Agustin v. Edu, G.R. No. L-49112 February 2, 1979, 88 SCRA 195

CASE DIGEST

FACTS: This was an original action in the Supreme Court for prohibition.Petitioner was an owner of a volkswagen beetle car,model 13035 already properly equipped when it came out from the assembly lines with blinking lights which could serve as an early warning device in case of the emergencies mentioned in Letter of Instructions No 229, as amended, as well as the Implementing rules and regulations in Administrative Order No 1 issued by Land transportation Commission.Respondent Land Transportation commissioner Romeo Edu issued memorandum circular no 32 pursuant to Letter of Instructions No.229,as amended. It required the use of early Warning Devices (EWD) on motor vehicles. Petitioner alleged that the letter of instructions, as well as the implementing rules and regulations were unlawful and unconstitutional.

ISSUE: Whether the Letter of Instruction imposes valid measure of police power?

HELD: YES, The court held that the letter of Instruction No.229,as amended as well as the implementing rules and regulations were valid and constitutional as a valid measure of police power. The Vienna Convention on Road signs and signals and the United Nations Organization was ratified by the Philippine local legislation for the installation of road safety signs and devices.It cannot be disputed then that this Declaration of Principle found in the Constitution possesses relevance,between the International law and municipal law in applying the rule municipal law prevails.