Reasons why laws on same subject are reconciled.

In enacting a statute, the legislature is presumed to have been aware of, and have taken into account, prior laws on the subject of legislation. The lawmaking body cannot be said to have intended the establishment of conflicting and hostile systems on the same subject, or to leave in force provisions of a prior law which may thwart or overthrow the will of the legislature. Such a result would render the legislature a useless and idle ceremony, and subject the laws to uncertainty and unintelligibility.

Statutes in pari materia should be read and construed together becaseu enactment s of the same legislature on the same subject are supposed to form part of one uniform system; later statutes are supplementary or complimentary to the earlier enactments and in the passage of acts, the legislature is supposed to have in mind the existing legislations on the subject and to have enacted its new act with reference thereto.

Where harmonization is impossible.

If two or more laws in the same subject cannot possibly be reconciled or harmonized, one has to give way in favor of the other. Either, the two are reconciled, or, if they cannot, the earlier one must yield to the later one, it being the later expression of the legislative will.

Where a statute provides that the “mayor shall hold office for four years unless sooner removed,” the phrase “unless sooner removed” should be read in relation to removal statutes and construed to mean that the mayor cannot be removed during his term except for cause as provided by law and after due process, since the legislature is presumed to have such removal statures in mind when it employed the phrase.

Cases:

In King vs Hernaez, 114 Phil. 730, it was held that RA No. 1180 otherwise known as the Retail Trade Nationalization Act, implies that the nationalization of the retail trade is merely confined to its ownership and not to management, control or operation. Nevertheless, the court said that this apparent flaw in the law cannot be availed of by an unscrupulous alien as a convenient pretext to flout the law or subvert its nationalistic purpose, for in pari material with such law is Commonwealth Act No. 108, otherwise known as the Anti-Dummy Law, which punishes “acts of evasion of the laws of nationalization of certain rights, franchises or privileges,” such as the employment of aliens in wholly or partly nationalized businesses.

In C & C Commercial Corp. vs National Waterworks & Sewerage Authority, the issue refers to the interpretation of two statutes requiring the preference be made in the purchase and use of Philippine-made materials and products. RA No. 912 Section 2 provides that “in the construction or repair work undertaken by the Government , x x x Philippine-made materials and products, whenever available, practical and usable x x x shall be available used in the said construction or repair work, x x x. On the other hand Commonwealth Act No. 138, otherwise known as Flag Law, gives native products preference in the purchase of articles by the government, including GOCCs. The argument has been

advanced that since Commonwealth Act No. 138 expressly includes purchases by the government-owned companies while RA No. 912 merely relates to construction or repair by the government, GOCCs, have been excepted from the operation of the later statute. In rejecting such argument, the court said that being statutes in pari material, they should be construed to attain the same objectives – to give preference to locally-produce materials in purchases, works or projects of the government - the accomplishment of which will be defeated if the GOCCs are excluded from the operation of RA No. 912.

Related Cases:

Manila Jockey Club, Inc. vs CA, 300 SCRA 181 (1998)Cabada vs Alunan III, 260 SCRA 838 (1996)

General Statutes and Special Statutes

A General statute is a statute which applies to all of the people of the state of to all of a particular class of persons in the state with equal force. On the other hand, a Special statute, as the term is generally understood, is one which relates to a particular persons or things of a class or to a particular portion or section of the state only.

A general law and a special law on the same subject are statutes in pari material and should, accordingly, be read together and harmonized, if possible, with a view to giving effect to both. The rule is that where there are two acts, one of which is special and particular and the other general which, if standing alone, would include the same matter and thus conflict with the special act, the special must prevail since it evinces the legislative intent more clearly than that of a general statute and must be taken as intended to constitute an exception to the general act. The fact that one law is special and the other general, creates a presumption that the special act is to be considered as remaining an exception of the general act, one as a general law of the land and the other as the law of the particular case.

The circumstance that the special law is passed before or after the general act does not change the principle. Where the special law is later, it will be regarded as an exception to, or a qualification of, the prior general act; and where the general act is later, the special statute will be construed as remaining an exception to its terms, unless repealed expressly or by necessary implication.

Thus, PD No. 959, as amended, which confers upon the National Housing Authority exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide cases involving unsound real estate business practices and claims involving refund and any other claims against land developers prevail over BP Blg. 129 which grants RTC general jurisdiction over such cases, even when the latter was enacted later than the former because BP Blg. 129 is a general law and PD No. 957, as amended, is a special law.

The reason for such rule that special law is considered an exception to the general law on the same subject is that the legislature in passing a law of special character has its attention directed to the special facts and circumstances which the special act is intended to meet. The legislature considers and makes provisions for all the circumstances of the particular case.