POLICE GENERAL LEVY MACASIANO (Ret.), in his capacity as the consultant of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Task Force on Demolition and/or in his personal capacity as taxpayer, vs. NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY, HOUSING AND LAND USE REGULATORY BOARD and NATIONAL MAPPING RESOURCES…
- G.R. Number: G.R. No. 107921
- Promulgated: 1993-07-01
- Ponente: Davide, Jr., J.
Doctrine
Courts should avoid deciding constitutional questions where there is no clear and unmistakable showing to the contrary; statutes enjoy a presumption of constitutionality.
A declaratory relief action requires a justiciable controversy between adverse parties and a legal interest by the plaintiff; mere assertion of taxpayer status is discretionary and not automatically sufficient.
Facts
Petitioner is Police General Levy Macasiano (Ret.), acting as DPWH consultant and in his personal capacity as taxpayer, who sought to declare Sections 28 and 44 of R.A. No. 7279 unconstitutional.
Petitioner invoked locus standi as consultant under a Contract of Consultancy on removal of obstructions and as a taxpayer.
The Court considered and denied a motion to intervene and proceeded without comments from intervenors, finding issues clear and simple.
The Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC) for NHA adopted the opinion of the officer-in-charge without independent reasoning; the Court criticized this approach.
The Court dismissed the petition for lack of merit and imposed costs against petitioner.
Issues
Whether Sections 28 and 44 of R.A. No. 7279 are unconstitutional.
Whether petitioner has standing to seek declaratory relief as consultant and/or taxpayer.
Ruling
The Court rejected the constitutional challenge for failure to show an indispensable necessity to resolve the question and invoked the presumption of constitutionality; petition on the merits denied.
The petition for declaratory relief was found not viable for lack of the requisite justiciable controversy and legal interest; taxpayer standing does not compel the Court to hear every such suit.
The motion to intervene was denied and the petition dismissed with costs against petitioner.