What are the tests of a valid ordinance? What is the principle of Noscitur a Sociis?

    TOPICS:

1. What is the principle of noscitur a sociis? 
2. Which should prevail in case of conflict between a statute and an ordinance?
3. Tests of a valid ordinance

Magtajas vs. Pryce

FACTS:

In 1992, the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) leased a portion of a building belonging to the Petitioner for the opening of its casino in Cagayan de Oro City. 

However, the Sangguniang Panlungsod of Cagayan de Oro City subsequently issued Ordinance No. 3353 and Ordinance No. 3375-93 prohibiting the issuance of business permits and cancelling existing permits for the operation of a casino.

The Petitioner assailed the ordinances before the CA, which declared the ordinances invalid. 

ISSUE:

Whether or not the assailed ordinances are valid. 

RULING: 

No, the assailed ordinances are not valid. 

A valid ordinance must not contravene the Constitution or any statute. 

In this case, the prohibition on the operation of casino in Cagayan de Oro City under Ordinance No. 3353 and Ordinance No. 3375-93 contravenes P.D. 1869, a statute granting the PAGCOR to operate casinos. 

Therefore, the ordinances are not valid.   

STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION DISCUSSION

1.  What are the tests of a valid ordinance?

To be valid, an ordinance must conform to the following substantive requirements:

1) It must not contravene the constitution or any statute.

2) It must not be unfair or oppressive.

3) It must not be partial or discriminatory.

4) It must not prohibit but may regulate trade.

5) It must be general and consistent with public policy.

6) It must not be unreasonable.

2. What is the rationale of the requirement that ordinances should not contravene a statute? 

Municipal governments are only agents of the national government. Local councils exercise only delegated legislative powers conferred on them by Congress as the national lawmaking body.

3. Isn’t it that Section 458 of the LGC grants the power to the Sangguniang Panlungsod to enact ordinances preventing “gambling and other prohibited games of chance”? 

Yes, however, since the word "gambling" is associated with "and other prohibited games of chance, " the word should be read as referring to only illegal gambling which, like the other prohibited games of chance, must be prevented or suppressed. 

Example of those prohibited are jueteng and monte but those not prohibited are lotteries, cockfighting, and horse-racing. 

4. What is the basis in interpreting the word “gambling”? 

The principle of noscitur a sociis. 

5. What is the principle of noscitur a sociis?  

Under the rule of noscitur a sociis, a word or phrase should be interpreted in relation to, or given the same meaning of, words with which it is associated.

6. Did the SC rule on the morality of gambling?

No. The morality of gambling is not a justiciable issue. Gambling is not illegal per se. While it is generally considered inimical to the interests of the people, there is nothing in the Constitution categorically proscribing or penalizing gambling or, for that matter, even mentioning it at all.

It is left to Congress to deal with the activity as it sees fit. In the exercise of its own discretion, the legislature may prohibit gambling altogether or allow it without limitation or it may prohibit some forms of gambling and allow others for whatever reasons it may consider sufficient.

Full text here.