PEOPLE

VS JOLLIFE

FACTS:

William Ernest Joliffe is a Canadian, born in China, permanently residing in
Hongkong. H e was from a reputable family & is quite well-known. He made several
trips to Manila, sometimes for business trips, sometimes to meet his wife & children
who would be passing through. One day he came to Manila to collect on a debt from
Woo. He did not know if he was going to be paid. He was paid in g old, which he hid
under his shirt. When he was going to his hotel room, he was accosted by
a woman secret service agent, Amanda Arimbay, and was brought to a search room.
He tried to prevent the gold from being found but eventually,4 pcs of gold bullion and a
100$ travellers check was found on him. He offered to settle the case by bribing the
agents. He does not deny that he had no license to export the gold.


He was then arrested for violating RA 265: An Act Establishing The Central Bank
Of The Philippines, Defining Its Powers In The Administration Of The Monetary And
Banking System, Amending The Pertinent Provisions Of T he Administrative Code
With Respect To The Currency And The Bureau Of Banking, And For Other
Purposes Sec 34 thereof states: Whenever anyone willfully violates this Act or any
order, instruction, etc. legally issued b y the Monetary Board, he/she shall be
punished by a fine and by imprisonment.


Note that when he was arrested, there was already CB Circular 21: Any person
desiring to export gold bullions must obtain a license from the Central Bank. CFI found
him guilty. He then questions the validity of CB Circular 21 for being an undue
delegation of legislative power.

ISSUE:


WON there is a valid delegation of powers if in the affirmative, WON Circular 21
requiring him to obtain license from Central Bank is valid

SUPREME COURT DECISION:


Under our system of govt, legislative power may not be delegated except to local
govts. HOWEVER, it is one thing to d elegate the power (1) to determine
what the law shall be; and another thing (2) to delegate the authority to
fix the details in the execution or enforcement of a policy set out in the law itself.

The rule is that the delegated power fall under the 2 nd c ategory, if the law
authorizing the delegation furnishes a reasonable standard which sufficiently
marks the field within which the Administrator is to act so that it may be known
whether he has kept within it in compliance with the legislative will.


In this case, Sec 74 of RA 265 conferred upon the Monetary Board
and the President the power: To subject to licensing all transactions in
gold and foreign exchange to protect the international reserve of t he Central
Bank during an exchange crisis and to give the Monetary Board and the
Government time to take constructive measures to combat such crisis. The
Board is also authorized to take such appropriate remedial measures to protect the
international stability of the peso, whether the international reserve is falling, as a
result of payment or remittances abroad t hat, in the opinion of the Monetary
Board, are contrary to the national welfare.


Note that these powers must be exercised in relation to the objectives
of the law creating the Central Bank, which are (Sec 2 RA 265): To maintain
monetary stability in the Philippines and To promote a rising level of production,
employment and real income in the Philippines. T hese standards are sufficiently
definite to vest in the delegated authority the character of administrative details
in the enforcement of the law and to place the grant of authority BEYOND the category
of a delegation of legislative powers.


Therefore there was a valid delegation of legislative power since there is
sufficient standard to which the assailed circular was based upon. The appeal was
dimissed.