DOJ Opinion No. 004, s. 1989

DOJ OPINION NO. 004 , s. 1989 January 6, 1989 Sec. Luis T. Santos Dept. of Local Government PNCC Bldg., EDSA cor. Reliance St. Mandaluyong, Metro Manila Sir : This has reference to your request for "opinion whether or not the term election in Section 62 of the Local Government Code (B.P. Blg. 337) includes barangay elections," and if so, "whether or not a preventive suspension issued within 90 days prior thereto should be lifted." LibLex The instant queries, we take it, were raised on account of your perception that the forthcoming barangay election, which was previously scheduled on November 14, 1988 under R.A. 6653, but postponed to March 23, 1989 under R.A. No. 6679 "is non-political in nature." Both queries should be answered in the affirmative. Section 62 of B.P. Blg. 337 states: "Sec. 62. Notice of Hearing ". Within seven days after the complaint is filed, the Minister of Local Government or the sanggunian concerned, as the case may be, shall require the respondent to submit his verified answer within seven days from receipt of the said complaint, and commence the hearing and investigation of the case within ten days after receipt of such answer of the respondent. No investigation shall be held within ninety days immediately, prior to an election, and no preventive suspension shall be imposed within the said period. If preventive suspension has been imposed prior to the aforesaid period, the preventive suspension shall be lifted ." (Emphasis supplied) Well-accepted in statutory construction is the rule, ube lex non distinquit, nec nos distinquere debemus . Thus, it has been held that there should be no distinction in the application of the law where none is indicated therein (SSS vs. City of Bacolod 115 SCRA 412) and that general words and phrases in a statute should be accorded their natural and general significance (Lo Cham vs. Ocampo, 77 Phil. 636) By said rule, the term "election" in the aforequoted section should be interpreted as including all elections mentioned in the Local Government Code. prcd Moreover, examination of the relevant provisions of the Code in question indicates a legislative intent to include barangay election within the contemplation of Section 62, supra. It is noted that said section is part of Chapter 4 on "Suspension and Removal" of local elective official and that Section 61 (on filing of complaints) includes elective barangay official, while Section 63 (on preventive suspension) covers "an elective barangay official." Indeed, the barangay and their elective official are an integral part of the whole scheme of the local governmental system established by B.P. Blg. 337 and to exclude the election of their officials from the coverage of Section 62 would run counter to that language and intention of the rest of the statutory provisions. It has been said, in this connection, that a construction so dependent upon an artificial or strained meaning of the statutory terms and so out of harmony with the statutory scheme or purpose should be avoided (Helvering vs. Hutchings, 85 L. Ed. 909). It is true that R.A. 6679 intends the coming barangay election to be non-partisan in nature (2nd par.), but we are unable to see how such character would militate against the inclusion of the said electoral exercise within the ambit of Section 62. The mischief sought to be avoided by said Section is political harassment in one form or another (Orendain, Philippine Local Government code Annotated, 1983 Ed., p. 97), an evil which can occur in a barangay election. Please be guided accordingly. Very truly yours, (SGD.) SEDFREY A. ORDOEZ Secretary of Justice