Supreme Court Hearing on Constitutionality

Manila Bulletin, July 14, 2005 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Supreme Court Hearing on Constitutionality


Government lawyers yesterday asked the Supreme Court (SC) to dismiss four petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Expanded Value-Added Tax Act of 2005 (EVAT) whose implementation was stopped temporarily by the court last July 1.

The plea was contained in a 150page comment filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), a copy of which was obtained by the Manila Bulletin on the eve of the public hearing on the petitions set today.

In a press statement issued late last week, the High Court said that it is giving priority to the EVAT cases and vowed to resolve the issue in a months time. Solicitor General Alfredo Benipayo, in behalf of the Department of Finance, told the Supreme Court that the four petitions against EVAT failed to show "clear and unequivocal breach of the Constitution."

"The petitioners, collectively and separately, failed to unequivocally cast doubt on the validity of Republic Act No. 9337 (the EVAT Act), much less prove any violation of the Constitution beyond reasonable doubt," Benipayo said.

Originally, the public hearing (oral argument) on the four petitions was set by the High Court on July 26. However, when the government sought the lifting of the temporary restraining order (TRO), the members of the court agreed to advance the hearing today.

Expected to engaged in legal skirmishes today are Benipayo and his assistants, on one side, and the lawyers of minority members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, petroleum dealers and motorists association, and the ABAKADA Guro partylist, on the other.

Supreme Court justices, led by Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide Jr. who voted against the issuance of a TRO, are also expected to propound questions on RA 9337.

According to the petitions, RA 9337 is unconstitutional because the bicameral conference committee mangled the bills that came from both the House and the Senate. Among other things, they pointed out that the bicameral conference committee deleted the provision for "no pass-on" to consumers of the VAT on the sale of petroleum products and electricity.

They also said that the "standby authority" given to the President to increase the VAT from 10 to 12 per cent next year is unconstitutional since only Congress has the exclusive tax power.

But Benipayo said the "standby authority" given to the President is not tantamount to a power of legislation.

"The EVAT law merely directs the President to implement the VAT rate increase to 12 per cent on Jan. 1, 2006, when any of the two conditions set by Congress is satisfied," he said.

At the same time, Benipayo said, the bicameral conference committee has the prerogative to make amendments in the bills and it is possible that the committee, itself, may in fact approve an entirely new bill.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Supreme Court Hearing on Constitutionality


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?