LEY NO 27037 PDF

Como requisito básico para el acogimiento a los beneficios tributarios establecidos de conformidad con la ley N ,las empresas deben. Clause 21 21st. , Ley General de Industrias, which meet the requirements established in the 11th paragraph of Article of this Law, to benefit. , Ley General de lndustrias, which meet the requirements established in the 11th paragraph of Article of this Law, Section Third.

Author: Nacage Samuzil
Country: Yemen
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Relationship
Published (Last): 1 October 2015
Pages: 186
PDF File Size: 15.82 Mb
ePub File Size: 13.90 Mb
ISBN: 561-1-59046-115-7
Downloads: 68783
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Tojalabar

In this connection, it should be borne in mind that the power to conduct preliminary investigations has never been deemed as a mere incidental prerogative of any court.

On January 28,this Court by resolution required respondents to file an answer to the petition and not to move for the dismissal of the same. In compliance therewith, respondent Judge filed a petition for admission of answer on November 29, pp.

It is inconceivable that with said considerations in view, Congress could have meant by omitting mention of preliminary investigations in the statute that it should nevertheless be construed in the sense of “encumbering”, to borrow the language of the main opinion, the circuit criminal courts with the burden of “attending to preliminary examination and investigation of criminal complaints”, which the main opinion emphasizes and the legislature must be presumed to have known can be better performed by the multitudinous other offices in the prosecution staff government already referred to above.

The statute cannot give a restricted meaning to the generic term “judge” used in the constitutional guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures.

El texto en ingles del projecto dice: In what I consider, with the pardon I hope of my learned 270037, to be a desperate but vain effort to provide substantive law basis for Section 13 of Rulethe main opinion falls back on of all things the provision of the Bill of Rights of the Constitutions of and enjoining that no warrant of arrest “may issue but upon probable cause, to be determined by the judge 6 after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce.

Herein petitioner opposed the same in a pleading dated June 1, p. Indeed, with on broad control given to the Secretary of Justice over crime prosecution by the Presidential Decreenot to mention Our own ruling in Lfy recognizing his power of supervision and control over fiscals, as long as the case has not passed to the jurisdiction of the court, it does not sound realistic and in keeping with the trend of recent developments in the pertinent laws to further allow prosecutions to be initiated in the Courts of First Instance.

De ahi que si queremos salvaguardar en todo lo posible el derecho de un individuo a arrestos o registros arbitrarios; si queremos que el derecho del individuo a la seguridad de sus bienes o papeles este rodeado de todas las garantias que puedan impedir o que impidan la expedicion de registros inmotivados o infundados que pueden dar lugar a molestias o vejaciones injustas e irreparables, creo que debemos hacer que en nuestra constitucion se consigne el precepto tal como yo propongo que se enmienda.


As heretofore stated, it is an elementary precept in statutory construction that where the law does not distinguish, WE should not distinguish Colgate Palmolive Philippines, Inc. It is patent that under the Constitution, only the “judge” is directed to conduct 270377 preliminary examination issuance of the warrant of arrest by express constitutional conferment.

Ley Nº – Modifica la Ley Nº , Ley de promoción de la inversión en la Amazonía.

The dignification of the idea into a constitutional provision was zealously insisted upon, in order to make the principle more sacred to the judges and to prosecuting officials. As enunciated in the Armaga case in U.

I do not mind saying that whenever I want to be comprehensive in my study of constitutional issues, I always find his views illuminating. L is dismissed and the order of respondent Judge dated July 6, in G.

On June 20,Republic Act No. Petitioner Collector of Customs refused to obey the order due to the “prior institution of seizure proceedings thereon. The load to be shouldered by a trial judge is heavy enough for him to attend to matters which could be looked after by municipal judges. In this case, petitioners were given an unreasonable period of one 1 day within which to elevate the matter before this Tribunal.

Ley Nº 27759 – Modifica la Ley Nº 27037, Ley de promoción de la inversión en la Amazonía.

On the other hand, the judge derives his authority not only from the Rules of Court, but also — and originally — from the fundamental law to which all other laws are subordinate.

Ag FA – No. It is not denied that the crime of indirect bribery is essentially one committed by public officers. Under the jurisprudence then or prior to the Constitution, the preliminary investigation before the justice of the peace or municipal court consisted of two stages, namely, preliminary examination for the issuance of the warrant oey arrest where only the complainant and his witnesses are heard by the justice of the peace; and the second stage where the accused and his witnesses are heard.

He may, however, if he is not satisfied, call such witnesses as he may deem necessary before issuing the warrant. The proviso of Section 5 of Republic Act No.

ley de amazonia by janet parillo on Prezi

I took this view in my concurring opinion in the case of People v. Furthermore, in People versus Manantan L, July 31,5 SCRAa justice of the peace, Accused of violating Section 54 of the Revised Election Code, moved to dismiss the information on the ground that the law refers merely to a justice, judge, or fiscal and that being a justice of the peace, he is beyond the coverage of the said Code.


The Court remarked in said case: Otherwise, the Courts of First Instance would still be carrying the burden of conducting preliminary investigation in those cases where Circuit Criminal Courts have jurisdiction and consequently delaying the trial and disposition of criminal cases pending before such Courts of First Instance.

Respondent Judge was likewise admonished “to concentrate on hearing and deciding criminal cases filed before their courts see Mateo v. The Supreme Court in denying such contention, held that there was no need of including justices of the peace in the enumeration in said section because the legislature let availed itself of the more generic term “judge.

To my mind, this difference in phraseology must have been intentional in order to emphasize the restricted and on prerogatives of Circuit Criminal Courts, not only as to the nature of the cases that can be filed with them but also as to the extent of their functions and powers relative to said cases.

The Constitution of and vest in the judge the power to issue a warrant of arrest or search warrant after conducting a ldy examinations. Such finding is not final acquittal as would preclude further proceedings.

For instance, in the On Act itself, it can be clearly seen that as in the case of Actseventy-five years ago, by Section 87 of the Act, the legislature had to expressly vest upon inferior courts the power to conduct such preliminary investigations.

Ley Nº 27406 – Modifica la Ley Nº 27037, Ley de promoción de la inversión en la Amazonía.

I had in mind then Mr. There can be no dispute about the imperative need to make the safeguards against unreasonable arrests, searches and seizures as air tight as possible, but it is equally undeniable that giving the power to determine the existence of probable cause exclusively to judges is not the only guarantee that can ensure that end. In cases triable only in the Court of First instance the defendant shall not be entitled as of right to a preliminary examination in any case where the fiscal of the city, after a due investigation of the facts, shall have presented an information against him in proper form.