G.R. No. L-63915 April 24, 1985
LORENZO M. TAÑADA, ABRAHAM F. SARMIENTO, and MOVEMENT OF ATTORNEYS FOR BROTHERHOOD, INTEGRITY AND NATIONALISM, INC. [MABINI], petitioners, vs. HON. JUAN C. TUVERA, in his capacity as Executive Assistant to the President, HON. JOAQUIN VENUS, in his capacity as Deputy Executive Assistant to the President, MELQUIADES P. DE LA CRUZ, in his capacity as Director, Malacañang Records Office, and FLORENDO S. PABLO, in his capacity as Director, Bureau of Printing, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners, led by Senator Lorenzo Tañada and the MABINI organization, filed a petition for mandamus to compel various Malacañang officials to publish, or cause the publication in the Official Gazette, a vast and enumerated list of presidential decrees, letters of instructions, general orders, proclamations, executive orders, letters of implementation, and administrative orders. They invoked the people’s constitutional right to information on matters of public concern and the fundamental principle that laws must be published to be valid and enforceable. The petitioners argued that the non-publication of these issuances deprived the public of knowledge of laws governing their conduct and rights.
The respondents, represented by the Solicitor General, moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the petitioners lacked legal standing. They contended that the petitioners were not “aggrieved parties” under the Rules of Court, as they failed to show any personal and direct injury from the alleged non-publication. The petitioners countered that when the subject involves a public right and the objective is to compel the performance of a public duty, any citizen can institute the action without demonstrating a specific personal interest.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the petitioners have legal standing to file this mandamus suit seeking the publication of presidential issuances. A secondary, substantive issue is whether such publication in the Official Gazette is required for these laws to become effective.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the petitioners possess the requisite legal standing. The Court reaffirmed the doctrine from Severino v. Governor-General that when the question involves a public right and the mandamus action seeks to enforce a public duty, the people are the real party in interest. A citizen, as a member of the public, need not show a specific legal or special interest in the outcome; it is sufficient that they are a citizen interested in the execution of the laws. This case, which concerns the fundamental public right to be informed of laws that govern society, clearly falls within this exception to the general rule on standing.
On the substantive issue, the Court held that publication in the Official Gazette is indispensable for the effectivity of laws, including presidential issuances of a legislative character. The logic is rooted in due process. No person should be bound by a law, nor suffer its penalties, without being officially informed of its contents. Publication in the Official Gazette, or in a newspaper of general circulation as an alternative allowed by law, provides this constructive notice to the populace. The Court declared that all statutes, including presidential decrees and executive issuances of general applicability, must be published as a condition for their effectivity. The mandamus was granted, ordering the respondents to publish all unpublished issuances, but the decision was made prospective in its application.