Calalang vs. Williams et al., 70 Phil., 726, No. 47800 December 2, 1940.
Maximo Calalang, petitioner,
vs.
A. D. Williams, as Chairman of the National Traffic Commission; Vicente Fragante, as Director of Public Works; Sergio Bayan, as Acting Secretary of Public Works and Communications; Eulogio Rodriguez, as Mayor of the City of Manila; and Juan Dominguez, as Acting Chief of Police of Manila, respondents.
Doctrine
Social Justice.—Social justice is “neither communism, nor despotism, nor atomism, nor anarchy,” but the humanization of laws and the equalization of social and economic forces by the State so that justice in its rational and objectively secular conception may at least be approximated. Social justice means the promotion of the welfare of all the people, the adoption by the Government of measures calculated to insure economic stability of all the competent elements of society, through the maintenance of a proper economic and social equilibrium in the interrelations of the members of the community, constitutionally, through the adoption of measures legally justifiable, or extra-constitutionally, through the exercise of powers underlying the existence of all governments on the time-honored principle of salus populi est supremo, lex. Social justice, therefore, must be founded on the recognition of the necessity of interdependence among divers and diverse units of a society and of the protection that should be equally and evenly extended to all groups as a combined force in our social and economic life, consistent with the fundamental and paramount objective of the state of promoting the health, comfort, and quiet of all persons, and of bringing about “the greatest good to the greatest number.” Calalang vs. Williams et al., 70 Phil., 726, No. 47800 December 2, 1940.
Facts
On July 18, 1940, the Chairman of the National Traffic Commission, recommended to the Director of Public Works the adoption of the measure of the provisions of Commonwealth Act No. 548 which gives the Director of Public Works an authority, with the approval of the Secretary of Public Works and Communications, to promulgate rules and regulations to regulate and control the use of and traffic on national roads. With this, Maximo Calalang, the petitioner, a private citizen, filed a petition for a writ of prohibition against the respondents, A. D. Williams, et al., He argues that the said commonwealth act is unconstitutional because it constitutes an undue delegation of legislative power. He also argue that the provisions of of this act constitutes an unlawful interference with legitimate business or trade and abridge the right to personal liberty and freedom of locomotion which is also unconstitutional.
Issue
(1) Whether or not the Commonwealth Act No. 548 is unconstitutional since it constitutes an undue delegation of legislative power
(2) Whether or not the provisions of the Commonwealth Act No. 548 constitute unlawful interference with legitimate business or trade and abridge the right to personal liberty and freedom of locomotion.
Ruling
(1) No. Commonwealth Act NO. 548 is constitutional as the court ruled “with the growing complexity of modern life, the multiplication of the subjects of governmental regulations, and the increased difficulty of administering the laws, the rigidity of the theory of separation of governmental powers has, to a large extent, been relaxed by permitting the delegation of greater powers by the legislative and vesting a larger amount of discretion in administrative and executive officials, not only in the execution of the laws, but also in the promulgation of certain rules and regulations calculated to promote public interest.”
(2) No. The provisions under the Commonwealth Act No. 548 supports business and trade. It also does not violate the right to personal liberty and freedom of locomotion.
The primary principle in this case is the Salus populi est suprema lex (the welfare of the people is the supreme law) which means that every law must be for the promotion of the welfare of the people. Hence on this case, the rules and regulation that was promulgated aims to promote safe transit upon and avoid obstruction on national roads, in the interest and convenience of the public. With these in enacting the law, the traffic congestion will be lessened and economic stability will be promoted.
Calalang vs. Williams
