G.R. No. L-24022; March 3, 1965
ILOILO PALAY AND CORN PLANTERS ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL., petitioners, vs. HON. JOSE Y. FELICIANO, ET AL., respondents.

FACTS

On December 26, 1964, Jose Y. Feliciano, Chairman and General Manager of the Rice and Corn Administration (RCA), urged the President to import 595,400 metric tons of rice, based on National Economic Council (NEC) Resolution No. 70, which certified a shortage of such gravity as to constitute a national emergency. The cabinet approved the importation on December 28, 1964. On January 4, 1965, the President designated the RCA to undertake the importation, and Feliciano announced a bidding set for February 1, 1965. The Iloilo Palay and Corn Planters Association, Inc., and Ramon A. Gonzales, as a taxpayer, filed a petition to restrain Feliciano from conducting the bidding and proceeding with the importation. They argued that the importation was prohibited by Republic Act No. 3452 , which bans government agencies from importing rice and corn, leaving importation exclusively to private parties, and that no law appropriated funds for it. The Supreme Court issued a preliminary injunction. Respondents defended the importation’s validity under Republic Act No. 2207 , which allows government importation during a certified national emergency shortage.

ISSUE

Whether the government, through the Rice and Corn Administration, can legally import rice despite the prohibition in Republic Act No. 3452 , in light of a certified national emergency shortage.

RULING

The Supreme Court, in a majority decision, ruled that the government importation is legal and valid. The Court held that Republic Act No. 2207 , specifically Section 2, remains in force and authorizes the President to designate a government agency to import rice when the NEC certifies a shortage of such gravity as to constitute a national emergency. The Court found no implied repeal of Republic Act No. 2207 by Republic Act No. 3452 . The two laws are reconcilable: Republic Act No. 3452 governs importation during normal conditions, prohibiting government importation and leaving it to private parties, while Republic Act No. 2207 applies specifically during a certified national emergency shortage, permitting government importation. The repealing clause in Republic Act No. 3452 is not express but conditional on inconsistency, and no irreconcilable conflict exists as the laws address different circumstances. The Court noted that legislative debates indicated Republic Act No. 3452 ’s importation provisions were intended for normal conditions. The preliminary injunction was dissolved, and the petition was dismissed. (A dissenting opinion argued that Republic Act No. 3452 ’s prohibition was absolute and that the importation violated constitutional appropriation requirements.)