Request for Guidance on the Validity and Effect of Executive Order No. 39, Series of 2025, Suspending the Collection of Septage Management Fees under Tripartite Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)

[2025-08-13-072] contract and possible claim for damages since the private sector allotted money or capital with the intention to recover the same with the continuity of the program; 3. Whether or not the Sangguniang Bayan may suspend, nullify or terminate existing contract without fault, negligence or breach on the part of the private sector or service provider or any analogous causes mentioned in RA 9184; 4. Are there existing guidelines and policies regarding the issuance of executive orders as well as the prescribed period of its validity; 5. Whether the Municipal Mayor may through an executive order, unilaterally suspend the collection of septage fees which is explicitly mandated under DILG-Memorandum Circular 2019-16 or the regular desludging of septic tanks once every five (5) years, absent mutual consent of parties or judicial intervention; 6. Whether the Municipality’s non-implementation of the contract exposes it to continued violations of our environmental laws and possible disqualification from recognition under Seal of Good Local Governance program.” At the outset, please be apprised that the Department, in its previous legal opinions, has been consistent that inasmuch as the local ordinance, resolution, or executive order has undergone the procedural process for its enactment pursuant to the Local Government Code of 1991, the same is considered valid unless declared otherwise by courts. Moreover, pursuant to this Department's Memorandum Order No. 2010-02 dated 17 September 2010, it states: “xxx all concerned are hereby advised that the Department shall not act on queries of the following kinds, to wit: XXX Those presumptively valid acts, e.g., enacted ordinance, consummated acts that already enjoy the presumption of regularity on the part of the public officer concerned, and similar instances,” Accordingly, any definitive determination as to the legality of Executive Order No. 39, Series of 2025, properly pertains to the courts in an appropriate judicial proceeding. Nevertheless, the Department hereby opines based solely on the facts stated in your letter sans any annexed document. A contract validly entered into by parties pursuant to law acquires the force of law between them and must be complied with in good faith. Article 1159 of the Civil Code expressly provides that obligations 5 1 16 1 3 5 783 1843 88 29 96.704002 arising 5 1 16 1 3 6 891 1843 60 23 96.885170 from 5 1 16 1 3 7 971 1843 124 22 96.135353 contracts 5 1 16 1 3 8 1115 1842 65 23 96.843895 have 5 1 16 1 3 9 1199 1842 41 23 96.311195 the 5 1 16 1 3 10 1259 1841 67 23 96.896469 force 5 1 16 1 3 11 1346 1841 26 23 96.930450 of 5 1 16 1 3 12 1389 1841 44 23 96.963486 law 4 1 16 1 4 0 253 1878 1178 32 -1 5 1 16 1 4 1 253 1881 114 23 95.014435 between 5 1 16 1 4 2 379 1881 42 23 95.014435 the 5 1 16 1 4 3 434 1881 150 29 96.635605 contracting 5 1 16 1 4 4 598 1880 91 30 96.533951 parties 5 1 16 1 4 5 702 1880 48 23 96.949738 and 5 1 16 1 4 6 764 1880 88 23 96.464203 should 5 1 16 1 4 7 866 1880 32 22 96.988113 be 5 1 16 1 4 8 911 1879 121 29 96.415855 complied 5 1 16 1 4 9 1045 1879 53 22 96.946136 with 5 1 16 1 4 10 1112 1879 20 22 96.610558 in 5 1 16 1 4 11 1146 1879 66 28 96.812317 good 5 1 16 1 4 12 1226 1878 77 23 91.844368 faith. Applying these principles, once a contract has been duly authorized by the sanggunian and thereafter perfected by the parties, the rights and obligations arising therefrom cannot ordinarily be modified, suspended, or extinguished through unilateral action by one of the contracting parties absent a legal ground recognized by law, an express contractual stipulation, a mutual agreement, or a competent judicial determination. Page 2 of 4