21 February 2012

HON. RODELIO MAMAC, SR.
Punong Barangay
Barangay Balibago
Angeles City

Dear PB Mamac,

This pertains to your letter seeking our legal opinion on the following issues:

1. Whether or not is within the power of a city council, in the exercise of its legislative power, to adopt a local ordinance regulating the imposition of fees imposed by a Barangay Council?
2. May we also be enlightened to the proper interpretation of Section 66 of RA 7160, “Form and Notice of Decision”, whether or not the “decision”so contemplated by the said provision is in the form of a document entitled a “decision” or can perhaps be substituted to a “resolution” and whether or not said decision requires an affirmative signature of the majority of the members concurring or a mere approval of the Presiding Officer attested by the secretary of the city council.

Anent the first issue, an examination of Section 57 of the Local Government Code is indispensable, which reads:

“Sec. 57.  Review of Barangay Ordinance by the Sangguniang Panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan – (a) Within ten (10) days after its enactment, the Sangguniang Barangay shall furnish copies of all barangay ordinances to the Sangguniang Panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan concerned for review as to whether the ordinance is consistent with law and city or municipal ordinance.”

It can be gleaned from the foregoing provision that is does not expressly vest upon the Sangguniang Panlungsod or Sangguniang Bayan authority to adopt a local ordinance regulating the imposition of fees imposed by Barangay Council; the limitations are already stated in the Local Government Code itself.

Thus, the reviewing function of the sangguniang concerned does not carry with it the authority to adopt ordinance or resolution forwarded before it.  Neither is the reviewing sanggunian given authority to replace the content of the said Ordinance.

In Legal Opinion No. 182, series of 1994 and DILG Opinion No.64, series of 1995, this Department opined that barangay ordinances are subject to review by the city or municipal councils and not the other way around.  To say otherwise would defeat the supervisory authority of municipalities and cities over its component barangays. 

The supervisory authority of the higher sanggunian does not carry with it the authority to control lower sanggunian.  Thus, we rule in the negative.

Along this line, Section 17 of the LGC provides for the devolved functions of basic services a barangay should deliver.  Important to note is the last paragraph of Section 17 which empowers LGUs to raise revenue by imposing reasonable fee to cover cost of the delivery of basic services or facilities enumerated therein.  In DILG Opinion 26, series of 2012, if services are being rendered by a barangay, then it can impose reasonable fees pursuant to Sec. 153 of the LGC. 

In your second query, we defer to render opinion on that matter considering that same issue was included in your Memorandum of Appeal already filed before the Office of the President.  Rendering an opinion regarding that matter would be violative of the sub judice rule.

This is without prejudice to any other opinion of higher authorities.

We hope that we have properly addressed your concerns.               

Very truly yours,

(sgd.)
FLORIDA M. DIJAN, DPA, CESO IV
Regional Director

Copy Furnished:

Ms. Myrvi M. Apostol-Fabia
City Director
DILG Angeles City