An unpublished portion of a law, such as a handwritten addendum to a presidential proclamation, has no legal force or effect; publication in full is an indispensable condition for the effectivity of all laws to ensure the public is duly informed of their contents and to comply with the due process requirement.

The dispute originates from the status of land within the Fort Bonifacio military reservation. In 1957, President Carlos P. Garcia reserved the area for military use through Proclamation No. 423. Over the years, subsequent proclamations excluded certain portions for other purposes. In 1986, President Ferdinand E. Marcos issued Proclamation No. 2476, declaring specific barangays within the reservation as alienable and disposable. The core of the controversy is a handwritten note he allegedly added to this proclamation to include Western Bicutan, which was omitted from the official publication, leading petitioners to claim rights over the land they occupy therein.

• On January 7, 1986, President Ferdinand E. Marcos issued Proclamation No. 2476, which excluded barangays Lower Bicutan, Upper Bicutan, and Signal Village from the Fort Bonifacio military reservation and declared them open for disposition.
• At the bottom of the proclamation, President Marcos made a handwritten addendum which reads: "P.S. - This includes Western Bicutan (SGD.) Ferdinand E. Marcos".
• On February 3, 1986, Proclamation No. 2476 was published in the Official Gazette, but the handwritten addendum was not included in the publication.
• On October 16, 1987, President Corazon C. Aquino issued Proclamation No. 172, which excluded Lots 1 and 2 of Western Bicutan from the military reservation, substantially reiterating the published version of Proclamation No. 2476.
• Petitioners, Nagkakaisang Maralita ng Sitio Masigasig, Inc. (NMSMI) and Western Bicutan Lot Owners Association, Inc. (WBLOAI), are associations of informal settlers occupying Lots 3 and 7 of Western Bicutan, respectively.
• Petitioners filed a case with the Commission on Settlement of Land Problems (COSLAP), praying for the reclassification of the areas they occupied as alienable and disposable pursuant to the handwritten addendum on Proclamation No. 2476.
• COSLAP granted their petition, ruling that the handwritten addendum was an integral part of the proclamation and reflected the President's true intent, which could not be defeated by the negligence of others in failing to publish it.
• Respondent Military Shrine Services – Philippine Veterans Affairs Office (MSS-PVAO) appealed to the Court of Appeals, which reversed the COSLAP decision, holding that the unpublished addendum had no legal effect.

• The handwritten addendum by President Marcos is an integral part of Proclamation No. 2476, and his true intention was to include all of Western Bicutan in the reclassification of land as disposable public land.
• The omission of the addendum from the Official Gazette publication was a result of negligence or inadvertence and should not defeat the clear intent of the President.
• Proclamation No. 2476 was issued when President Marcos was exercising legislative powers, and as such, it cannot be amended or superseded by Proclamation No. 172, which was a mere executive enactment issued by President Aquino after her legislative powers had ceased.
• The Court of Appeals erred in not considering that COSLAP has broad powers to recommend innovative measures to resolve land cases.

• The handwritten addendum has no legal force and effect because it was not published in the Official Gazette, a mandatory requirement for the effectivity of laws under Article 2 of the Civil Code.
• The published version of Proclamation No. 2476 is clear and unambiguous, and there is no need to look into legislative intent beyond the text of the law itself.
• COSLAP had no authority to supply the omitted addendum, as doing so would be tantamount to encroaching on the field of the legislature.
• Since the addendum is legally non-existent, the land occupied by the petitioners remains part of the Fort Bonifacio military reservation and is not alienable or disposable.

• Procedural Issues:
  • N/A
• Substantive Issues:
  • Whether the handwritten addendum of President Marcos on Proclamation No. 2476, which was not included in its publication in the Official Gazette, has the force and effect of law to reclassify portions of Western Bicutan as alienable and disposable land.

• Procedural:
  • N/A
• Substantive:
  • The petitions are denied. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, ruling that the handwritten addendum has no legal force and effect. Citing the landmark case of Tañada v. Tuvera, the Court reiterated that publication is an indispensable requirement for the effectivity of all laws, including presidential decrees and executive orders promulgated in the exercise of legislative powers. The purpose of publication is to inform the public of the contents of the law, which is a fundamental requirement of due process. Since the addendum was never published, it never became effective and cannot be considered part of the law. The Court cannot speculate on the President's intent beyond the words of the published law, as doing so would be a violation of the principle of separation of powers, effectively amounting to judicial legislation.

• Doctrine of Indispensable Publication — Based on Article 2 of the Civil Code, all laws must be published in full as a condition for their effectivity. The Court applied this doctrine strictly, holding that because the handwritten addendum to Proclamation No. 2476 was not published, it never acquired the force of law and could not be the basis for reclassifying the subject lots.
• Separation of Powers — The Court invoked this principle to emphasize that its role is to apply or interpret laws, not to legislate. Giving legal effect to the unpublished addendum would amount to amending the law, a function that belongs to the legislative branch, not the judiciary.
• Plain Meaning Rule (Verba Legis) — The Court reasoned that it may not speculate as to the probable intent of the legislature apart from the words appearing in the law as published. Since the published version of Proclamation No. 2476 did not include the addendum, the Court must confine its interpretation to the text that was made public.

• "Laws must come out in the open in the clear light of the sun instead of skulking in the shadows with their dark, deep secrets. Mysterious pronouncements and rumored rules cannot be recognized as binding unless their existence and contents are confirmed by a valid publication intended to make full disclosure and give proper notice to the people. The furtive law is like a scabbarded saber that cannot feint, parry or cut unless the naked blade is drawn."

• Tañada v. Hon. Tuvera — This landmark case was the controlling precedent used by the Court to establish that publication is an indispensable requirement for the effectivity of all laws, including presidential decrees, without which they have no force and effect.
• Pagpalain Haulers, Inc. v. Hon. Trajano — This case was cited to reinforce the doctrine of separation of powers, clarifying that the function of the courts is to interpret the law, not to create or enact it.
• Aparri v. CA — This case was referenced to support the plain meaning rule, which dictates that courts should not speculate on legislative intent beyond the explicit text of the law.

• Article 2, Civil Code — This article provides the statutory basis for the mandatory publication of laws for their effectivity, stating that laws shall take effect fifteen days after their publication in the Official Gazette unless otherwise provided.
• Article 8, Civil Code — Cited to explain that while judicial decisions form part of the legal system, courts cannot create law, which is the role of the legislature.
• Section 24, Chapter 6, Book I of the Administrative Code — This section was cited to establish that the publication of a law in the Official Gazette serves as prima facie evidence of its authority, thereby validating reliance on the published version over any unpublished notes or intentions.