"ber 3+, +-%9, onl .

0hereafter, the provisions of said E#ecutive *rder No. $$ absolutel prohibiting fishing b "eans of tra!ls in all the !aters co"prised !ithin the San Miguel Ba shall be revived and given full force and effect as originall provided therein. 1one in the Cit of Manila, this $nd da of Nove"ber, in the ear of *ur 6ord, nineteen hundred and fift -four and of the 7ndependence of the Philippines, the ninth. )%& *ff. :a;. %+-2, 7t is li.e!ise ad"itted that petitioners assailed the validit of said e#ecutive orders in their petition for a !rit of in/unction and<or declarator relief filed !ith the Court of 4irst 7nstance of Manila, and that the lo!er court, upon declaring E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2& invalid, issued an order re'uiring the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the 1irector of 4isheries to post a bond for P3&,&&& if the !rit of in/unction restraining the" fro" enforcing the e#ecutive orders in 'uestion "ust be sta ed. 0he Solicitor :eneral avers that the constitutionalit of an e#ecutive order cannot be ventilated in a declarator relief proceeding. Ce find this untenable, for this Court ta.ing cogni;ance of an appeal fro" the decision of the lo!er court in the case of Hilado s. !e la "osta, et al., 23 Phil., 98+, !hich involves the constitutionalit of another e#ecutive order presented in an action for declarator relief, in effect accepted the propriet of such action. 0his 'uestion being eli"inated, the "ain issues left for *ur deter"ination !ith respect to defendants5 appeal ):.R. No. 6--+-+,, areA )+, Chether the Secretar of an E#ecutive 1epart"ent and the 1irector of a Bureau, acting in their capacities as such :overn"ent officials, could la!full be re'uired to post a bond in an action against the"= )$, Chether the President of the Philippines has authorit to issue E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2&, banning the operation of tra!ls in San Miguel Ba , or, said in other !ords, !hether said E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2& !ere issued in accordance !ith la!= and. )3, Chether E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2& !ere valid, for the issuance thereof !as not in the e#ercise of legislative po!ers undul delegated to the President. Counsel for both parties presented co""endable e#haustive defenses in support of their respective stands. Certainl , these cases deserve such efforts, not onl because the constitutionalit of an act of a coordinate branch in our tripartite s ste" of :overn"ent is in issue, but also because of the nu"ber of inhabitants, ad"ittedl classified as Gsubsistence fisher"enG, that "a be affected b an ruling that Ce "a pro"ulgate herein. 7. As to the first proposition, it is an ele"entar rule of procedure that an appeal sta s the e#ecution of a /udg"ent. An e#ception is offered b section 9 of Rule 3- of the Rules of Court !hich provides thatA SEC. 9. 7N?BNC07*N, RECE7>ERSD7P AN1 PA0EN0 ACC*BN07N:, N*0 S0AFE1. @ Bnless other!ise ordered b the court, a /udg"ent in an action for in/unction or in a receivership action, or a /udg"ent or order directing an accounting in an action for infringe"ent of letter patent, shall not be sta ed after its rendition and before an appeal is ta.en or during the pendenc of an appeal. 0he trial court, ho!ever, in its discretion, !hen an appeal is ta.en fro" a /udge"ent granting, dissolving or den ing an in/unction, "a "a.e an order suspending, "odif ing, restoring, or granting such in/unction during the pendenc of an appeal, upon such ter"s as to bond or other!ise as it "a consider proper for the securit of the rights of the adverse part .

0his provision !as the basis of the order of the lo!er court dated 4ebruar +-, +-%%, re'uiring the filing b the respondents of a bond for P3&,&&& as a condition for the non-issuance of the in/unction pra ed for b plaintiffs therein, and !hich the Solicitor :eneral charged to have been issued in e#cess of /urisdiction. 0he State5s counsel, ho!ever, alleges that !hile /udg"ent could be sta ed in in/unction, receivership and patent accounting cases and although the co"plaint !as st led G7n/unction, and<or 1eclarator Relief !ith Preli"inar 7n/unctionG, the case is necessaril one for declarator relief, there being no allegation sufficient to convince the Court that the plaintiffs intended it to be one for in/unction. But aside fro" the title of the co"plaint, Ce find that plaintiffs pra for the declaration of the nullit of E#ecutive *rder Nos. $$, (( and 2&= the issuance of a !rit of preli"inar in/unction, and for such other relief as "a be dee"ed /ust and e'uitable. 0his Court has alread held that there are onl t!o re'uisites to be satisfied if an in/unction is to issue, na"el , the e#istence of the right sought to be protected, and that the acts against !hich the in/unction is to be directed are violative of said right )North Negros Sugar Co., 7nc. s. Serafin Didalgo, (3 Phil., ((9,. 0here is no 'uestion that at least ++ of the co"plaining tra!l operators !ere dul licensed to operate in an of the national !aters of the Philippines, and it is undeniable that the e#ecutive enact"ent5s sought to be annulled are detri"ental to their interests. And considering further that the granting or refusal of an in/unction, !hether te"porar or per"anent, rests in the sound discretion of the Court, ta.ing into account the circu"stances and the facts of the particular case )Rodulfa s. Alfonso, 8( Phil,, $$%, 9$ *ff. :a;., $93-,, Ce find no abuse of discretion !hen the trial Court treated the co"plaint as one for in/unction and declarator relief and e#ecuted the /udg"ent pursuant to the provisions of section 9 of Rule 3- of the Rules of Court. *n the other hand, it shall be re"e"bered that the part defendants in Civil Case No. $92(8 of the Court of 4irst 7nstance of Manila are Salvador Araneta, as Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources, and, 1eogracias >illadolid, as 1irector of 4isheries, and !ere sued in such capacities because the !ere the officers charged !ith dut of carr ing out the statutes, orders and regulations on fishing and fisheries. 7n its order of 4ebruar +-, +-%%, the trial court denied defendants5 "otion to set aside /udg"ent and the !ere re'uired to file a bond for P3&,&&& to ans!er for da"ages that plaintiffs !ere allegedl suffering at that ti"e, as other!ise the in/unction pra ed for b the latter !ould be issued. Because of these facts, Ce agree !ith the Solicitor :eneral !hen he sa s that the action, being one against herein petitioners as such :overn"ent officials, is essentiall one against the :overn"ent, and to re'uire these officials to file a bond !ould be indirectl a re'uire"ent against the :overn"ent for as regards bonds or da"ages that "a be proved, if an , the real part in interest !ould be the Republic of the Philippines )6. S. Moon and Co. s. Darrison, 93 Phi., 3-= Salgado s. Ra"os, (9 Phil., 8$9-8$8, and others,. 0he reason for this pronounce"ent is understandable= the State undoubtedl is al!a s solvent )0olentino s. Carlos (( Phil., +9&= :overn"ent of the P. 7. s. ?udge of the Court of 4irst 7nstance of 7loilo, 39 Phil., +(8, cited in ?oa'uin :utierre; et al. s. Ca"us et al. H :.R. No. 6-(8$%, pro"ulgated *ctober 3&, +-%9,. Do!ever, as the records sho! that herein petitioners failed to put up the bond re'uired b the lo!er court, allegedl due to difficulties encountered !ith the Auditor :eneral5s *ffice )giving the i"pression that the !ere !illing to put up said bond but failed to do so for reasons be ond their control,, and that the orders sub/ects of the prohibition and certiorari proceedings in :.R. No. 622-%, !ere enforced, if at all,$ in accordance !ith section 9 of Rule 3-, !hich Ce hold to be applicable to the case at bar, the issue as to the regularit or ade'uac of re'uiring herein petitioners to post a bond, beco"es "oot and acade"ic. 77. Passing upon the 'uestion involved in the second proposition, the trial /udge e#tending the controvers to the deter"ination of !hich bet!een the 6egislative, and E#ecutive 1epart"ents of the :overn"ent had Gthe po!er to close an definite area of the Philippine !atersG instead of li"iting the sa"e to the real issue raised b the enact"ent of E#ecutive *rders No. $$, $( and 2&, especiall the first and the last Gabsolutel# prohibitin$ fishin$ b# means tra%ls in all the !aters co"prised !ithin the San Miguel Ba G, ruled in favor of Congress had not intended to abdicate its po!er to legislate on the "atter, he "aintained as stated before, that Guntil the tra!ler is outla!ed b legislative enact"ent, it cannot be banned fro" San Miguel Ba b

e#ecutive procla"ationG, and that Gthe re"ed for respondents and population of the coastal to!ns of Ca"arines Sur is to go to 6egislature,G and thus declared said E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2& invalidG. 0he Solicitor :eneral, on the contrar , asserts that the President is e"po!ered b la! to issue the e#ecutive enact"ent5s in 'uestion. Sections (, +3 and 8% of Act No. 9&&3, .no!n as the 4isheries 6a!, the latter t!o sections as a"ended b section + of Co""on!ealth Act No. 98+, read as follo!sA SEC. (. C*R1S AN1 PDRASES 1E47NE1. @Cords and ter"s used in this Act shall be construed as follo!sA ### ### ###

0AIE or 0AI7N: includes pursuing, shooting, .illing, capturing, trapping, snaring, and netting fish and other a'uatic ani"als, and all lesser acts, such as disturbin$, !ounding, stupef ing= or placing, setting, dra!ing, or using an net or other device co""onl used to ta.e or collect fish and other a'uatic ani"als, %hether the# result in ta&in$ or not, and includes ever atte"pt to ta.e and ever act of assistance to ever other person in ta.ing or atte"pting to ta.e or collect fish and other a'uatic ani"alsA PR*>71E1, 0hat !henever ta.ing is allo!ed b la!, reference is had to ta.ing b la!ful "eans and in la!ful "anner. ### ### ###

SEC. +3. PR*0EC07*N *4 4RF *R 47SD E::S. @ E#cept for scientific or educational purpose or for propagation, it shall be unla%ful to ta.e or catch fr or fish eggs and the s"all fish, not "ore than three )3, centi"eters long, .no!n as siliniasi, in the territorial !aters of the Philippines. To%ards this end, the Secretar# of A$riculture and "ommerce shall be authorized to pro ide b# re$ulations such restrictions as ma# be deemed necessar# to be imposed on TH' (S' O) A*+ ),SH,*G *'T O- ),SH,*G !'.,"' )O- TH' P-OT'"T,O* O) )-+ O- ),SH 'GGS/ Pro ided, ho%e er , 0hat the Secretar of Agriculture and Co""erce shall per"it the ta.ing of oung of certain species of fish .no!n as hipon under such restrictions as "a be dee"ed necessar . SEC. 8%. 47SD RE4B:EES AN1 SANC0BAR7ES. @ Bpon the reco""endation of the officer or chief of the bureau, office or service concerned, the Secretar of Agriculture and Co""erce "a set aside and establish fisher reservation or fish refuges and sanctuaries to be ad"inistered in the "anner to be prescribed b hi". All strea"s, ponds and !aters !ithin the ga"e refuge, birds, sanctuaries, national par.s, botanical gardens, co""unal forest and co""unal pastures are hereb declared fishing refuges and sanctuaries. ,t shall be unla%ful for an# person, to ta&e, destro# or &ill in an# of the places aforementioned, or in an# manner disturb or dri e a%a# or ta&e therefrom, an# fish fr# or fish e$$s. Act No. 9&&3 further provides as follo!sA SEC. 23. *0DER >7*6A07*NS. @ An other violation of the provisions of this Act or an rules and regulations pro"ulgated thereunder shall sub/ect the offender to a fine of not "ore than t!o hundred pesos, or i"prison"ent for not "ore than si# "onths, or both, in the discretion of the Court. As "a be seen fro" the /ust 'uoted provisions, the la! declares unla!ful and fi#es the penalt for the ta.ing )e#cept for scientific or educational purposes or for propagation,, destro ing or

.illing of an fish fr or fish eggs, and the Secretar of Agriculture and Co""erce )no! the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources, is authori;ed to pro"ulgate regulations restricting the use of an fish net or fishing device )!hich includes the net used b tra!l fisher"en, for the protection of fr or fish eggs, as !ell as to set aside and establish fisher reservations or fish refuges and sanctuaries to be ad"inistered in the "anner prescribed b hi", fro" !hich no person could la!full ta.e, destro or .ill in an of the places afore"entioned, or in an "anner disturb or drive a!a or ta.e therefro" an s"all or i""ature fish, fr or fish eggs. 7t is true that said section 8% "entions certain strea"s, ponds and !aters %ithin the ga"e refuges, . . . co""unal forest, etc., !hich the la! itself declares fish refuges and sanctuaries, but this enu"eration of places does not curtail the general and unli"ited po!er of the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources in the first part of section 8%, to set aside and establish fisher reservations or fish refuges and sanctuaries, !hich naturall include seas or ba s, li.e the San Miguel Ba in Ca"arines. 4ro" the resolution passed at the Conference of Municipal Ma ors held at 0ina"bac, Ca"arines Sur, on 1ece"ber +2, +-%3 )E#h. 4,, the follo!ing "anifestation is "adeA CDEREAS, the continuous operation of said tra!ls even during the close season as specified in said E#ecutive *rder No. $& caused the !anton destruction of the "other shri"ps la ing their eggs and the "illions of eggs laid and the inevitable e#ter"ination of the shri"ps specie= in order to save the shri"ps specie fro" eventual e#ter"ination and in order to conserve the shri"ps specie for posterit = 7n the brief sub"itted b the NAM4RE6 and addressed to the President of the Philippines )E#h. $,, in support of the petition of San Miguel Ba fisher"en )allegedl (, +8% in nu"ber,, pra ing that tra!lers be banned fro" operating in San Miguel Ba , it is stated thatA 0he tra!ls ra" and destro the fish corrals. 0he heav tra!l nets dig deep into the ocean bed. 0he destro the fish foods !hich lies belo! the ocean floor. 0heir da ti"e catches net "illions of shri"ps scooped up fro" the "ud. 7n their nets the bring up the life of the seaA algea, shell fish and star fish . . . 0he absence of so"e species or the apparent decline in the catch of so"e fisher"en operating in the ba "a be due to several factors, na"el A the indiscriminate catchin$ of fr# and immature sizes of fishes, the !ide-spread use of e#plosives inside as !ell as at the "outh and approaches of the ba , and the e0tensi e operation of the tra!ls. )p.-, Report of Santos B. Rasalan, E#h. A, '0tensi e Operation of Tra%lsA @ 0he strenuous effect of the operations of the +8 T-A12S of the demersal fisheries of San 3i$uel Ba# is better appreciated !hen !e consider the fact that out of its about 2%& s'uare .ilo"eters area, onl about 3%& s'uare .ilo"eters of % fatho"s up could be tra!led. Cith their continuous operation, is greatl strained. 0his is sho!n b the fact that in vie! of the non-observance of the close season fro" Ma to *ctober, each ear, ma4orit# of their catch are immature. 7f their operation !ould continue unrestricted, the suppl !ould be greatl depleted. )p. ++,, Report of Santos B. Rasalan, E#h. A, San Miguel Ba @ can sustain 5 to 6 small tra%lers )*tter 0ra!l E#plorations in Philippine Caters, Research Report $% of the 4ish and Cildlife Service, Bnited States 1epart"ent of the 7nterior, p. - E#hibit B,. According to Anne# A of the co"plaint filed in the lo!er court in Civil Case No. $92(8 @ :.R. No. 6--+-+ )E#h. 1, p. %3 of the folder of E#hibits,, the +2 plaintiffs-appellees operate $- tra!ling boats, and their operation "ust be in a big scale considering the invest"ents plaintiffs have "ade therefore, a"ounting to P328,&&& )Record on Appeal, p. +(-+8,.

7n virtue of the afore"entioned provisions of la! and the "anifestation /ust copied, Ce are of the opinion that !ith or !ithout said E#ecutive *rders, the restriction and banning of tra!l fishing fro" all Philippine !aters co"e, under the la!, !ithin the po!ers of the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources, !ho in co"pliance !ith his duties "a even cause the cri"inal prosecution of those !ho in violation of his instructions, regulations or orders are caught fishing !ith tra!ls in the Philippine !aters. No!, if under the la! the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources has authorit to regulate or ban the fishing b tra!l !hich, it is clai"ed, obno#ious for it carries a!a fish eggs and fr 5s !hich should be preserved, can the President of the Philippines e#ercise that sa"e po!er and authorit J Section +&)+,, Article >77 of the Constitution of the Philippines prescribesA SEC. +& )+,. 0he President shall have control of all the e#ecutive depart"ents, bureaus or offices, e#ercises general supervision over all local govern"ents as "a be provided b la!, and ta.e care that the la!s be faithfull e#ecuted. Section (3 of the Revised Ad"inistrative Code reads as follo!sA SEC. (3. EEECB07>E *R1ERS AN1 EEECB07>E PR*C6AMA07*N. @ Ad"inistrative acts and co""ands of the President of the Philippines touching the organi;ation or "ode of operation of the :overn"ent or rearranging or read/usting an of the district, divisions, parts or ports of the Philippines, and all acts and co""ands $o ernin$ the $eneral performance of duties b# public emplo#ees or disposin$ of issues of $eneral concern shall be made in e0ecuti e orders. ### ### ###

Regarding depart"ent organi;ation Section 89 of the Revised Ad"inistrative Code also provides thatA All e0ecuti e functions of the $o ernment of the -epublic of the Philippines shall be directl# under the '0ecuti e !epartments sub/ect to the supervision and control of the President of the Philippines in "atters of general polic . 0he 1epart"ents are established for the proper distribution of the !or. of the E#ecutive, for the perfor"ance of the functions e#pressl assigned to the" b la!, and in order that each branch of the ad"inistration "a have a chief responsible for its direction and polic . Each 1epart"ent Secretar shall assu"e the burden of, and responsibilit for, all activities of the :overn"ent under his control and super ision. 4or ad"inistrative purposes the President of the Philippines shall be considered the 1epart"ent Dead of the E#ecutive *ffice. *ne of the e#ecutive depart"ents is that of Agriculture and Natural Resources !hich b la! is placed under the direction and control of the Secretar , !ho e#ercises its functions sub/ect to the general supervision and control of the President of the Philippines )Sec. 8%, R. A. C.,. Moreover, Ge#ecutive orders, regulations, decrees and procla"ations relative to "atters under the supervision or /urisdiction of a 1epart"ent, the pro"ulgation !hereof is e#pressl assigned b la! to the President of the Philippines, shall as a general rule, be issued upon proposition and reco""endation of the respective 1epart"entG )Sec. 8--A, R.A.C.,, and there can be no doubt that the pro"ulgation of the 'uestioned E#ecutive *rders !as upon the proposition and reco""endation of the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources and that is !h said Secretar , !ho !as and is called upon to enforce said e#ecutive *rders, !as "ade a part defendant in one of the cases at bar ):.R. No. 6--+-+,. 4or the foregoing reasons Ce do hesitate to declare that E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2&, series of +-%9, of the President, are valid and issued b authorit of la!.

777. But does the e#ercise of such authorit b the President constitute and undue delegation of the po!ers of CongressJ As alread held b this Court, the true distinction bet!een delegation of the po!er to legislate and the conferring of authorit or discretion as to the e#ecution of la! consists in that the for"er necessar involves a discretion as to !hat the la! shall be, !ile in the latter the authorit or discretion as to its e#ecution has to be e#ercised under and in pursuance of the la!. 0he first cannot be done= to the latter no valid ob/ection can be "ade )Cru; s.Foungberg, %( Phil., $39, $3-. See also Rubi, et al. s. 0he Provincial Board of Mindoro, 3- Phil., ((&,. 7n the case of (. S. s. An$ Tan$ Ho, 93 Phil. +, Ce also heldA 0DE P*CER 0* 1E6E:A0E. @ 0he 6egislature cannot delegate legislative po!er to enact an la!. 7f Act No. $2(2 is a la! unto itself, and it does nothing "ore than to authori;e the :overnor-:eneral to "a.e rules and regulations to carr it into effect, then the 6egislature created the la!. 0here is no delegation of po!er and it is valid. *n the other hand, if the act !ithin itself does not define a cri"e and is not co"plete, and so"e legislative act re"ains to be done to "a.e it a la! or a cri"e, the doing of !hich is vested in the :overnor-:eneral, the act is delegation of legislative po!er, is unconstitutional and void. 4ro" the provisions of Act No. 9&&3 of the 6egislature, as a"ended b Co""on!ealth Act No. 98+, !hich have been afore'uoted, Ce find that Congress )a, declared it unla!ful Gto ta.e or catch fr or fish eggs in the territorial !aters of the Philippines= )b, to!ards this end, it authori;ed the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources to provide b the regulations such restrictions as "a be dee"ed necessar to be i"posed on the use of an# fishin$ net or fishin$ de ice for the protection of fish fr# or fish e$$s )Sec. +3,= )c, it authori;ed the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources to set aside and establish fisher reservations or fish refuges and sanctuaries to be ad"inistered in the "anner to be prescribed b hi" and declared it unla%ful for an# person to ta&e, destro# or &ill in an# of said places, or, in an# manner disturb or dri e a%a# or ta&e therefrom, an# fish fr# or fish e$$s)See. 8%,= and )d, it penali;es the e#ecution of such acts declared unla!ful and in violation of this Act )No. 9&&3, or of an rules and regulations pro"ulgated thereunder, "a.ing the offender sub/ect to a fine of not "ore than P$&&, or i"prison"ent for not "ore than ( "onths, or both, in the discretion of the court )Sec. 23,. 4ro" the foregoing it "a be seen that in so far as the protection of fish fr or fish egg is concerned, the 4isheries Act is co"plete in itself, leaving to the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources the pro"ulgation of rules and regulations to carr into effect the legislative intent. 7t also appears fro" the e#hibits on record in these cases that fishing !ith tra!ls causes Ga !anton destruction of the "other shri"ps la ing their eggs and the "illions of eggs laid and the inevitable e#ter"ination of the shri"ps specieG )E#h. 4,, and that, Gthe tra!ls ra" and destro the fish corrals. 0he heav tra!l nets dig deep into the ocean bed. 0he destro the fish food !hich lies belo! the ocean floor. 0heir da ti"e catches net "illions of shri"ps scooped up fro" the "ud. 7n their nets the bring up the life of the seaG )E#h- $,. 7n the light of these facts it is clear to *ur "ind that for the protection of fr or fish eggs and s"all and i""ature fishes, Congress intended !ith the pro"ulgation of Act No. 9&&3, to prohibit the use of an fish net or fishing device li.e tra!l nets that could endanger and deplete our suppl of sea food, and to that end authori;ed the Secretar of Agriculture and Natural Resources to provide b regulations such restrictions as he dee"ed necessar in order to preserve the a'uatic resources of the land. Conse'uentl , !hen the President, in response to the cla"or of the people and authorities of Ca"arines Sur issued E#ecutive *rder No. 2& absolutel prohibiting fishing b "eans of tra!ls in all !aters co"prised !ithin the San Miguel Ba , he did nothing but sho! an an#ious regard for the !elfare of the inhabitants of said coastal province and dispose of issues of general concern )Sec. (3, R.A.C., !hich !ere in consonance and strict confor"it !ith the la!.

Cherefore, and on the strength of the foregoing considerations Ce render /udge"ent, as follo!sA )a, 1eclaring that the issues involved in case :.R. No. 6-22-% have beco"e "oot, as no !rit of preli"inar in/unction has been issued b this Court the respondent ?udge of the Court of 4irst 7nstance of Manila Branch E7>, fro" enforcing his order of March 3, +-%%= and )b, Reversing the decision appealed fro" in case :. R. No. 6--+-+= dissolving the !rit of in/unction pra ed for in the lo!er court b plaintiffs, if an has been actuall issued b the court a 7uo= and declaring E#ecutive *rders Nos. $$, (( and 2&, series of +-%9, valid for having been issued b authorit of the Constitution, the Revised Ad"inistrative Code and the 4isheries Act. Cithout pronounce"ent as to costs. 7t is so ordered. Ben$zon, Padilla, 3ontema#or, Bautista An$elo, 2abrador, "oncepcion, -e#es, J.B.2. and 'ndencia, JJ., concur.

(oo*no*+s 0ra!l is a fishing net "ade in the for" of a bag !ith the "outh .ept open b a device the !hole affair being to!ed, dragged, trailed or tra!led on the botto" of the sea to capture de"ersal, ground or botto" species )E#ecutive *rder No. $$, series of +-%9,.
+ H

-( Phil., ++9.

Chether said orders !ere enforced is not clear fro" the record, for it does not appear certain therefro" that plaintiffs furnished the bond re'uired fro" the" and that the !rit of in/unction !as actuall issued b the Court.
$