TANADA VS. TUVERA (136 SCRA 27)
April 24, 1985
(Case Digest)
Facts:
Petitioners Lorenzo Tanada, et. al. filed for a writ of mandamus. This is to compel respondents to
publish various presidential decrees, letters of instructions, general orders, proclamations,
executive orders, letters of implementations, and administrative orders. They did so because
Section 6, Article IV of the 1973 Constitution recognizes the right of the people to be educated
on subjects of public importance. In addition, petitioners point out that Article 2 of the Civil
Code stipulates that laws must be published in order to be effective. Respondents, on the other
hand, also argue that publication in the Official Gazette is not a requirement for the effectivity of
laws if the laws themselves specify the date of effectivity.
Issue:
Whether or not a law or statute must be published in the Official Gazette before it
becomes enforceable.
Holding:
The Court instructs respondents to disclose all unpublished presidential issuances in the Official
Gazette. The court concluded that all statutes, even those of local application, must be published
before they become effective, which begins 15 days after publication unless the legislature sets a
different effective date. Because the objective of the publication is to inform the public on the
content of the laws, it must be complete or no publishing at all.
Ratio Decidendi:
The reasons for the decision were set in place as protections against legislative abuses and as
guarantees of constitutional rights on topics of public concern, and as such, they must be strictly
followed. Section 1 of CA 638 begins with the phrase "there shall be published in the Official
Gazette.” The word "shall" there imposes an obligatory duty on response officials. If the people's
constitutional right to be informed about matters of public concern is to be given substance and
legitimacy, that obligation must be carried out.