Jean Claude C.
Vargas
Judge Dela Cruz
Statutory Construction – Term Paper
November 14, 2019
Statutory Construction Concept and Aids in the Construction and Interpretation
I. Statutory Construction Concept
a. Statutory Construction
Statutory Construction is defined as the art or process of discovering and expounding
the meaning and intention of the authors of the law with respect to its application to a given
case, where the intention is rendered doubtful, among others, by reason of the fact that the
given case is not explicitly provided for in the law. Caltex (Philippines) Inc. v. Palomar, G.R.
No. L-19650, September 29, 1966. Also, Justice Martin defined statutory construction as the
art of seeking the intention of the legislature in enacting a statute and applying it to a given
state of facts.
As the Supreme Court has explained; in interpreting a statute a court should always
turn to one cardinal canon before all others. Courts must presume that a legislature says in a
statute what it means and means in a statute what it says there. (Connecticut Nat'l Bank v.
Germain, 112 S. Ct. 1146, 1149 (1992). Indeed, when the words of a statute are
unambiguous, then, this first canon is also the last: judicial inquiry is complete. Congress is
presumed to act intentionally and purposely when it includes language in one section but
omits it in another. (Estate of Bell v. Commissioner, 928 F.2d 901, 904 (9th Cir. 1991).
b. Statutory Construction and Interpretation
Construction and Interpretation have the same purpose and that is to ascertain and
give effect to the legislative intent. However, there is a difference in the two; Construction is
the drawing of conclusions with respect to subjects that are beyond the direct expression of
the text, while interpretation is the process of discovering the true meaning of the language
used. Therefore, the one who interprets makes use of intrinsic aids or those found in the
statute itself, while the one who constructs makes use of extrinsic aids or those found outside
the written language of the law. One of the basic rules in Statutory Construction based from
the difference of construction and interpretation is that “One must interpret first before he
construes.”
There are kinds of construction and interpretation of the law. The science and art of
such is called Hermeneutics. It is understood to be the systematic body of rules which are
recognized as applicable to the construction and interpretation if the legal writings. However,
in our jurisdiction, we do not deal so much in the kinds of interpretations but they are
incorporated in the different rules in statutory construction. More often, our laws are
interpreted either literally, strictly or liberally and prospectively or retrospectively.
Most common subjects of statutory construction and interpretation are the constitution
and statutes which includes ordinances. But resolutions, executive orders and department
circulars may also be added.
c. Statutory Construction and Constitutional Construction
It is an established principle of constitutional law that a court will not rule upon the
constitutionality of a statute unless such a determination is absolutely necessary to decide the
merits of the case. A statute will be construed to avoid a constitutional question whenever this
is possible. The construction of a constitutional provision by Congress (note it is congress
construing, not the Supreme Court, that is why it is called “Contemporaneous Construction”
is entitled to consideration, and if the construction is contemporaneous with adoption of the
constitutional provision, it is entitled to great weight.
II. Aids in the Construction and Interpretation
There are two kinds of aids that are used in Statutory Construction and Interpretation
to ascertain and give effect to the legislative intent. Aids to statutory construction and
interpretation are divided into internal aids and external aids. Intrinsic aids or those found in
the statute itself and extrinsic aids or those found outside the written language of the law. In
applying the law, the court should discover the real intent and purpose of the legislature. If
that intent and purpose can be discovered with the law, it is the duty of court to carry out that
intention. If the same cannot be discovered within the law, the court shall be guided by
extrinsic aids.
a. Intrinsic Aid
The term “intrinsic” means internal or within. Intrinsic Aids are those which can be
found in the statute itself which includes: title, preamble, words, phrases and sentences
context; punctuation; headings and marginal notes; and legislative definitions and
interpretation clauses. Intrinsic aids are used only when there is ambiguity. In resorting to
intrinsic aids, one must go back to the part of the statute.
1. Title
That which expresses the subject matter of the law. It can help in the construction
of statutes but it is not controlling and not entitled to much weight.
2. Preamble
That part of the statute following the title and preceding the enacting clause which
states the reasons or the objectives of the enactment.
3. Words, Phrases and Sentences Context
The intention of the legislature must primarily be determined form the language of
the statute and such language consists of the word, phrases and sentences used
therein. The meaning of the law should however be taken the general
consideration of the act as a whole.
4. Punctuation
It is an aid of low degree in interpreting the language of a statute and can never
control against the intelligible meaning of the written word.
5. Headings and Marginal Notes
If the meaning of the statute is clear or if the text of the statute is clear they will
prevail as against the headings, especially if the headings have been prepared by
compilers and not by the legislature.
6. Legislative Definitions and Interpretations
If the legislative has defined the words used in the statute and have declared the
construction to be placed thereon; such definition or construction should be
followed by the courts.
The title of the law is a valuable intrinsic aid in determining the legislative intent.
Subtitle of the statute can be also used as an intrinsic aid. The intent of the law is form its
preamble and from the situation, circumstances and conditions it sought to remedy, must be
enforced. Preamble is used as a guide in determining the intent of the lawmaker.
b. Extrinsic Aid
Extrinsic Aids are those found outside the written language of the law are those that
may consist of contemporaneous circumstances, policy, legislative history of the statute,
contemporaneous or practical construction, executive construction, legislative construction,
judicial construction, and construction by the bar and legal commentators. These are existing
aids from outside sources, meaning outside of the four corners of the statute. If there is any
doubt as to the meaning of the statute, the interpreter must first find that out with the statute.
Extrinsic aids are used after exhausting all the available intrinsic aids and still there remain
some ambiguity in the statute.
1. Contemporaneous Circumstances
History of the times and conditions existing at the time the law was enacted;
previous state of law; the evils sought to be remedied or corrected by the law; and
the customs and usages of the people. These are circumstances constitute the
reason why the law was enacted.
2. Policy
The general policy of the law or the settled policy of the State may enlighten the
interpreter of the law as to the intention of the legislature in enacting the same.
3. Legislative History of the Statute
Such history may be found in reports of legislative committee, in the transcript of
stenographic notes taken during the hearing, legislative investigation or legislative
debate.
4. Contemporaneous and Practical Construction
Those who lived at or near the time when the law was passed were more
acquainted with conditions and the reasons why that law was enacted.
5. Executive Construction
The construction given by the executive department deserves great weight and
should be respected if said construction has been formed and observed for a long
period of time.
6. Legislative Construction
Legislative construction is entitled to consideration and great weight but it cannot
control as against the court’s prerogative to decide on what is the right or wrong
interpretation.
7. Judicial Construction
It is presumed that the legislature was acquainted with and had in mind the
judicial construction of former statutes on the subject.
It is well accepted principle that where a statute is ambiguous, courts may examine
both the printed pages of the published Act as well as those extrinsic matters that may aid in
construing the meaning of the statute, such as the history of its enactment, the reason of the
passage of the bill and purposes to be accomplished by the measure.
There are situations that are necessary to interpret or construct a statute or law and
these are the following:
1. When the language of the statute is ambiguous, doubtful, or obscure when taken in
relation to a set of facts; and
2. When reasonable minds disagree as to the meaning of the language used in the statute.
Ambiguity exists if reasonable persons can find different meanings in a statute, document,
etc. A statute is ambiguous if it is admissible of two or more possible meaning.
It is not necessary to interpret or construct when the law speaks in clear and categorical
language. Only when there is ambiguous or of doubtful meaning may the court interpret or
construe its true intent. The duty of the court in that case is to apply the law and not to
interpret it. (Go Ka Toc & Sons v. Rice & corn Board, GR No. l-23607, May 23, 1967;
People v. Mapa, Gr No. l-22301, Aug. 30, 1967.)
Construction and interpretation of the law come only after it has been demonstrated
that application is impossible or inadequate without them.
Works Cited
Caltex (Philippines) Inc. v. Palomar, G.R. No. L-19650, September 29, 1966
(Go Ka Toc & Sons v. Rice & corn Board, GR No. l-23607, May 23, 1967; People v.
Mapa, Gr No. l-22301, Aug. 30, 1967.)
Black’s Legal Dictionary, centennial ed
Commissioner of customs v. Reluvia, GR No, l-118860, May 29, 1969
Ace Bus Transportation v. South Hudson Country Blood Owners Associations, 177 A.
360
https://www.upcounsel.com/legal-def-statutory-construction-interpretation
Introduction To Law Sixth Edition by Rolando A. Suarez