Briones vs. Macabagdal case digestFull description
Garcia vs Mata FACTS:
Petitioner was a reserve ofcer on active duty with the Armed Forces o the Philippine Philippines s until his reversion to inactive status on 15 November 1960 pursuant to the provisions o !epublic Act No" #$$#" %une 1& 1955 the date when !epubli !epublic c Act No" 1$ too' e(ect petitioner had a total o 9 years ) months and 1# days o accumulated active commissioned service in the Armed Forces o the Philippines* +n %uly %uly 11 11 19 1956 56 the the date date when when !epub epubli lic c Act 16 1600 00 too' too' e(ec e(ect t petitioner had an accumulated active commissioned service o 10 years 5 months and 5 days in the Armed Forces Forces o the Philippines* Peti etitio tioner ner,s ,s re rever versio sion n to ina inacti ctive ve stat status us on 15 Nov Novemb ember er 196 1960 0 was pursuant to the provisions o !epublic Act #$$) and such reversion was neither or cause at his own re-uest nor ater court.martial proceedin/s* proceedin/s* From 15 November 1960 up to the present petitioner has been on inactive status and as such he has neither received any emoluments rom the the Arme Armed d Force orces s o the the Ph Phil ilip ippi pine nes s nor nor was was he ever ever empl employ oyed ed in the the overnment overnment in any capacity* +n ept eptem embe berr 12 19 196 69 the peti petiti tion one er brou brou/h /htt an act action ion or or 34andamus and !ecovery o a um o 4oney3 in the court a -uo to -uo to compel the responde espondents nts ecre ecretar tary y o Nation National al eens eense e and hie hie o ta( ta( o the Armed Forces o the Philippines to reinstate him in the active commissioned service o the Armed Forces o the Philippines to read7ust his ran' and to pay all the emoluments and allowances due to him rom the time o his reversion reversion to inactive status" 8owever the respondents contend that the para/raph 11 has no relevance relev ance or pertinence whatsoever to the bud/et in -uestion or to any appropriation item contained law since !A 1600 is about appropriation o money or the operation o the overnm overnment ent or the scal year 1956.1952 1956.1952 while the said para/raph 11 reers to the undamental /overnment policy matters o the callin/ to active a ctive duty and the reversion to inactive status o reserve ofcers in the AFP" AFP" and is thereore proscribed by Art" :; ec" 19 4 par" # o the 19$5 onstitution o the Philippines which reads< No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the /eneral appropriation bill unless it relates specically to some particular appropriation therein* therein* and any such provision or enactment shall be limited in its operation to such appropriation"
=+N para/raph 11 !A 1600 is unconstitutional" oes it contain rider in an appropriation bill>
[email protected]" he incon/ruity and irrelevancy are already evident" ection 11 o !A 1600 ails to disclose the relevance to any appropriation item" !A 1600 is , is restricted to "appropriating funds for the operation of the government while ection 11 reers to a undamental /overnmental policy o callin/ to active duty and the reversion o inactive statute o reserve ofcers in the AFP" B That reserve officers with at least ten years of active accumulated commissioned service who are still on active duty at the time of the approval of this Act shall not be reverted to inactive status except for cause after proper court-martial proceedings or upon their request ;…
8ence it was A N+N.APP!+P!;A;+N ;@4 ;N@!@ ;N AN APP!+P!;A;+N [email protected][email protected] in violation o the constitutional prohibition a/ainst !;@! to the /eneral appropriation act" ;t was a completely unrelated provision attached to the AA" ;t also violates the rule on one.bill one sub7ect" he sub7ect to be considered must be eDpressed in the title o the act" =hen an act contains provisions which are clearly not embraced in the sub7ect o the act as eDpressed in the title such provisions are void inoperative and without e(ect" @;+N 11 is unconstitutional" arcia cannot compel the AFP to reinstate him"