Section 8 of P.D. No. 910, entitled “Creating an Energy Development Board, defining its powers and functions, providing funds therefor and for other purposes,” provides that: “All fees, revenues and receipts of the Board from any and all sources x x x shall form part of a Special Fund to be used to finance energy resource development and exploitation programs and projects of the government and for such other purposes as may be hereafter directed by the President.”
The Malampaya NGO contends that the provision constitutes an undue delegation of legislative power since the phrase “and for such other purposes as may be hereafter directed by the President” gives the President unbridled discretion to determine the purpose for which the funds will be used. On the other hand, the government urges the application of ejusdem generis.
[a] Explain the “completeness test” and “sufficient standard test.” (2.5%)
[b] Does the assailed portion of section 8 of PD 910 hurdle the two (2) tests? (2.5%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
The completeness test requires a law to set forth the policy to be executed, while the sufficient standard test requires guidelines mapping the delegate's authority. The assailed portion of Section 8, P.D. No. 910 fails both tests.
Under Belgica v. Ochoa, valid delegation requires a complete law and a sufficient standard to prevent the delegate from running riot. Granting unbridled discretion over the purpose of fund disbursements constitutes undue delegation of legislative power.
Here, allowing Malampaya funds to be used "for such other purposes as may be hereafter directed by the President" gives unfettered spending discretion. Failing to define policy or boundaries for those purposes, the provision violates both tests.
Therefore, Section 8 of P.D. No. 910 fails the completeness and sufficient standard tests due to undue delegation.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
What constitutional principle prohibits Congress from re-delegating its exclusive authority to enact laws?
The principle delegata potestas non potest delegari dictates that delegated legislative power cannot be re-delegated.
Which test requires a statute to set forth complete terms leaving nothing to the delegate except enforcement?
The completeness test requires that a law set forth the complete policy to be executed by the delegate.
What does the sufficient standard test require for a valid delegation of statutory authority?
The sufficient standard test mandates adequate statutory guidelines to map and restrict the delegate's authority.
Why did the Supreme Court invalidate the assailed phrase in Section 8 of P.D. No. 910 in Belgica v. Ochoa?
The Supreme Court held that granting unbridled spending discretion without statutory standards constitutes undue delegation.
What legal effect results when a statutory provision fails both the completeness and sufficient standard tests?
A statutory provision that fails both tests is unconstitutional for undue delegation of legislative power.
Learn more about these topics
1. Non-Delegation Principle
Under Article VI, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution, legislative power is vested in the Congress of the Philippines. The principle of non-delegation of legislative powers dictates that what has been delegated cannot be delegated further. Congress cannot abdicate its constitutional responsibility by delegating pure legislative functions, such as defining policy or determining what the law shall be, to executive officials or administrative agencies. Any statutory provision that delegates legislative authority without clear constitutional authorization or proper legislative boundaries is unconstitutional, null, and void.
2. Legislative Delegation Tests
To determine whether a statute validly delegates authority, jurisprudence applies two fundamental tests: the completeness test and the sufficient standard test. Under the completeness test, a statute must be complete in all its terms and provisions when it leaves the legislature, leaving nothing for the delegate to do except enforce it. Under the sufficient standard test, the law must lay down adequate guidelines or limitations mapping out the boundaries of the delegate's authority to prevent executive overreach, arbitrary discretion, or running riot.
3. Malampaya Fund Validity
In Belgica v. Ochoa, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional the phrase 'and for such other purposes as may be hereafter directed by the President' in Section 8 of Presidential Decree No. 910. The Court held that this provision gave the President unbridled discretion to spend the Malampaya Fund for any purpose whatsoever. Because the statute failed to specify statutory limitations or define policy boundaries for those additional purposes, it violated both the completeness test and sufficient standard test, constituting an undue delegation of legislative power.