ELPIDIO SORIANO III V. REUBEN LISTA, ET AL.

March 24, 2003 | Corona, J.

Power of Appointment
AKGL

DOCTRINE: Because PCG is not part of Philippine Navy and AFP, the appointments and/or promotions of its officers do not require
anymore the confirmation of CA, as the enumeration in Sec. 16, Art. 7 of the Const. is exclusive.
CASE SUMMARY: Read the facts. Short lang naman.

FACTS:
PGMA appointed/promoted the public respondents to different positions in the Philippine Coast Guards (PCG) and their
subsequent assumption of office without confirmation by the Commission on Appointments (CA).
Despite the lack of confirmation by the CA, respondents had assumed their duties and functions.
Petitioners assails the said appointments precisely because of the failure to undergo the confirmation process by CA; hence,
they should be prohibited from discharging their duties and functions. Likewise, the petitioners avers the disbursement of the
salaries and emoluments of the said PCG officers.

ISSUE: W/N the permanent appointments of the respondents (e.g., Lista, Estera, Tabares, Gosingan, etc.) made by PGMA are legal
and constitutional? YES

RULING:
The history of the PCG would show that it used to be administered and maintained by the Philippine Navy as a separate unit.
It was then placed under the direct supervision and control of the Secretary of National Defense. It was then integrated in the
Armed Forces of the Philippines as a major subordinate unit. However, in March 1998, the President issued EO 475
transferring the PCG from DND to the Office of the President. He later on transferred the PCG from the Office of the
President to the DOTC.
Because PCG had been transferred to the DOTC and is no longer part of the Philippine Navy or AFP, the promotions and
appointments do not require the confirmation of the CA. CONST. art. 7, sec. 16 requires that the confirmation of CA is only
applicable to the officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel or naval captain. The enumeration in the said provision
is exclusive.

DISPOSITION: The petitioner is hereby DISMISSED.

NOTES:
The Court finds the petitioner to be without legal standing to file the petition. But, it still decided to resolve the issue.