Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 991, Manila City

RHAEGAR DELA CRUZ For: Petition for Certiorari

Petitioner, and Prohibition from
Spending Public Funds to
be used by PAGCOR

-versus-

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY TYWIN

and

BUDGET SECRETARY BALERION

Respondents

x-------------------------------------------------------------------------x

MEMORANDUM

COME NOW RESPONDENTS, through the undersigned

counsel, unto this Honorable Court most respectfully submit
and present this Memorandum in the above-titled case and
aver that:

THE PARTIES

1. Respondents Executive Secretary Tywin and Budget

Secretary Balerion, through a Petition for Certiorari and
Prohibition filed by herein petitioner, were enjoined
from spending public funds for the herein assailed
bill, where they may be served with legal processes
and notices issued by this Honorable Court;
2. Petitioner Rhaegar Dela Cruz is a Filipino citizen,
dutiful taxpayer, and may be served with legal
processes and other judicial notices thereto.

I. STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. The Author of the assailed Bill, Viserys, is a

Statistician by profession and loves to apply his
expertise in probability by playing games of chance;

2. Thereafter, he ran and fortunately won a seat in the

Philippine Senate;

3. Senator Viserys is consistent in spreading the use of

statistics to every province in the country, and he
likewise find that the General Appropriations Act is
insufficient to further his said passion;

4. He therefore authored the assailed bill entitled “An

Act Appropriating Emergency Funds for the Philippine
Amusement Gaming Corporation and for Other
Purposes”, which was later passed into law. The
significant provisions of the bill are as follows:

“Section 2. Declaration of policy. It shall be the

policy of the State to invigorate the
government-sanctioned gambling industry by
making a long-term commitment of building at
least one (1) casino in every province and city
in the country.”

“Section 3. Appropriation.The amount of ONE

HUNDRED TWENTY MILLION PESOS (Php
120,000,000.00) is hereby appropriated for the
use of PAGCOR to start the urgent need for the
construction of new casinos in the different
provinces of the Philippines.”

“Section 5. Donations to PAGCOR exempt from

donor’s tax and other kinds of taxes. All
donations made to the PAGCOR by any person
shall be exempt from donor’s tax and any from
 other kind of taxes as defined in the National
Internal Revenue Code.”

5. Petitioner Rhaegar, believing that to legalized

gambling would be detrimental to public morality,
filed before the Supreme Court a Petition for Certiorari
and Prohibition against herein Respondents to enjoin
from spending public funds;

6. Petitioner likewise prayed that the assailed bill be

declared null and void for being violative to the
Constitution,;

7. The Supreme Court forwarded the Petition to

Honorable RTC Manila Branch 991 for judgment
following the doctrine of Judicial Hierarchy, and
ordered for the Parties to file their respective
memorandum;

Hence, the filing of the instant Memorandum.

II. ISSUES OF THE CASE

A.) WHETHER OR NOT THE BILL ENTITLED

“AN ACT APPROPRIATING EMERGENCY FUNDS
FOR THE PHILIPPINE AMUSEMENT GAMING
CORPORATION AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES” IS
VIOLATIVE TO THE CONSTITUTION;

B.) WHETHER OR NOT THE LEGISLATURE

MAY APPROPRIATE EMERGENCY FUNDS TO
BE USED BY PAGCOR

III. ARGUMENTS

A.) The passage of the assailed bill is a proper

exercise of State’s inherent Police Power;

B.) The Constitution vested to the Legislature the

power to Appropriate Funds;
 C.) Presumption of Constitutionality shall be
upheld.

IV. DISCUSSION

State’s inherent Police Power

It is a well-settled principle in our legal system that the State,

through its inherent Police Power, has the authority to enact
legislation that may interfere with personal liberty or property
to promote the general welfare. This power is vested in the
legislature branch by the Constitution to make, ordain,
establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable laws for the
good and welfare of the State and its people.(1)

Anent to the two tests in order to justify the police power, the
herein assailed bill was enacted for the purpose of invigorating
and allowing the PAGCOR to build at least one (1) casino in
every province. PAGCOR is engaged in a business affected with
public interest, and it has been considered as the equivalent of
“subject to the exercise of the police power.” (2) Being a
Corporate that is beneficial not just to the government but to
the society in general, as well as a reliable source of much
needed revenue, there is no doubt that its regulation is
lawfully subject to the State’s inherent police power.

As by the means employed, there exists a reasonable

connection between it and the purpose sought to be achieved
by the questioned bill. Building at least one (1) Casino in every
province or city is neither unreasonable nor harmful means in
order to attain its purpose.

Appropriation of Funds: a power vested in

the Philippine Legislature

Anent to petitioner’s attack of Section 3:

“Section 3. Appropriation.The amount of ONE

HUNDRED TWENTY MILLION PESOS (Php
120,000,000.00) is hereby appropriated for the

1 Ermita Malate Hotel vs City Mayor (July 31, 1967)

2 Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, A Commentary,

1996 ed., p. 1053
 use of PAGCOR to start the urgent need for the
construction of new casinos in the different
provinces of the Philippines.”

It is, in fact, in accordance with the Constitutional mandate

that the Appropriation of funds is a duty vested in the
Philippine Legislature. The questioned Section 3 relates
specifically its appropriation, moreover, it specify the purpose
for which it is intended, all in harmony with the provisions in
Constitution.

All laws are presumed to be Constitutional

Every law has in its favor the presumption of constitutionality.

Therefore, for the herein assailed bill to be nullified, the
petitioner must be shown that there is a clear and unequivocal
breach of the Constitution; not merely a doubtful and
equivocal one. However, in the instant petition, Petitioner
Rhaegar failed to prove a clear breach of any provision in the
Constitution, rather, he just alleged that its enactment would
be detrimental to public morality. Contrary to that allegation,
PAGCOR was created to regulate and operate games of
chance which are allowed by law, and any other means to
further such duty is presumed to be in accordance with the
fundamental law of the land.

V. PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed

of this Honorable Court that the instant petition be
DISMISSED.

Other reliefs just or equitable under the circumstances are

likewise prayed for.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

Manila City, 18 March 2015.

CLASH OF CLANS LAW OFFICE

# 62 Makaveli Village, Manila City
Tel No. 12-345-67

By:

Atty. Finn D. Human

Counsel for Respondent
 #876 Brgy. Tibay, Manila City
Roll of Attorneys No. 0987
PTR No. 12345
IBP No. 65748 / Manila Chapter

Copy furnished:

Atty. Jake D. Doug

Counsel for Petitioner
#1234 Brgy. Mahina, Manila City

Branch Clerk of Court

Kindly submit this Trial Memorandum for the kind

consideration of this
Honorable Court.

EXPLANATION

The filing and service of this Trial Memorandum is being done

by registered mail due to lack of sufficient personnel to effect
personal filing and service.

SUBMITTED BY: APRIL ROSE S. LERIT

1 JD-C