1) TAÑADA VS.

TUVERA

G.R. No. L-63915 April 24, 1985

ESCOLIN, J.:

FACTS:

Invoking the people’s right to be informed on matters of public concerns as well as the principle
that laws to be valid and enforceable, they must be published in the Official Gazette or otherwise
effectively promulgated, Lorenzo Tañada, et.al. filed for a writ of mandamus to compel Juan
Tavera, Executive Secretary to President Ferdinand Marcos, to publish and/or cause to publish
various presidential decrees, letters of instructions, general orders, proclamations, executive
orders, letters of implementations, and administrative orders.

The Solicitor General, representing the respondents, moved for the dismissal of the case, contending
that petitioners have no legal personality to bring the instant petition.

ISSUE:

Whether the publication in the Official Gazette is required before any law or statute becomes
valid and enforceable.

RULING:
The Court held in affirmative.

Article 2 of the Civil Code does not preclude the requirement of publication in the Official
Gazette, even if the law itself provides for the date of its effectivity. The clear object of this
provision is to give the general public adequate notice of the various laws which are to regulate
their actions and conduct as citizens. Without such notice and publication, there would be no
basis for the application of the maxim, ignorantia legis nominem excusat. It would be the height
of injustice to punish or otherwise burden a citizen for the transgression of a law which he had no
notice whatsoever, not even a constructive one.

The very first clause of Section 1 of the CA 638 reads, there shall be published in the Official
Gazette. The word “shall” therein imposes upon respondent officials an imperative duty. That
duty must be enforced if the constitutional right of the people to be informed on matters of public
concern is to be given substance and validity.

The publication of presidential issuances of public nature or general applicability is

indispensable and a requirement of due process. The Court declared that presidential issuances of
general application which have not been published have no force and effect.

“Unless it is otherwise provided” refers to the date of effectivity and not with the publication
requirement which cannot be omitted as public needs to be notified for the law to become
effective. The necessity for the publication in the Official Gazette of all unpublished
presidential issuances which are of general application, was affirmed by the court on April 24,
1985. This is necessary to provide the general public adequate notice of the various laws which
regulate actions and conduct as citizens. Without this, there would be no basis for Art 3 of the
Civil Code “Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith”.

2) TANADA VS. TUVERA 146 S 446

Category: Civil Law Jurisprudence
Facts:
Petitioners Lorenzo M. Tanada, et. al. invoked due process in demanding the
disclosure of a number of Presidential Decrees which they claimed had not been published as
required by Law. The government argued that while publication was necessary as a rule, it was
not so when it was otherwise provided, as when the decrees themselves declared that they were
to become effective immediately upon approval. The court decided on April 24, 1985 in
affirming the necessity for publication of some of the decrees. The court ordered the respondents
to publish in the official gazette all unpublished Presidential Issuances which are of general force
and effect. The petitioners suggest that there should be no distinction between laws of general
applicability and those which are not. The publication means complete publication, and that
publication must be made in the official gazette. In a comment required by the solicitor general,
he claimed first that the motion was a request for an advisory opinion and therefore be dismissed.
And on the clause “unless otherwise provided” in Article 2 of the new civil code meant that the
publication required therein was not always imperative, that the publication when necessary, did
not have to be made in the official gazette.
Issues:

(1) Whether or not all laws shall be published in the official gazette.

(2) Whether or not publication in the official gazette must be in full.

Held:

(1) The court held that all statute including those of local application shall be published as
condition for their effectivity, which shall begin 15 days after publication unless a different
effectivity date is fixed by the legislature.

(2) The publication must be full or no publication at all since its purpose is to inform the public
of the content of the laws.