KEMBAR78
Us v. Ang Tang Ho | PDF | Legislature | Executive Order
Scribd
Upload
243 views1 page

Us v. Ang Tang Ho

The Supreme Court ruled that there was an undue delegation of legislative power to the Governor General in the case of The United States v. Ang Tang Ho. Act No. 2868 passed by the Philippine Legislature authorized the Governor General to issue rules regulating the distribution of rice, palay and corn under extraordinary circumstances. However, the Act did not sufficiently define what constituted "extraordinary circumstances." As a result, the Governor General was given too much discretion in issuing Executive Order 53, which fixed rice prices. For a law to be valid, it must be complete when it leaves the legislature and cannot delegate essential legislative details to another branch of government. The Court found Act No. 2868 deficient and reversed the conviction of the defendant rice dealer

Uploaded by

RNicolo Ballesteros
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
243 views1 page

Us v. Ang Tang Ho

The Supreme Court ruled that there was an undue delegation of legislative power to the Governor General in the case of The United States v. Ang Tang Ho. Act No. 2868 passed by the Philippine Legislature authorized the Governor General to issue rules regulating the distribution of rice, palay and corn under extraordinary circumstances. However, the Act did not sufficiently define what constituted "extraordinary circumstances." As a result, the Governor General was given too much discretion in issuing Executive Order 53, which fixed rice prices. For a law to be valid, it must be complete when it leaves the legislature and cannot delegate essential legislative details to another branch of government. The Court found Act No. 2868 deficient and reversed the conviction of the defendant rice dealer

Uploaded by

RNicolo Ballesteros
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

BALLESTEROS

THE UNITED STATES v. ANG TANG HO


G.R. No. 17122, February 27, 1922

DOCTRINE:
The law must be complete in all its terms and provisions when it leaves the legislative branch of
the government; and nothing must be left to the judgment of the electors or other appointee or
delegate of the legislature. This will ensure that in form and substance, it is a law in all its details
in presenti, but which may be left to take effect in future, if necessary, upon the ascertainment of
any prescribed fact or event.

Facts:
1. The Philippine Legislature, during a special session, passed Act No. 2868 entitled "An Act
penalizing the monopoly and hoarding of, and speculation in, palay, rice, and corn. The
said act, under extraordinary circumstances, authorizes the Governor General to issue
necessary rules and regulations in regulating the distribution of such products. With this,
the Governor General issued Executive Order No. 53 (EO 53) in which it fixes the price at
which rice is to be sold.
2. Ang Tang Ho, a rice dealer, voluntarily, criminally, and illegally sold a ganta of rice to
Pedro Trinidad at the price of eighty centavos. The said amount was way higher than that
prescribed by the Executive Order. He was charged in violation of the said Executive Order
and was sentenced to 5 months imprisonment plus a P500.00 fine. He appealed the
sentence countering that there was an undue delegation of power to the Governor
General.

Issue: Whether or not there was an undue delegation of legislative power to Governor General

Ruling: YES
1. This question involves an analysis and construction of Act No. 2868, in so far as it
authorizes the Governor General to fix the price at which rice should be sold. The power
to legislate and enact laws is vested exclusively in the Legislative. As to the question here
involved, the authority of the Governor-General to fix the maximum price at which palay,
rice and corn may be sold in the manner power is in violation of the organic law.
2. Act No. 2868, as analyzed by the Court, wholly fails to provide definitely and clearly what
the standard policy should contain. The Legislature did not specify or define what was
“any cause” or what was “an extraordinary rise in the price of rice, palay or corn.” Neither
did it specify or define the conditions upon which the proclamation should be issued. The
law must be complete in all its terms and provisions when it leaves the legislative branch
of the government and nothing must be left to the judgment of the electors or other
appointee or delegate of the legislature, so that, in form and substance, it is a law in all its
details in presenti, but which may be left to take effect in future, if necessary, upon the
ascertainment of any prescribed fact or event.

Dispositive:
The judgment of the lower court is reversed, and the defendant discharged. So ordered.

You might also like