Ople vs Torres et.al.; G.R. No.

127685, July23, 1998

FACTS: Administrative Order No. 308 entitled Adoption ot a National Computerized Identification Reference System was issued by President Fidel V. Ramos and was published in four newspapers of general circulation. It aims to establish a decentralized Identification Reference System among the key basic services and social security providers. There shall be a Population Reference Number (PRN) for each individual and all basic and social security transactions shall be regulated by the PRN with the use of Biometrics Technology. The funding shall be sourced from the respective budgets of the concerned agencies like GSIS, SSS, NSO and others. Petitioner Bias Ople assailed the Administrative Order and prayed for its nullification on two important constitutional grounds: one, it is a usurpation of the power of Congress to legislate, and two, it impermissibly intrudes on our citizens protected zone of privacy. The petitioner claims that AO No. 308 is not a mere administrative order but a law and hence, beyond the power of the President to issue. On the other hand, the respondents maintain that the President has merely exercised his administrative power in implementing the legislative policy of the Administrative Code of 1987 and that A.O. No. 308 is not a law for it confers no right,imposes no duty, affords no protection and creates no office. On the right of privacy, claims that A.O. No. 308 will infringe on the peoples right to be let alone while respondents deny such allegation.

ISSUES: Whether or not A.O. No. 308 encroaches on the law-making power of the legislative department; whether or not A.O. No. 308 infringes the peoples right of privacy. HELD:A.O. No. 308 involves a subject that is not appropriate to be covered by an administrative order. An administrative order is an ordinance issued by the President which relates to specific aspects in the administrative operation of government, It must be in harmony with the law and should be for the sole purpose of implementing the law and carrying out the legislative policy. It cannot be simplistically argued that A.O. No. 308 merely implements the Administrative Code of 1987 for the former establishes for the first time a National Computerized Identification Reference System. Nor is it correct to argue that A.O. 308 is not a law for it confers no right, imposes no.duty, affords no protection, and creates no office. Under the assailed administrative order, a citizen cannot transact business with government agencies delivering basic services to the people

without the contemplated identification card. Thus, without the ID, a citizen will have difficulty exercising his rights and enjoying his privileges. Given this reality, the contention that A.O. No. 308 gives no right and imposes no duty cannot stand. Regarding the right of privacy, it is a right recognized and enshrined in the several provisions of our Constitution, and in our laws. Hence, it is the burden of government to show, that A.O. No. 308 is justified by some compelling state interest and that it is narrowly drawn. To note, what is not arguable is the broadness, the vagueness, the overbreadth of A.O. No 308 which if implemented will put our peoples right to privacy in clear and present danger. It is noteworthy that A.O. No. 308 does riot state what specific biological characteristics and what particular biometrics technology shall be used to identify people who will seek its coverage; it does not state whether encoding of data is limited to biological information alone for identification purposes; and it does not state in clear and categorical terms how theses information gathered shall be handled. The A. 0. speaks of computer linkage which will give other governmental agencies access to the information. Yet, there are no controls to guard against leakage of information. The possibilities of abuse and misuse of the PRN, biometric and computer technology cannot be downplayed.