Case Digest: People vs Nazario

Facts: Eusebio Nazario was charged in violation of refusal and failure to pay his municipal taxes amounting to Php 362.62 because of his fishpond operation provided
under Ordinance 4, Series of 1955, as amended. He is a resident of Sta. Mesa Manila and just leases a fishpond located at Pagbilao, Quezon with the Philippine
Fisheries Commission. The years in question of failure to pay was for 1964, 1965, and 1966. Nazario did not pay because he was not sure if he was covered under the
ordinance. He was found guilty thus this petition.

Issues:
1. Whether or not Ordinance 4, Series of 1955, as amended null and void for being ambiguous and uncertain
2. Whether or not the ordinance was unconstitutional for being ex post facto

Held:
1. No, the coverage of the ordinance covers him as the actual operator of the fishpond thus he comes with the term Manager. He was the one who spent money in
developing and maintaining it, so despite only leasing it from the national government, the latter does not get any profit as it goes only to Nazario. The dates of
payment are also clearly stated Beginning and taking effect from 1964 if the fishpond started operating in 1964.
2. No, it is not ex post facto. Ordinance 4 was enacted in 1955 so it cant be that the amendment under Ordinance 12 is being made to apply retroactively. Also, the
act of non-payment has been made punishable since 1955 so it means Ordinance 12 is not imposing a retroactive penalty

The appeal is DISMISSED with cost against the appellant.

ESTRADA v SANDIGANBAYANG.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001
Facts:
Petitioner Joseph Estrada prosecuted An Act Defining and Penalizing the Crime of Plunder, wishes to impress upon the Court that the assailed law i s so
defectively fashioned that i t crosses that thin but distinct line which divides the valid from the constitutionally infirm. His contentions are
mainly based on the effects of the said law that i t suffers from the vice of vagueness; it dispenses with the "reasonable doubt" standard in criminal
prosecutions; and it abolishes the element of mens rea in crimes already punishable under The Revised Penal Code saying that it violates the fundamental rights of the accused.
The f oc al poi nt of t he c as e i s t he al l eged vaguenes s of t he l aw i n t he t er ms i t us es . Particularly, this terms are: combination, series and
unwarranted. Because of this, the petitioner uses the facial challenge on the validity of the mentioned law.
Issue: Whether or not the petitioner possesses the locus standi to attack the validity of the law using the facial challenge.
Ruling: On how the law uses the terms combination and series does not constitute vagueness. The petitioners contention that it would not give a fair
warning and sufficient notice of what the lawseeks to penalize cannot be plausibly argued.
Voidforvagueness doctrine is manifestlymisplaced under the peti tioners reliance since ordinary intelligence can understand whatconduct is
prohibited by the statute. It can only be invoked against that specie of legislation that is utterly vague on its face, wherein clarification by a saving clause or
construction cannot be invoked. Said doctrine may not invoked in this case since the statute i s clear and free from ambiguity. Vagueness doctrine
merely requires a reasonable degree of certainty for the statute to be upheld, not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude. On the other hand, over breadth
doctrine decrees that governmental purpose may not be
ac hi eved by means whi c h s weep unnec es s a r i l y br oa dl y a nd t her eby i nvade t he a r ea of protected freedoms. Doctrine of strict scrutiny holds
that a facial challenge is allowed to be made to vague statute and to one which i s overbroad because of possible chilling effect upon protected speech.
Furthermore, in the area of criminal law, the law cannot take chances as in the area of free speech. A facial challenge to legislative acts is the most difficult
challenge to mount successfully since the challenger must establish that no set of circumstances exists. Doctrines mentioned are analytical tools developed for facial
challenge of a statute in free speech cases. With respect to such statue, the established rule is that one to who application of a statute is constitutional will not be heard to
attack the statute on the ground that impliedly it might also be taken as applying to other persons or other situations in which its application
might be unconstitutional. On its face invalidation of statues results i n striking them down entirely on the ground that they might be applied to parties
not before the Court whose activities are constitutionally protected. It is evident that the purported ambiguity of the Plunder Law is more imagined than real. The crime
of plunder as a malum i n se i s deemed to have been resolve i n the Congress decision to include it among the heinous crime punishable by reclusion perpetua to death.
Supreme Court holds the plunder law constitutional and petition is dismissed for lacking merit.


Statute - written law passed by a legislative body.
"violation of the hate crimes statute"
synonyms: law, regulation, enactment, act, bill, decree, edict, rule, ruling, resolution,dictum, command, order, directive, order-in-
council, pronouncement,proclamation, dictate, fiat, bylaw, ordinance
"she built her case around an all but forgotten statute"
o a rule of an organization or institution.
"the appointment will be subject to the statutes of the university"
o archaic
(in biblical use) a law or decree made by a sovereign, or by God.