JD102

Statutory Construction
WHAT IS STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION?
 The act or process of interpreting a statute.
 The principles developed by courts for interpreting statutes.
As we know in the three branches of government, the executive, the legislative, and
judiciary. It is the judiciary that has the power to interpret the laws. Because it is the
legislative which enacts. The executive that implements. In case of conflict, it is the
judiciary that settles or construes the law in case of doubt or there is a need to
interpret.
 Statutory Construction comes in if there is a doubt/confusion with the
meaning of the law.
 Construction comes from the word “construe”, it is the art/process of
discovering or expounding the meaning and intention of authors of the
law where that intention is rendered doubtful by reason of ambiguity in
its language or of the fact that the given case is not explicitly provided
for in the law.
WHAT ARE THE STATUTES?
 A law passed by a legislative body.
 A legislation enacted by any lawmaking body, including legislatures,
administrative boards, and municipal courts.
Here are examples of Statutes that could be Subject to Statutory Construction:
 The Constitution;
 The republic acts passed by congress;
 The ordinances passed by the local legislative body; and
 The orders or rules issued by government departments.
WHEN IS THE INTERPRETATION DONE?
 Apply when the law is clear; if unclear?
 Interpret, when the law itself is enough to help you find the meaning and
effect, if not?
 Construe (apply the rules of construction)
It is the most basic principle of statutory construction. First, you interpret if the
law itself is enough to help you find the meaning and effect. So, it means there
is only the need for intrinsic aids, statements, provisions, or the lines or words,
phrases found in the law itself. But what if it is not enough? And there is a need
for extrinsic aids in order to help in interpreting the law? Then you have to
apply the rules of construction.
“One of the primary and basic rules in statutory construction is that. Where the
words of a statute are clear, plain, and free from ambiguity, it must be given its
literal meaning and applied without attempted interpretation.” (Supreme Court
Statement on Chavez vs. Judicial and Bar Council, G.R. No. 202242, July 17, 2012)
-
(https://lawstudentdigest.blogspot.com/2019/06/statutory-construction.html)
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JUDICIAL LEGISLATION AND STATUTORY
CONSTRUCTION:
Where legislature attempts to do several things one which is invalid, it may be
discarded if the remainder of the act is workable and in no way depends upon the
invalid portion, but if that portion is an integral part of the act, and its excision
changes the manifest intent of the act by broadening its scope to include
subject matter or territory which was not included therein as enacted, such excision
is “judicial legislation” and not “statutory construction”.
CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION, DISTINGUISHED
Construction is the drawing of conclusions with respect to subjects that are
beyond the direct expression of the text, while interpretation is the process of
discovering the true meaning of the language used.
Interpretation is limited to exploring the written text. Construction on the other hand is
the drawing of conclusions, respecting subjects that lie beyond the direct
expressions of the text.
SITUS OF CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION
(Situs: the place to which, for purposes of legal jurisdiction or taxation, a property
belongs)
In our system of government:
• Legislative power is vested in the Congress of the Philippines – the Senate and the
House of the Representatives
• Executive power is vested in the President of the Republic of the Philippines (Art.
VII, Sec.1, Phil. Const.)
• Judicial power is vested in one Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be
established by law. (Art VIII, Sec. 1, Phil. Const.)
Legislative – makes the law
Executive - executes the law
Judicial – interprets the law
Simply stated, the situs of construction and interpretation of written laws
belong to the judicial department.
It is the duty of the Courts of Justice to settle actual controversies involving rights
which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not
there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government.
Supreme Court is the one and only Constitutional Court and all other lower
courts are statutory courts, and such lower courts have the power to construe
and interpret written laws.
DUTY OF THE COURTS TO CONSTRUE AND INTERPRET THE LAW;
REQUISITES:
1. There must be an actual case or controversy,
2. There is ambiguity in the law involved in the controversy.
 Ambiguity exists if reasonable persons can find different meanings in a
statute, document, etc.
 A statute is ambiguous if it is admissible of two or more possible meanings.
 If the law is clear and unequivocal, the Court has no other alternative but to
apply the law and not to interpret.
 Construction and interpretation of law come only after it has been
demonstrated that application is impossible or inadequate without them.
DIFFERENT KINDS OF CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION
Hermeneutics – the science or art of construction and interpretation.
Legal hermeneutics – is the systematic body of rules which are recognized as
applicable to the construction and interpretation of legal writings.
Dr. Lieber in his work on Hermeneutics gives the following classification of the
different kinds of interpretation:
1. Close interpretation – adopted if just reasons connected with the character and
formation of the text induce as to take the words in the narrowest meaning. This
is generally known as “literal” interpretation.
2. Extensive interpretation – also called as liberal interpretation, it adopts a more
comprehensive signification of the words.
3. Extravagant interpretation – substitutes a meaning evidently beyond the
true one. It is therefore not genuine interpretation.
4. Free or unrestricted interpretation – proceeds simply on the general principles
of interpretation in good faith, not bound by any specific or superior principle.
5. Limited or restricted interpretation - influenced by other principles than the
strictly hermeneutic ones.
6. Predestined interpretation – takes place when the interpreter, laboring under a
strong bias of mind, makes the text subservient to his preconceived views and
desires.
REASON WHY AN ORDINANCE SHOULD NOT CONTRAVENE A STATUTE
 Local councils exercise only delegated legislative powers conferred on them
by Congress as the national law-making body.
 The delegate cannot be superior to the principal.
BASIC GUIDELINES IN THE CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF LAWS
LEGISLATIVE INTENT
The object of all interpretation and construction of statutes is to ascertain the
meaning and intention of the legislature, to the end that the same may be
enforced.
Legislative intent is determined principally from the language of the statute.
VERBA LEGIS
 - If the language of the statute is plain and free from ambiguity, and express
a single, definite, and sensible meaning, that meaning is conclusively
presumed to be the meaning which the legislature intended to convey.
STATUTES AS A WHOLE
- A cardinal rule in statutory construction is that legislative intent must be
ascertained from a consideration of the statute as a whole and not
merely of a particular provision. A word or phrase might easily convey a
meaning which is different from the one actually intended.
- A statute should be construed as a whole because it is not to be presumed
that the legislature has used any useless words, and because it is
dangerous practice to base the construction upon only a part of it, since
one portion may be qualified by other portions.
SPIRIT AND PURPOSE OF THE LAW
- When the interpretation of a statute according to the exact and literal import
of its words would lead to absurd or mischievous consequences or would
thwart or contravene the manifest purpose of the legislature in its enactment,
it should be construed according to its spirit and reason, disregarding,
or modifying, so far as may be necessary, the strict letter of the law.
CASUS OMISSUS
- When a statute makes specific provisions in regard to several
enumerated cases or objects, but omits to make any provision for a case
or object which is analogous to those enumerated, or which stands upon
the same reason, and is therefore within the general scope of the statute, and
it appears that such case or object was omitted by inadvertence or
because it was overlooked or unforeseen, it is called a “casus omissus”.
Such omissions or defects cannot be supplied by the courts.
- The rule of “casus omissus pro omisso habendus est” can operate and
apply only if and when the omission has been clearly established.
STARE DECISIS
- It is the doctrine that, when court has once laid down a principle, and apply it
to all future cases, where facts are substantially the same, regardless of
whether the parties and properties are the same.
- “Stare decisis et non quieta movere” (Follow past precedents and do not
disturb what has been settled)
- Matters already decided on the merits cannot be relitigated again and
again.
CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF WORDS AND PHRASES
- When the law does not distinguish, courts should not distinguish. The
rule, founded on logic, is a corollary of the principle that general words and
phrases of a statute should ordinarily be accorded their natural and general
significance.
- The courts should administer the law not as they think it ought to be but as
they find it and without regard to consequences.
- If the law makes no distinction, neither should the Court.
EXCEPTIONS IN THE STATUTE
 - When the law does not make any exception, courts may not except
something unless compelling reasons exist to justify it.
GENERAL AND SPECIAL TERMS
- General terms in a statute are to receive a general construction, unless
retrained by the context or by plain inferences from the scope and
purpose of the act.
- Special terms in a statute may sometimes be expanded to a general
signification by the consideration that the reason of the law is general.
GENERAL TERMS FOLLOWING SPECIAL TERMS (EJUSDEM GENERIS)
- It is a general rule of statutory construction that where general words follow
an enumeration of persons or things, by words of a particular and specific
meaning, such general words are not to be construed in their widest
extent but are to be held as applying only to persons or things of the
same general kind or class as those specifically mentioned. But this rule
must be discarded where the legislative intention is plain to the contrary.
- This rule is commonly called the “ejusdem generis” rule because it teaches
us that broad and comprehensive expressions in an act, such as “and
all others”, or “any others”, are usually to be restricted to persons or
things “of the same kind” or class with those specially named in the
preceding words.
- Rule of ejusdem generis merely a tool of statutory construction resorted to
when legislative intent is uncertain.
EXPRESS MENTION AND IMPLIED EXCLUSION
- “Expressio unius est exclusio alterius” (It is a general rule of statutory
construction that the express mention of one person, thing, or
consequence is tantamount to an express exclusion of all others)
Except:
 When there is manifest of injustice
 When there is no reason for exception
ASSOCIATED WORDS (NOSCITUR SOCIIS)
 Where a particular word is equally susceptible of various meanings, its
correct construction may be made specific by considering the company
of terms in which it is found or with which it is associated.
USE OF NEGATIVE WORDS
 Negative words and phrases regarded as mandatory while those affirmatives
are mere directory.
 The word “shall” emphasize mandatory character and means
imperative, operating to impose a duty which may be enforced.
THE USE OF THE WORD “MAY” AND “SHALL” IN THE STATUTE
 Use of the word “may” in the statute generally connotes a permissible
thing and operates to confer discretion while the word “shall” is imperative,
operating to impose a duty which may be enforced. The term “shall”
may be either as mandatory or directory depending upon a consideration
 of the entire provision in which it is found, its object and consequences
that would follow from construing it one way or the other.
USE OF THE WORD “MUST”
 The word “must” in a statute like “shall” is not always imperative and
may be consistent with an exercise discretion.
THE USE OF THE TERM “AND” AND THE WORD “OR”
 “And” means conjunction connecting words or phrases expressing the
idea that the latter is to be added or taken along with the first.
 “Or” is a disjunctive particle used to express as alternative or to give a
choice of one among two or more things. It is also used to clarify what
has already been said, and in such cases, means “in other words,” “to wit,”
or “that is to say.”
COMPUTATION OF TIME
 When the laws speak of years, months, days, or nights, it shall be understood
that years are of 365 days each; months of 30 days; days of 24 hours;
and nights from sunset to sunrise.
 If months are designated by their name, they shall be computed by the
number of days which they respectively have.
 In computing a period, the first day shall be excluded, and the last day
included (Art. 13, New Civil Code).
 A “week” means a period of seven consecutive days without regard to the day
of the week on which it begins.
FUNCTION OF THE PROVISO
 Proviso is a clause or part of a clause in the statute, the office of which is
either to except something from the enacting clause, or to qualify or restrain
its generality, or to exclude some possible ground of misinterpretation of its
extent.
 “Provided” is the word used in introducing a proviso.
PRESUMPTIONS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION
PRESUMPTIONS
 In construing a doubtful or ambiguous statute, the Courts will presume that it
was the intention of the legislature to enact a valid, sensible, and just law, and
one which should change the prior law no further than may be necessary to
effectuate the specific purpose of the act in question.
PRESUMPTION AGAINST UNCONSTITUTIONALITY
 Laws are presumed constitutional. To justify nullification of law, there must be
a clear and unequivocal breach of the constitution.
 The theory is that, as the joint act of the legislative and executive authorities,
a law is supposed to have been carefully studied and determined to be
constitutional before it was finally enacted.
 All laws are presumed valid and constitutional until or unless otherwise
ruled by the Court.
PRESUMPTION AGAINST INJUSTICE
 The law should never be interpreted in such a way as to cause injustice
as this is never within the legislative intent. We interpret and apply the law
in consonance with justice. Judges do not and must not unfeelingly apply
the law as it is worded, yielding like robots to the literal command without
regard to its cause and consequence.
PRESUMPTION AGAINST IMPLIED REPEALS
 The two laws must be absolutely incompatible, and clear finding thereof must
surface, before the inference of implied repeal may be drawn.
 In the absence of an express repeal, a subsequent law cannot be
construed as repealing a prior law unless an irreconcilable
inconsistency and repugnancy exists in terms of the new and old laws.
PRESUMPTION AGAINST INEFFECTIVENESS
 In the interpretation of a statute, the Court should start with the
assumption that the legislature intended to enact an effective statute.
PRESUMPTION AGAINST ABSURDITY
 Statutes must receive a sensible construction such as will give effect to
the legislative intention so as to avoid an unjust and absurd conclusion.
 Presumption against undesirable consequences were never intended by a
legislative measure.
PRESUMPTION AGAINST VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
 Philippines as democratic and republican state adopts the generally accepted
principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the
policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all
nations. (Art. II, Sec. 2, Phil. Constitution).
INTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION
INTRINSIC AIDS
 The term “intrinsic” means internal or within. Intrinsic aids, therefore, are
those aids within the statute.
 Intrinsic aids are resorted to only if there is ambiguity. In resorting to
intrinsic aids, one must go back to the parts of the statute: the title, the
preamble, context or body, chapter and section headings, punctuation,
and interpretation.
 If the language of the statute is clear and unequivocal, there is no need to
resort to intrinsic aids.
In resorting to intrinsic aids, one must go back to the parts of the statute:
 The title of the law is a valuable intrinsic aid in determining legislative intent.
 Text of the statute as intrinsic aid in determining legislative intent.
 Preamble as intrinsic aid (The intent of the law as culled from its preamble
and from the situation, circumstances, and conditions it sought to remedy,
must be enforced)
EXTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION
EXTRINSIC AIDS
 These are existing aids from outside sources, meaning outside of the
four corners of the statute. If there is any doubt as to the meaning of the
statute, the interpreter must first find that out within the statute.
 Extrinsic aids therefore are resorted to after exhausting all the available
intrinsic aids and still there remain some ambiguity in the statute.
 Extrinsic aids resorted to by the courts are history of the enactment of the
statute; opinions and rulings of officials of the government called upon to
execute or implement administrative laws; contemporaneous construction
by executive officers; actual proceedings of the legislative body;
individual statements by members of congress; and the author of the
law.
STRICT AND LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
 If a statute should be strictly construed, nothing should be included within
the scope that does not come clearly within the meaning of the language
used.
 But the rule of strict construction is not applicable where the meaning of
the statute is certain and unambiguous, for under these circumstances,
there is no need for construction.
 On the other hand, there are many statutes which will be liberally construed.
The meaning of the statute may be extended to matters which come within
the spirit or reason of the law or within the evils which the law seeks to
suppress or correct.
 Liberal interpretation or construction of the law or rules, however, applies
only in proper cases and under justifiable causes and circumstances.
While it is true that litigation is not a game of technicalities, it is equally true
that every case must be prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed
procedure to insure an orderly and speedy administration of justice.
PENAL STATUTES
 Penal laws are to be construed strictly against the state and in favor of
the accused. Hence, in the interpretation of a penal statute, the tendency is
to subject it to careful scrutiny and to construe it with such strictness as to
safeguard the right of the accused.
 If the statute is ambiguous and admits of two reasonable but contradictory
constructions, that which operates in favor of a party accused under its
provisions is to be preferred.
TAX LAWS
 Taxation is a destructive power which interferes with the personal and
property rights of the people and takes from them a portion of their property
for the support of the government.
 Accordingly, in case of doubt, tax statutes must be construed strictly
against the government and liberally in favor of the taxpayer, for taxes,
being burdens, are not to be presumed beyond what the applicable statute
expressly and clearly declares.
  Any claim for exemption from a tax statute is strictly construed against
the taxpayer and liberally in favor of the state.

NATURALIZATION LAW
 Naturalization laws should be rigidly enforced and strictly construed in favor
of the government and against the applicant.
INSURANCE LAW
 Contracts of Insurance are to be construed liberally in favor of the insured
and strictly against the insurer. Thus, ambiguity in the words of an
insurance contract should be interpreted in favor of its beneficiary.
LABOR AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONS
 Doubts in the interpretation of Workmen’s Compensation and Labor Code
should be resolved in favor of the worker. It should be liberally construed
to attain their laudable objective, i.e., to give relief to the workman
and/or his dependents in the event that the former should die or sustain in
an injury.
 The sympathy of the law on social security is towards its beneficiaries
and the law by its own terms, requires a construction of utmost liberality in
their favor.
RETIREMENT LAWS
 Retirement laws are liberally interpreted in favor of the retiree because the
intention is to provide for the retiree’s sustenance and comfort when he
is no longer capable of earning his livelihood.
ELECTION RULES
 Statute providing for election contests are to be liberally construed to the
end that the will of the people in the choice of public officer may not be
defeated by mere technical objections.
RULES OF COURT
 Rule of court shall be liberally construed in order to promote their
objective of securing a just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of
every action and proceeding.
--
PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE STATUTES
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Prospective statute - is a statute which operates upon acts and transactions which
have not occurred when the statute takes effect, that is, which regulates the future.
Retrospective or retroactive law - is one which takes away or impairs vested rights
acquired under existing laws, or creates new obligations and imposes new duties, or
attaches new disabilities in respect of transaction already past.
  A sound canon of statutory construction is that statutes operate
prospectively only and never retrospectively unless the legislative intent
to the contrary is made manifest either by the express terms of the statute
or by necessary implication.
 The Civil Code of the Philippines follows the above rule thus: Laws shall
have no retroactive effect unless the contrary is provided.
 Retroactive legislation is looked upon with disfavor, as a general rule and
properly so because of its tendency to be unjust and oppressive.
PENAL STATUTES
 Penal statutes as a rule are applied prospectively. Felonies and
misdemeanors are punished under the laws in force at the time of their
commission. (Art. 366, RPC). However, as an exception, it can be given
retroactive effect if it is favorable to the accused who is not a habitual
criminal. (Art. 22, RPC).
PROCEDURAL LAWS ARE RETROSPECTIVE
 Statutes regulating the procedure of the Court will be construed as
applicable to actions pending and undermined at the time of their
passage. However, Rules of Procedure should not be given retroactive
effect if it would result in great injustice and impair substantive right.
 Procedural provisions of the Local Government Code are retrospective.
CURATIVE STATUTES
 They are those which undertake to cure errors and irregularities and
administrative proceedings, and which are designed to give effect to contracts
and other transactions between private parties which otherwise would fail of
producing their intended consequences by reason of some statutory disability
or failure to comply with some technical requirement. They are therefore
retroactive in their character.
CONFLICTING STATUTES
EFFECT SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ENTIRE STATUTE
 It may happen that in a statute, conflicting clauses and provisions may
arise. If such situation may occur, the statute must be construed as a
whole.
STATUTES IN PARI MATERIA
 Statutes that relate to the same subject matter, or to the same class of
persons or things, or have the same purpose or object.
 Statutes in pari materia are to be construed together; each legislative
act is to be interpreted with reference to other acts relating to the same
matter or subject.
GENERAL AND SPECIAL STATUTES
 Sometimes we find statutes treating a subject in general terms and another
treating a part of the same subject in particularly detailed manner. If both
statutes are irreconcilable, the general statute must give way to the
 special or particular provisions as an exception to the general
provisions.
STATUTE AND ORDINANCE
 If there is conflict in an ordinance and a statute, the ordinance must give
way.
 It is a well-settled rule that a substantive law cannot be amended by a
procedural law.
 A general law cannot repeal a special law. / A general law is one which
embraces a class of subjects or places and does not omit any subject or
place naturally belonging to such class, while a special law is one which
relates to particular persons or things of a class. (Statutory Construction,
Crawford, p. 2645.)
 In case of conflict between a general provision of a special law and a
particular provision of a general law, the latter will prevail.
 When there is irreconcilable repugnancy between a proviso and the body of a
statute, the former prevails as latest expression of legislative intent.
 The enactment of a later legislation which is general law cannot be construed
to have repealed a special law.
 A statute is superior to an administrative circular, thus the latter cannot repeal
or amend it.
 Where the instrument is susceptible of two interpretations, one which will
make it invalid and illegal and another which will make it valid and legal, the
latter interpretation should be adopted.
 In case of conflict between an administrative order and the provisions of the
Constitutions, the latter prevails.
CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION
 A constitution is a system of fundamental law for the governance and
administration of a nation. It is supreme, imperious, absolute, and
unalterable except by the authority from which it emanates.
 Under the doctrine of constitutional supremacy, if a law or contract violates
any norm of the constitution, that law or contract whether promulgated by
the legislative, or by the executive branch or entered into by private persons
for private purposes is null and void and without any force or effect.
ALL PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION ARE SELF-EXECUTING, EXCEPT:
 Some constitutions are merely declarations of policies. Their provisions
command the legislature to enact laws and carry out the purposes of the
framers who merely establish an outline of government providing for the
different departments of the governmental machinery and securing certain
fundamental and inalienable rights of citizens. Thus, a constitutional
provision is self-executing if the nature and extent of the right conferred,
and the liability imposed are fixed by the constitution itself.
 Unless it is expressly provided that a legislative act is necessary to
enforce a constitutional mandate, the presumption now is that all
provisions of the constitution are self-executing.
 In case of doubt, the Constitution should be considered self-executing rather
than non-self-executing, unless the contrary is clearly intended.
PROHIBITORY PROVISIONS GIVEN LITERAL AND STRICT INTERPRETATION
Guidelines in construction and interpretation of the constitution are stressed:
 The Court in construing a constitution should bear in mind the object sought to
be accomplished by its adoption, and the evils, if any, sought to be prevented
or remedied.
 One provision of the Constitution is to be separated from all the others, to be
considered alone, but that all provisions bearing upon a particular subject are
to be brought into view and to be interpreted as to effectuate the great
purposes of the instrument.
 The proper interpretation of the constitution depends more on how it was
understood by the people adopting it than the framer’s understanding thereof.
RECENT CASES ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
 The term “may” is indicative of a mere possibility, an opportunity, or an option.
 An implied repeal is predicated on a substantial conflict between the new and
prior laws.
 The abrogation or repeal of a law cannot be assumed; the intention to revoke
must be clear and manifest.
 When the law speaks in clear and categorical language, there is no occasion
for interpretation.
 Penal laws must be construed strictly. Such rule is founded on the tenderness
of the law for the rights of individuals and on the plain principle that the power
of punishment is vested in the Congress, not in the Judicial department.
 Where a requirement is made explicit and unambiguous terms, no discretion
is left to the judiciary. It must see to it that the mandate is obeyed.