QUASI-JUDICIAL/ADJUDICATORY (Incidental Powers)

Salazar vs. Achacoso DISPOSITION: petition is GRANTED. Article 38, paragraph (c) of the Labor Code is declared
G.R. No. 81510. March 14, 1990.* UNCONSTITUTIONAL and null and void. The respondents are ORDERED to return all materials
Ponente: SARMIENTO, J. Digest Author: FABI seized as a result of the implementation of Search and Seizure Order No. 1205.

DOCTRINE: Only a judge may issue warrants of search and arrest.—Section 38, paragraph (c), NOTES:
of the Labor Code, as now written, was entered as an amendment by Presidential Decrees Only the judge, and no other official can issue the warrant of arrest, and this power depends
Nos. 1920 and 2018 of the late President Ferdinand Marcos, to Presidential Decree No. 1693, on the finding by the judge himself of the existence of probable cause. (People vs. Soriano, 130
in the exercise of his legislative powers under Amendment No. 6 of the 1973 Constitution. We SCRA 377.)
reiterate that the Secretary of Labor, not being a judge, may no longer issue search or arrest
warrants. Hence, the authorities must go through the judicial process. To that extent, we
declare Article 38, paragraph (c), of the Labor Code, unconstitutional and of no force and
effect.

FACTS:
 Tesoro filed with the POEA a complaint against Salazar. Having ascertained that
Salazar had no license to operate a recruitment agency, public respondent
Administrator Achacosa issued his challegend CLOSURE AND SEIZURE ORDER.
 POEA brought a team to the premises of Salazar to implement the order. It was
found that petitioner was operating Hannalie Dance Studio.
 Before entering, the team served the CLOSURE AND SEIZURE ORDER to Mrs. Salazar
who voluntarily allowed them to enter.
 The team confiscated assorted costumes.
 Salazar then filed a letter to POEA requesting that the seized personal properties be
returned in the reason that it was taken without due process.
 Salazar also alleged that what happened was robbery and violation of domicile.

ISSUE: W/N the POEA (or the Secretary of Labor) validly issue warrants of search and seizure
(or arrest) under Article 38 of the Labor Code.

RULING+RATIO: NO. ART. 38 of Labor Code is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Art. III, Sec. 2 of the Constitution provides that “No search warrant or warrant of arrest shall
issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be
seized.”

The Court held that the Secretary of Labor, not being a judge, may no longer issue search or
arrest warrants. Hence, the authorities must go through the judicial process. To that extent,
the court declared Article 38, paragraph (c), of the Labor Code, unconstitutional and of no
force and effect.

OTHER DISCUSSION:

Exception; The President has the power to order the arrest (of illegal or undesirable aliens) for
the purpose of deportation. —The State has the inherent power to deport undesirable aliens.