Under Section 58 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), the Act shall take effect “fifteen (15) days after its complete publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two newspapers of general circulation.” No rule is more settled in the legal realm than that the publication of a law is an indispensable requirement for its effectivity as the purpose of which is to make full disclosure and give proper notice to the people. Complying with this legal obligation, the ATA was not only posted on the Official Gazette’s website on 3 July 2020 but also subsequently published on the print Official Gazette on 6 July 2020. Despite the wider reach of the internet, however, the Supreme Court, in Garcillano v. House of Representative (G.R. No. 170338, 23 December 2008) ruled that the internet is not a proper medium for publishing laws, rules, and regulations. The official medium remains to be the print Official Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation. All these things considered, the ATA shall take effect after the lapse of fifteen (15) days from (6 July 2020) the complete publication on the Official Gazette, that is 22 July 2020.
Consistent with procedure after the enactment of a law is the crafting and promulgation of its corresponding Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR). However, even while the IRR is still underway, the ATA is already in force, due to the following reasons:
First, the promulgation of the IRR is not a condition precedent for the effectivity of the ATA. The pending issuance of an IRR cannot defer the law coming into force. A law is presumed to be valid when there exists an interpretation favorable to its effectivity. Unless there are clear and unmistakable showing of the law’s constitutional and statutory infirmity, the presumption of validity subsists, and the law is binding and effective.
Second, the complete publication of the ATA is the only condition sine qua non before it can take effect. While there are provisions where operational details need to be spelled out or standards clearly defined in the IRR for the proper implementation of the law, there is no provision in the ATA which prohibits its implementation without an IRR.
Sections 45 and 52 of the ATA are exceptions to the general rule. Under both sections, Congress delegated quasi-legislative functions to the Anti-Terrorism Council and the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology and Bureau of Corrections to craft purely administrative rules for the effective implementation of the policies of the law. Save for these provisions, the law is self-executing.
As the Supreme Court held in SEC v. Interport Resources Corporation (G.R. No. 135808, 6 October 2008), laws are not contingent on the implementing rules. To claim that the law is ineffective until implementing rules are promulgated creates an absurd situation where an agency can delay the effectivity of the law by delaying promulgation of its rules. To argue that a law is less than a law, because it is made to depend on a future event or act, is to rob Congress of its plenary power to act wisely for the public welfare.
